User:IssaRice/Tao's notation for limits: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "Tao's notation for a limit is <math>\lim_{x\to x_0;\, x\in E} f(x)</math>. Can we write this in a more standard way? basically, if we give one additional definition, we have...") |
No edit summary |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
The additional definition is this: if <math>f : X \to \mathbf R</math>, then we define <math>\lim_{x\to x_0} f(x) := \lim_{x\to x_0;\, x \in X} f(x)</math>. In other words, by default we assume that the limit is taken over the entire domain of the function. | The additional definition is this: if <math>f : X \to \mathbf R</math>, then we define <math>\lim_{x\to x_0} f(x) := \lim_{x\to x_0;\, x \in X} f(x)</math>. In other words, by default we assume that the limit is taken over the entire domain of the function. | ||
Now, given <math>f : X \to \mathbf R</math> and some <math>E \subseteq X</math>, we have <math>f|_E : E \to \mathbf R</math>. Thus, <math>\lim_{x\to x_0} | Now, given <math>f : X \to \mathbf R</math> and some <math>E \subseteq X</math>, we have <math>f|_E : E \to \mathbf R</math>. Thus, <math>\lim_{x\to x_0} f|_E(x) = \lim_{x\to x_0;\, x \in E} f|_E(x)</math>. | ||
By exercise 9.4.6, <math>\lim_{x \to x_0;\, x\in E} f(x) = \lim_{x\to x_0;\, x\in E} f|_E(x)</math> | By exercise 9.4.6, <math>\lim_{x \to x_0;\, x\in E} f(x) = \lim_{x\to x_0;\, x\in E} f|_E(x)</math> | ||
Combining these two equalities, we have <math>\lim_{x \to x_0;\, x\in E} f(x) = \lim_{x\to x_0} | Combining these two equalities, we have <math>\lim_{x \to x_0;\, x\in E} f(x) = \lim_{x\to x_0} f|_E(x)</math> as promised. |
Revision as of 03:00, 1 December 2018
Tao's notation for a limit is .
Can we write this in a more standard way? basically, if we give one additional definition, we have the very appealing formula .
The additional definition is this: if , then we define . In other words, by default we assume that the limit is taken over the entire domain of the function.
Now, given and some , we have . Thus, .
By exercise 9.4.6,
Combining these two equalities, we have as promised.