6

How does substitution for limits exactly work?

I see often answers that use the substitution $t=\frac1x$, then changing $x\rightarrow\infty$ to $t\rightarrow0^+$.

I have seen this question, this appears to solve my question in the finite case. How does it work when going to infinty?

Books I'm using don't cover substitutions, but they seem very useful.

wythagoras
  • 25,026
  • I pretty freely substitute as long as the f is an invertible function by the rule you have given above. When going to infinity, things get more ambiguous for example depending on what side (or in the complex plane what direction) one tends x to 0 $\frac{1}{x}$ gets a different value. Most of the times I've done that substitution, "stuff just works out at the end" I feel as though rigorous justification for that sort of trick, is very very specific to each problem it is being applied to. And that there should be plenty of cases out there, that show the 1/x substitution is ridiculous. – Sidharth Ghoshal Jul 27 '15 at 18:08
  • You would change $x\to \infty $ to $t\to 0^+.$ – zhw. Jul 27 '15 at 18:13
  • 1
    @frogeyedpeas I see. I hope to get something more rigorous though. – wythagoras Jul 27 '15 at 18:15
  • @zhw. Okay, I shall fix that. This is exactly the reason why I'm asking this question. – wythagoras Jul 27 '15 at 18:15
  • There really should be. But I think to make it more rigorous, will result in a lot of bad edge cases showing that the way go about doing certain limits, really is very loose. – Sidharth Ghoshal Jul 27 '15 at 18:15
  • @Siminore Thank you. I hadn't thought of calling it a change of variables. However, I would like to see some more detail in the infinite case. – wythagoras Jul 27 '15 at 18:26

2 Answers2

2

For real-valued function $f$ we say that:

$\underset{x\rightarrow \infty}{\text{lim}}f(x) = L \iff$ for all $\epsilon > 0$ there exists $B > 0$ such that $x>B \implies |f(x) - L| < \epsilon$.

On the other hand:

$\underset{t\rightarrow 0^+}{\text{lim}}f(\frac{1}{t}) = L^* \iff$ for all $\epsilon > 0$ there exists $\delta > 0$ such that $0 < t <\delta \implies |f(\frac{1}{t}) - L^*|< \epsilon$.

If we have the second version, then by letting $\delta = 1/B$ we have that $0 < t < \frac{1}{B} \implies \frac{1}{t} > B \implies |f(\frac{1}{t})-L^*| < \epsilon$.

If $x = \frac{1}{t}$, we can rewrite the last part as $x > B \implies |f(x) - L^*| < \epsilon$ and we have the first version. By the uniqueness of limits, $L = L^*$.

This proves you can perform this change of variable without any trouble, and the limit will be the same if it exists.

Stanley
  • 3,094
1

Since the other question doesn't address the infinite case, I will try to prove some of them here myself. They are generally quite simple and there are numerous cases so I won't write them out all here.

Lemma 1. Suppose that $\lim_{y\to \pm\infty} f(y)= \ell$ and suppose that $\lim_{x\to a} g(x)=\pm\infty$. Also suppose that the range of $g$ is a subset of the domain of $f$. Then $$\lim_{x \to \pm\infty} f(g(x)) = \ell $$

Proof. We only do the case for positive infinity. The negative case goes similiarly.

We know that, for every $\varepsilon>0$, there is a $K$ such that for all $y>K$ we have $|f(y)-\ell|<\varepsilon$.

Also, we know that, for any $M$, that there is a $\delta$ such that if $|x-a|<\delta$, then $g(x) > M$.

Now we have that there exist $\delta$ such that if $|x-a|<\delta$, then $g(x)> K$ and thus $|f(g(x))-\ell|<\varepsilon$. This concludes the proof.

Lemma 2. Suppose that $\lim_{y\to \ell} f(y)= \pm\infty$ and suppose that $\lim_{x\to a} g(x)=\ell$, yet $g$ does not attain the value $\ell$ in the neighbourhood of $x$. Also suppose that the range of $g$ is a subset of the domain of $f$. Then $$\lim_{x \to a} f(g(x)) = \pm\infty$$

Proof. We only do the case for positive infinity. The negative case goes similiarly.

We know that, for any $M$, that there is a $\delta_1$ such that if $|x-\ell|<\delta_1$, then $f(x) > M$.

We know that, for every $\varepsilon>0$, there is a $\delta_2$ such that if $|x-a|<\delta_2$ we have $|g(x)-\ell|<\varepsilon$.

Therefore, there is a $\delta$ such that if $|x-a|<\delta$, then $|g(x)-\ell|<\delta_1$, and then we can conclude $f(g(x)) > M$.

wythagoras
  • 25,026