Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sec2 2
Sec2 2
Math 2451
So y1 y < y and y y1 < y. The latter inequality implies y1 > 0, that is,
(x1 ; y1 ) 2 A. Therefore Dr (x; y) A, and we conclude that A is open.
because this will imply that Dr (x; y) D and we will be able to conclude that
D is open. To this end we observe that, by the triangle inequality,
But k(x1 ; y1 ) (x; y)k < r so by subtracting k(x1 ; y1 ) (x; y)k from both sides
of the previous inequality we see that
as desired.
2
cos x 1 sin2 x
5. (b) lim x2 = lim cosxx2 1 ( cos x+1
lim x2cos
cos x+1 ) = x!0
x 1
(cos x+1) = x!0
lim x2 (cos x+1) =
x!0 x!0
lim sinx x sinx x cos 1x+1 = (1)(1)( 12 ) = 12 . Or, we could use L’Hospital’s
x!0
rule since we have the indeterminate form " 00 ".
h
(c) Given lim e h 1 ; we directly substitute in the limit value to see that we
h!0
have the indeterminate form " 1 0 1 = 00 " so we may apply L’Hospital’s rule to
see that
d h
eh 1 dh (e 1) eh
lim = lim d
= lim = 1:
h!0 h h!0
dh (h)
h!0 1
1
6. (a) lim x3 y = (0)(1) = 0:
(x;y)!(0;1)
2 2
(b) lim sinx x = lim sinx x x
x = lim sin x
x
sin x
x
x
1 = (1)(1)(0) = 0:
x!0 x!0 x!0
2
(c) lim sin2 x = lim sinx x sin x
= (1)(1) = 1:
x!0 x x!0 x
x3 y 3 r3 cos3 r3 sin3
lim , lim = lim r(cos3 sin3 ) = 0:
(x;y)!(0;0) x2 + y 2 r!0 r2 r!0
exy e0
10. (a) lim x+1 = 0+1 = 1:
(x;y)!(0;0)
2
cos x 1 x2
(b) Given lim x4 +y 4 we consider …rst the path x = 0 and …nd
(x;y)!(0;0)
cos(0) 1 0 1 1 0
lim = lim = lim = 0:
y!0 y4 y!0 y4 y!0 y4
x2
cos x 1
However, if we consider the path y = 0 then we must compute lim x4
2
.
x!0
Since this limit is an indeterminate of the form " 00 ",
we may repeatedly apply L’
Hospital’s rule until we achieve a limit that is not of indeterminate form. That
is,
2
cos x 1 x2 sin x x cos x 1
lim 4
= lim 3
= lim
x!0 x x!0 4x x!0 12x2
But
1 cos x 1
lim cos x 1 = 2 and lim = 1 so lim = ( 2)(1) = 1:
x!0 x!0 12x2 x!0 12x2
Since the limit is not path-independent, we conclude that the limit does not
exist.
(x y)2 x2
(c) Given lim x2 +y 2 we consider …rst the path y = 0 and …nd lim x2 =
(x;y)!(0;0) x!0
2
1. However, if we consider the path x = y then we compute lim (x2xx)
2 = 0:
x!0
Since the limit is not path-independent, we conclude that the limit does not
exist.
2
12. (a) We observe that our given limit is of the indeterminate form " 00 "
so that we may apply L’Hospital’s rule repeatedly until we reach a determinate
form to obtain
sin 2x 2x 2 cos 2x 2 4 sin 2x 4 sin 2x 4
lim = lim = lim = lim = :
x!0 x3 x!0 3x2 x!0 6x 3 x!0 2x 3
4
(b) Along the path y = 0 our limit reduces to part (a) so equals 3. Along
the path x = y we apply L’Hospital’s rule repeatedly to obtain
sin 2x x 2 cos 2x 1
lim = lim = 1:
x!0 x3 + x x!0 3x2 + 1
Since our limit is path dependent we conclude that it does not exist.
(c) We convert our limit to spherical coordinates to obtain
2
2x2 y cos z 2 3
(sin ' cos ) (sin ' sin ) cos z
lim = lim =0
(x;y;z)!(0;0;0) x2 + y 2 !0 2 (sin ' cos + sin ' sin )
kf (x) Lk = k1 1k = 0 <
whenever
0 < kx x0 k <
since f (x) = 1 is the constant function and L = 1. We conclude that
lim f (x) = 1:
x!x0
(b) No, since the limit does not exist, we cannot remove the discontinuity
at (0; 0). Indeed, along the path y = 0 we have lim x02 = 0 but along the path
x!0
x2
y = x we have lim 2x2 = 21 .
x!0
3
(c) By theorem, it is su¢ cient to observe that f is the sum of products and
powers of continuous functions.
xyz
18. Given lim 2 2 2 let x = sin ' cos , y = sin ' sin , and
(x;y;z)!(0;0;0) x +y +z
z = cos ' so that
3
(sin ' cos )(sin ' sin )(cos ')
= lim 2
= lim (sin ' cos )(sin ' sin )(cos ') = 0:
!0 !0
kx yk < s < t
so y 2 Dt (x) :
(b) If U is a neighborhood of x then, by de…nition, U is open and x 2 U . If
V is also a neighborhood of x then clearly x 2 U \ V . It remains to be shown
that U \ V is open. To this end we must show that for every y 2 U \ V there
is some r > 0 such that Dr (y) U \ V . If y 2 U \ V then y 2 U and y 2 V
so we may choose r; s > 0 such that Dr (y) U and Ds (y) V . Now choose
t = 21 minfr; sg. Without loss of generality, assume r < s. From part (a) we
have t < r < s so that
(b r; b + r) = Dr (b) U:
But
1 1 1 1
(b r) 2 I; (b + r) 2 = I and (b r) ; (b + r) 2 U:
2 2 2 2
Since every neighborhood of b contains points in I and points not in I, we
conclude that b is a boundary point of I. A similar argument works for a.
kz yk
f : Rn ! R by f (z) = :
kz xk + kx yk
4
Obviously, f (x) = 1, f (y) = 0 and 0 f (z). Now, by the triangle inequality,
we have
kz yk kz xk + kx yk
kz yk kz xk + kx yk so = 1:
kz xk + kx yk kz xk + kx yk
which, by de…nition, is equivalent to for every > 0 there is > 0 such that
0 < kx x0 k < implies
If
lim kf (x) f (x0 )k = 0
x!x0
then, by de…nition, for every > 0 there is > 0 such that 0 < kx x0 k <
implies
kkf (x) f (x0 )k 0k = kf (x) f (x0 )k < :
Clearly the two de…nitions are equivalent.
5
and f is continuous at x0 2 Rn so, by de…nition, for every > 0 there exists
> 0 such that kx x0 k < implies
So consider
D (x0 ) = fx 2 Rn : kx f (x0 )k < g:
For any x 2 D (x0 ) we have f (x) 2 D (f (x0 )) U so that x 2 f 1 (U ) and
therefore D (x0 ) f 1 (U ). Since x0 2 f 1 (U ) was arbitrary, we conclude
1
that f (U ) is open. Conversely, if we assume that the inverse image of open
sets are open then for every U open we must have f 1 (U ) open. Choose some
x0 2 Rn . Then f (x0 ) 2 f (Rn ) Rm . Since every point in Rm is contained
in some open set, there exists some neighborhood U of f (x0 ). Furthermore,
we may choose some > 0 so that D (f (x0 )) U . Clearly D (f (x0 )) is open
so, by assumption, we must have that
1
f (D (f (x0 ))) = fx 2 Rn : f (x) 2 D (f (x0 ))g
That is, for every > 0 there is some > 0 such that kf (x) f (x0 )k <
whenever kx x0 k < . Since x0 2 Rn was arbitrary, we conclude that f is
continuous at all points.