Is “$limlimits_{n to infty}f(x_0+frac{1}{n})=l$” another way of expressing the right-sided limit?












0












$begingroup$


Let $f:mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$. Can we say that $limlimits_{n to infty}f(x_0+frac{1}{n})=l$ is another way of expressing the right-sided limit at $x_0$?

I tried to use the definition of the limit,but I am stuck.Intuitively, it seems true, but I don't know how to prove it.






real-analysis limits definition







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    Let $f:mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$. Can we say that $limlimits_{n to infty}f(x_0+frac{1}{n})=l$ is another way of expressing the right-sided limit at $x_0$?

    I tried to use the definition of the limit,but I am stuck.Intuitively, it seems true, but I don't know how to prove it.






    real-analysis limits definition







    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0





      $begingroup$


      Let $f:mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$. Can we say that $limlimits_{n to infty}f(x_0+frac{1}{n})=l$ is another way of expressing the right-sided limit at $x_0$?

      I tried to use the definition of the limit,but I am stuck.Intuitively, it seems true, but I don't know how to prove it.






      real-analysis limits definition







      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Let $f:mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$. Can we say that $limlimits_{n to infty}f(x_0+frac{1}{n})=l$ is another way of expressing the right-sided limit at $x_0$?

      I tried to use the definition of the limit,but I am stuck.Intuitively, it seems true, but I don't know how to prove it.






      real-analysis limits definition




      real-analysis limits definition






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Apr 19 at 12:53









      user21820

      40.4k544163




      40.4k544163










      asked Apr 19 at 10:24









      Math GuyMath Guy

      1657




      1657






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          10












          $begingroup$

          No, it is not true. Take, for instance,$$f(x)=begin{cases}sinleft(fracpi xright)&text{ if }xneq0\0&text{ if }x=0.end{cases}$$Then the limit $lim_{xto0^+}f(x)$ doesn't exist, in spite of the fact that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Who said that $n$ was an integer ? ;-)
            $endgroup$
            – Yves Daoust
            Apr 19 at 10:35






          • 3




            $begingroup$
            LOL. This is why I prefer the notation for limits that we use in my country: the limit of a sequence $(a_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ is denoted by $lim_{ninmathbb N}a_n$, instead of $lim_{ntoinfty}a_n$. So, there is no ambiguity.
            $endgroup$
            – José Carlos Santos
            Apr 19 at 10:39










          • $begingroup$
            @YvesDaoust it is an integer. In my country, integers are commonly denoted by $n$, this is why I forgot that this may not be the case everywhere.
            $endgroup$
            – Math Guy
            Apr 19 at 11:42








          • 2




            $begingroup$
            @MathGuy: in my country, "n" stands for "not-necessarily-natural" and is short for "nnn" :-)
            $endgroup$
            – Yves Daoust
            Apr 19 at 11:47





















          6












          $begingroup$

          No. Right hand limit of $f$ at $x_0$ is $l$ if $f(x_0+r_n) to l$ for every sequence $(r_n)$ decreasing to $0$. A particular sequence will not do. For example, take $f(x)=0$ for $x$ rational and $1$ for $x$ irrational. Take $x_0=0$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$














            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3193405%2fis-lim-limits-n-to-inftyfx-0-frac1n-l-another-way-of-expressing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            10












            $begingroup$

            No, it is not true. Take, for instance,$$f(x)=begin{cases}sinleft(fracpi xright)&text{ if }xneq0\0&text{ if }x=0.end{cases}$$Then the limit $lim_{xto0^+}f(x)$ doesn't exist, in spite of the fact that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$









            • 2




              $begingroup$
              Who said that $n$ was an integer ? ;-)
              $endgroup$
              – Yves Daoust
              Apr 19 at 10:35






            • 3




              $begingroup$
              LOL. This is why I prefer the notation for limits that we use in my country: the limit of a sequence $(a_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ is denoted by $lim_{ninmathbb N}a_n$, instead of $lim_{ntoinfty}a_n$. So, there is no ambiguity.
              $endgroup$
              – José Carlos Santos
              Apr 19 at 10:39










            • $begingroup$
              @YvesDaoust it is an integer. In my country, integers are commonly denoted by $n$, this is why I forgot that this may not be the case everywhere.
              $endgroup$
              – Math Guy
              Apr 19 at 11:42








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              @MathGuy: in my country, "n" stands for "not-necessarily-natural" and is short for "nnn" :-)
              $endgroup$
              – Yves Daoust
              Apr 19 at 11:47


















            10












            $begingroup$

            No, it is not true. Take, for instance,$$f(x)=begin{cases}sinleft(fracpi xright)&text{ if }xneq0\0&text{ if }x=0.end{cases}$$Then the limit $lim_{xto0^+}f(x)$ doesn't exist, in spite of the fact that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$









            • 2




              $begingroup$
              Who said that $n$ was an integer ? ;-)
              $endgroup$
              – Yves Daoust
              Apr 19 at 10:35






            • 3




              $begingroup$
              LOL. This is why I prefer the notation for limits that we use in my country: the limit of a sequence $(a_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ is denoted by $lim_{ninmathbb N}a_n$, instead of $lim_{ntoinfty}a_n$. So, there is no ambiguity.
              $endgroup$
              – José Carlos Santos
              Apr 19 at 10:39










            • $begingroup$
              @YvesDaoust it is an integer. In my country, integers are commonly denoted by $n$, this is why I forgot that this may not be the case everywhere.
              $endgroup$
              – Math Guy
              Apr 19 at 11:42








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              @MathGuy: in my country, "n" stands for "not-necessarily-natural" and is short for "nnn" :-)
              $endgroup$
              – Yves Daoust
              Apr 19 at 11:47
















            10












            10








            10





            $begingroup$

            No, it is not true. Take, for instance,$$f(x)=begin{cases}sinleft(fracpi xright)&text{ if }xneq0\0&text{ if }x=0.end{cases}$$Then the limit $lim_{xto0^+}f(x)$ doesn't exist, in spite of the fact that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            No, it is not true. Take, for instance,$$f(x)=begin{cases}sinleft(fracpi xright)&text{ if }xneq0\0&text{ if }x=0.end{cases}$$Then the limit $lim_{xto0^+}f(x)$ doesn't exist, in spite of the fact that $lim_{ntoinfty}fleft(frac1nright)=0$.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Apr 19 at 20:51

























            answered Apr 19 at 10:27









            José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos

            177k24138250




            177k24138250








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              Who said that $n$ was an integer ? ;-)
              $endgroup$
              – Yves Daoust
              Apr 19 at 10:35






            • 3




              $begingroup$
              LOL. This is why I prefer the notation for limits that we use in my country: the limit of a sequence $(a_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ is denoted by $lim_{ninmathbb N}a_n$, instead of $lim_{ntoinfty}a_n$. So, there is no ambiguity.
              $endgroup$
              – José Carlos Santos
              Apr 19 at 10:39










            • $begingroup$
              @YvesDaoust it is an integer. In my country, integers are commonly denoted by $n$, this is why I forgot that this may not be the case everywhere.
              $endgroup$
              – Math Guy
              Apr 19 at 11:42








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              @MathGuy: in my country, "n" stands for "not-necessarily-natural" and is short for "nnn" :-)
              $endgroup$
              – Yves Daoust
              Apr 19 at 11:47
















            • 2




              $begingroup$
              Who said that $n$ was an integer ? ;-)
              $endgroup$
              – Yves Daoust
              Apr 19 at 10:35






            • 3




              $begingroup$
              LOL. This is why I prefer the notation for limits that we use in my country: the limit of a sequence $(a_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ is denoted by $lim_{ninmathbb N}a_n$, instead of $lim_{ntoinfty}a_n$. So, there is no ambiguity.
              $endgroup$
              – José Carlos Santos
              Apr 19 at 10:39










            • $begingroup$
              @YvesDaoust it is an integer. In my country, integers are commonly denoted by $n$, this is why I forgot that this may not be the case everywhere.
              $endgroup$
              – Math Guy
              Apr 19 at 11:42








            • 2




              $begingroup$
              @MathGuy: in my country, "n" stands for "not-necessarily-natural" and is short for "nnn" :-)
              $endgroup$
              – Yves Daoust
              Apr 19 at 11:47










            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            Who said that $n$ was an integer ? ;-)
            $endgroup$
            – Yves Daoust
            Apr 19 at 10:35




            $begingroup$
            Who said that $n$ was an integer ? ;-)
            $endgroup$
            – Yves Daoust
            Apr 19 at 10:35




            3




            3




            $begingroup$
            LOL. This is why I prefer the notation for limits that we use in my country: the limit of a sequence $(a_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ is denoted by $lim_{ninmathbb N}a_n$, instead of $lim_{ntoinfty}a_n$. So, there is no ambiguity.
            $endgroup$
            – José Carlos Santos
            Apr 19 at 10:39




            $begingroup$
            LOL. This is why I prefer the notation for limits that we use in my country: the limit of a sequence $(a_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ is denoted by $lim_{ninmathbb N}a_n$, instead of $lim_{ntoinfty}a_n$. So, there is no ambiguity.
            $endgroup$
            – José Carlos Santos
            Apr 19 at 10:39












            $begingroup$
            @YvesDaoust it is an integer. In my country, integers are commonly denoted by $n$, this is why I forgot that this may not be the case everywhere.
            $endgroup$
            – Math Guy
            Apr 19 at 11:42






            $begingroup$
            @YvesDaoust it is an integer. In my country, integers are commonly denoted by $n$, this is why I forgot that this may not be the case everywhere.
            $endgroup$
            – Math Guy
            Apr 19 at 11:42






            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            @MathGuy: in my country, "n" stands for "not-necessarily-natural" and is short for "nnn" :-)
            $endgroup$
            – Yves Daoust
            Apr 19 at 11:47






            $begingroup$
            @MathGuy: in my country, "n" stands for "not-necessarily-natural" and is short for "nnn" :-)
            $endgroup$
            – Yves Daoust
            Apr 19 at 11:47













            6












            $begingroup$

            No. Right hand limit of $f$ at $x_0$ is $l$ if $f(x_0+r_n) to l$ for every sequence $(r_n)$ decreasing to $0$. A particular sequence will not do. For example, take $f(x)=0$ for $x$ rational and $1$ for $x$ irrational. Take $x_0=0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              6












              $begingroup$

              No. Right hand limit of $f$ at $x_0$ is $l$ if $f(x_0+r_n) to l$ for every sequence $(r_n)$ decreasing to $0$. A particular sequence will not do. For example, take $f(x)=0$ for $x$ rational and $1$ for $x$ irrational. Take $x_0=0$.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                6












                6








                6





                $begingroup$

                No. Right hand limit of $f$ at $x_0$ is $l$ if $f(x_0+r_n) to l$ for every sequence $(r_n)$ decreasing to $0$. A particular sequence will not do. For example, take $f(x)=0$ for $x$ rational and $1$ for $x$ irrational. Take $x_0=0$.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                No. Right hand limit of $f$ at $x_0$ is $l$ if $f(x_0+r_n) to l$ for every sequence $(r_n)$ decreasing to $0$. A particular sequence will not do. For example, take $f(x)=0$ for $x$ rational and $1$ for $x$ irrational. Take $x_0=0$.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Apr 19 at 10:27









                Kavi Rama MurthyKavi Rama Murthy

                77.3k53471




                77.3k53471






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid …



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3193405%2fis-lim-limits-n-to-inftyfx-0-frac1n-l-another-way-of-expressing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Plaza Victoria

                    Image
                    Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l
                    Read more

                    Puebla de Zaragoza

                    Image
                    Para otros usos de este término, véase Puebla (desambiguación). Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localidad De arriba a abajo de izquierda a derecha: Estrella de Puebla, Volcán Popocatépetl, Catedral de Puebla, Monumento a Ignacio Zaragoza, Estadio Cuauhtémoc, Angelópolis y Vista panorámica de la ciudad. Escudo Otros nombres: El relicario de América/ La ciudad de los Ángeles/ La Angelópolis Lema: Muy noble y muy leal ciudad de Puebla de los Ángeles Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en México Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en Puebla Mapa interactivo Coordenadas 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Coordenadas: 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Idioma oficial Español Entidad Localidad  • País   México  • Estado Puebla  • Municipio Puebla Presidente municipal Claudia Rivera Vivanc
                    Read more

                    Musa

                    Image
                    Para el género de plantas, véase Musa (planta). Apolo y la Nueve Musas En la mitología griega, las musas (en griego antiguo μοῦσαι « mousai» ) son, según los escritores más antiguos, las divinidades inspiradoras de las Artes: cada una de ellas está relacionada con ramas artísticas y del conocimiento. Son hijas de Zeus y de Mnemósine, compañeras del séquito de Apolo, dios olímpico de la música y patrón de las bellas artes, quien tuvo romances con cada una de ellas, dejando descendientes. Bajaban a la tierra a susurrar ideas e inspirar a aquellos mortales que las invocaran. En la época más arcaica eran las ninfas inspiradoras de las fuentes, en las cuales eran adoradas. Finalmente, alrededor de los siglos VIII-VII a. C. [ 1 ] ​ prevaleció en todo el territorio de la Hélade la adoración de las nueve Musas, que son Calíope, Clío, Erato, Euterpe, Melpómene, Polimnia, Talía, Terpsícore y Urania. El culto a las musas era originalmente de Tracia y Beocia, y fueron de vital impo
                    Read more