62
Lokesh Verma
·2009-07-16 00:05:40
I think bhargav means this
The periodic functions f(x): R -> R and g(x): R -> R satisfy the condition:
lim (f(x)-g(x))=0 for all a ε R
x->a
Prove that f(x)=g(x) for every real number x
Bhargav can you confirm this?
62
Lokesh Verma
·2009-07-16 22:02:55
bhargav.. not every one in the world is as smart as u :P
for students in class XII i am sure that not more than 1 in 1000 know tihs definition.
39
Dr.House
·2009-07-16 21:54:21
The proof uses the definiton that for every sub-sequence of the sequence, the limit tends to zero
isnt it obvious?
62
Lokesh Verma
·2009-07-16 21:53:00
In the proof of bhargav, the problem for most ppl will be that the definition of limits is not very obvious.
The proof uses the definiton that for every sub-sequence of the sequence, the limit tends to zero.... that is what he has used.
39
Dr.House
·2009-07-16 21:42:13
here`s a solution:
Suppose T1 and T2 are the periods of f and g respectively. For a fixed x lim(f(x+nT1)-g(x+nT1)) =0 as n->infinity, so lim g(x+nT1)=f(x) as n->infinity. By the same way lim f(x+nT2)=g(x) as n->infinity. We also have lim(f(x+nT1+nT2)-g(x+nT1+nT2)) =0 as n-> infinity, so lim(f(x+nT2)- g(x+nT1))=0 as n->infinity, but this limit is g(x)-f(x) (this is for a fixed x), so g(x)-f(x)=0 for any x.
39
Dr.House
·2009-07-16 21:41:18
sorry i slighly misunderstood the question myself.
KAYMANT SIR`S QUESTION IS RIGHT.
9
Celestine preetham
·2009-07-16 07:52:49
superb counter example sir
learnt a lot from this thread abt continuity and limits
this is a classic
62
Lokesh Verma
·2009-07-16 06:50:45
look at the functions
f(x) = 0
g(x) = 0 if x is not an integer and 1 otherwise
lim x-> a f(X)-g(x) = 0 for all values of a.
Hence the question that I guessed is incorrect :P
I guess Anant sir's question is the correct one :)
9
Celestine preetham
·2009-07-16 06:43:37
sir but it seems so obvious ( i may be wrong also)
lim h(x) =0 for all x
now if there isnt a continuity at x
wont the limit at x→x+ and x→x- not exist ??
66
kaymant
·2009-07-16 01:09:57
but that does not make it continuous.
9
Celestine preetham
·2009-07-16 00:52:26
but here
bhargav has given that lim exists for each and every point
66
kaymant
·2009-07-16 00:09:46
well I have seen a very similar problem, it goes:
Show that if f,g : R → R are continuous and periodic and lim_{x→∞} (f(x)-g(x))=0, then f=g.
I think this is what Bhargav means.
3
msp
·2009-07-14 09:51:39
hey bargave can u pls check the limit
66
kaymant
·2009-07-16 00:02:03
for a limit to exist at a point the function is not required to be continuous. in fact, it need not be defined at that point. consider as an example f(x)=(sin x)/x
What about the limit at x=0 where f is not even defined.
62
Lokesh Verma
·2009-07-15 23:53:29
lim (f(x)-g(x))=0 for all x ε R
this statement is a bit vague
Bhargav has not given where x limits to !
I think what he has written makes not much sense mathematically
Bhargav can you check if you have missed out somthing!?
1
vector
·2009-07-15 23:47:46
fn can bear missing pt discontinuity n still the limit can exist
1
vector
·2009-07-15 23:32:27
for a limit to exist a fn need nt be cntinuous
9
Celestine preetham
·2009-07-15 23:23:25
if h(x) is not continuous then how does limit exist
66
kaymant
·2009-07-15 22:25:49
no celestine, your conclusion presupposes continuity of h(x) but that is not mentioned.
66
kaymant
·2009-07-15 20:04:35
@ b555, I think the limit you are talking about should be x→∞. Additionally, the continuity of these functions are required as well. (I am saying so because provided these I have a proof.)
39
Dr.House
·2009-07-15 10:22:28
thats all the solution u have celestine?
39
Dr.House
·2009-07-14 09:54:09
yes edited. and ,ya, my name is bhargav` not bhargave``