Results 1 to 5 of 5

Math Help - Composition of convergent functions

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    16

    Composition of convergent functions

    Hi,
    I'd appreciate some help with this question...

    Suppose that f(x)\to l as x\to a and g(y)\to k as y\to l. Must it be true that g(f(x))\to k as x\to a?
    I'm thinking no, since from the definition of limit of a function we require "x not equal to a" for the limit of f(x) to exist. But here, we could have f(x) = l and then g(f(x)) isn't necessarily defined.
    Is this right? If not then I could probably find a proof assuming f(x) is not l, but why could I do this?

    Many thanks.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Member
    Joined
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    131
    Hello,

    i suppose the functions are defined on real numbers and have their range also in \mathbb{R}.

    Since composition of cont. functions are still cont., this is right

    Regards
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    37
    Are we dealing with continuous functions here?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Member
    Joined
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    131
    Think about the definition of a continuous map in a point.
    How did you defined continuous functions?

    Regards
    Sogan
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Joined
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    16
    We defined continuous functions in 2 ways, f is continuous at a if either "for any sequence zn tending to a, f(zn) tends to a" or

    \forall\epsilon >0 \exists\delta >0 \ s.t. \ \mid x-a \mid < \delta \implies \mid f(x)-f(a) \mid < \epsilon

    The question doesn't state the range of the functions (the definitions are valid also for complex numbers) and doesn't say they are continuous. I know the composition of 2 continuous functions is continuous, but how do we know we can simply apply this theorem?

    The definition of f(x) --> l as x --> a that I had in mind was;

    \forall\epsilon >0 \exists\delta >0 \ s.t. \ 0<\mid x-a \mid < \delta \implies \mid f(x)-f(a) \mid < \epsilon

    I'm aware also of the similar one using sequences.
    It's the additional inclusion of "but not equal to" that's confusing me here. Clearly we can't just ignore it (if we do then the composition DOES tend to k), since f(x) in the question could equal l at some point.
    So a counterexample would be eg. f(x) = 3 for all x. Then obviously f(x) --> 3, but the definition of g(y) --> k isn't valid since f(x)-3 is always 0. But this doesn't seem rigorous, so is there a better counterexample, or a proof of why I can "forget" that f(x)=3?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Composition of functions
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 9th 2010, 04:36 AM
  2. Composition & Functions
    Posted in the Pre-Calculus Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 13th 2008, 12:44 PM
  3. Functions / Composition
    Posted in the Pre-Calculus Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 12th 2008, 03:26 PM
  4. Composition of Functions
    Posted in the Pre-Calculus Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: July 13th 2007, 10:50 PM
  5. composition functions
    Posted in the Pre-Calculus Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: November 26th 2006, 11:49 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum