Sunday, 19 May 2013

real analysis - Is my proof of the following theorem correct?



Theorem





Let f:R2R and (a,b)R2. Let fb:RR be defined by fb(x)=(x,b) for all xR. Then, lim(x,y)(a,b)f(x,y)=f(a,b)(lim(x,y)(a,b)g(x,y)=0)(limxafb(x)=fb(a))

where g:R2R defined by g(x,y)=f(x,y)f(x,b).




My Proof



Necessity Part





Let us first prove that, lim(x,y)(a,b)f(x,y)=f(a,b)(lim(x,y)(a,b)g(x,y)=0)(limxafb(x)=fb(a))

Let ((xn,yn))n1 be any sequence converging to (a,b). Then since lim(x,y)(a,b)f(x,y)=f(a,b), by definition we have, (ε>0)(n1(ε)N)[nn1(ε)|f(xn,yn)f(a,b)|<ε]
Furthermore since fb is continuous at x=a (I am skipping the proof of it for now) we have, (ε>0)(n2(ε)N)[nn2(ε)|f(xn,b)f(a,b)|<ε]
What remains is to prove that, lim(x,y)(a,b)g(x,y)=0. For this observe that from (1) and (2) we can write, (ε2>0)(n1(ε2)N)[nn1(ε2)|f(xn,yn)f(a,b)|<ε2]
(ε2>0)(n2(ε2)N)[nn2(ε2)|f(xn,b)f(a,b)|<ε2]
Now taking N(ε2)=max(n1(ε2),n2(ε2)) we get, (ε2>0)(N(ε2)N)[nN(ε2)|f(xn,yn)f(a,b)|<ε2]
(ε2>0)(N(ε2)N)[nN(ε2)|f(xn,b)f(a,b)|<ε2]
From (3) and (4) and using Triangle Inequality we get, (ε>0)(N(ε2)N)[nN(ε2)|f(xn,yn)f(xn,b)|<ε]
In other words, (ε>0)(N(ε2)N)[nN(ε2)|g(xn,yn)g(a,b)|<ε]
and this is what we wanted to prove.




Sufficiency Part




Now we try to prove that, lim(x,y)(a,b)f(x,y)=f(a,b)(lim(x,y)(a,b)g(x,y)=0)(limxafb(x)=fb(a))

Let ((xn,yn))n1 be any sequence converging to (a,b). Observe that since g is continuous at (a,b) we have, (ε>0)(n1(ε)N)[nn1(ε)|g(xn,yn)g(a,b)|<ε]
In other words, (ε>0)(n1(ε)N)[nn1(ε)|f(xn,yn)f(xn,b)|<ε]
Also, since fb is continuous at a, we have, (ε>0)(n2(ε)N)[nn2(ε)|f(xn,b)f(a,b)|<ε]
Now observe that from (5) and (6) we can conclude respectively that, (ε2>0)(n1(ε2)N)[nn1(ε2)|f(xn,yn)f(xn,b)|<ε2]
(ε2>0)(n2(ε2)N)[nn2(ε2)|f(xn,b)f(a,b)|<ε2]

Now taking N(ε2)=max(n1(ε2),n2(ε2)) from the above two statements (using Triangle Inequality) we can conclude that, (ε>0)(N(ε2)N)[nN(ε2)|f(xn,yn)f(a,b)|<ε]
Since ((xn,yn))n1 was arbitrary, we are done.



Answer




Yes, your proof is entirely correct, allthough it is hard to read because of your quantor notation. But mathematically it is completely valid. Good Job!


No comments:

Post a Comment

real analysis - How to find limhrightarrow0fracsin(ha)h

How to find limh0sin(ha)h without lhopital rule? I know when I use lhopital I easy get $$ \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}...