Prove $x^n$ is not uniformly convergent











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
5












This question pertains to the sequence of functions $f_n(x)=x^n$ on the interval $[0,1]$.



It can be shown this sequence of functions ${f_n}$ converges point-wise to the limit $f$ where $f$ is defined by $f(x)=0$ on $[0,1)$ and $f(x)=1$ at $x=1$.



However, this sequence of functions ${f_n}$ does not converge uniformly to $f$. One way to prove this (which I have seen) is via a theorem which proves that if a sequence of functions ${f_n}$ converges uniformly to $f$, then $f$ is continuous. And clearly it is not the case that $f$ is continuous in our example, so our convergence is not uniform.



However, I have seen another test for uniform convergence on an interval $s$. That is that:



$${rm lim} [{rm sup} { | f_n(x)-f(x)| : xin S }]=0$$



This conception of uniform convergence can be found in my Walter Rudin analysis book for example. My question is, how can we use this definition of uniform convergence to show $x^n$ is not uniformly convergent?



I am having trouble seeing how to apply this definition to this example, especially since the limit $f$ is defined piece-wise. But I know I need to find the sup of the difference between $f_n$ and $f$ over the interval $[0,1]$ (how do I find this sup?). And then once I find it, I need to take the limit as $ntoinfty$ and show it does not equal $0$.



Thank you for your help!










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You probably want something explicit. Pick $epsilon<1$ small. Check that for any $delta>0$ there is an $N$ (you can explicitly find a formula for $N$ in terms of $epsilon,delta$) such that if $n>N$, then $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<epsilon$ if $0le xle 1-delta$. Use this to explicitly verify that uniform convergence is violated.
    – Andrés E. Caicedo
    Jan 27 '14 at 2:19















up vote
4
down vote

favorite
5












This question pertains to the sequence of functions $f_n(x)=x^n$ on the interval $[0,1]$.



It can be shown this sequence of functions ${f_n}$ converges point-wise to the limit $f$ where $f$ is defined by $f(x)=0$ on $[0,1)$ and $f(x)=1$ at $x=1$.



However, this sequence of functions ${f_n}$ does not converge uniformly to $f$. One way to prove this (which I have seen) is via a theorem which proves that if a sequence of functions ${f_n}$ converges uniformly to $f$, then $f$ is continuous. And clearly it is not the case that $f$ is continuous in our example, so our convergence is not uniform.



However, I have seen another test for uniform convergence on an interval $s$. That is that:



$${rm lim} [{rm sup} { | f_n(x)-f(x)| : xin S }]=0$$



This conception of uniform convergence can be found in my Walter Rudin analysis book for example. My question is, how can we use this definition of uniform convergence to show $x^n$ is not uniformly convergent?



I am having trouble seeing how to apply this definition to this example, especially since the limit $f$ is defined piece-wise. But I know I need to find the sup of the difference between $f_n$ and $f$ over the interval $[0,1]$ (how do I find this sup?). And then once I find it, I need to take the limit as $ntoinfty$ and show it does not equal $0$.



Thank you for your help!










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You probably want something explicit. Pick $epsilon<1$ small. Check that for any $delta>0$ there is an $N$ (you can explicitly find a formula for $N$ in terms of $epsilon,delta$) such that if $n>N$, then $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<epsilon$ if $0le xle 1-delta$. Use this to explicitly verify that uniform convergence is violated.
    – Andrés E. Caicedo
    Jan 27 '14 at 2:19













up vote
4
down vote

favorite
5









up vote
4
down vote

favorite
5






5





This question pertains to the sequence of functions $f_n(x)=x^n$ on the interval $[0,1]$.



It can be shown this sequence of functions ${f_n}$ converges point-wise to the limit $f$ where $f$ is defined by $f(x)=0$ on $[0,1)$ and $f(x)=1$ at $x=1$.



However, this sequence of functions ${f_n}$ does not converge uniformly to $f$. One way to prove this (which I have seen) is via a theorem which proves that if a sequence of functions ${f_n}$ converges uniformly to $f$, then $f$ is continuous. And clearly it is not the case that $f$ is continuous in our example, so our convergence is not uniform.



However, I have seen another test for uniform convergence on an interval $s$. That is that:



$${rm lim} [{rm sup} { | f_n(x)-f(x)| : xin S }]=0$$



This conception of uniform convergence can be found in my Walter Rudin analysis book for example. My question is, how can we use this definition of uniform convergence to show $x^n$ is not uniformly convergent?



I am having trouble seeing how to apply this definition to this example, especially since the limit $f$ is defined piece-wise. But I know I need to find the sup of the difference between $f_n$ and $f$ over the interval $[0,1]$ (how do I find this sup?). And then once I find it, I need to take the limit as $ntoinfty$ and show it does not equal $0$.



Thank you for your help!










share|cite|improve this question















This question pertains to the sequence of functions $f_n(x)=x^n$ on the interval $[0,1]$.



It can be shown this sequence of functions ${f_n}$ converges point-wise to the limit $f$ where $f$ is defined by $f(x)=0$ on $[0,1)$ and $f(x)=1$ at $x=1$.



However, this sequence of functions ${f_n}$ does not converge uniformly to $f$. One way to prove this (which I have seen) is via a theorem which proves that if a sequence of functions ${f_n}$ converges uniformly to $f$, then $f$ is continuous. And clearly it is not the case that $f$ is continuous in our example, so our convergence is not uniform.



However, I have seen another test for uniform convergence on an interval $s$. That is that:



$${rm lim} [{rm sup} { | f_n(x)-f(x)| : xin S }]=0$$



This conception of uniform convergence can be found in my Walter Rudin analysis book for example. My question is, how can we use this definition of uniform convergence to show $x^n$ is not uniformly convergent?



I am having trouble seeing how to apply this definition to this example, especially since the limit $f$ is defined piece-wise. But I know I need to find the sup of the difference between $f_n$ and $f$ over the interval $[0,1]$ (how do I find this sup?). And then once I find it, I need to take the limit as $ntoinfty$ and show it does not equal $0$.



Thank you for your help!







real-analysis sequences-and-series analysis convergence uniform-convergence






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 27 '14 at 2:54









HK Lee

13.8k51957




13.8k51957










asked Jan 27 '14 at 1:33









Mathemanic

1,28011135




1,28011135












  • You probably want something explicit. Pick $epsilon<1$ small. Check that for any $delta>0$ there is an $N$ (you can explicitly find a formula for $N$ in terms of $epsilon,delta$) such that if $n>N$, then $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<epsilon$ if $0le xle 1-delta$. Use this to explicitly verify that uniform convergence is violated.
    – Andrés E. Caicedo
    Jan 27 '14 at 2:19


















  • You probably want something explicit. Pick $epsilon<1$ small. Check that for any $delta>0$ there is an $N$ (you can explicitly find a formula for $N$ in terms of $epsilon,delta$) such that if $n>N$, then $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<epsilon$ if $0le xle 1-delta$. Use this to explicitly verify that uniform convergence is violated.
    – Andrés E. Caicedo
    Jan 27 '14 at 2:19
















You probably want something explicit. Pick $epsilon<1$ small. Check that for any $delta>0$ there is an $N$ (you can explicitly find a formula for $N$ in terms of $epsilon,delta$) such that if $n>N$, then $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<epsilon$ if $0le xle 1-delta$. Use this to explicitly verify that uniform convergence is violated.
– Andrés E. Caicedo
Jan 27 '14 at 2:19




You probably want something explicit. Pick $epsilon<1$ small. Check that for any $delta>0$ there is an $N$ (you can explicitly find a formula for $N$ in terms of $epsilon,delta$) such that if $n>N$, then $|f_n(x)-f(x)|<epsilon$ if $0le xle 1-delta$. Use this to explicitly verify that uniform convergence is violated.
– Andrés E. Caicedo
Jan 27 '14 at 2:19










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
5
down vote



accepted










It all boils down to proving that $$sup_{xin [0,1]}|x^n-chi_{{1}}|=sup_{xin [0,1)}|x^n-0|=sup_{xin[0,1)}x^n=1notto 0$$






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 2




    @Pedro Tamaroff: What is $chi_{{1}}$?
    – Sujaan Kunalan
    Jul 7 '16 at 14:54










  • It is the indicator function for $x=1$.
    – Brofessor
    Sep 5 '17 at 13:45










  • Can you explain, why you can go from $[0,1]$ to $[0,1)$?
    – philmcole
    Jan 8 at 17:51




















up vote
2
down vote













I think the best way to see that this function doesn't converge uniformly on $x in [0,1]$ is to note that the limiting function is discontinuous for $x in [0,a], a<1$ and $x=1$:
$$
lim_{n to infty} f_n(x)= left{
begin{array}{rl}
0 &x in [0,a]\
1 & x=1
end{array}
right.
$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    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',
    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%2f652696%2fprove-xn-is-not-uniformly-convergent%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








    up vote
    5
    down vote



    accepted










    It all boils down to proving that $$sup_{xin [0,1]}|x^n-chi_{{1}}|=sup_{xin [0,1)}|x^n-0|=sup_{xin[0,1)}x^n=1notto 0$$






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 2




      @Pedro Tamaroff: What is $chi_{{1}}$?
      – Sujaan Kunalan
      Jul 7 '16 at 14:54










    • It is the indicator function for $x=1$.
      – Brofessor
      Sep 5 '17 at 13:45










    • Can you explain, why you can go from $[0,1]$ to $[0,1)$?
      – philmcole
      Jan 8 at 17:51

















    up vote
    5
    down vote



    accepted










    It all boils down to proving that $$sup_{xin [0,1]}|x^n-chi_{{1}}|=sup_{xin [0,1)}|x^n-0|=sup_{xin[0,1)}x^n=1notto 0$$






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 2




      @Pedro Tamaroff: What is $chi_{{1}}$?
      – Sujaan Kunalan
      Jul 7 '16 at 14:54










    • It is the indicator function for $x=1$.
      – Brofessor
      Sep 5 '17 at 13:45










    • Can you explain, why you can go from $[0,1]$ to $[0,1)$?
      – philmcole
      Jan 8 at 17:51















    up vote
    5
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    5
    down vote



    accepted






    It all boils down to proving that $$sup_{xin [0,1]}|x^n-chi_{{1}}|=sup_{xin [0,1)}|x^n-0|=sup_{xin[0,1)}x^n=1notto 0$$






    share|cite|improve this answer














    It all boils down to proving that $$sup_{xin [0,1]}|x^n-chi_{{1}}|=sup_{xin [0,1)}|x^n-0|=sup_{xin[0,1)}x^n=1notto 0$$







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Jan 27 '14 at 2:41

























    answered Jan 27 '14 at 1:34









    Pedro Tamaroff

    95.5k10149295




    95.5k10149295








    • 2




      @Pedro Tamaroff: What is $chi_{{1}}$?
      – Sujaan Kunalan
      Jul 7 '16 at 14:54










    • It is the indicator function for $x=1$.
      – Brofessor
      Sep 5 '17 at 13:45










    • Can you explain, why you can go from $[0,1]$ to $[0,1)$?
      – philmcole
      Jan 8 at 17:51
















    • 2




      @Pedro Tamaroff: What is $chi_{{1}}$?
      – Sujaan Kunalan
      Jul 7 '16 at 14:54










    • It is the indicator function for $x=1$.
      – Brofessor
      Sep 5 '17 at 13:45










    • Can you explain, why you can go from $[0,1]$ to $[0,1)$?
      – philmcole
      Jan 8 at 17:51










    2




    2




    @Pedro Tamaroff: What is $chi_{{1}}$?
    – Sujaan Kunalan
    Jul 7 '16 at 14:54




    @Pedro Tamaroff: What is $chi_{{1}}$?
    – Sujaan Kunalan
    Jul 7 '16 at 14:54












    It is the indicator function for $x=1$.
    – Brofessor
    Sep 5 '17 at 13:45




    It is the indicator function for $x=1$.
    – Brofessor
    Sep 5 '17 at 13:45












    Can you explain, why you can go from $[0,1]$ to $[0,1)$?
    – philmcole
    Jan 8 at 17:51






    Can you explain, why you can go from $[0,1]$ to $[0,1)$?
    – philmcole
    Jan 8 at 17:51












    up vote
    2
    down vote













    I think the best way to see that this function doesn't converge uniformly on $x in [0,1]$ is to note that the limiting function is discontinuous for $x in [0,a], a<1$ and $x=1$:
    $$
    lim_{n to infty} f_n(x)= left{
    begin{array}{rl}
    0 &x in [0,a]\
    1 & x=1
    end{array}
    right.
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer

























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      I think the best way to see that this function doesn't converge uniformly on $x in [0,1]$ is to note that the limiting function is discontinuous for $x in [0,a], a<1$ and $x=1$:
      $$
      lim_{n to infty} f_n(x)= left{
      begin{array}{rl}
      0 &x in [0,a]\
      1 & x=1
      end{array}
      right.
      $$






      share|cite|improve this answer























        up vote
        2
        down vote










        up vote
        2
        down vote









        I think the best way to see that this function doesn't converge uniformly on $x in [0,1]$ is to note that the limiting function is discontinuous for $x in [0,a], a<1$ and $x=1$:
        $$
        lim_{n to infty} f_n(x)= left{
        begin{array}{rl}
        0 &x in [0,a]\
        1 & x=1
        end{array}
        right.
        $$






        share|cite|improve this answer












        I think the best way to see that this function doesn't converge uniformly on $x in [0,1]$ is to note that the limiting function is discontinuous for $x in [0,a], a<1$ and $x=1$:
        $$
        lim_{n to infty} f_n(x)= left{
        begin{array}{rl}
        0 &x in [0,a]\
        1 & x=1
        end{array}
        right.
        $$







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 27 '14 at 1:37









        Alex

        14.2k42133




        14.2k42133






























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded



















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f652696%2fprove-xn-is-not-uniformly-convergent%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

            In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

            How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...