3
$\begingroup$

I know to how prove normal limits using the epsilon-delta definition, say:

$$\lim_{x\to a}f(x) = L$$

But, there was a question on my textbook which I couldn't quite figure out to do, even though I've thought about it for a while I don't even know how to go about starting it.

Use $\varepsilon$-$\delta$ definition of a limit to prove that

$$\lim \limits _{x\to c}f(x) = 0$$ iff $$\lim \limits_{x\to c}|f(x)| = 0$$

Could anyone help me with this, even a hint on where to start? Thank you in advance.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Do you know that you're required to prove that $$\forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_f(|x-c|<\delta\implies |f(x)-L|<\varepsilon) \\ \Updownarrow \\ \forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_{|f|}(|x-c|<\delta\implies ||f(x)|-L|<\varepsilon)?$$ $\endgroup$ – Git Gud Sep 25 '13 at 18:23
  • $\begingroup$ yes, i realize by that by the definition, but I've never encountered a situation where two limits are involved.. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Cook Sep 25 '13 at 18:29
  • $\begingroup$ You assume one of the statements to be true and prove the other. The direction $\Uparrow$ is easier. $\endgroup$ – Git Gud Sep 25 '13 at 18:32
  • $\begingroup$ Will I later have to prove that my assumption was indeed true? $\endgroup$ – Daniel Cook Sep 25 '13 at 18:33
  • $\begingroup$ No. What you want to prove is something that looks like $P\iff Q$. To prove something like this, it suffices to prove that $P\implies Q$ and $Q\implies P$. To prove that $P\implies Q$, you assume that $P$ is true and try to concldue that so is $Q$. Similarly for $Q\implies P$. $\endgroup$ – Git Gud Sep 25 '13 at 18:35
5
$\begingroup$

With $L=0$ you wish to prove that $$\forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_f(|x-c|<\delta\implies |f(x)-L|<\varepsilon) \\ \Updownarrow \\ \forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_{|f|}(|x-c|<\delta\implies ||f(x)|-L|<\varepsilon)$$

which is equivalent to proving that $$\forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_f(|x-c|<\delta\implies |f(x)|<\varepsilon) \\ \Updownarrow \\ \forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_{|f|}(|x-c|<\delta\implies |\color{green}|f(x)\color{green}||<\varepsilon).$$

Now you need to prove that $D_f=D_{|f|}$, once this is done your initial problem becomes equivalent to proving $$\forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_f(|x-c|<\delta\implies |f(x)|<\varepsilon) \\ \Updownarrow \\ \forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_f(|x-c|<\delta\implies |\color{green}|f(x)\color{green}||<\varepsilon).$$

Now just prove that for all $x\in D_f$ the equality $|\color{green}|f(x)\color{green}||=|f(x)|$ holds and you get

$$\forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_f(|x-c|<\delta\implies |f(x)|<\varepsilon) \\ \Updownarrow \\ \forall \varepsilon >0\exists\delta >0 \forall x\in D_f(|x-c|<\delta\implies |f(x)|<\varepsilon)$$

which is obviously true.

$\endgroup$

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.