You are on page 1of 13

# MH1100/MTH112: Calculus I.

## Solutions to Problem list for Week #3.

Problem 1:
(i) For every a, b R, |ab| = |a||b|. Prove this identity by checking all the
possible cases for the signs of a and b.

(ii) For every a, b R, with b 6= 0, ab = |a|
|b| . Prove this identity.
Solution to Part (i).
Well directly check the 4 possible cases for the signs of a and b.
Case 1: a 0, b 0. In this case |a| = a, |b| = b, and, because ab 0,
|ab| = ab. Thus:
LHS = |ab| = ab = |a||b| = RHS.
Case 2: a 0, b 0. In this case |a| = a, |b| = b, and, because ab 0,
|ab| = ab. Thus:
LHS = |ab| = ab = (a) (b) = |a||b| = RHS.
Case 3: a 0, b 0. In this case |a| = a, |b| = b, and, because ab 0,
|ab| = ab. Thus:
LHS = |ab| = ab = (a) (b) = |a||b| = RHS.
Case 4: a 0, b 0. In this case |a| = a, |b| = b, and, because ab 0,
|ab| = ab. Thus:
LHS = |ab| = ab = (a) (b) = |a||b| = RHS.

Solution to Part (ii).
Using Part (i) we deduce:
a

= a
b

1
1

=
|a|

b
b
1

(?).

Next, well understand the quantity 1b . We can understand this via:

1
1
1 = |1| = b = |b| .
b
b
Thus:

1
=
b
Substituting this into equation (?), we
a

=
b

1
.
|b|
deduce:
|a|
.
|b|


Problem 2:

## For every a R, a2 = |a|. Explain why this identity is true, illustrating

with a few examples. Then use this identity to give another proof of the
identity in Problem 1 part (i).
Solution to Part (i).
The first thing tounderstand is why the equation you might want to use
(by which I mean p
a2 = a) is wrong. Well, just substitute a negative a, like
3. Then LHS = (3)2 = 3 while RHS = 3.
To think about the correct equation carefully, keep clear what the square
root function actually is: If x 0, then x is the unique number y 0
solving the equation y 2 = x.

Now to explain the equation a2 = |a| well consider the two possible cases.

## Case 1: a 0. Note that a 0, and a2 = a2 , so in this case a2 = a = |a|,

as required. Here is an example:
p
(7)2 = 7 = |7|.

## Case 2: a 0. In this case note that a 0, and (a)2 = a2 , so a2 =

a = |a|, as required. Here is an example illustrating this case:
p
(7)2 = 7 = | 7|.
Solution to Part (ii).
Assuming Part (i), we deduce:

p
|ab| = (ab)2 = a2 b2 = a2 b2 = |a||b|.

2

Problem 3:
Prove that for every x R the following inequality is true:
|x| x |x|.
Solution
Well just check this for the two possible signs of x.
If x 0, then x = |x|, and the inequality that must be true is
|x| |x| |x|,
which is obviously true.
On the other hand, if x 0, then x = |x|, and the inequality that must
be true is
|x| |x| |x|.
Again, this is obviously true.


Problem 4:
If a > 0 then we have the following two facts:
(i) |x| = a if and only if x = a.
(ii) |x| < a if and only if a < x < a.
Explain these facts using a graph of the absolute value function. Then prove
them (probably by laboriously checking all the possible cases).
Solution
We can read these facts directly from a graph of the absolute value function.
Here is such a graph:

Fact (i) concerns the set of x with the property that |x| = a. Looking at
the graph of the function |x| we observe that there are exactly two such x,
namely a.
Fact (ii) concerns the set of x such that |x| < a. Thinking in terms of the
graph, we want the set of x with the property that the graph over those
points lies (strictly) under the line y = a. Looking at the graph we can just
read off that this is the set of x such that a < x < a.
Now lets think about how we would actually prove these facts formally.
Proof of (i). The clearest way, logically speaking, to prove a statement
like A if and only if B is to prove that A implies B, and separately prove
4

that B implies A. (Sometimes you can do both directions at the same time,
but you have to be very careful when you do this.) So we have two questions
If |x| = a, why is x = a? Well, take some x such that |x| = a. If x 0,
then |x| = x, so x = |x| = a. On the other hand, if x 0, then |x| = x, so
x = |x| = a.
If x = a, why is |x| = a? We are assuming that a > 0, so this is obviously
true. (Details are: |a| = a, while | a| = (a) = a because a < 0.)
Proof of (ii). Again, well split this if and only if proof into two questions.
If |x| < a, then why is a < x < a? Well just check this for the two cases
that x 0 and x 0. If x 0, then one side of the required inequality is
obtained from the deduction x = |x| < a, and the other is obtained from
a < 0 x. On the other hand, if x 0 then one side of the required
inequality is obtained from the deduction x = |x| > a and the other is
obtained by x 0 < a.
If a < x < a, then why is |x| < a? If x 0 then |x| = x < a. And if x 0
then |x| = x < (a) = a.

Problem 5:
Let d > 0, and a R. Determine the following sets. (You can give your
answer using interval notation, e.g. (r, s).)
(i) {x R | |x a| < d}.
(ii) {x R | 0 < |x a| < d}.
Explain using a graph of the absolute value function, and also using your
answers to problem 3.
Solution to (i).
The answer is (a d, a + d). This can be read straight off the graph of the

## Alternatively, we can exploit Problem 4 part (ii) to deduce:

|x a| < d d < x a < d
a d < x < a + d.
Solution to (ii).
Again, we can read this straight off the graph above to deduce that
{x R|0 < |x a| < d} = (a d, a) (a, a + d).
Another way to deduce this answer is to argue that {x R|0 < |x a| < d}
is the set of points you get by removing from the set {x R||x a| < d} the
points x where |x a| = 0. The only point satisfying |x a| = 0 is x a = 0
i.e. x = a. So you get this answer by removing {a} from the answer to part
(i).


## Problem 6: (#1.8.15 from [Stewart])

In this problem we will investigate the limit:
lim (2x + 3) = 5.

x1

## Solution to Part (i) and (ii).

To begin we are asked to graph the function y = 2x + 3, and add lines at
y = 5 + 2 and 5 2. We get:

Looking at the graph, we observe that we can choose any such that 0 <
1. For such a delta, if 0 < |x 1| < , then 0 < x < 2 and we can
observe directly that every point of the graph above such an x lies between
the horizontal lines.
Solution to Part (iii).
In the case  = 1.5 the graph looks like:

7

## Solution to Part (iv).

In the case  = 1 the graph looks like:

## In this case we can choose any such that 0 < 0.5.

Solution to Part (v).
In the case  = 0.5 the graph looks like:

## Solution to Part (vi).

We express |f (x) 5| as a function of |x 1| via:
|f (x) 5| = |(2x + 3) 5| = |2x 2| = |2 (x 1)| = |2||x 1| = 2|x 1|.
Solution to Part (vii).
If we choose an x such that 0 < |x 1| < (), then the equation we found
in part (vi) tells us that for this x:
|f (x) 5| = 2|x 1| < 2().
So the question we have to ask is: if we want this quantity to be less than
, what do we set () to? If we choose () = 2 then we get:

|f (x) 5| = 2|x 1| < 2() = 2 = .
2
Thus |f (x) 5| <  for every x such that 0 < |x 1| < 2 , as required.
Solution to Part (viii).
Proof that limx1 (2x + 3) = 5:
Let  be an arbitrary positive real.
Set () = 2 . (?).
Let x be a number such that 0 < |x 1| < . (??)
Then:
|f (x) L| =
=
=
<
=
=

|(2x + 3) 5|
|2x 2|
2|x 1|
2
(By assumption (??).)

2 2
(By assumption (?).)
.



## Problem 7: (#1.8.16 from [Stewart])

Prove that: limx2

1
2x


+ 3 = 2.

Proof.
Let  be an arbitrary positive real.
Set = 2 (?).
Let x be an arbitrary number such that 0 < |x (2)| < (??).
Then:


|f (x) L| = 21 x + 3 2
= 12 x + 1
= 12 |x (2)|
< 21
(By assumption (??).)
= 12 (2)
(By assumption (?).)
= .
Thus, when 0 < |x (2)| < 2, |f (x) 2| < , as required.

Problem 8:
Prove that limx4 (7 3x) = 5.
Proof
Let  be an arbitrary positive real number.
Set = 3 . (?)
Let x be an arbitrary number such that 0 < |x 4| < . (??).
Then:
|f (x) L| =
=
=
=
<
=
=

## |(7 3x) (5)|

|12 3x|
3 |4 x|
3 |x 4|
3
(By assumption (??).)

3 3
(By assumption (?).)
.

## Thus: |(7 3x) (5)| <  when 0 < |x 4| < 3 , as required.


10

Problem 9:
Prove that

x
3
= .
x3 5
5
lim

Proof
Let  be an arbitrary positive real.
Set = 5. (?).
Let x be an arbitrary real number such that 0 < |x 3| < . (??).
Then:

x 3
= (x3)
5
5
5
= 15 |x 3|
< 15
(By assumption (??).)
1
= 5 (5 ) (By assumption (?).)
= .


Problem 10: (#1.8.25 from [Stewart])
Prove that
lim x2 = 0.

x0

Solution
Let  be an arbitrary positive real.

Set = . (?).
Let x be an arbitrary real number such that 0 < |x 0| < .
Then:
|x2 0| = |x2 |
< 2
(By assumption (??).)
= 
(By assumption (?).)


11

## Problem 11: (#1.8.27 from [Stewart])

Prove that
lim |x| = 0.

x0

Proof
Let  be an arbitrary positive real number.
Set = . (?).
Let x be an arbitrary real number such that 0 < |x| < . (??).
Then:
|f (x) 0| = ||x| 0|
= |(|x|)|
= |x|
<
(By assumption (??).)
= 
(By assumption (?).)

Problem 12? : (#1.8.29 from [Stewart])
Prove that
lim (x2 4x + 5) = 1.

x2

Solution Proof
Let  be an arbitrary positive real number.

Set = . (?).
Let x be an arbitrary real number such that 0 < |x 2| < . (??).
Then:

|f (x) 1| = (x2 4x + 5)
1

= x2 4x + 4
= (x 2)2
= |x 2|2
< 2
= .


12

## Problem 13? : (#5.26 from [Spivak])

Give examples to illustrate why the following are not correct definitions of
limxa f (x) = L:
(i) For every > 0, there exists an  > 0 such that if 0 < |x a| < ,
then |f (x) L| < .
(ii) For every  > 0, there exists an > 0 such that if |f (x) L| < , then
0 < |x a| < .
Solution
One way to answer this is to think of an example (i.e. a function f and
numbers a and L) where the actual limit limxa f (x) (using the usual definition) doesnt exist, but such that the given statement is satisfied. There
will be countless possible examples.
One example for (i) could be

f (x) =

1 if x > 0
1 if x < 0

## together with a = 0 and L = 1. Note that these choices satisfy statement

(i) because no matter what is, you could choose  = 5, and |f (x) L| < 
for every 0 < |x a| < . (This is because |f (x) 1| < 5 is true for every x,
which you can see by just thinking about a graph for f (x).) But limx0 f (x)
certainly does not exist, as you can easily check.
For statement (ii) you could use the example

1 + x if x > 0
f (x) =
1 + x if x < 0.
with L = 0 and a = 0. In this case the given statement is true (you could
set = ) but, again, the limit certainly doesnt exist.
Another way to see that (ii) is different to the usual definition would be
to consider the example f (x) = sin x, a = 0, and L = 0. It is certainly true
that limxa f (x) = L in this case, but you definitely wont be able to find a
with the required property, for any  > 0.


13