Is there a function $f(x)$ such that $lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$ for all $x_0$ in some interval? [on...
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Let $f(x)$ be a real valued function with its domain in $mathbb{R}$. Is there an example of $f(x)$ such that
$$lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$$
for all $x_0$ in some interval?
calculus real-analysis examples-counterexamples
put on hold as off-topic by user10354138, Brahadeesh, user302797, Kavi Rama Murthy, Chinnapparaj R yesterday
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user10354138, Brahadeesh, user302797, Kavi Rama Murthy, Chinnapparaj R
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Let $f(x)$ be a real valued function with its domain in $mathbb{R}$. Is there an example of $f(x)$ such that
$$lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$$
for all $x_0$ in some interval?
calculus real-analysis examples-counterexamples
put on hold as off-topic by user10354138, Brahadeesh, user302797, Kavi Rama Murthy, Chinnapparaj R yesterday
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user10354138, Brahadeesh, user302797, Kavi Rama Murthy, Chinnapparaj R
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
4
No.in orden to make sense The Notion of LIMIT, The point must be accessible, that is, it must be an acumulation point.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
1
@TitoEliatron could you add a formal proof of this? I'm not terribly experienced in RA, but it seems feasible that a sufficiently "hilly" function will have the desired behavior.
– DreamConspiracy
yesterday
2
@TitoEliatron What are you talking about? If $x_0in[a,b]$ then $x_0$ is an accumulation point of $[a,b]$.
– David C. Ullrich
yesterday
Ok. I see my misunderstanding. Sorry. I was think it on some regular function.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
Relaten to this question, is there a function such that for any $x_0in [a,b]$ there is a subsequence $(x_k^0)$ such that $x_k^0to x_0$ and $f(x_k^0)to x_0$?
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Let $f(x)$ be a real valued function with its domain in $mathbb{R}$. Is there an example of $f(x)$ such that
$$lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$$
for all $x_0$ in some interval?
calculus real-analysis examples-counterexamples
Let $f(x)$ be a real valued function with its domain in $mathbb{R}$. Is there an example of $f(x)$ such that
$$lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$$
for all $x_0$ in some interval?
calculus real-analysis examples-counterexamples
calculus real-analysis examples-counterexamples
asked yesterday
user300871
7315
7315
put on hold as off-topic by user10354138, Brahadeesh, user302797, Kavi Rama Murthy, Chinnapparaj R yesterday
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user10354138, Brahadeesh, user302797, Kavi Rama Murthy, Chinnapparaj R
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as off-topic by user10354138, Brahadeesh, user302797, Kavi Rama Murthy, Chinnapparaj R yesterday
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user10354138, Brahadeesh, user302797, Kavi Rama Murthy, Chinnapparaj R
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
4
No.in orden to make sense The Notion of LIMIT, The point must be accessible, that is, it must be an acumulation point.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
1
@TitoEliatron could you add a formal proof of this? I'm not terribly experienced in RA, but it seems feasible that a sufficiently "hilly" function will have the desired behavior.
– DreamConspiracy
yesterday
2
@TitoEliatron What are you talking about? If $x_0in[a,b]$ then $x_0$ is an accumulation point of $[a,b]$.
– David C. Ullrich
yesterday
Ok. I see my misunderstanding. Sorry. I was think it on some regular function.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
Relaten to this question, is there a function such that for any $x_0in [a,b]$ there is a subsequence $(x_k^0)$ such that $x_k^0to x_0$ and $f(x_k^0)to x_0$?
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
add a comment |
4
No.in orden to make sense The Notion of LIMIT, The point must be accessible, that is, it must be an acumulation point.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
1
@TitoEliatron could you add a formal proof of this? I'm not terribly experienced in RA, but it seems feasible that a sufficiently "hilly" function will have the desired behavior.
– DreamConspiracy
yesterday
2
@TitoEliatron What are you talking about? If $x_0in[a,b]$ then $x_0$ is an accumulation point of $[a,b]$.
– David C. Ullrich
yesterday
Ok. I see my misunderstanding. Sorry. I was think it on some regular function.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
Relaten to this question, is there a function such that for any $x_0in [a,b]$ there is a subsequence $(x_k^0)$ such that $x_k^0to x_0$ and $f(x_k^0)to x_0$?
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
4
4
No.in orden to make sense The Notion of LIMIT, The point must be accessible, that is, it must be an acumulation point.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
No.in orden to make sense The Notion of LIMIT, The point must be accessible, that is, it must be an acumulation point.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
1
1
@TitoEliatron could you add a formal proof of this? I'm not terribly experienced in RA, but it seems feasible that a sufficiently "hilly" function will have the desired behavior.
– DreamConspiracy
yesterday
@TitoEliatron could you add a formal proof of this? I'm not terribly experienced in RA, but it seems feasible that a sufficiently "hilly" function will have the desired behavior.
– DreamConspiracy
yesterday
2
2
@TitoEliatron What are you talking about? If $x_0in[a,b]$ then $x_0$ is an accumulation point of $[a,b]$.
– David C. Ullrich
yesterday
@TitoEliatron What are you talking about? If $x_0in[a,b]$ then $x_0$ is an accumulation point of $[a,b]$.
– David C. Ullrich
yesterday
Ok. I see my misunderstanding. Sorry. I was think it on some regular function.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
Ok. I see my misunderstanding. Sorry. I was think it on some regular function.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
Relaten to this question, is there a function such that for any $x_0in [a,b]$ there is a subsequence $(x_k^0)$ such that $x_k^0to x_0$ and $f(x_k^0)to x_0$?
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
Relaten to this question, is there a function such that for any $x_0in [a,b]$ there is a subsequence $(x_k^0)$ such that $x_k^0to x_0$ and $f(x_k^0)to x_0$?
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
10
down vote
Assuming that "domain in $Bbb R$" means $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$: No. Say $f:[a,b]toBbb R$. For $ninBbb Z$ let $$E_n={xin[a,b]:f(x)le n}.$$Then $$[a,b]=bigcup_{ninBbb Z} E_n.$$Since $[a,b]$ is uncountable this shows that there exists $n$ such that $E_n$ is infinite. So $E_n$ has an accumulation point $x_0in[a,b]$, and hence $f$ does not tend to infinty at $x_0$.
+1 very nice argument.
– Paramanand Singh
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Short answer: Yes.
While David C. Ullrich has given what seems to be a good answer, there's a fatal flaw. It assumes that $f$ is defined everywhere in some interval. The question, however, only says that the domain is in $Bbb{R}$, and makes no other assertions.
The function:
In fact, there is a function $f$ which is defined on the rationals that has the property you want. In fact, it has the property that for all $x_0inBbb{R}$ it has $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)= infty.$$
Define $f:Bbb{Q}to Bbb{R}$ by $f(p/q)=q$, where $p/q$ is the expression of the rational number in least terms.
Then for any $n$, the set of points at which $f$ has value less than or equal to $n$ is a subset of $bigcup_{k=1}^nfrac{1}{k}Bbb{Z}$, which is a finite union of discrete subsets of $Bbb{R}$, and hence itself a discrete subset of $Bbb{R}$.
Thus every point of $Bbb{R}$ has a punctured neighborhood disjoint from this set, and hence for every $ninBbb{N}$, and every $x_0inBbb{R}$ there exists $epsilon > 0$ such that for all $qin Bbb{Q}$ with $0<|x_0-q|<epsilon$ $f(q) > n$. However, this is exactly what it means for
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x) = infty.$$
Wrong argument at $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$. By definition, $lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$ means $forall nin mathbb{N}, exists epsilon>0$ such that $f(x)>n$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-x_0|<epsilon$ (not $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$).
– user300871
16 hours ago
2
@user300871 That's incorrect. If we defined it that way, then the limit of the function $g(x)=1/x^2$ for $xne 0$ with $g(0)=0$ wouldn't have that the limit at 0 is $infty$. Limits of functions are usually defined by using punctured neighborhoods, so that the value of the function at the point doesn't influence the limit.
– jgon
16 hours ago
you're right, I'm wrong.
– user300871
15 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
10
down vote
Assuming that "domain in $Bbb R$" means $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$: No. Say $f:[a,b]toBbb R$. For $ninBbb Z$ let $$E_n={xin[a,b]:f(x)le n}.$$Then $$[a,b]=bigcup_{ninBbb Z} E_n.$$Since $[a,b]$ is uncountable this shows that there exists $n$ such that $E_n$ is infinite. So $E_n$ has an accumulation point $x_0in[a,b]$, and hence $f$ does not tend to infinty at $x_0$.
+1 very nice argument.
– Paramanand Singh
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
Assuming that "domain in $Bbb R$" means $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$: No. Say $f:[a,b]toBbb R$. For $ninBbb Z$ let $$E_n={xin[a,b]:f(x)le n}.$$Then $$[a,b]=bigcup_{ninBbb Z} E_n.$$Since $[a,b]$ is uncountable this shows that there exists $n$ such that $E_n$ is infinite. So $E_n$ has an accumulation point $x_0in[a,b]$, and hence $f$ does not tend to infinty at $x_0$.
+1 very nice argument.
– Paramanand Singh
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
up vote
10
down vote
Assuming that "domain in $Bbb R$" means $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$: No. Say $f:[a,b]toBbb R$. For $ninBbb Z$ let $$E_n={xin[a,b]:f(x)le n}.$$Then $$[a,b]=bigcup_{ninBbb Z} E_n.$$Since $[a,b]$ is uncountable this shows that there exists $n$ such that $E_n$ is infinite. So $E_n$ has an accumulation point $x_0in[a,b]$, and hence $f$ does not tend to infinty at $x_0$.
Assuming that "domain in $Bbb R$" means $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$: No. Say $f:[a,b]toBbb R$. For $ninBbb Z$ let $$E_n={xin[a,b]:f(x)le n}.$$Then $$[a,b]=bigcup_{ninBbb Z} E_n.$$Since $[a,b]$ is uncountable this shows that there exists $n$ such that $E_n$ is infinite. So $E_n$ has an accumulation point $x_0in[a,b]$, and hence $f$ does not tend to infinty at $x_0$.
edited 16 hours ago
answered yesterday
David C. Ullrich
57.3k43791
57.3k43791
+1 very nice argument.
– Paramanand Singh
yesterday
add a comment |
+1 very nice argument.
– Paramanand Singh
yesterday
+1 very nice argument.
– Paramanand Singh
yesterday
+1 very nice argument.
– Paramanand Singh
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Short answer: Yes.
While David C. Ullrich has given what seems to be a good answer, there's a fatal flaw. It assumes that $f$ is defined everywhere in some interval. The question, however, only says that the domain is in $Bbb{R}$, and makes no other assertions.
The function:
In fact, there is a function $f$ which is defined on the rationals that has the property you want. In fact, it has the property that for all $x_0inBbb{R}$ it has $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)= infty.$$
Define $f:Bbb{Q}to Bbb{R}$ by $f(p/q)=q$, where $p/q$ is the expression of the rational number in least terms.
Then for any $n$, the set of points at which $f$ has value less than or equal to $n$ is a subset of $bigcup_{k=1}^nfrac{1}{k}Bbb{Z}$, which is a finite union of discrete subsets of $Bbb{R}$, and hence itself a discrete subset of $Bbb{R}$.
Thus every point of $Bbb{R}$ has a punctured neighborhood disjoint from this set, and hence for every $ninBbb{N}$, and every $x_0inBbb{R}$ there exists $epsilon > 0$ such that for all $qin Bbb{Q}$ with $0<|x_0-q|<epsilon$ $f(q) > n$. However, this is exactly what it means for
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x) = infty.$$
Wrong argument at $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$. By definition, $lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$ means $forall nin mathbb{N}, exists epsilon>0$ such that $f(x)>n$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-x_0|<epsilon$ (not $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$).
– user300871
16 hours ago
2
@user300871 That's incorrect. If we defined it that way, then the limit of the function $g(x)=1/x^2$ for $xne 0$ with $g(0)=0$ wouldn't have that the limit at 0 is $infty$. Limits of functions are usually defined by using punctured neighborhoods, so that the value of the function at the point doesn't influence the limit.
– jgon
16 hours ago
you're right, I'm wrong.
– user300871
15 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Short answer: Yes.
While David C. Ullrich has given what seems to be a good answer, there's a fatal flaw. It assumes that $f$ is defined everywhere in some interval. The question, however, only says that the domain is in $Bbb{R}$, and makes no other assertions.
The function:
In fact, there is a function $f$ which is defined on the rationals that has the property you want. In fact, it has the property that for all $x_0inBbb{R}$ it has $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)= infty.$$
Define $f:Bbb{Q}to Bbb{R}$ by $f(p/q)=q$, where $p/q$ is the expression of the rational number in least terms.
Then for any $n$, the set of points at which $f$ has value less than or equal to $n$ is a subset of $bigcup_{k=1}^nfrac{1}{k}Bbb{Z}$, which is a finite union of discrete subsets of $Bbb{R}$, and hence itself a discrete subset of $Bbb{R}$.
Thus every point of $Bbb{R}$ has a punctured neighborhood disjoint from this set, and hence for every $ninBbb{N}$, and every $x_0inBbb{R}$ there exists $epsilon > 0$ such that for all $qin Bbb{Q}$ with $0<|x_0-q|<epsilon$ $f(q) > n$. However, this is exactly what it means for
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x) = infty.$$
Wrong argument at $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$. By definition, $lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$ means $forall nin mathbb{N}, exists epsilon>0$ such that $f(x)>n$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-x_0|<epsilon$ (not $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$).
– user300871
16 hours ago
2
@user300871 That's incorrect. If we defined it that way, then the limit of the function $g(x)=1/x^2$ for $xne 0$ with $g(0)=0$ wouldn't have that the limit at 0 is $infty$. Limits of functions are usually defined by using punctured neighborhoods, so that the value of the function at the point doesn't influence the limit.
– jgon
16 hours ago
you're right, I'm wrong.
– user300871
15 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Short answer: Yes.
While David C. Ullrich has given what seems to be a good answer, there's a fatal flaw. It assumes that $f$ is defined everywhere in some interval. The question, however, only says that the domain is in $Bbb{R}$, and makes no other assertions.
The function:
In fact, there is a function $f$ which is defined on the rationals that has the property you want. In fact, it has the property that for all $x_0inBbb{R}$ it has $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)= infty.$$
Define $f:Bbb{Q}to Bbb{R}$ by $f(p/q)=q$, where $p/q$ is the expression of the rational number in least terms.
Then for any $n$, the set of points at which $f$ has value less than or equal to $n$ is a subset of $bigcup_{k=1}^nfrac{1}{k}Bbb{Z}$, which is a finite union of discrete subsets of $Bbb{R}$, and hence itself a discrete subset of $Bbb{R}$.
Thus every point of $Bbb{R}$ has a punctured neighborhood disjoint from this set, and hence for every $ninBbb{N}$, and every $x_0inBbb{R}$ there exists $epsilon > 0$ such that for all $qin Bbb{Q}$ with $0<|x_0-q|<epsilon$ $f(q) > n$. However, this is exactly what it means for
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x) = infty.$$
Short answer: Yes.
While David C. Ullrich has given what seems to be a good answer, there's a fatal flaw. It assumes that $f$ is defined everywhere in some interval. The question, however, only says that the domain is in $Bbb{R}$, and makes no other assertions.
The function:
In fact, there is a function $f$ which is defined on the rationals that has the property you want. In fact, it has the property that for all $x_0inBbb{R}$ it has $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)= infty.$$
Define $f:Bbb{Q}to Bbb{R}$ by $f(p/q)=q$, where $p/q$ is the expression of the rational number in least terms.
Then for any $n$, the set of points at which $f$ has value less than or equal to $n$ is a subset of $bigcup_{k=1}^nfrac{1}{k}Bbb{Z}$, which is a finite union of discrete subsets of $Bbb{R}$, and hence itself a discrete subset of $Bbb{R}$.
Thus every point of $Bbb{R}$ has a punctured neighborhood disjoint from this set, and hence for every $ninBbb{N}$, and every $x_0inBbb{R}$ there exists $epsilon > 0$ such that for all $qin Bbb{Q}$ with $0<|x_0-q|<epsilon$ $f(q) > n$. However, this is exactly what it means for
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x) = infty.$$
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
jgon
10.2k11638
10.2k11638
Wrong argument at $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$. By definition, $lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$ means $forall nin mathbb{N}, exists epsilon>0$ such that $f(x)>n$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-x_0|<epsilon$ (not $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$).
– user300871
16 hours ago
2
@user300871 That's incorrect. If we defined it that way, then the limit of the function $g(x)=1/x^2$ for $xne 0$ with $g(0)=0$ wouldn't have that the limit at 0 is $infty$. Limits of functions are usually defined by using punctured neighborhoods, so that the value of the function at the point doesn't influence the limit.
– jgon
16 hours ago
you're right, I'm wrong.
– user300871
15 hours ago
add a comment |
Wrong argument at $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$. By definition, $lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$ means $forall nin mathbb{N}, exists epsilon>0$ such that $f(x)>n$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-x_0|<epsilon$ (not $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$).
– user300871
16 hours ago
2
@user300871 That's incorrect. If we defined it that way, then the limit of the function $g(x)=1/x^2$ for $xne 0$ with $g(0)=0$ wouldn't have that the limit at 0 is $infty$. Limits of functions are usually defined by using punctured neighborhoods, so that the value of the function at the point doesn't influence the limit.
– jgon
16 hours ago
you're right, I'm wrong.
– user300871
15 hours ago
Wrong argument at $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$. By definition, $lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$ means $forall nin mathbb{N}, exists epsilon>0$ such that $f(x)>n$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-x_0|<epsilon$ (not $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$).
– user300871
16 hours ago
Wrong argument at $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$. By definition, $lim_{xrightarrow x_0}f(x)=infty$ means $forall nin mathbb{N}, exists epsilon>0$ such that $f(x)>n$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-x_0|<epsilon$ (not $0<|x-x_0|<epsilon$).
– user300871
16 hours ago
2
2
@user300871 That's incorrect. If we defined it that way, then the limit of the function $g(x)=1/x^2$ for $xne 0$ with $g(0)=0$ wouldn't have that the limit at 0 is $infty$. Limits of functions are usually defined by using punctured neighborhoods, so that the value of the function at the point doesn't influence the limit.
– jgon
16 hours ago
@user300871 That's incorrect. If we defined it that way, then the limit of the function $g(x)=1/x^2$ for $xne 0$ with $g(0)=0$ wouldn't have that the limit at 0 is $infty$. Limits of functions are usually defined by using punctured neighborhoods, so that the value of the function at the point doesn't influence the limit.
– jgon
16 hours ago
you're right, I'm wrong.
– user300871
15 hours ago
you're right, I'm wrong.
– user300871
15 hours ago
add a comment |
4
No.in orden to make sense The Notion of LIMIT, The point must be accessible, that is, it must be an acumulation point.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
1
@TitoEliatron could you add a formal proof of this? I'm not terribly experienced in RA, but it seems feasible that a sufficiently "hilly" function will have the desired behavior.
– DreamConspiracy
yesterday
2
@TitoEliatron What are you talking about? If $x_0in[a,b]$ then $x_0$ is an accumulation point of $[a,b]$.
– David C. Ullrich
yesterday
Ok. I see my misunderstanding. Sorry. I was think it on some regular function.
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday
Relaten to this question, is there a function such that for any $x_0in [a,b]$ there is a subsequence $(x_k^0)$ such that $x_k^0to x_0$ and $f(x_k^0)to x_0$?
– Tito Eliatron
yesterday