MA2002 CALCULUS

May 17, 2023

Chapter 1: Limits Part II: Precise Definition of Limits 2

Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
One-Sided Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Infinite Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Inequality on Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Squeeze Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Appendix 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Appendix 3 -Proofs of the Limit Laws. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Scalar Multiplication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Sum Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Subtraction Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Product Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Quotient Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Intuitive Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

1
Chapter 1: Limits Part II: Precise Definition of Limits2 / 37

Intuitive Definition of Limits

✔ Recall the intuitive definition of limit:
✘ We say lim f (x) = L if
x→a

f (x) is arbitrarily close to L

by taking x sufficiently close to a.
✔ Recall the intuitive definition of infinite limit:
✘ We say lim f (x) = ∞ if
x→a

f (x) is arbitrarily large

by taking x sufficiently close to a.
✔ What does it mean by “arbitrarily close”?
What does it mean by “arbitrarily large”?
What does it mean by “sufficiently close”?
3 / 37

Precise Definition of Limits

✔ Definition. Let f be a function defined on an open interval containing a, except possibly
at a.
a x
The limit of f (x), as x approaches a, equals L if
✘ for every ! > 0 there is a δ! > 0 such that
|f (x) − L| < ! whenever 0 < |x − a| < δ! .
Compare with the intuitive definition of limit:
f (x) is arbitrarily close to L
by taking x sufficiently close to a.
✔ Remark.
✘ The number δ! depends on ! but does’t depend on x.
✘ The choice of δ! is not unique.
✘ Write δ instead of δ! for convenience.
4 / 37

2
 https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/ first answer which
4310014/good-explanation-of-epsilon-delta- t
it as
definition-of-a-limit presents a game
iS good
A Pictorial View of Limits
✔ Given a function f . Suppose that lim f (x) = L.
x→a

· 11
LL++100
10
L

W 11
LL−−100
10

O a x
a−δ a+δ

✔ We see that in the proof of limits, the key point is

✘ For the given ! > 0, how to find a proper δ > 0 so that
✓ 0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ |f (x) − L| < !
↳ can be read as :
5 / 37
then f(x) E of L
# x is within 8 of a
,
is within

Examples
✔ Show that lim c = c, where c is a constant.
x→a

O a x
a−δ a+δ

✘ No matter which ! is given, we do not need to change δ.

Proof. Let ! > 0. Choose δ = 1 (or any number > 0).
✓ 0 < |x − a| < δ = 1 ⇒ |c − c| = 0 < !.
6 / 37

3
 Examples
✔ Show that lim (4x − 5) = 7.
x→3

7+"
y = 4x − 5
7
7−"

O 3 x
3−δ 3+δ

7 / 37

Examples
✔ Show that lim (4x − 5) = 7.
x→3

Given ! > 0. Our aim is to find a proper δ > 0 such that

0 < |x − 3| < δ ⇒ |(4x − 5) − 7| < !.

✘ We work “backwards”:
0 < |x − 3| < δ ⇒ |(4x − 5) − 7| < !
$
|4(x − 3)| < !
take δ = !/4 $
|x − 3| < !/4

Proof. Let ! > 0. Choose δ = !/4. Then

0 < |x − 3| < δ ⇒ |(4x − 5) − 7| = 4|x − 3| < 4δ = !.

8 / 37

minSinters Smal a
o
choose S
whenever possibe ,
=

,
-
E

↓
4 to make
impt
in don
a

Sue
or to
from
Suth ?
Examples need "two steps"
✔ Show that lim x2 = 9.
x→3

Let ! > 0 be given. We shall work backwards to find a proper δ > 0 such that
0 < |x − 3| < δ ⇒ |x2 − 9| < !.
✘ The only restriction is 0 < |x − 3| < δ. ①
So we first write |x2 − 9| in terms of |x − 3|: Teral's
(8 6) 8 +
|x2 − 9| = |x − 3| · |x + 3|
= |x − 3| · |(x − 3) + 6| OR
≤ |x − 3| · (|x − 3| + 6) < δ(δ + 6).
To have |x2 − 9| < !, it suffices to have δ(δ + 6) ≤ !.
(to this) ② o
s)'
make sure
li true
ba-al 8 (8 +
a

✘ Here we used the triangle inequality:

D
|a + b| ≤ |a| + |b|, for all a, b ∈ R.
00
o ↳ another version of triangle inequality :
9 / 37

(a + b /= (a) -

(b)

Examples
✔ Show that lim x2 = 9. this ,
x→3 we
choose
what

o
see
✘ How to take δ so that δ(δ + 6) ≤ ! ? then
happens

δ(δ + 6) ≤ δ·7 ≤ !
⇑ ⇑
δ ≤ 1 and δ ≤ !/7
⇑
δ ≤ min{1, !/7}

Proof. Let ! > 0. Choose δ = min{1, !/7}. Then

0 < |x − 3| < δ ⇒ |x2 − 9| = |x − 3| · |x + 3|

≤ |x − 3| · (|x − 3| + 6)
< δ · (δ + 6)
≤ δ · 7 ≤ !.

Y ↑ 10 / 37
b c S[I
bc812

5
Example Show 11 4 2
Given any E 0 need to find a 8 o st

O lx 21 8 I I E

Again we work
backwards looking at I t first

t
swe.ws nmn 212T Tix231
I
iii
If 8 1
Ix is bounded
bysome M
1 12121 111
I x 3 21
11 I
Exist
I EX E 3
So if lx 21 1 then Ex I If I 1 21 1 12

want
I E l
15 e So zit I t
If I ZE
then I 1 Ex 1 21 E E ZE E E

Then O 1 21 8 I El II I ZE E

first choose 8 2 8 3
Hence
fin what happens if we or
Y

Key points I I cannotbe madevey

fm É jtiÉÉiÉÉÉÉ need to
make sure

bounded
not too bigby choosing 8 1 is

away fro O

1 21 can be made arbitrarily small bychoosing 8 appropriately to

prevent to
if 8 1.9x problem
then 20 I s 10
Comments about proofs
✔ For complicated functions, as one sees from the above examples, it may be quite difficult
to prove that the limit is L, and one needs to be very clever and careful in applying
inequalities to find the δ for a given ! > 0.
✔ It is thus useful to prove the limit laws, the intuitive conclusion etc in full generality using
the ! − δ definition so we can apply them for these cases.
✔ The proofs of these limit laws are given in Appendix 3, they will not be tested, those
interested may try to look and understand the proofs.
✔ The ideas and techniques are basically the same as when we do specific examples, we just
need apply these in a more general setting.
11 / 37

Precise Definition of One-Sided Limits

✔ Definition.
!
✘ Left-hand limit: We write lim− f (x) = L if
mube mana
x
x→a
for every ! > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that
|f (x) − L| < ! whenever 0 < a − x < δ.
Compare with the intuitive definition:
“f (x) is close to L” as “x is close to a from the left”.

must be
✘ Right-hand limit: We write lim+ f (x) = L if
x→a 2
for every ! > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that -
|f (x) − L| < ! whenever 0 < x − a < δ.
Compare with the intuitive definition:
“f (x) is close to L” as “x is close to a from the right”.
✔ “lim f (x) = L” ⇐⇒ “ lim− f (x) = L = lim+ f (x)”.
x→a x→a x→a

12 / 37

6
Example
√
✔ Show that lim+ x − 2 = 0.
x→2

y
√
y= x−2

O 2 x

Proof. Let ! > 0. Our aim is to find a proper δ > 0 such that
√
0 < x − 2 < δ ⇒ | x − 2 − 0| < !.
$
0 ≤ x − 2 < !2
✘ Let ! > 0. Choose δ = !2 . Then
√ √ √
0 < x − 2 < δ ⇒ | x − 2 − 0| = x − 2 < δ = !.
13 / 37

Precise Definition of Infinite Limit

✔ Definition. Infinite Limit: We write lim f (x) = ∞ if
x→a
✘ for every M > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that
f (x) > M whenever 0 < |x − a| < δ.
Compare with the intuitive definition:
“f (x) is arbitrarily large” as “x is close to a”.

O a x
a−δ a+δ

14 / 37

7
Precise Definition of Negative Infinite Limit
✔ Definition. Negative Infinite Limit: lim f (x) = −∞ if
x→a
✘ for every M < 0 there exists δ > 0 such that
f (x) < M whenever 0 < |x − a| < δ.
Comparing with the intuitive definition:
“f (x) is arbitrarily negatively large” as “x is close to a”.

✔ Similarly, we can define the one-sided infinite limits:

✘ lim f (x) = ∞, lim f (x) = −∞,
x→a+ x→a+
✘ lim f (x) = ∞, lim f (x) = −∞.
x→a− x→a−

✔ The limits at infinity: lim f (x) = L and lim f (x) = ∞ are left as exercises in tutorial.
x→∞ x→∞

15 / 37

Example
1
✔ Show that lim = ∞.
x→0 x2
y

O x

Proof. Let M > 0. We shall choose δ > 0 such that

0 < |x − 0| < δ ⇒ 1/x2 > M
$ √
0 < |x| < 1/ M
√
✘ Let M > 0. Choose δ = 1/ M . Then
0 < |x − 0| < δ ⇒ 1/x2 > 1/δ 2 = M.
16 / 37

8
An Inequality on Limits
✔ Theorem. Suppose f (x) ≤ g(x) for all x near a (i.e., in an open interval containing a),
except possibly at a.
✘ If lim f (x) = L and lim g(x) = M,
x→a x→a
✘ then L ≤ M.
y

O
x

D
✔ Note. Even if f (x) < g(x) for all x near a, it is still possible that lim f (x) = lim g(x).
x→a x→a
2 2
✘ For example, −x < x for all x *= 0,
but lim (−x2 ) = lim x2 = 0.
x→0 x→0

17 / 37

An Inequality on Limits
✔ Theorem. Suppose f (x) ≤ g(x) for all x near a (i.e., in an open interval containing a),
except possibly at a.
✘ If lim f (x) = L and lim g(x) = M,
x→a x→a
✘ then L ≤ M.
g(x) flor]
✔ Lemma. Suppose h(x) ≥ 0 for all x in an open interval containing a (except possibly at
a).
m L
special case
✘ If lim h(x) = #, then # ≥ 0. of above theorem
x→a

Proof of Lemma. Assume that # < 0. Let ! = |#|. Proof by contradation !

Then there exists δ > 0 such that
0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ |h(x) − #| < |#|
⇒ h(x) − # < |#| = −# = h(x) e< l
-
-

⇒ h(x) < 0. h(x) 0 <

✘ A contradiction! ∴ # ≥ 0.
18 / 37

9
An Inequality on Limits
✔ Theorem. Suppose f (x) ≤ g(x) for all x near a (i.e., in an open interval containing a),
except possibly at a.
✘ If lim f (x) = L and lim g(x) = M,
x→a x→a
✘ then L ≤ M.
✔ Lemma. Suppose h(x) ≥ 0 for all x in an open interval containing a (except possibly at
a).
the
✘ If lim h(x) = #, then # ≥ 0.
x→a >
-
Skel mubem b , lemma
to

Proof of Theorem. Let h(x) = g(x) − f (x). a

prome
Then h(x) ≥ 0 near a, and
lim h(x) = M − L.
x→a

Then by Lemma M − L ≥ 0, or equivalently, M ≥ L.

19 / 37

Squeeze Theorem
✔ Theorem. Let f, g, h be functions such that
✘ f (x) ≤ g(x) ≤ h(x) for all x near a (except at a), and
✘ lim f (x) = lim h(x) = L.
x→a x→a

Then lim g(x) exists and equals L.

x→a
y

y = x2 y = x2 sin(1/x)

y = −x2

✘ −x2 ≤ x2 sin(1/x) ≤ x2 for all x near 0, and

lim (−x2 ) = lim x2 = 0.
x→0 x→0
∴ lim x2 sin(1/x) = 0.
x→0

20 / 37

10
Squeeze Theorem
✔ Theorem. Let f, g, h be functions such that
✘ f (x) ≤ g(x) ≤ h(x) for all x near a (except at a), and
✘ lim f (x) = lim h(x) = L.
x→a x→a

Then lim g(x) exists and equals L.

x→a

Proof. Let lim g(x) = M. Then cannot assee !

s
x→a >
-
!
f (x) ≤ g(x) ⇒ L ≤ M
⇒ L = M.
g(x) ≤ h(x) ⇒ M ≤ L

Note. This is again a WRONG proof.

✘ In order to use the previous theorem to evaluate the limit, we have to know that
lim g(x) exists.
x→a

21 / 37

Squeeze Theorem
✔ Theorem. Let f, g, h be functions such that
✘ f (x) ≤ g(x) ≤ h(x) for all x near a (except at a), and
✘ lim f (x) = lim h(x) = L.
x→a x→a

Then lim g(x) exists and equals L.

x→a

Proof. Let ! > 0. There exists δ1 > 0 such that

0 < |x − a| < δ1 ⇒|f (x) − L| < !
⇒ − ! < f (x) − L ≤ g(x) − L.
-
There exists δ2 > 0 such that
0 < |x − a| < δ2 ⇒ |h(x) − L| < !
⇒ ! > h(x) − L ≥ g(x) − L.
- -

Let δ = min{δ1 , δ2 }. Then

0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ − ! < g(x) − L < !
⇒|g(x) − L| < !.

22 / 37

11
 * so a lb can be negative !

- you can have

Appendix: Triangle Inequality
✔ Theorem. For any a, b ∈ R. ⑳ | a + ( -

b))1(9) + (b)

|a| − |b| ≤ |a + b| ≤ |a| + |b|.

Proof. Let a, b ∈ R. | a, + a + as + a
+ /
>
- (a 1
,
+ 192) + 193) + 194)
ab ≤ |ab| ⇒ 2ab ≤ 2|ab|
⇒ a2 + b2 + 2ab ≤ a2 + b2 + 2|ab|
⇒ (a + b)2 ≤ (|a| + |b|)2
⇒ |a + b| ≤ |a| + |b|.

|a| = |(a + b) + (−b)| ≤ |a + b| + |b|

∴ |a| − |b| ≤ |a + b|.
23 / 37

Appendix 2
1 1 1 1 1
✔ Evaluate S = 1 + 2
+ 22
+ 23
+···+ 2n
+ 2n+1
+ ···.
1 1 1 1
✘ 2S = 2 + 1 + + 2 22
+···+ 2n−1
+ 2n
+ ···.
2S − S = 2 + (1 − 1) + ( 12 − 12 ) + ( 212 − 1
22
)
+ · · · + ( 21n − 21n ) + · · ·
∴ S = 2. (Correct, but non-rigorous).
✔ Evaluate T = 1 + 2 + 22 + 23 + · · · + 2n−1 + 2n + · · · .
✘ 2T = 2 + 22 + 23 + 24 · · · + 2n + 2n+1 + · · · .
2T − T = (−1) + (2 − 2) + (22 − 22 ) + (23 − 23 )
+ · · · + (2n − 2n ) + · · ·
∴ T = −1. (Incorrect, of course!)
✔ We cannot apply the arithmetic operations to a limit unless we have shown that it exists.
24 / 37

12
Appendix 3 -Proofs of the Limit Laws
The following slides gives the proofs of the various limit laws, as well as the proof of the
intuitive conclusion mentioned earlier.
25 / 37

Proof of Scalar Multiplication Law (Supplementary)

✔ Theorem. If lim f (x) = L, then lim (cf (x)) = cL, where c is a constant.
x→a x→a

Proof.
✘ If c = 0, the conclusion becomes lim 0 = 0. Done!
x→a
✘ Suppose c *= 0. Aim: Let ! > 0. Find δ > 0 such that

0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ |cf (x) − cL| = |c||f (x) − L| < !

$
How? |f (x) − L| < !/|c|

Let ! > 0. Then there exists δ > 0 such that

✓ if 0 < |x − a| < δ, then |f (x) − L| < !/|c|,
then |cf (x) − cL| = |c||f (x) − L| < !.
∴ lim (cf (x)) = cL.
x→a

26 / 37

13
Proof of Sum Law (Supplementary)
✔ Theorem. If lim f (x) = L and lim g(x) = M, then lim (f (x) + g(x)) = L + M.
x→a x→a x→a
Proof. Aim: Let ! > 0. Choose δ > 0 such that
0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ |(f (x) + g(x)) − (L + M)| < !
⇑
|f (x) − L| + |g(x) − M| < !
✘ Let ! > 0. There exists δ1 > 0 such that
0 < |x − a| < δ1 ⇒ |f (x) − L| < !/2,
and there exists δ2 > 0 such that
0 < |x − a| < δ2 ⇒ |g(x) − M| < !/2.
✘ Choose δ = min{δ1 , δ2 }. If 0 < |x − a| < δ, then

|(f (x) + g(x)) − (L + M)| ≤ |f (x) − L| + |g(x) − M|

< !/2 + !/2 = !.

27 / 37

Proof of Substraction Law (Supplementary

✔ Theorem. If lim f (x) = L and lim g(x) = M, then lim (f (x) − g(x)) = L − M.
x→a x→a x→a
Proof. We can use the results proved just now:

lim (f (x) − g(x)) = lim f (x) + lim (−g(x))

x→a x→a x→a
= lim f (x) − lim g(x) = L − M.
x→a x→a

Alternative proof: similar method as for Sum Law:

✘ Let ! > 0. There exist δ1 > 0 and δ2 > 0 such that
0 < |x − a| < δ1 ⇒ |f (x) − L| < !/2, and
0 < |x − a| < δ2 ⇒ |g(x) − M| < !/2.
✘ Choose δ = min{δ1 , δ2 }. Then if 0 < |x − a| < δ,

|(f (x) − g(x)) − (L − M)| ≤ |f (x) − L| + |g(x) − M|

< !/2 + !/2 = !.

28 / 37

14
Proof of Product Law (Supplementary)
✔ Theorem. If lim f (x) = L and lim g(x) = M, then
x→a x→a
lim f (x)g(x) = LM .
x→a

✔ Lemma. If lim f (x) = L, then lim (f (x))2 = L2 .

x→a x→a

Proof of Theorem using Lemma. Note that

1
[(f + g)2 − f 2 − g 2 ] = f g.
2
lim f (x)g(x)
x→a
" %
1# 2 2 2
$
= lim (f (x) + g(x)) − (f (x)) − (g(x))
x→a 2
1& '
= lim (f (x) + g(x))2 − lim (f (x))2 − lim (g(x))2
2 x→a x→a x→a
1#
(L + M)2 − L2 − M 2 = LM.
$
=
2
29 / 37

Proof of the Lemma to Product Law (Supplementary)

✔ Lemma. If lim f (x) = L, then lim (f (x))2 = L2 .
x→a x→a

Proof. We first consider the special case when L = 0.

✘ That is, lim f (x) = 0 ⇒ lim (f (x))2 = 0.
x→a x→a
Aim: For ! > 0, find a proper δ > 0 such that

0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ |(f (x))2 − 0| < !.

$ √
|f (x)| < !
✘ Let ! > 0. There exists δ > 0 such that
√
0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ |f (x)| < !
⇒ |(f (x))2 − 0| = (f (x))2 < !.
∴ lim (f (x))2 = 0.
x→a

30 / 37

15
Proof of the Lemma to Product Law (Supplementary)
✔ Lemma. If lim f (x) = L, then lim (f (x))2 = L2 .
x→a x→a

Proof. Now we consider the general case.

lim f (x) = L ⇒ lim (f (x) − L) = L − L = 0

x→a x→a
⇒ lim (f (x) − L)2 = 0.
x→a
✘ On the other hand, note that
(f (x) − L)2 = (f (x))2 − 2Lf (x) + L2 .

lim (f (x))2 = lim [(f (x) − L)2 + 2Lf (x) − L2 ]

x→a x→a
= lim (f (x) − L)2 + 2L lim f (x) − L2
x→a x→a
= 0 + 2L · L − L2
= L2 .

31 / 37

Proof of Quotient Law (Supplementary)

✔ Theorem. If lim f (x) = L and lim g(x) = M, then
x→a x→a
f (x) L
lim = provided that M *= 0.
x→a g(x) M
f (x)
✔ Proof. Let K = lim . Then
x→a g(x)
( )
f (x)
L = lim f (x) = lim · g(x)
x→a x→a g(x)

f (x)
= lim · lim g(x) = KM.
x→a g(x) x→a

f (x) L
∴ lim =K= .
g(x)
x→a M
✔ Note. This is a WRONG proof, because we have not checked whether lim f (x)/g(x)
x→a
exists.
32 / 37

16
Proof of Quotient Law (Supplementary)
✔ Theorem. If lim f (x) = L and lim g(x) = M, then
x→a x→a
f (x) L
lim = provided that M *= 0.
x→a g(x) M
1 1
✔ Lemma. Iflim g(x) = M (*= 0), then lim = .
x→a x→a g(x) M
Proof of Theorem. ( )
f (x) 1
lim = lim f (x) ·
x→a g(x) x→a g(x)
1
= lim f (x) · lim
x→a x→a g(x)

1 L
=L· = .
M M
33 / 37

Proof of the Lemma to Quotient Law (Supplementary)

1 1
✔ Lemma. If lim g(x) = M (*= 0), then lim = .
x→a x→a g(x) M
✔ Proof. Since |M|/2 > 0, there exists δ1 > 0 such that
if 0 < |x − a| < δ1 then |g(x) − M| < |M|/2, then
|g(x)| = |M + (g(x) − M)|
≥ |M| − |g(x) − M|
> |M| − |M|/2 = |M|/2.

Let ! > 0. Our aim is to choose a proper δ > 0 such that

* *
* 1 1 **
0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ * * − <!
g(x) M *
$
|M − g(x)|
<!
|g(x)| · |M|

34 / 37

17
Proof of the Lemma to Quotient Law (Supplementary)
1 1
✔ Lemma. If lim g(x) = M (*= 0), then lim = .
x→a x→a g(x) M
|M − g(x)|
✔ Proof. How to make sure that < !?
|g(x)| · |M|

|M − g(x)| |M − g(x)|
< < !
|g(x)| · |M| | M2 | · |M|
⇑ ⇑
|M| ! M2
|g(x)| > |M − g(x)| <
2 2
⇑ ⇑
0 < |x − a| < δ1 0 < |x − a| < δ2
⇑
0 < |x − a| < min{δ1 , δ2 }

35 / 37

Proof of the Lemma to Quotient Law (Supplementary)

1 1
✔ Lemma. If lim g(x) = M (*= 0), then lim = .
x→a x→a g(x) M
✔ Proof. Let ! > 0. There exists δ2 > 0 such that
!|M|2
0 < |x − a| < δ2 ⇒ |g(x) − M| < .
2
Take δ = min{δ1 , δ2 }. If 0 < |x − a| < δ, then
* *
* 1 1 ** |M − g(x)|
* g(x) − M * = |g(x)| · |M|
*

|M − g(x)|
< |M |
(|x − a| < δ1 )
2
· |M|
! M2
2
< M2
(|x − a| < δ2 )
2
= !.

36 / 37

18
The Precise Proof to the Intuitive Conclusion (Supplementary)
✔ Theorem. Suppose f (x) = g(x) for all x near a (i.e., in an open interval containing a),
except possibly at a.

✔
✘

Proof.
x→a x→a

Suppose f (x) = g(x) when 0 < |x − a| < r (r > 0).

I
If lim f (x) = L, then lim g(x) exists and equals L.
save meaning

✘ Let ! > 0 be given. Then there exists δ1 > 0 such that

0 < |x − a| < δ1 ⇒ |f (x) − L| < !.

Choose δ = min{r, δ1 }. Then

0 < |x − a| < δ ⇒ |g(x) − L| = |f (x) − L| < !.

✔ From the precise definition, we see why “the limit only depends on the values of the
function near the point”.
37 / 37

19