Real Analysis limit proof problem.

In summary, the function f is continuous at every irrational point and proves lim (p/q)->a f(x)=0 for any p and q in an interval.
  • #1
gottfried
119
0

Homework Statement


Define the function f:ℝ→ℝ by f(x)=0 if x is irrational and f(p/q)=1/q if p,q are integers and q>0 and the fraction is in reduced form.

Prove f is continuous at every irrational point.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


We must show that lim x->a f(x)=f(a)=0 if a is irrational.
This is clearly true for all the irrationals near a so we need to show that

lim (p/q)->a f(x)=0
From the limit definiton
[itex]\forall[/itex](|p|.[itex]\epsilon[/itex]-a)>0 [itex]\exists[/itex] [itex]\delta[/itex]=(|p|.[itex]\epsilon[/itex] - a) > 0 such that |p/q - a|<[itex]\delta[/itex]

|p/q|<[itex]\delta[/itex] + a

|q| > [itex]\frac{|p|}{\delta + a}[/itex]

[itex]\frac{1}{|q|}[/itex] < [itex]\frac{\delta + a}{|p|}[/itex]
since [itex]\delta[/itex] = (|p|.[itex]\epsilon[/itex] -a)

we simplify to

|[itex]\frac{1}{q}[/itex]|< [itex]\epsilon[/itex]

Is that a sufficient proof

Any thoughts about this is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I do not follow your proof. I do not even understand what (|p|.ϵ-a) is.

Anyway, since you have separated irrationals and rationals, then you have to prove that any sequence of rational numbers converging to an irrational has the denominator going to infinity. It looks like you are trying to prove just that, but I do not see any notion of sequences involved.
 
  • #3
What you need is that for any interval [a, b], for a given q there exist only a finite number of p such that p/q is in that interval. Therefore, as you get closer and closer to any given point, the denominator must go to infinity.
 
  • #4
voko said:
I do not follow your proof. I do not even understand what (|p|.ϵ-a) is.
I'm trying to use the limit definition that
lim x->a f(x)=L
if [itex]\forall[/itex] [itex]\epsilon[/itex]'>0 [itex]\exists[/itex] [itex]\delta[/itex] > 0 such that |x-a|<[itex]\delta[/itex] implies |f(x)-L|<[itex]\epsilon[/itex]'.

In my proof I'm trying to show that
lim (p/q)->a f(x)=0
[itex]\forall[/itex] [itex]\epsilon[/itex]>0 [itex]\exists[/itex] [itex]\delta[/itex] > 0 such that |[itex]\frac{p}{q}[/itex]-a|<[itex]\delta[/itex] implies |[itex]\frac{1}{q}[/itex]-0|<[itex]\epsilon[/itex].

and to show this I've tried to use (|p|.ϵ-a) instead of [itex]\epsilon[/itex]' so that my inequality

[itex]\frac{1}{|q|}[/itex]<[itex]\frac{\delta + a}{|p|}[/itex] simplifies into the desired result which is

|[itex]\frac{1}{q}[/itex]|< [itex]\epsilon[/itex]
 
  • #5
That means p is both part of the ϵ specification, which is supposed to be arbitrary, and part of the value constrained by δ. That does not seem correct in any way.
 

FAQ: Real Analysis limit proof problem.

What is Real Analysis?

Real Analysis is the branch of mathematics that deals with the rigorous study of the real numbers, functions, and sequences. It is a fundamental subject in pure mathematics and is essential for understanding many other areas of mathematics, including calculus, differential equations, and probability theory.

What is a limit in Real Analysis?

In Real Analysis, a limit is a value that a function approaches as its input variable gets closer and closer to a particular value. It is a fundamental concept in calculus and is used to describe the behavior of functions at specific points.

How do you prove a limit in Real Analysis?

To prove a limit in Real Analysis, one must use the formal definition of a limit, which involves showing that for any given epsilon (a small positive number), there exists a corresponding delta (a small positive number) such that the function's values are within epsilon of the limit whenever the input is within delta of the limit point. This proof typically involves using algebraic manipulations, inequalities, and theorems.

What are the challenges in proving limits in Real Analysis?

One of the main challenges in proving limits in Real Analysis is the need for precise and rigorous reasoning. Real Analysis is a highly formal and exact subject, so proofs must be logically sound and free of any errors. Additionally, some limits can be very difficult to calculate and require advanced mathematical techniques to prove.

What are some common mistakes in limit proofs in Real Analysis?

Some common mistakes in limit proofs in Real Analysis include using incorrect notation, making assumptions without proper justification, and skipping steps in the proof. It is also essential to carefully check the validity of any theorems or techniques used in the proof, as using an incorrect or invalid result can lead to an incorrect conclusion.

Back
Top