Proving rational function converges from first principles

In summary, the process of proving that a rational function converges from first principles involves analyzing the limits of the function as the input approaches a certain value. This includes determining the behavior of the numerator and the denominator, ensuring that the denominator does not approach zero, and applying the definitions of limits to establish convergence. By breaking down the function into simpler components and using epsilon-delta definitions, one can rigorously demonstrate the conditions under which the rational function converges to a specific limit.
  • #1
member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Epsilon-Delta definition of a limit
For this problem,
1712889043063.png

I am confused how they get $$| x - 4 | > \frac{1}{2}$$ from. I have tried deriving that expression from two different methods. Here is the first method:

$$-1\frac{1}{2} < x - 4 < -\frac{1}{2}$$
$$1\frac{1}{2} > -(x - 4) > \frac{1}{2}$$
$$|1\frac{1}{2}| > |-(x - 4)| > |\frac{1}{2}|$$
$$1\frac{1}{2} > |-1||x - 4| > \frac{1}{2}$$
$$1\frac{1}{2} > |x - 4| > \frac{1}{2}$$
Thus $$ |x - 4| > \frac{1}{2}$$

However, I also have an alternative method, but I am unsure why it is not giving the correct expression. Here the second method:

$$-1\frac{1}{2} < x - 4 < -\frac{1}{2}$$
$$|-1\frac{1}{2}| < |x - 4| < |-\frac{1}{2}|$$
$$1\frac{1}{2} < |x - 4| < \frac{1}{2}$$

Does someone please know what I have done wrong?

Thank you - Chiral
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
ChiralSuperfields said:
I am confused how they get $$| x - 4 | > \frac{1}{2}$$ from.
That is because ##|x-3|<\frac {1}{2}## so ##x## is closer to 3 than it is to 4..
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes WWGD and member 731016
  • #3
FactChecker said:
That is because ##|x-3|<\frac {1}{2}## so ##x## is closer to 3 than it is to 4..
Thank you for your reply @FactChecker!

Sorry I am still confused. I am trying to understand how they algebraically derive $$|x - 4| > \frac{1}{2}$$

Thanks!
 
  • #4
1) You can look on the number line and see it geometrically.
or
2) |x-3| <1/2
=> x-3 < 1/2
=> x-4 < 1/2-1 = -1/2
=> 4-x > 1/2
=> |x-4| > 1/2
 
  • Love
Likes member 731016
  • #5
FactChecker said:
1) You can look on the number line and see it geometrically.
or
2) |x-3| <1/2
=> x-3 < 1/2
=> x-4 < 1/2-1 = -1/2
=> 4-x > 1/2
=> |x-4| > 1/2
Thank for your reply @FactChecker!

However, I am still confused. Do you please know why you only consider the positive case when you take off the absolute value off x - 3 i.e not $$-(x - 3) < 1/2$$?

Do you also please know whether my two algebraic methods are correct?

Thanks!
 
  • #6
ChiralSuperfields said:
$$-1\frac{1}{2} < x - 4 < -\frac{1}{2}$$
$$|-1\frac{1}{2}| < |x - 4| < |-\frac{1}{2}|$$
This is your error. ##x-4 \lt -\frac{1}{2}## does not imply ##|x-4|\lt |-\frac{1}{2}|##.
 
  • Love
Likes member 731016
  • #7
FactChecker said:
This is your error. ##x-4 \lt -\frac{1}{2}## does not imply ##|x-4|\lt |-\frac{1}{2}|##.
Thank you for your reply @FactChecker!

That is interesting, do you please know why? I took the absolute value of all three sides of the equation from the law of algebra. I thought they would be equivalent since I did the same thing to each side of the equation.

Thanks!
 
  • #8
ChiralSuperfields said:
That is interesting, do you please know why? I took the absolute value of all three sides of the equation from the law of algebra. I thought they would be equivalent since I did the same thing to each side of the equation.
These are not equations. When you have a comparison like ##-100 \lt 1##, which is not an equation, you can not just do the same thing to both sides and know that the same comparison still works.
##-100 \lt 1## does not mean that ##|-100 |\lt |1|##.
 
  • Love
Likes member 731016
  • #9
It there is equality, then any function applied to equal things will give equal answers. If ##x1=x2##, then ##f(x1)=f(x2)##. Otherwise, the function ##f()## is not well defined. But if there is some other relationship between ##x1## and ##x2## different from equality, that can not be guarantied.
 
  • Love
Likes member 731016

FAQ: Proving rational function converges from first principles

What is a rational function?

A rational function is a function that can be expressed as the quotient of two polynomials. It is typically written in the form f(x) = P(x) / Q(x), where P(x) and Q(x) are polynomials and Q(x) is not equal to zero.

What does it mean for a rational function to converge?

Convergence of a rational function refers to the behavior of the function as the input approaches a certain value, often infinity or a specific point. A rational function converges if it approaches a finite limit as the input approaches that value.

How can I determine the limit of a rational function as x approaches infinity?

To determine the limit of a rational function as x approaches infinity, you can divide the numerator and the denominator by the highest power of x present in the denominator. This simplifies the function and allows you to identify the behavior of the function as x grows large.

What are the first principles of proving convergence?

The first principles of proving convergence typically involve using the epsilon-delta definition of limits. This means showing that for every ε > 0, there exists a δ > 0 such that if the distance between x and the point of interest is less than δ, the distance between f(x) and the limit is less than ε.

Can you give an example of proving convergence for a specific rational function?

Sure! Consider the rational function f(x) = (2x^2 + 3) / (x^2 + 1). To prove that it converges to 2 as x approaches infinity, divide the numerator and denominator by x^2: f(x) = (2 + 3/x^2) / (1 + 1/x^2). As x approaches infinity, the terms 3/x^2 and 1/x^2 approach 0, so f(x) approaches 2/1 = 2, proving convergence to 2.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
868
Replies
4
Views
693
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
40
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
807
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top