how to prove limit exits using sequential limit definition

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

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











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












Let $f:(-infty, 1) cup (1,infty) to mathbbR$ be defined by $f(x)=fracx^3-1x-1$ . Prove that $lim _xto 1f(x)=3$



i am proving this problem by limit of the definition



$|f(x)-3|=left|fracx^3-1x-1-3right|=|x^2+x-2|=|x-1||x+2|leq |x-1|(|x|+2)=4|x-1|<epsilon $ as i choose $|x-1|<delta=epsilon/4$



how to prove this by sequence of limit



ie how to prove by if $x_n to 1$ then $f(x_n)to 3$






sequences-and-series limits







share|cite|improve this question





















  • @farruhota how its dupicate i asked how to prove by sequence of limit
    – Inverse Problem
    Sep 4 at 12:19














up vote
0
down vote

favorite












Let $f:(-infty, 1) cup (1,infty) to mathbbR$ be defined by $f(x)=fracx^3-1x-1$ . Prove that $lim _xto 1f(x)=3$



i am proving this problem by limit of the definition



$|f(x)-3|=left|fracx^3-1x-1-3right|=|x^2+x-2|=|x-1||x+2|leq |x-1|(|x|+2)=4|x-1|<epsilon $ as i choose $|x-1|<delta=epsilon/4$



how to prove this by sequence of limit



ie how to prove by if $x_n to 1$ then $f(x_n)to 3$






sequences-and-series limits







share|cite|improve this question





















  • @farruhota how its dupicate i asked how to prove by sequence of limit
    – Inverse Problem
    Sep 4 at 12:19












up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite











Let $f:(-infty, 1) cup (1,infty) to mathbbR$ be defined by $f(x)=fracx^3-1x-1$ . Prove that $lim _xto 1f(x)=3$



i am proving this problem by limit of the definition



$|f(x)-3|=left|fracx^3-1x-1-3right|=|x^2+x-2|=|x-1||x+2|leq |x-1|(|x|+2)=4|x-1|<epsilon $ as i choose $|x-1|<delta=epsilon/4$



how to prove this by sequence of limit



ie how to prove by if $x_n to 1$ then $f(x_n)to 3$






sequences-and-series limits







share|cite|improve this question













Let $f:(-infty, 1) cup (1,infty) to mathbbR$ be defined by $f(x)=fracx^3-1x-1$ . Prove that $lim _xto 1f(x)=3$



i am proving this problem by limit of the definition



$|f(x)-3|=left|fracx^3-1x-1-3right|=|x^2+x-2|=|x-1||x+2|leq |x-1|(|x|+2)=4|x-1|<epsilon $ as i choose $|x-1|<delta=epsilon/4$



how to prove this by sequence of limit



ie how to prove by if $x_n to 1$ then $f(x_n)to 3$






sequences-and-series limits




sequences-and-series limits






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Sep 4 at 11:39









Inverse Problem

906918




906918











  • @farruhota how its dupicate i asked how to prove by sequence of limit
    – Inverse Problem
    Sep 4 at 12:19
















  • @farruhota how its dupicate i asked how to prove by sequence of limit
    – Inverse Problem
    Sep 4 at 12:19















@farruhota how its dupicate i asked how to prove by sequence of limit
– Inverse Problem
Sep 4 at 12:19




@farruhota how its dupicate i asked how to prove by sequence of limit
– Inverse Problem
Sep 4 at 12:19










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










Let it be given that $x_n to 1$. This means you can make $|x_n-1| < epsilon$, taking $n$ big enough.



We want to show $f(x_n) to 3$, so we want to show that we can make |$f(x_n)-3|<epsilon$, by taking large enough $n$.



But you know that $|f(x_n)-3| = |x_n-1||x_n+2|$. The first factor can be made $ < epsilon$ by assumption, and the second one can be made arbitrarily close to $3$ for a large enough $n$.



All that's left is writing up all the details.






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    You already know that $f(x)-3=x^2+x-2$. If $x_n to 1$ then $x_n^2 to 1$ so $f(x)-3 to 1+1-2=0$ and $f(x) to 3$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • ..its okay what if i want to prove both left and right limits exists and equal
      – Inverse Problem
      Sep 4 at 11:53










    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%2f2904938%2fhow-to-prove-limit-exits-using-sequential-limit-definition%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest

















    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted










    Let it be given that $x_n to 1$. This means you can make $|x_n-1| < epsilon$, taking $n$ big enough.



    We want to show $f(x_n) to 3$, so we want to show that we can make |$f(x_n)-3|<epsilon$, by taking large enough $n$.



    But you know that $|f(x_n)-3| = |x_n-1||x_n+2|$. The first factor can be made $ < epsilon$ by assumption, and the second one can be made arbitrarily close to $3$ for a large enough $n$.



    All that's left is writing up all the details.






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      up vote
      1
      down vote



      accepted










      Let it be given that $x_n to 1$. This means you can make $|x_n-1| < epsilon$, taking $n$ big enough.



      We want to show $f(x_n) to 3$, so we want to show that we can make |$f(x_n)-3|<epsilon$, by taking large enough $n$.



      But you know that $|f(x_n)-3| = |x_n-1||x_n+2|$. The first factor can be made $ < epsilon$ by assumption, and the second one can be made arbitrarily close to $3$ for a large enough $n$.



      All that's left is writing up all the details.






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted






        Let it be given that $x_n to 1$. This means you can make $|x_n-1| < epsilon$, taking $n$ big enough.



        We want to show $f(x_n) to 3$, so we want to show that we can make |$f(x_n)-3|<epsilon$, by taking large enough $n$.



        But you know that $|f(x_n)-3| = |x_n-1||x_n+2|$. The first factor can be made $ < epsilon$ by assumption, and the second one can be made arbitrarily close to $3$ for a large enough $n$.



        All that's left is writing up all the details.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        Let it be given that $x_n to 1$. This means you can make $|x_n-1| < epsilon$, taking $n$ big enough.



        We want to show $f(x_n) to 3$, so we want to show that we can make |$f(x_n)-3|<epsilon$, by taking large enough $n$.



        But you know that $|f(x_n)-3| = |x_n-1||x_n+2|$. The first factor can be made $ < epsilon$ by assumption, and the second one can be made arbitrarily close to $3$ for a large enough $n$.



        All that's left is writing up all the details.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Sep 4 at 12:00









        JuliusL33t

        1,260817




        1,260817




















            up vote
            1
            down vote













            You already know that $f(x)-3=x^2+x-2$. If $x_n to 1$ then $x_n^2 to 1$ so $f(x)-3 to 1+1-2=0$ and $f(x) to 3$.






            share|cite|improve this answer




















            • ..its okay what if i want to prove both left and right limits exists and equal
              – Inverse Problem
              Sep 4 at 11:53














            up vote
            1
            down vote













            You already know that $f(x)-3=x^2+x-2$. If $x_n to 1$ then $x_n^2 to 1$ so $f(x)-3 to 1+1-2=0$ and $f(x) to 3$.






            share|cite|improve this answer




















            • ..its okay what if i want to prove both left and right limits exists and equal
              – Inverse Problem
              Sep 4 at 11:53












            up vote
            1
            down vote










            up vote
            1
            down vote









            You already know that $f(x)-3=x^2+x-2$. If $x_n to 1$ then $x_n^2 to 1$ so $f(x)-3 to 1+1-2=0$ and $f(x) to 3$.






            share|cite|improve this answer












            You already know that $f(x)-3=x^2+x-2$. If $x_n to 1$ then $x_n^2 to 1$ so $f(x)-3 to 1+1-2=0$ and $f(x) to 3$.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Sep 4 at 11:44









            Kavi Rama Murthy

            26.1k31437




            26.1k31437











            • ..its okay what if i want to prove both left and right limits exists and equal
              – Inverse Problem
              Sep 4 at 11:53
















            • ..its okay what if i want to prove both left and right limits exists and equal
              – Inverse Problem
              Sep 4 at 11:53















            ..its okay what if i want to prove both left and right limits exists and equal
            – Inverse Problem
            Sep 4 at 11:53




            ..its okay what if i want to prove both left and right limits exists and equal
            – Inverse Problem
            Sep 4 at 11:53

















             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2904938%2fhow-to-prove-limit-exits-using-sequential-limit-definition%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest
































































            DR4gibXRO,ESDK,5,uaWqfW,j8,YP pmM,aU8RbTveWAEMHlrqE4bO6iZJwX
            -
            lI1hLu733FfIRy2m8ueYNAUlKEnQJAFC,ivNgYX H5 SgHwKtTxN7EI0,EH1Sq68d9nof9I4d

            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            圖片
            Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 2 down vote favorite My aim is to smooth the terrain in a video game. Therefore I contrived an algorithm that makes use of Bézier curves of different orders. But this algorithm is defined in a two dimensional space for now. To shift it into the third dimension I need to somehow combine the Bézier curves. Given two curves in each two dimensions, how can I combine them to build a surface? I thought about something like a curve of a curve. Or maybe I could multiply them somehow. How can I combine them to cause the wanted behavior? Is there a common approach? In the image you can see the input, on the left, and the output, on the right, of the algorithm that works in a two dimensional space. For the real application there is a three dimensional input. The algorithm relays only on the adjacent tiles. Given these it will define the control points of the mentioned Bézier cur...
            閱讀完整內容

            Propositional logic and tautologies

            圖片
            Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 0 down vote favorite Taken from P. Suppes "Introduction to logic" pp16 Starting from the sentence "If $P$ tautologically implies $Q$, then.." Question: Is it true that, at least within propositional logic, we are able to prove only tautologies or do I mis-understand something? If yes, is propositional logic special in some way? Is the notion of tautology meaningful only in propositional logic? logic propositional-calculus share | cite | improve this question edited Nov 29 '17 at 18:53 Mauro ALLEGRANZA 60.8k 4 46 105 asked Nov 29 '17 at 16:32 Alvin Lepik 2,448 9 20 add a comment  |  up vote 0 down vote favorite Taken from P. Suppes "Introduction to logic" pp16 Starting from the sentence "If $P$ tautologically implies $Q$, then.." Question: Is it true that, at least within propositional logic, we are able to prove only tautologi...
            閱讀完整內容

            Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility

            圖片
            Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 0 down vote favorite Let $(W_s)_s geq 0$ be a Wiener process and $tau$ be a random variable with an exponential distribution with parameter $lambda$. Suppose that $W$ and $tau$ are independent. In this question, we see that the distribution of the stopped Wiener process $W_tau$ corresponds to a Laplace distribution with scale parameter $fracsigmasqrt2lambda$ where $sigma$ is the instantaneous variance of the Wiener process. Suppose now, that the variance $sigma^2$ also follows a stochastic process such that we have: $$dS = sigma SdW_s \ dsigma^2 = alphasigma^2dt + xisigma^2dW_sigma$$ where $alpha$ and $xi$ are independent of $S$ and $dW_s$ and $dW_sigma$ are independent Wiener processes. My aim is to derive the distribution of $log S_tau$. First, if $barV_T$ denotes the mean variance over some time interval $[0,T]$ defined by $$barV_T = frac1T intlimits_0^Tsigma^2(t)dt,$$ it is easy to show (Lemma of Îto) that $$...
            閱讀完整內容