This is a general process question. I'm taking my first analysis class in in the chapters of differentiation and continuity, there were quite a few exercises assigned that essentially come down to "compute such-and-such limit". Now, the definition of a limit is clear but for practical purposes isn't constructive; when I look up answers online, or my professor publishes the suggested answers, invariably what is done is the following:

1) Use some computational trick to reduce the expression whose limit we want to a polynomial or something trivial (factoring, multiplying by some sort of conjugate expression to eliminate radicals, etc). Alternatively, use L'Hospitals rule.

2) Heuristically assume that $\lim_{t \rightarrow x} t^a = x^a$ (heuristic because we justify it in my experience by saying "polynomials are continuous, so the limit must be thus", though in a former thread a member suggested an excellent proof using logarithms:

How do we prove in general that $\lim_{t \to x} {t^a} = x^a$).

That being said, this doesn't prove that this is the limit. So my questions are:

1) Are these tools reliable; that is, do they produce limits in general that can be rigorously proven to be correct (using $\epsilon, \delta$ proofs).

2) When is it safe in a proof to simply say: "let such-and-such tend to zero", or "Let this value go to infinity"?

I have some intuitive ideas, but I can't seem to codify any sort of solid answer, and I'm hoping someone with a lot more experience and a bird's eye view on the problem (both in terms of mathematical savvy and teaching experience) can shed some light.


  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Saying that the $\lim\limits_{t \rightarrow x} f(t) = f(x)$ when $f$ is continuous is perfectly rigorous, since that is the definition of continuity at $x$. One can also rigorously prove continuity of polynomials. The epsilon-delta arguments can be used to prove trivially that the constants and the function $t$ are continuous, and limit theorems can be used to prove products are also continuous. The continuity of polynomials then follows by induction. $\endgroup$ – Tob Ernack May 4 '17 at 17:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In any decent course in analysis, you prove everything. Everything is done completely rigorously. That doesn't mean you always go back to the definition in proving a limit exists, or equals $1$, or whatever. That's what theorems are for. $\endgroup$ – zhw. May 4 '17 at 17:20
  • $\begingroup$ You should already proven when you first defined limits, that these operations are all valid operations. $\endgroup$ – Doug M May 4 '17 at 17:29
  • $\begingroup$ @zhw I'm taking analysis at an Ivy League university, so I think we can assume the course is "decent". That said, the basic fact that for any $a \in \mathbb{R} \lim_{t \rightarrow x} t^a = x^a$ isn't something I've ever seen proven directly except on this site when I asked. Of course we can say 1) All polynomials are continuous 2) therefore this limit as written, and I have proven the continuity of polynomials. $\endgroup$ – BenL May 4 '17 at 17:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I appreciate your honesty both in accepting your beliefs about limits and mention of the flagging. You may wish to have a look at the proofs of various limit theorems which are used to evaluate limits. This will be a first step towards understanding that these things are rigorous. Next you will need a rigorous theory of exponential and logarithmic functions which are almost never presented rigorously in introductory calculus texts. You may find nice exposition of these topics in my blog posts paramanands.blogspot.com/2014/05/… $\endgroup$ – Paramanand Singh May 4 '17 at 18:57

The method is rigorous. It is based on the following theorems

$$\lim\limits_{x\to a}(f(x)+g(x))=\lim\limits_{x\to a}f(x)+ \lim\limits_{x\to a}g(x)$$ $$\lim\limits_{x\to a}(f(x)g(x))=(\lim\limits_{x\to a}f(x)) (\lim\limits_{x\to a}g(x))$$

$$\lim\limits_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)}=\frac{\lim\limits_{x\to a}f(x)}{ \lim\limits_{x\to a}g(x)}$$

Assuming that $\lim\limits_{x\to a}f(x)$ and $\lim\limits_{x\to a}g(x)$ exist and are finite (and $\lim\limits_{x\to a}g(x)\neq 0$ in the last case).

The aim of the tricks you mention is to express a the function in a form where application of the above theorems is valid.

There is of course input of basic limits (eg $\lim\limits_{x\to 0}\frac{\sin x}{x}=1$) which must be proved by some other means.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ I believe you meant to write $\lim_{x \to 0} \sin(x)/x = 1$ $\endgroup$ – Alex Provost May 4 '17 at 17:36
  • $\begingroup$ Don't we also have to assume that the limit on the LHS exists as well? $\endgroup$ – Brevan Ellefsen May 4 '17 at 17:38
  • $\begingroup$ @BrevanEllefsen No that is the conclusion of the theorem. $\endgroup$ – Rene Schipperus May 4 '17 at 17:43

And there are a number of ways to prove that polynomials are continuous.

One way is to prove that the sum and product of continuous functions are continuous and then prove that 1 and x are continuous.

Another, specialized for polynomials, is to use $x^n-a^n =(x-a)\sum_{k=0}^{n-1} x^k a^{n-1-k} $ so

$\begin{array}\\ |x^n-a^n| &=|x-a||\sum_{k=0}^{n-1} x^k a^{n-1-k}|\\ &\le|x-a|n\max(|x|, |a|)^{n-1}\\ &\le|x-a|n(|a|+1)^{n-1} \qquad\text{if }|x-a| \le 1\\ \end{array} $

| cite | improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.