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