MAT042-Lecture Notes

February 8, 2024

1 LIMITS
1.1 Intuitive Idea of Limits
Let a be a real number and let f be a function of x given by y = f (x). In
Calculus and its applications, we are often interested in the values f (x) of a
function f when x is very closed to a number a, but not necessarily equal to a.
In many instances, as a matter of fact, a is not in the domain of f ; that is, f (a)
is undefined. Roughly speaking, we ask the following questions:

As x gets closer and closer to a (but x ̸= a), does f (x) get closer and closer to
some number L?

If the answer is yes, we say that the limit of f (x), as x approaches a, equals
L or the limit of f (x), as x approaches a is L and we write in symbol as
either of the following:
1. f (x) −→ L, as x −→ a
2. lim f (x) = L
x→a

To Illustrate the idea above, let us consider the following examples:

Consider the values of the function f (x) = 21 (3x − 1) as x gets very close to
x = 4. Note that 4 ∈ df = R. That is, 4 is an element of the domain of the
function f . But then we are interested primarily in the behavior of f (x) as x
takes values closer and closer to a = 4 but not neccessarily equal to 4.

So, to address this interest, we consider the following tables:

1
 x 3.99 3.999 3.99999 3.99999
f (x) = 12 (3x − 1) 5.485 5.4985 5.49985 5.499985

Table 1: The values of the function f (x) = 12 (3x − 1) for x < 4.

Considering the values of x < 4,observe that as the values of x get closer to 4,
the values of f (x) become closer to 5.5.

x 4.01 4.001 4.0001 4.00001

f (x) 12 (3x − 1) 5.515 5.5015 5.50015 5.500015

Table 2: The values of the function f (x) = 12 (3x − 1) for x > 4.

Also for x > 4, observe that as the values of x get closer to 4, the values of f (x)
become closer to 5.5.
Thus, as x gets closer to 4, both from the left (that is, x < 4) and from the
right of 4 (that is, x > 4), the values of f (x) become closer to 5.5.
Hence, we say that the limit of f (x) = 21 (3x − 1) as x gets very close to x = 4
is 5.5.
In symbol,
1
As x → 4, f (x) → 5.5 or lim (3x − 1) = 5.5.
x→4 2
Note that from the preceeding example, the number a = 4 could actually have
been substituted for x in the given function f , thus obtaining L = 5.5 as the
limit of the function, i.e.,
1 1 1
lim (3x − 1) = (3(4) − 1) = (11) = 5.5.
x→4 2 2 2
This method of evaluating limits is called direct substitution. But the next
examples show that it is not always possible to find the number L by merely
substituting a for x.

Example 2.
x−1
Determine the values of f (x) = as x takes values closer to a = 1 or
x2 − 1
determine
x−1
lim .
x→1 x2 − 1
Consider the following solutions.

2
Solution 1.
Constructing the table of values for x and f (x):

x 0.9 0.99 0.999 0.99999 0.99999

f (x) 0.52631 0.50251 0.50025 0.500025 0.5000025

Table 3: For x < 1

x 1.1 1.01 1.001 1.0001 1.00001

f (x) 0.4761 0.4975 0.49975 0.499975 0.4999975

Table 4: For x > 1

Note that the values of f (x) tend to get closer to .5 as x approaches to 1. Thus,
x−1
lim = .5
x→1 x2 − 1
Solution 2.
0
Note that direct substitution yields the expression 0, which is meaningless.
Thus, direct substitution does not give us the limit of f (x).
However, simplifying the expression by factoring and applying direct substitu-
tion to the result, we get
x−1 x−1 1 1
lim = lim = lim = = 0.5.
x→1 x2 − 1 x→1 (x − 1)(x + 1) x→1 x + 1 2
x−1 1
Here, = since x ̸= 1, x only approaches 1.
x2 − 1 x+1

x−4
Example 3. If f (x) = √ , find lim f (x).
x−2 x→4

Solution 1. (Making a table of values)

Constructing the table of values, we get

Note that the values of f (x) tend to get closer to 4 as x approaches to 4. Thus,
x−4
lim √ = 4.
x→4 x−2

3
 x 3.9 3.99 3.999 4 4.001 4.01 4.1
f (x) 3.9748 3.9975 3.9997 −− 4.0002 4.0025 4.0248

Table 5: For x → 4

Solution 2. (Simplifying the expression by rationalizing)

First, observe that direct substitution yields 00 , which is again an indeterminate

form. However rationalizing the denominator of the function, we get
√
x−4 x−4 x+2
lim √ = lim √ ·√
x→4 x−2 x→4 x−2 x+2
√
(x − 4)( x + 2)
= lim
x→4 x−4
√
= lim ( x + 2)
x→4
√
= 2+2
= 4.

Each solution of the preceeding two examples shows that the following algebraic
manipulations enumerated below can be used to simplify the task of finding
limits especially when the result of direct substitution is 00 :
i. simplifying rational expressions by factoring: as used in Example
2,
ii. rationalizing denominator or numerator: as used in Example 3.

The succeeding example shows that in some instances, the limit does not exist.
1
Example 4. Evalute the limit of f (x) = as x approaches to a = 0.
x
Solution: Consider the following tables :

x 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 0.00001

f (x) 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000

Table 6: For x > 0

4
 x -1 −0.1 −0.01 −0.001 −0.0001 −0.00001
f (x) −1 −10 −100 −10000 −10000 −100000

Table 7: For x < 0

Observe that as x approaches 0 (from the left or right), the value of f (x) either
1
increases or decreases without bound. Hence, we say that lim does not exist.
x→0 x

Exercise. Evaluate each of the following limits, if it exists.

1
1. lim 6. lim (−4)
x→−2 x + 2 x→2
√
2
2. lim 102 − 5x √ x −3
7. lim
x→0 x→ 2

x2 − 4
3. lim [(2x − 7) + 4 − 3x] 8. lim
x→1 x→−2 x + 2

r2 + 2r − 3 s2 − 16
4. lim 9. lim √
r→−3 r 2 + 7r + 12 s→4 s−2
1−t h3 − 8
5. lim 10. lim
t→1 t − 1 h→2 h2 − 4

ASSESSMENT TEST

NAME: SIGNATURE:
SECTION: DATE:
SCORE:

Evaluate each of the following limit, if it exists.

1−t
1. lim
t→1 t−1
2. lim 3x + 4
x→1

h3 − 8
3. lim
h→2 h2 − 4

5
1.2 Formal Definition
Formal Definition of Limit The intention of the informal discussion in the
previous section is to give us an intuitive(unpremiditated) grasp of when a limit
does or does not exist. However, it is neither desirable nor practical to reach into
a conclusion on limit existence by merely basing on such intuition. We must be
able to evaluate a limit or discern its existence in a somewhat technical fashion.
The theorems that we shall consider and discuss in this section establish such a
means.
Consider the table of values of the function given in Example 1. In detail, the
variation of f (x) = 12 (3x−1) when x is close to 4 can be written in the following
conditional statements:

(i) If 3.9 < x < 4.1, then 5.35 < f (x) < 5.65.

(ii) If 3.99 < x < 4.01, then 5.485 < f (x) < 5.515.

(iii) If 3.999 < x < 4.001, then 5.4985 < f (x) < 5.5015.

(iv) If 3.9999 < x < 4.0001, then 5.49985 < f (x) < 5.50015.

(v) If 3.99999 < x < 4.00001, then 5.499985 < f (x) < 5.500015.

If we let the Greek letters ϵ ”Epsilon” and δ ”Delta” denote small positive real
numbers, then each of the statements: (i) - (v) is of the form
If 4 − δ < x < 4 + δ, then 5.5 − ϵ < f (x) < 5.5 + ϵ.
That is, statement (i) is obtained if we take δ = 0.1 and ϵ = 0.15. The values
δ = 0.01 and ϵ = 0.015 yield statement (ii); and δ = 0.001 with ϵ = 0.0015 gives
statement (iii); and so on.
In interval form, we say:
If x is in the open interval (4 − δ, 4 + δ),

then f (x) is in the open interval (5.5 − ϵ, 5.5 + ϵ).

Or equivalently,
If |x − 4| < δ, then |f (x) − 5.5| < ϵ.

Since ϵ and δ are positive real numbers, the statements above can be written as

6
 If 0 < |x − 4| < δ, then 0 < |f (x) − 5.5| < ϵ.

Definition. Let f be a function which is defined for all x on the open interval
I containing a, except posssibly at a itself. The limit of f (x) as x approaches
to a is L, written
lim f (x) = L
x→a
if for every ϵ > 0, however small, there exists a δ > 0 such that
|f (x) − L| < ϵ whenever 0 < |x − a| < δ.
The following examples will illustrate how to show that lim f (x) = L using the
x→a
formal definition of limit.

1 11
Example 1. Prove that lim (3x − 1) = .
x→4 2 2

Proof. Let f (x) = 12 (3x − 1), a = 4, and L = 11

2 .
By definition, we must show that for every ϵ > 0,
there exists a number δ > 0 such that if 0 < |x − 4| < δ, then

1 11
(3x − 1) − < ϵ.
2 2
1 11
A clue to the choice of δ can be found by examining the inequality 2 (3x − 1) − 2 <
ϵ, which involves ϵ.
Now, let ϵ > 0. Observe that

1 11 1
(3x − 1) − < ϵ ⇔ |(3x − 1) − 11| < ϵ
2 2 2
⇔ |3x − 12| < 2ϵ
⇔ 3 |x − 4| < 2ϵ
2
⇔ |x − 4| < ϵ.
3
The final inequality gives us the needed clue.
If we take δ = 32 ϵ, then for ϵ > 0 there exist a δ > 0 such that |x − 4| < δ and

7
 1 11 1
(3x − 1) − = |(3x − 1) − 11|
2 2 2
1
= |3x − 12|
2
3
= |x − 4|
2
3
< δ
2  

3 2
= ϵ
2 3
= ϵ.

Therefore, lim 12 (3x − 1) = 11

2 . □
x→4

Example 2. Prove that the lim (5x − 3) = 2.

x→1

Proof. Let ϵ > 0.

We want show that there exists a δ > 0 such that

|(5x − 3) − 2| < ϵ whenever 0 < |x − 1| < δ.

Now, |(5x − 3) − 2| = |5x − 5| = 5|x − 1|.

Hence, we will show that
ϵ
5|x − 1| < ϵ ⇐⇒ |x − 1| <
5
whenever 0 < |x − 1| < δ.
Choose δ = 5ϵ . Then, for ϵ > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that if 0 < |x − 1| < δ,
we have
ϵ
|(5x − 3) − 2| = 5|x − 1| < 5δ = 5 = ϵ.
5
Thus,
|(5x − 3) − 2| < ϵ whenever 0 < |x − 1| < δ.
Thus, by definition, lim (5x − 3) = 2. □
x→1

 
1
Example 1.10 Show that lim does not exist.
x→0 x

8
  
1
Proof. Suppose that lim exists. Then for some number L,
x→0 x
 
1
lim = L.
x→0 x

Thus, for each ϵ > 0, it is possible to find an interval (0 − δ, 0 + δ) containing 0

such that whenever 0 < |x − 0| < δ,
1
|f (x) − L| = − L < ϵ.
x
Now,
1 1
x− x−
   
1 1 − xL L L
|f (x) − L| = −L = = (−L) =L .
x x x x
Note that for x ̸= 0, L1 ̸= 0, which is a contradiction.
1
Hence, we can not find a δ such  that
 for every ϵ > 0, x − L < ϵ whenever
1
0 < |x − 0| < δ. Therefore, lim does not exist. □
x→0 x

Exercise. Prove each of the following limits.

1. lim (5x + 7) = 17
x→2

2. lim (10 − 2x) = 16

x→−3
x 
3. lim − 2 = − 53
x→1 3
4. lim x = π
x→π

5. lim 7 = 7
x→5

ASSESSMENT TEST
NAME: SIGNATURE:
SECTION: DATE:
SCORE:

Show that each of the following limits is true:

1. lim (2x + 1) = 1
t→0

2. lim (3 − 4x) = −1
x→1

t3 + 8
3. lim = 12
t→−2 t + 2