CHAPTER 2

Concept of Functions, Limit and Continuity

BY

Dr. Pulak Sahoo

Assistant Professor
Department of Mathematics
University Of Kalyani
West Bengal, India
E-mail : sahoopulak1@gmail.com

1
Module-2: Limit of a Function

1 Definition
Let f (z) be a function defined in some neighbourhood of z0 . A complex number w0
is said to be the limit of f as z → z0 , symbolically, w0 = lim f (z), if for given ε > 0,
z→z0
there exists a δ > 0 such that

| f (z) − w0 |< ε whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ.

The definition says that for each ε-neighbourhood | w − w0 |< ε of w0 , there exists a
deleted δ-neighbourhood of z0 such that every point z within this has an image w lying
in ε neighbourhood (see Fig. 1).

Fig. 1:

If no such number w0 exists we say that lim f (z) does not exist. It is to be noted
z→z0
that z is allowed to approach z0 in an arbitrary manner, not just from some particular
direction. Hence the limit w0 is independent of the path by which z approaches z0 .

2
Remark 1. Since || f (z) | − | w0 || ≤ | f (z) − w0 |, from the definition of the limit of
f (z) we see that

|| f (z) | − | w0 || < ε whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ.

This proves that lim | f (z) |= | w0 | .

z→z0

Remark 2. By Remark 1 we have

| w0 | − ε <| f (z) |<| w0 | + ε whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ.

From this we can say that the function f (z) is bounded in some deleted neighbourhood of
z0 .

Theorem 1. If lim f (z) = l, then the limit is unique.

z→z0

Proof. If possible, we assume that lim f (z) = l and lim f (z) = m and l 6= m. Then for
z→z0 z→z0
given ε(> 0), we can find δ1 (> 0) and δ2 (> 0) such that
ε
| f (z) − l |< whenever 0 <| z − z0 | < δ1 ,
2

ε
| f (z) − m |< whenever 0 <| z − z0 | < δ2 .
2
Let δ = min{δ1 , δ2 }. Then for 0 <| z − z0 | < δ, we have

| l − m | = | l − f (z) + f (z) − m |

≤ | f (z) − l | + | f (z) − m |
ε ε
< + = ε.
2 2
Since ε > 0 is arbitrary, it follows that l = m and hence the limit is unique. This proves
the theorem.

Theorem 2. A necessary and sufficient condition that the function f (z) = u(x, y) +
iv(x, y) may tend to l = α + iβ as z = x + iy tends to z0 = x0 + iy0 is that

u(x, y) → α and v(x, y) → β as (x, y) → (x0 , y0 ).

Proof. Necessity of the Condition :

We first assume that lim f (z) = l. Then for given ε(> 0), there exists a δ(> 0) such that
z→z0

| f (z) − l |< ε whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ

3
 i.e. | u(x, y) + iv(x, y) − α − iβ |< ε whenever 0 <| x + iy − x0 − iy0 |< δ
p
i.e. | (u(x, y) − α) + i(v(x, y) − β) |< ε whenever 0 < (x − x0 )2 + (y − y0 )2 < δ
p
i.e. | u(x, y) − α |< ε and | v(x, y) − β |< ε whenever 0 < (x − x0 )2 + (y − y0 )2 < δ,

since | Re(z) | ≤ | z | and | Im(z) | ≤ | z |.

This shows that

lim u(x, y) = α and lim v(x, y) = β.

(x,y)→(x0 ,y0 ) (x,y)→(x0 ,y0 )

Sufficiency of the Condition :

Next we assume that lim u(x, y) = α and lim v(x, y) = β. Then for given
(x,y)→(x0 ,y0 ) (x,y)→(x0 ,y0 )
ε(> 0), we can find δ1 (> 0) and δ2 (> 0) such that
ε p
| u(x, y) − α |< whenever 0 < (x − x0 )2 + (y − y0 )2 < δ1 ,
2
ε p
| v(x, y) − β |< whenever 0 < (x − x0 )2 + (y − y0 )2 < δ2 .
2
p
We choose δ = min{δ1 , δ2 }. Then for 0 < (x − x0 )2 + (y − y0 )2 < δ, i.e. for
0 < | z − z0 | < δ, we have

| f (z) − l | = | (u(x, y) − α) + i(v(x, y) − β) |

≤ | u(x, y) − α | + | v(x, y) − β |
ε ε
< + = ε,
2 2
which implies that lim f (z) = l. This proves the theorem.
z→z0

Theorem 3. Suppose that lim f (z) = l and lim g(z) = m. Then

z→z0 z→z0
(i) lim [f (z) + g(z)] = l + m;
z→z0
(ii) lim cf (z) = c l, where c is a constat;
z→z0
(iii) lim f (z)g(z) = lm;
z→z0
f (z) l
(iv) lim = if m 6= 0.
z→z0 g(z) m

Proof. (i) Since lim f (z) = l and lim g(z) = m, we have, for given ε > 0, there exists
z→z0 z→z0
δ1 (> 0) and δ2 (> 0) such that
ε
| f (z) − l |< whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ1 ,
2

4
 ε
| g(z) − m |< whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ2 .
2
Then for all z with 0 <| z − z0 |< δ = min{δ1 , δ2 }, we have

| (f (z) + g(z)) − (l + m) | ≤ | f (z) − l | + | g(z) − m |

ε ε
< + = ε, say.
2 2
This implies that lim [f (z) + g(z)] = l + m.
z→z0
(iii) Since lim f (z) = l and lim g(z) = m, we have, for given ε > 0, there exists δ1 (> 0)
z→z0 z→z0
and δ2 (> 0) such that
√
| f (z) − l |< ε whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ1 ,

√
| g(z) − m |< ε whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ2 .

Then for all z with 0 <| z − z0 |< δ = min{δ1 , δ2 }, we have

| f (z)g(z) − lm | ≤ | m(f (z) − l) + l(g(z) − m) + (f (z) − l)(g(z) − m) |

≤ | m || f (z) − l | + | l || g(z) − m | + | (f (z) − l) || (g(z) − m) |

√
< (| l | + | m |) ε + ε.

Since ε(> 0) is arbitrary, we obtain lim f (z)g(z) = lm.

z→z0
(iv) Since lim g(z) = m, and m 6= 0, we have, for given ε > 0, there exists δ(> 0) such
z→z0
that

| g(z) − m |< ε whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ.

|m|
Choosing ε = 2
, the above inequality reduces to
|m| 3|m|
<| g(z) |< whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ.
2 2
Now for 0 <| z − z0 |< δ, we have
1 1 g(z) − m | g(z) − m | 2 | g(z) − m | 2ε
| − |=| |= ≤ 2
< .
g(z) m mg(z) | m || g(z) | |m| | m |2
Since ε(> 0) is arbitrary, we obtain
1 1
lim = .
z→z0 g(z) m
Now using (iii) we obtain
f (z) 1 l
lim = lim f (z) lim = .
z→z0 g(z) z→z0 z→z0 g(z) m
This proves the theorem.

5
2 Limits involving point at infinity
Now we consider the concepts of limits in the extended complex number system.
Limit at infinity
Let f be defined for | z |> R where R > 0. Then the function f is said to tend to a finite
limit l as z → ∞, symbolically lim f (z) = l if for any ε(> 0), there exists a positive
z→∞
number K0 such that | f (z) − l |< ε whenever | z |> K0 .

Infinite Limit
(i) Let f be defined in a domain D except perhaps at the point z0 ∈ D. The function f
is said to tend to infinity as z → z0 , symbolically lim f (z) = ∞ if for any real number
z→z0
K(> 0), however large, there is a δ(> 0) such that | f (z) |> K whenever 0 <| z − z0 |< δ.
(ii) Let f be defined for | z |> R where R > 0. The function f is said to tend to ∞ as
z → ∞, symbolically lim f (z) = ∞ if for each number K(> 0), there exists a number
z→∞
K0 (> 0) such that | f (z) |> K whenever | z |> K0 .
Another Definition of Limit
A complex function f (z) defined in some neighbourhood of z0 is said to have limit w0 at
z0 if, for every sequence {zn } converging to z0 , we have

lim f (zn ) = w0 .
n→∞

In this definition we assumed that the function f (z) is defined for all zn . It can be easily
shown that both definitions of limits are equivalent.

Example 1. Using the definition, verify that lim(z 2 + 2) = 1.

z→i

Solution. To verify this limit we have to find a δ > 0, for given ε > 0 such that

0 <| z − i |< δ ⇒ | z 2 + 2 − 1 | < ε.

Now

| z 2 + 2 − 1 | = | z 2 + 1 | = | (z + i)(z − i) | = | z + i || z − i | . (1)

From (1), we note that | z 2 + 2 − 1 | < ε holds if we assume | z + i || z − i |< ε. Now

restricting | z − i |< 1, we see that

| z + i | = | z − i + 2i | ≤ | z − i | +2 < 3.

Therefore if we choose δ = min{1, ε/3}, then the given limit holds.

6
Example 2. Consider the function f (z) = zz , z 6= 0. Verify whether lim f (z) exist or
z→0
not.

Solution. Here

z z2 z2 x2 − y 2 − 2ixy
f (z) = = = = .
z zz | z |2 x2 + y 2

Considering f (z) = f (x + iy) = u(x, y) + iv(x, y), we obtain

x2 − y 2 2xy
u(x, y) = 2 2
and v(x, y) = − 2 .
x +y x + y2

Letting z → 0 along the line y = mx, where m is any constant we see that

1 − m2 2m
f (x + imx) = 2
−i ,
1+m 1 + m2

which clearly depends on m. Hence lim f (z) does not exist.

z→0