I'll give the precise definition of a limit so that you can see the similarity to the definition you saw in single-variable calculus. The first definition is a technical point which you don't need to worry about too much. It simply ensures if we take a limit as , that x can approach c through a set where the function is defined.
Definition. Let U be a subset of . A point is an accumulation point of U if for every , the open ball contains a point other than c.
is the set of points in which are less than r units from c:
Definition. Let be a function defined on , and let c be an accumulation point of U. Then means:
For every , there is a , such that
Many results you know about limits from single-variable calculus have analogs for functions of several variables.
Proposition. Suppose where . Let c be an accumulation point of U, and let . Then:
(a) .
(b) .
(c) .
(d) , provided that .
All of these results mean that if the limits on the right side are defined, then so is the limit on the left side, and the two sides are equal.
I won't try to state all of the easy results on limits that generalize to functions of several variables. You will see many of them proven in a course in real analysis. Let's look at some of the complications that result from being able to approach a point in more than one dimension.
Example. Compute .
I can compute the limit by plugging in. (This is another way of saying that is continuous at .) Thus.
Example. Compute .
I can compute the limit by plugging in.
Example. Compute .
Substituting yields the indeterminate form .
Here's the graph of the function. Notice that as the height seems to approach one value along the "ridgeline" while it approaches another value along the "valley":
This leads me to believe that the limit is undefined.
To prove this, I try to find different ways of approaching which give different limits. Specifically, I try to pick different curves through which make simplify to different values. In this case, I try the x-axis, which is , and the y-axis, which is .
Set and let . I have
Set and let . I have
Since approaches different numbers depending on how approaches , the limit is undefined.
Example. Compute .
Substituting yields the indeterminate form .
Here's the graph of the function. It is a little harder to tell from the graph what is happening near the origin.
It turns out that the limit is undefined. To show this, I'll approach along a line and along a curve.
If you approach along the line , you get
Next, I notice that and . Thus, I can get multiple " " terms by setting .
If you approach along the curve , you get
Since approaches different numbers depending on how approaches , the limit is undefined.
Example. Compute by converting to polar coordinates.
Let and . Then
Then
Example. Compute .
I try to find different curves through which make simplify to different values.
If you approach along the line , , you get
If you approach along the line , you get
Since you get different limits by approaching in different ways, is undefined.
Definition. Let , where , and let . Then f is continuous at c if
Remark. Some authors will say a function is not continous at a point where the function isn't defined. For example, the function f defined by has (natural) domain . These authors will say that f is not continuous at , with similar terminology for multivariable functions. I'll avoid doing this: It seems inappropriate to talk about whether a function does or does not have a property like continuity at the point where there is no function!
I'll only consider continuity (or lack of continuity) at points in a function's domain.
Example. A function is defined by
Is f continuous at ?
However, ,
Since , it follows that f is not continuous at .
Copyright 2018 by Bruce Ikenaga