Doubt about definition of infinite limit and limit as x tends to infinity

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












In the limits and continuity chapter in my textbook, the following definitions are given:



(1) For limit of f(x) as x tends to infinity:



We say that $ƒ(x)$ has the limit $L$ as $x$ approaches infinity and write $lim_xto infty f(x) = L$ if, for every number $epsilon > 0$ there exists a corresponding number $M>0$ such that for all $x>M, |f(x) - L| < epsilon$.



(2) For infinite limits:



We say that $ƒ(x)$ approaches infinity as $x$ approaches $x_0$, and write $lim_xto x_0 ƒ(x) = infty$, if for every number $B>0$ there exists a corresponding $delta > 0$ such that for all $x$,
$$0 < |x - x_0| < delta implies f(x) > B$$



What I don't understand is why the numbers M and B have to be greater than zero in the first and second definitions respectively. I think the definition would work without this added constraint, i.e. if M (and, similarly, B) is any real number.
So, I don't understand why this condition is present in the definitions.



Since I couldn't find any discussion on this topic anywhere on the net or in my book, I have asked this question.



What am I missing?










share|cite|improve this question

















  • 3




    You're right. The demands of $M$ and $B$ are positive are superfluous.
    – MathOverview
    Sep 9 at 13:25










  • @MathOverview, but then why are they included in the definitions?
    – Mr Reality
    Sep 9 at 13:30










  • I think it's just to stay consistent with the other limite definitions.
    – MathOverview
    Sep 9 at 13:35










  • @MathOverview You should write that as an answer.
    – Noah Schweber
    Sep 9 at 14:04














up vote
0
down vote

favorite












In the limits and continuity chapter in my textbook, the following definitions are given:



(1) For limit of f(x) as x tends to infinity:



We say that $ƒ(x)$ has the limit $L$ as $x$ approaches infinity and write $lim_xto infty f(x) = L$ if, for every number $epsilon > 0$ there exists a corresponding number $M>0$ such that for all $x>M, |f(x) - L| < epsilon$.



(2) For infinite limits:



We say that $ƒ(x)$ approaches infinity as $x$ approaches $x_0$, and write $lim_xto x_0 ƒ(x) = infty$, if for every number $B>0$ there exists a corresponding $delta > 0$ such that for all $x$,
$$0 < |x - x_0| < delta implies f(x) > B$$



What I don't understand is why the numbers M and B have to be greater than zero in the first and second definitions respectively. I think the definition would work without this added constraint, i.e. if M (and, similarly, B) is any real number.
So, I don't understand why this condition is present in the definitions.



Since I couldn't find any discussion on this topic anywhere on the net or in my book, I have asked this question.



What am I missing?










share|cite|improve this question

















  • 3




    You're right. The demands of $M$ and $B$ are positive are superfluous.
    – MathOverview
    Sep 9 at 13:25










  • @MathOverview, but then why are they included in the definitions?
    – Mr Reality
    Sep 9 at 13:30










  • I think it's just to stay consistent with the other limite definitions.
    – MathOverview
    Sep 9 at 13:35










  • @MathOverview You should write that as an answer.
    – Noah Schweber
    Sep 9 at 14:04












up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite











In the limits and continuity chapter in my textbook, the following definitions are given:



(1) For limit of f(x) as x tends to infinity:



We say that $ƒ(x)$ has the limit $L$ as $x$ approaches infinity and write $lim_xto infty f(x) = L$ if, for every number $epsilon > 0$ there exists a corresponding number $M>0$ such that for all $x>M, |f(x) - L| < epsilon$.



(2) For infinite limits:



We say that $ƒ(x)$ approaches infinity as $x$ approaches $x_0$, and write $lim_xto x_0 ƒ(x) = infty$, if for every number $B>0$ there exists a corresponding $delta > 0$ such that for all $x$,
$$0 < |x - x_0| < delta implies f(x) > B$$



What I don't understand is why the numbers M and B have to be greater than zero in the first and second definitions respectively. I think the definition would work without this added constraint, i.e. if M (and, similarly, B) is any real number.
So, I don't understand why this condition is present in the definitions.



Since I couldn't find any discussion on this topic anywhere on the net or in my book, I have asked this question.



What am I missing?










share|cite|improve this question













In the limits and continuity chapter in my textbook, the following definitions are given:



(1) For limit of f(x) as x tends to infinity:



We say that $ƒ(x)$ has the limit $L$ as $x$ approaches infinity and write $lim_xto infty f(x) = L$ if, for every number $epsilon > 0$ there exists a corresponding number $M>0$ such that for all $x>M, |f(x) - L| < epsilon$.



(2) For infinite limits:



We say that $ƒ(x)$ approaches infinity as $x$ approaches $x_0$, and write $lim_xto x_0 ƒ(x) = infty$, if for every number $B>0$ there exists a corresponding $delta > 0$ such that for all $x$,
$$0 < |x - x_0| < delta implies f(x) > B$$



What I don't understand is why the numbers M and B have to be greater than zero in the first and second definitions respectively. I think the definition would work without this added constraint, i.e. if M (and, similarly, B) is any real number.
So, I don't understand why this condition is present in the definitions.



Since I couldn't find any discussion on this topic anywhere on the net or in my book, I have asked this question.



What am I missing?







definition epsilon-delta constraints






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Sep 9 at 13:18









Mr Reality

1469




1469







  • 3




    You're right. The demands of $M$ and $B$ are positive are superfluous.
    – MathOverview
    Sep 9 at 13:25










  • @MathOverview, but then why are they included in the definitions?
    – Mr Reality
    Sep 9 at 13:30










  • I think it's just to stay consistent with the other limite definitions.
    – MathOverview
    Sep 9 at 13:35










  • @MathOverview You should write that as an answer.
    – Noah Schweber
    Sep 9 at 14:04












  • 3




    You're right. The demands of $M$ and $B$ are positive are superfluous.
    – MathOverview
    Sep 9 at 13:25










  • @MathOverview, but then why are they included in the definitions?
    – Mr Reality
    Sep 9 at 13:30










  • I think it's just to stay consistent with the other limite definitions.
    – MathOverview
    Sep 9 at 13:35










  • @MathOverview You should write that as an answer.
    – Noah Schweber
    Sep 9 at 14:04







3




3




You're right. The demands of $M$ and $B$ are positive are superfluous.
– MathOverview
Sep 9 at 13:25




You're right. The demands of $M$ and $B$ are positive are superfluous.
– MathOverview
Sep 9 at 13:25












@MathOverview, but then why are they included in the definitions?
– Mr Reality
Sep 9 at 13:30




@MathOverview, but then why are they included in the definitions?
– Mr Reality
Sep 9 at 13:30












I think it's just to stay consistent with the other limite definitions.
– MathOverview
Sep 9 at 13:35




I think it's just to stay consistent with the other limite definitions.
– MathOverview
Sep 9 at 13:35












@MathOverview You should write that as an answer.
– Noah Schweber
Sep 9 at 14:04




@MathOverview You should write that as an answer.
– Noah Schweber
Sep 9 at 14:04















active

oldest

votes











Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2910774%2fdoubt-about-definition-of-infinite-limit-and-limit-as-x-tends-to-infinity%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest



































active

oldest

votes













active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2910774%2fdoubt-about-definition-of-infinite-limit-and-limit-as-x-tends-to-infinity%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

Carbon dioxide