|
|
Line 12: |
Line 12: |
| | | |
| ===Scalar Product Rule for Limits=== | | ===Scalar Product Rule for Limits=== |
− | : Suppose that <math>\lim_{x\to a}f(x)=L</math> for finite <math>L</math> and that <math>c</math> is constant. Then <math>\lim_{x\to a}c\cdot f(x)=c\cdot\lim_{x\to a}f(x)=c\cdot L</math>}}. | + | : Suppose that <math>\lim_{x\to a}f(x)=L</math> for finite <math>L</math> and that <math>c</math> is constant. Then <math>\lim_{x\to a}c\cdot f(x)=c\cdot\lim_{x\to a}f(x)=c\cdot L</math>. |
| | | |
| Proof: Given the limit above, there exists in particular a <math>\delta>0</math> such that <math>\Big|f(x)-L\Big|<\frac{\varepsilon}{k}</math> whenever <math>0<|x-a|<\delta</math> , for some <math>k>0</math> such that <math>|c|<k</math> . Hence | | Proof: Given the limit above, there exists in particular a <math>\delta>0</math> such that <math>\Big|f(x)-L\Big|<\frac{\varepsilon}{k}</math> whenever <math>0<|x-a|<\delta</math> , for some <math>k>0</math> such that <math>|c|<k</math> . Hence |
Revision as of 17:27, 15 January 2022
Now that we have the formal definition of a limit, we can set about proving some of the properties we stated earlier in this chapter about limits.
Constant Rule for Limits
- If are constants then .
Proof of the Constant Rule for Limits: We need to find a such that for every , whenever . and , so is satisfied independent of any value of ; that is, we can choose any we like and the condition holds.
Identity Rule for Limits
- If is a constant then .
Proof: To prove that , we need to find a such that for every , whenever . Choosing satisfies this condition.
Scalar Product Rule for Limits
- Suppose that for finite and that is constant. Then .
Proof: Given the limit above, there exists in particular a such that whenever , for some such that . Hence
- .
Sum Rule for Limits
- Suppose that and . Then,
- }}.
Proof: Since we are given that and , there must be functions, call them and , such that for all , whenever , and whenever .
Adding the two inequalities gives . By the triangle inequality we have , so we have whenever and . Let be the smaller of and . Then this satisfies the definition of a limit for having limit .
Difference Rule for Limits
- Suppose that and . Then
- }}
Proof: Define . By the Scalar Product Rule for Limits, . Then by the Sum Rule for Limits, .
Product Rule for Limits
- Suppose that and . Then
- }}
Proof: Let be any positive number. The assumptions imply the existence of the positive numbers such that
- when
- when
- when
According to the condition (3) we see that
- when
Supposing then that and using (1) and (2) we obtain
Quotient Rule for Limits
- Suppose that and and . Then
Proof: If we can show that , then we can define a function, as and appeal to the Product Rule for Limits to prove the theorem. So we just need to prove that .
Let be any positive number. The assumptions imply the existence of the positive numbers such that
- when
- when
According to the condition (2) we see that
- so when
which implies that
- when
Supposing then that and using (1) and (3) we obtain
Squeeze Theorem
- Suppose that holds for all in some open interval containing , except possibly at itself. Suppose also that . Then also.
Proof: From the assumptions, we know that there exists a such that and when .
These inequalities are equivalent to and when .
Using what we know about the relative ordering of , and , we have
- when .
Then
- when .
So
- when .
Resources
Licensing
Content obtained and/or adapted from: