A community for students.

Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

anonymous

  • one year ago

Prove limit using Epsilon Delta Defn lim [(x-1)(x+3)]/(x-2) =0 as x->1

  • This Question is Open
  1. anonymous
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    I know \[\left| f(x)-L \right|<\epsilon \] and \[\left| x-1 \right| <\]

  2. freckles
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    \[|\frac{(x-1)(x+3)}{x-2}| <\epsilon \\ |x-1| < \frac{\epsilon|x-2| }{|x+3|} \\ \text{ we can't express } \delta \text{ as a function of } x \\ \\ \text{ so let's look at } |x-1|<1 \text{ which means } \\ -1<x-1<1 \\ 0<x<2 \\ \text{ and so adding 3 on both sides } \\ 3<x+3<5 \\ \text{ or if instead we subtracted 2 on both sides } \\ -2<x-2<0 \\ \text{ choose } x \text{ so that } \frac{\epsilon |x-2|}{|x+3|} \text{ is at it's min value}\]

  3. zzr0ck3r
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Do you mean choose delta?

  4. amistre64
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    we never spent much time on it in my classes .... but this seems like a good reference from my perspective. http://www.milefoot.com/math/calculus/limits/DeltaEpsilonProofs03.htm

  5. anonymous
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    This suggestion has a lot in common with what freckles wrote. First let \(t=x-1\), so that as \(x\to1\) we have \(t\to0\). This doesn't change the problem (much); we still want to prove the same limit. \[\lim_{x\to1}\frac{(x-1)(x+3)}{x-2}=\lim_{t\to0}\frac{t(t+4)}{t-1}=0\] According to the definition of the limit, we want to show that, given any \(\epsilon>0\), we can determine an appropriate \(\delta\) so that if \(|t-0|=|t|<\delta\), then we must have \(\left|\frac{t(t+4)}{t-1}-0\right|=\left|\frac{t(t+4)}{t-1}\right|<\epsilon\). Let's try to work backwards. The strategy behind \(\epsilon-\delta\) proofs is to extract some inequality of the form \(|t|<(\text{some expression containing }\epsilon)\) from the desired \(|f(t)-L|<\epsilon\). One thing we could do is to compare \(\frac{t(t+4)}{t-1}\) to another rational expression such that the denominator can be canceled - namely, compare it to \(\frac{t(t-1)}{t-1}=t\). From the following plot, you can ascertain (at least for some interval containing \(t=0\)) that \[(*)\quad\quad|t|=\left|\frac{t(t-1)}{t-1}\right|\le\left|\frac{t(t+4)}{t-1}\right|\] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=plot+Abs%5Bt%28t%2B4%29%5D%2C+Abs%5Bt%28t-1%29%5D+over+-2%2C2 You have to be careful about this statement, though, as it's not true if \(t<-\frac{3}{2}\). To avoid this problem, we agree to fix \(|t|<1\), i.e. \(-1<t<1\), where \((*)\) does hold. So, it follows that \[|t|=\left|\frac{t(t-1)}{t-1}\right|\le\left|\frac{t(t+4)}{t-1}\right|<\epsilon\] This means that we can use \(\delta=\epsilon\), right? Wrong. Remember that \((*)\) is only true for certain \(t\), and of particular interest to us, it's true for \(|t|<1\). If \(\epsilon\) was large enough to force \(t\) outside of the interval \((-1,1)\), we should like to fix \(\delta\) so that it defaults to a value we know works. That value is \(1\), since we know if \(|t|<1\), then \((*)\) certainly holds. All this to say that we should actually be using the smaller of the two, i.e. we choose \(\delta=\min\{1,\epsilon\}\). Finding \(\delta\) is the hard part, in my opinion, so I'll leave the rest to you. (Disclaimer: I'm writing this while pretty tired, if anyone sees some silly mistake in the reasoning here, please let me know.)

  6. zzr0ck3r
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    So what I always try and do is get rid of the denominator is some way \(\dfrac{|x-1||x+3|}{|x-2|}< \dfrac{1}{a}|x-1||x+3|\) would be sweet because then we can easily deal with the \(|x+3|\) part. I always start with \(\delta=\dfrac{1}{2}\) and then just play around. \(|x-1|<\delta=\frac{1}{2}\implies -1.5<x-1<-0.5\implies 0.5<|x-2|<1.5\) Now we can say \(|f(x)-0|=\dfrac{|x-1||x+3|}{|x-2|}<\dfrac{1}{\frac{1}{2}}|x-1||x+3|=2|x-1||x+3|\) when \(|x-1|<\delta\). Now \(|x-1|<1\implies -1<x-1<1\implies 3<x+3<4\implies 3<|x+3|<4\) So now we have \[\dfrac{|x-1||x+3|}{|x-2|}<\dfrac{1}{\frac{1}{2}}|x-1||x+3|=2|x-1||x+3|<2|x-1|*4=8|x-1|\] And we want all of this less than \(\epsilon\) , so now the proof. Let \(\epsilon >0\) be given. Set \(\delta = \min\{\frac{1}{2}, \frac{\epsilon}{8}\}\). Then \[\dfrac{|x-1||x+3|}{|x-2|}<8|x-1|<8\delta\le \epsilon \] Just thought I would throw in a different method.

  7. Not the answer you are looking for?
    Search for more explanations.

    • Attachments:

Ask your own question

Sign Up
Find more explanations on OpenStudy
Privacy Policy

Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.

spraguer (Moderator)
5 → View Detailed Profile

is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...

23

  • Teamwork 19 Teammate
  • Problem Solving 19 Hero
  • You have blocked this person.
  • ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...

Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.

This is the testimonial you wrote.
You haven't written a testimonial for Owlfred.