Calculus 1 Quiz: Limit Definition And Notation
20 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Limit Definition And NotationQuestion 1 of 20

If limx3f(x)=5\lim_{x \to 3^-} f(x) = 5 and f(3)f(3) is undefined, what can be concluded about limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x)?

limx3f(x)=5\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) = 5.
limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) does not exist because f(3)f(3) is undefined.
limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) cannot be determined without information about the right-hand limit.
limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) must be different from 5.
← Back to quizzes

Calculus 1 Quiz

Calculus 1 Quiz: Limit Definition And Notation

Practice Limit Definition And Notation in Calculus 1 with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Limit Definition And Notation, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Calculus 1.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

If limx3f(x)=5\lim_{x \to 3^-} f(x) = 5 and f(3)f(3) is undefined, what can be concluded about limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x)?

  1. limx3f(x)=5\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) = 5.
  2. limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) does not exist because f(3)f(3) is undefined.
  3. limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) cannot be determined without information about the right-hand limit. (correct answer)
  4. limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) must be different from 5.
Explanation: The existence of a two-sided limit requires three conditions: the left-hand limit must exist, the right-hand limit must exist, and these two limits must be equal. We are only given that the left-hand limit exists and is 5. We have no information about the right-hand limit, limx3+f(x)\lim_{x \to 3^+} f(x). It could be 5, it could be another number, or it could fail to exist. Therefore, we cannot determine the two-sided limit. The fact that f(3)f(3) is undefined is irrelevant to the existence of the limit itself.

Question 2

Consider the limit limx3(4x5)=7\lim_{x \to 3} (4x - 5) = 7. If ϵ=0.01\epsilon = 0.01, what is the largest value of δ\delta such that if 0<x3<δ0 < |x - 3| < \delta, then (4x5)7<0.01|(4x - 5) - 7| < 0.01?

  1. 0.01
  2. 0.04
  3. 0.0025 (correct answer)
  4. 0.005
Explanation: We start with the inequality (4x5)7<0.01|(4x - 5) - 7| < 0.01. Simplifying the expression inside the absolute value gives 4x12<0.01|4x - 12| < 0.01. We can factor out a 4: 4x3<0.014|x - 3| < 0.01. To find the condition on x3|x - 3|, we divide both sides by 4: x3<0.01/4|x - 3| < 0.01 / 4, which simplifies to x3<0.0025|x - 3| < 0.0025. Therefore, the largest possible value for δ\delta is 0.0025.

Question 3

You are given that limx>af(x)=Llim_{x->a} f(x) = L. A student is proving that limx>a3f(x)=3Llim_{x->a} 3f(x) = 3L using the ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition. The student starts correctly: "For any ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, we need to find a δ>0\delta > 0 such that if 0<xa<δ0 < |x - a| < \delta, then 3f(x)3L<ϵ|3f(x) - 3L| < \epsilon." Which of the following is a correct and logical next step in their proof?

  1. First, find a δ\delta such that f(x)L<ϵ|f(x) - L| < \epsilon. Then multiplying by 3 gives 3f(x)3L<3ϵ|3f(x) - 3L| < 3\epsilon, which completes the proof.
  2. Let δ=ϵ/3\delta = \epsilon/3. Then for any xx such that 0<xa<ϵ/30 < |x - a| < \epsilon/3, we can conclude that 3f(x)3L<ϵ|3f(x) - 3L| < \epsilon.
  3. Let ϵ=3ϵ\epsilon' = 3\epsilon. From the given limit, we know there exists a δ>0\delta > 0 such that if 0<xa<δ0 < |x - a| < \delta, then f(x)L<ϵ|f(x) - L| < \epsilon'.
  4. Let ϵ=ϵ/3\epsilon' = \epsilon/3. From the given limit, we know there exists a δ>0\delta > 0 such that if 0<xa<δ0 < |x - a| < \delta, then f(x)L<ϵ|f(x) - L| < \epsilon'. (correct answer)
Explanation: When proving limits using the epsilon-delta definition, you need to work backwards from what you want to prove to what you're given. The key insight is connecting the constraint you need (3f(x)3L<ϵ|3f(x) - 3L| < \epsilon) to the limit you already know (limxaf(x)=L\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = L). The correct approach is option D. Since you need 3f(x)3L<ϵ|3f(x) - 3L| < \epsilon, you can factor this as 3(f(x)L)=3f(x)L<ϵ|3(f(x) - L)| = 3|f(x) - L| < \epsilon. This means you need f(x)L<ϵ/3|f(x) - L| < \epsilon/3. By setting ϵ=ϵ/3\epsilon' = \epsilon/3 and using the given limit, you can find a δ\delta such that f(x)L<ϵ|f(x) - L| < \epsilon', which gives you exactly what you need. Option A gets the inequality backwards – it finds δ\delta for f(x)L<ϵ|f(x) - L| < \epsilon, then multiplies to get 3f(x)3L<3ϵ|3f(x) - 3L| < 3\epsilon. This gives you more than ϵ\epsilon, not less than ϵ\epsilon as required. Option B incorrectly sets δ=ϵ/3\delta = \epsilon/3 without justification. The relationship between ϵ\epsilon and δ\delta depends on the specific function, not a direct proportionality. Option C sets ϵ=3ϵ\epsilon' = 3\epsilon, which would give you f(x)L<3ϵ|f(x) - L| < 3\epsilon. When you multiply by 3, you'd get 3f(x)3L<9ϵ|3f(x) - 3L| < 9\epsilon, which is far too large. Study tip: In epsilon-delta proofs involving constants, always work backwards from your target inequality to determine what epsilon value you need for the given limit.

Question 4

A student is investigating the limit limx>2f(x)lim_{x->2} f(x) and finds that for the specific choice of ϵ=0.1\epsilon = 0.1, the condition f(x)5<0.1|f(x) - 5| < 0.1 is satisfied for all xx in the interval 0<x2<0.020 < |x - 2| < 0.02. What can be rigorously concluded from this single finding?

  1. The limit is proven to be 5, i.e., limx>2f(x)=5lim_{x->2} f(x) = 5.
  2. For the choice ϵ=0.1\epsilon = 0.1, any δ\delta such that 0<δ0.020 < \delta \le 0.02 is a valid choice. (correct answer)
  3. For any new choice of ϵ<0.1\epsilon < 0.1, the corresponding value of δ\delta must be less than 0.02.
  4. The function f(x)f(x) must be defined at x=2x=2 and satisfy f(2)=5f(2) = 5.
Explanation: Demonstrating that a δ\delta exists for a single ϵ\epsilon is not sufficient to prove that the limit is 5; the definition requires that a δ\delta can be found for every ϵ>0\epsilon > 0. Therefore, A is incorrect. The finding gives no information about the value of f(2)f(2), so D is incorrect. We cannot conclude anything about the δ\delta for other ϵ\epsilon values without more information about the function, so C is not necessarily true. However, if δ=0.02\delta = 0.02 works for ϵ=0.1\epsilon = 0.1, it means the condition holds for all xx in (1.98,2)(2,2.02)(1.98, 2) \cup (2, 2.02). Any smaller positive δ\delta will define a smaller interval that is a subset of this one, so the condition must also hold for any smaller δ\delta. Thus, B is the only valid conclusion.

Question 5

Let f(x)f(x) be a function defined as f(x)={kx23if x<25if x=2x+kif x>2f(x) = \begin{cases} kx^2 - 3 & \text{if } x < 2 \\ 5 & \text{if } x = 2 \\ x + k & \text{if } x > 2 \end{cases}. For what value of the constant kk does limx>2f(x)lim_{x->2} f(x) exist?

  1. 5/35/3 (correct answer)
  2. 22
  3. 33
  4. 1/3-1/3
Explanation: For the two-sided limit limx>2f(x)lim_{x->2} f(x) to exist, the left-hand limit must equal the right-hand limit. The value of the function at x=2x=2, which is f(2)=5f(2)=5, is irrelevant for the existence of the limit. We calculate the one-sided limits: Left-hand limit: limx>2f(x)=limx>2(kx23)=k(22)3=4k3lim_{x->2^-} f(x) = lim_{x->2^-} (kx^2 - 3) = k(2^2) - 3 = 4k - 3. Right-hand limit: limx>2+f(x)=limx>2+(x+k)=2+klim_{x->2^+} f(x) = lim_{x->2^+} (x + k) = 2 + k. Setting them equal: 4k3=2+k4k - 3 = 2 + k. Solving for kk gives 3k=53k = 5, so k=5/3k = 5/3.

Question 6

Suppose it is known that limx>cf(x)=Llim_{x->c} f(x) = L. According to the ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition, for any chosen ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, there exists a δ>0\delta > 0 that satisfies the required conditions. If δ1\delta_1 is a specific value of δ\delta that is shown to work for a given ϵ1\epsilon_1, which of the following statements must also be true?

  1. For the same ϵ1\epsilon_1, any δ2\delta_2 such that 0<δ2<δ10 < \delta_2 < \delta_1 is also a valid choice for δ\delta. (correct answer)
  2. For the same ϵ1\epsilon_1, any δ2\delta_2 such that δ2>δ1\delta_2 > \delta_1 is also a valid choice for δ\delta.
  3. If 0<ϵ2<ϵ10 < \epsilon_2 < \epsilon_1, then any valid δ\delta for ϵ2\epsilon_2 must be less than δ1\delta_1.
  4. The value of δ1\delta_1 is uniquely determined by the function f(x)f(x) and the value of ϵ1\epsilon_1.
Explanation: The ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition states that if 0<xc<δ10 < |x - c| < \delta_1, then f(x)L<ϵ1|f(x) - L| < \epsilon_1. If we choose a δ2\delta_2 such that 0<δ2<δ10 < \delta_2 < \delta_1, then the set of xx values satisfying 0<xc<δ20 < |x - c| < \delta_2 is a subset of the xx values satisfying 0<xc<δ10 < |x - c| < \delta_1. Therefore, the condition f(x)L<ϵ1|f(x) - L| < \epsilon_1 must also hold for this smaller set of xx values, making δ2\delta_2 a valid choice.

Question 7

The formal definition of limx>cf(x)=Llim_{x->c} f(x) = L begins "For every ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, there exists a δ>0\delta > 0 such that...". Consider an altered statement where the quantifiers are swapped: "There exists an ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 such that for every δ>0\delta > 0, if 0<xc<δ0 < |x - c| < \delta, then f(x)L<ϵ|f(x) - L| < \epsilon." If a function f(x)f(x) satisfies this altered statement, what property must it have?

  1. The function f(x)f(x) must be a constant function.
  2. The function f(x)f(x) must be bounded for all xcx \neq c. (correct answer)
  3. The limit of f(x)f(x) as xx approaches cc must be LL.
  4. The function f(x)f(x) must be continuous for all xcx \neq c.
Explanation: The altered statement says that we can find a single fixed ϵ\epsilon-band around y=Ly=L that contains all function values f(x)f(x) (for xcx \neq c), no matter how wide we make the δ\delta-interval around x=cx=c. Since this must hold for every δ>0\delta > 0, it effectively means that for all xcx \neq c, the function's values must lie within (Lϵ,L+ϵ)(L-\epsilon, L+\epsilon). This is the definition of a bounded function (for all xcx \neq c). It does not imply the function is constant or that the limit is LL.

Question 8

Suppose for a function f(x)f(x), a student has shown that for the specific choice of ϵ=0.1\epsilon = 0.1, there exists a δ=0.5\delta = 0.5 such that if 0<x3<0.50 < |x - 3| < 0.5, then f(x)7<0.1|f(x) - 7| < 0.1. What can be definitively concluded from this single statement?

  1. The statement provides evidence that limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) might be 7, but does not prove it. (correct answer)
  2. The statement is sufficient to prove that limx3f(x)=7\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) = 7.
  3. The statement is sufficient to prove that f(3)=7f(3) = 7.
  4. The statement implies that for any ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, the choice δ=0.5\delta = 0.5 will satisfy the limit definition.
Explanation: The formal definition of a limit requires the condition to hold for every ϵ>0\epsilon > 0. Showing that it holds for a single, specific ϵ\epsilon (here, ϵ=0.1\epsilon = 0.1) is not a proof. It is merely one piece of evidence consistent with the limit being 7. To prove the limit, one must show that for any given ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, a corresponding δ\delta can be found.

Question 9

Consider the limit limx2(4x1)=7\lim_{x \to 2} (4x - 1) = 7. Using the formal ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition, for a given ϵ=0.08\epsilon = 0.08, what is the largest possible value of δ\delta such that 0<x2<δ0 < |x-2| < \delta guarantees (4x1)7<0.08|(4x - 1) - 7| < 0.08?

  1. δ=0.32\delta = 0.32
  2. δ=0.08\delta = 0.08
  3. δ=0.02\delta = 0.02 (correct answer)
  4. δ=0.01\delta = 0.01
Explanation: We need to find a δ\delta such that if 0<x2<δ0 < |x - 2| < \delta, then (4x1)7<0.08|(4x - 1) - 7| < 0.08. Let's simplify the epsilon inequality: 4x8<0.08|4x - 8| < 0.08. Factoring out 4 gives 4(x2)<0.08|4(x - 2)| < 0.08, which simplifies to 4x2<0.084|x - 2| < 0.08. Dividing by 4, we get x2<0.02|x - 2| < 0.02. The definition requires that x2<δ|x-2| < \delta must imply x2<0.02|x-2| < 0.02. The largest value of δ\delta for which this is true is δ=0.02\delta = 0.02.

Question 10

The concentration C(t)C(t) of a reactant in a chemical process, in moles per liter, is modeled by the function C(t)=t12tC(t) = \frac{t}{12-t} for the time interval 0t<120 \le t < 12 seconds. Which limit statement correctly describes the behavior of the concentration as the reaction approaches 12 seconds?

  1. limt12C(t)=\lim_{t \to 12} C(t) = \infty
  2. limt12C(t)=\lim_{t \to 12^-} C(t) = \infty (correct answer)
  3. limt12+C(t)=\lim_{t \to 12^+} C(t) = -\infty
  4. limtC(t)=1\lim_{t \to \infty} C(t) = -1
Explanation: The model is defined for t<12t < 12. Therefore, we can only consider the limit as tt approaches 12 from the left side (from below). As t12t \to 12^-, the numerator tt approaches 12, and the denominator 12t12-t approaches 0 from the positive side. A positive numerator divided by a very small positive number results in a very large positive number. Thus, the limit is \infty. The two-sided limit is not appropriate as the function is not defined for t>12t>12.

Question 11

Suppose limxaf(x)=L\lim_{x \to a^-} f(x) = L and limxa+f(x)=M\lim_{x \to a^+} f(x) = M, where LL and MM are finite real numbers. The statement limxaf(x)\lim_{x \to a} f(x) exists and is equal to some value KK if and only if which condition is met?

  1. L=ML = M, and in this case, K=L=MK=L=M. (correct answer)
  2. f(a)f(a) is defined, and in this case, K=f(a)K=f(a).
  3. LL and MM are both defined, and in this case, KK is their average, (L+M)/2(L+M)/2.
  4. f(a)=Lf(a) = L and f(a)=Mf(a) = M, ensuring the function connects with its one-sided limits.
Explanation: The two-sided limit, limxaf(x)\lim_{x \to a} f(x), exists if and only if the left-sided limit and the right-sided limit both exist and are equal. That is, LL must equal MM. If this condition is met, the value of the two-sided limit is this common value, K=L=MK=L=M. The value of f(a)f(a) is irrelevant for the existence of the limit.

Question 12

Suppose for a function f(x)f(x), it is known that for ϵ=0.1\epsilon = 0.1, the choice δ=0.05\delta = 0.05 satisfies the definition of the limit limx3f(x)=8\lim_{x \to 3} f(x) = 8. Which conclusion can be drawn from this specific information?

  1. If 0<x3<0.050 < |x - 3| < 0.05, then 7.9<f(x)<8.17.9 < f(x) < 8.1. (correct answer)
  2. If 0<x3<0.10 < |x - 3| < 0.1, then 7.95<f(x)<8.057.95 < f(x) < 8.05.
  3. If 7.9<f(x)<8.17.9 < f(x) < 8.1, then 0<x3<0.050 < |x - 3| < 0.05.
  4. The value of f(3)f(3) must be between 7.9 and 8.1.
Explanation: The ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition states that if 0<xc<δ0 < |x - c| < \delta, then f(x)L<ϵ|f(x) - L| < \epsilon. Substituting the given values c=3,L=8,ϵ=0.1,δ=0.05c=3, L=8, \epsilon=0.1, \delta=0.05, we get: if 0<x3<0.050 < |x - 3| < 0.05, then f(x)8<0.1|f(x) - 8| < 0.1. The inequality f(x)8<0.1|f(x) - 8| < 0.1 is equivalent to 0.1<f(x)8<0.1-0.1 < f(x) - 8 < 0.1, which simplifies to 7.9<f(x)<8.17.9 < f(x) < 8.1.

Question 13

Let f(x)f(x) be a function. If for every M>0M > 0, there exists a δ>0\delta > 0 such that f(x)>Mf(x) > M whenever 0<xa<δ0 < x - a < \delta, which of the following limit notations correctly expresses this property?

  1. limxaf(x)=\lim_{x \to a} f(x) = \infty
  2. limxf(x)=a\lim_{x \to \infty} f(x) = a
  3. limxaf(x)=\lim_{x \to a^-} f(x) = \infty
  4. limxa+f(x)=\lim_{x \to a^+} f(x) = \infty (correct answer)
Explanation: The condition 0<xa<δ0 < x - a < \delta is equivalent to a<x<a+δa < x < a + \delta. This means xx is approaching aa from the right side (from values greater than aa). The condition that for any large number MM, we can get f(x)>Mf(x) > M by choosing xx in this way, is the definition of the right-hand limit of f(x)f(x) at aa being positive infinity. This is denoted by limxa+f(x)=\lim_{x \to a^+} f(x) = \infty.

Question 14

Let f(x)f(x) be defined as f(x)=2xf(x) = 2x if xx is rational, and f(x)=x+3f(x) = x+3 if xx is irrational. Using the conceptual basis of the ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition, what is limx3f(x)\lim_{x \to 3} f(x)?

  1. 6 (correct answer)
  2. Does not exist because the function's definition switches between two formulas.
  3. Does not exist because for any xx near 3, there are both rational and irrational numbers.
  4. 9
Explanation: For the limit to exist, the function values must approach a single number LL as xx approaches 3, regardless of whether xx is rational or irrational. As x3x \to 3 along rational numbers, f(x)=2x2(3)=6f(x) = 2x \to 2(3) = 6. As x3x \to 3 along irrational numbers, f(x)=x+33+3=6f(x) = x+3 \to 3+3 = 6. Since both paths approach the same value, 6, the limit is 6. At any other point cc, where 2cc+32c \neq c+3, the limit would not exist.

Question 15

Consider the limit limxcx2=c2\lim_{x \to c} x^2 = c^2. For a fixed ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, the largest possible choice of δ\delta in the ϵδ\epsilon-\delta proof depends on both ϵ\epsilon and cc. As c|c| increases, what happens to this largest possible value of δ\delta?

  1. It increases because the function values are larger.
  2. It remains constant because ϵ\epsilon is fixed.
  3. It decreases because the function becomes steeper. (correct answer)
  4. It is independent of cc for any quadratic function.
Explanation: The slope of the function f(x)=x2f(x)=x^2 is f(x)=2xf'(x)=2x. As c|c| increases, the magnitude of the slope at x=cx=c increases, meaning the function becomes steeper. For a steeper function, a small change in xx (the δ\delta-interval) produces a larger change in f(x)f(x) (the ϵ\epsilon-interval). Therefore, to keep the change in f(x)f(x) within the fixed ϵ\epsilon tolerance, we must use a smaller δ\delta-interval as c|c| increases.

Question 16

Which statement correctly expresses the formal definition of limxf(x)L\lim_{x \to \infty} f(x) \neq L?

  1. For every ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 and for every NN, there is some x>Nx > N for which f(x)Lϵ|f(x) - L| \ge \epsilon.
  2. There exists an ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 such that for every NN, there is some x>Nx > N for which f(x)Lϵ|f(x) - L| \ge \epsilon. (correct answer)
  3. There exists an ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 and there exists an NN such that for all x>Nx > N, f(x)Lϵ|f(x) - L| \ge \epsilon.
  4. For every NN, there exists an ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 such that for all x>Nx > N, f(x)Lϵ|f(x) - L| \ge \epsilon.
Explanation: The formal definition of limxf(x)=L\lim_{x \to \infty} f(x) = L is: For every ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, there exists an NN such that for all x>Nx > N, f(x)L<ϵ|f(x) - L| < \epsilon. The logical negation of this is: There exists an ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 such that for every NN, there exists an x>Nx > N for which f(x)Lϵ|f(x) - L| \ge \epsilon. This means there is a specific error tolerance ϵ\epsilon that is always violated, no matter how far out on the x-axis you go.

Question 17

The Squeeze Theorem is a direct consequence of the ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition of a limit. If g(x)f(x)h(x)g(x) \le f(x) \le h(x) and limxcg(x)=limxch(x)=L\lim_{x \to c} g(x) = \lim_{x \to c} h(x) = L, how is a suitable δ\delta for f(x)f(x) constructed in the proof?

  1. A δ\delta is chosen for f(x)f(x) first, which then determines the valid ϵ\epsilon for g(x)g(x) and h(x)h(x).
  2. The δ\delta for f(x)f(x) is the average of the δ\delta's that work for g(x)g(x) and h(x)h(x) for a given ϵ\epsilon.
  3. For any ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, the δ\delta for f(x)f(x) is the minimum of the δ\delta's that work for g(x)g(x) and h(x)h(x). (correct answer)
  4. The Squeeze Theorem does not require the ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition; it is an independent axiom.
Explanation: For any given ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, since the limits of gg and hh exist, we can find a δg\delta_g and a δh\delta_h. If we choose δ=min(δg,δh)\delta = \min(\delta_g, \delta_h), then for any xx with 0<xc<δ0 < |x-c| < \delta, we know that both g(x)L<ϵ|g(x)-L| < \epsilon and h(x)L<ϵ|h(x)-L| < \epsilon. This means Lϵ<g(x)L-\epsilon < g(x) and h(x)<L+ϵh(x) < L+\epsilon. Since g(x)f(x)h(x)g(x) \le f(x) \le h(x), we have Lϵ<f(x)<L+ϵL-\epsilon < f(x) < L+\epsilon, which proves that limxcf(x)=L\lim_{x \to c} f(x) = L.

Question 18

For the function f(x)=xf(x) = \sqrt{x}, we want to prove limx9x=3\lim_{x \to 9} \sqrt{x} = 3. Given ϵ=0.1\epsilon = 0.1, we require x3<0.1|\sqrt{x} - 3| < 0.1. Which open interval for xx, centered at 9, guarantees this condition?

  1. (8.41,9.61)(8.41, 9.61) (correct answer)
  2. (8.9,9.1)(8.9, 9.1)
  3. (8.4,9.6)(8.4, 9.6)
  4. (8.1,9.9)(8.1, 9.9)
Explanation: The condition is x3<0.1|\sqrt{x} - 3| < 0.1, which is equivalent to 0.1<x3<0.1-0.1 < \sqrt{x} - 3 < 0.1. Adding 3 to all parts gives 2.9<x<3.12.9 < \sqrt{x} < 3.1. Squaring all parts gives (2.9)2<x<(3.1)2(2.9)^2 < x < (3.1)^2, which is 8.41<x<9.618.41 < x < 9.61. Any xx in this interval will satisfy the condition. The question asks for the interval that guarantees the condition, which is this exact interval derived from the epsilon value.

Question 19

The notation limxcf(x)=L\lim_{x \to c} f(x) = L conveys information about the values of f(x)f(x) when xx is in a small punctured neighborhood of cc. Which of the following is NOT guaranteed by this statement?

  1. For any given tolerance ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, the values of f(x)f(x) can be made to lie within ϵ\epsilon of LL by choosing xx sufficiently close to cc.
  2. The function f(x)f(x) must be defined at the point x=cx = c. (correct answer)
  3. The value LL is a finite real number.
  4. As xx gets arbitrarily close to cc, f(x)f(x) gets arbitrarily close to LL.
Explanation: The definition of a limit, limxcf(x)=L\lim_{x \to c} f(x) = L, only requires the function f(x)f(x) to be defined in a punctured neighborhood of cc, meaning in some interval around cc but excluding the point cc itself. The function does not need to be defined at x=cx = c for the limit to exist. Therefore, it is not guaranteed that f(c)f(c) is defined.

Question 20

To prove that limx2x2=4\lim_{x \to 2} x^2 = 4 using the ϵδ\epsilon-\delta definition, we start with x24<ϵ|x^2 - 4| < \epsilon. To control the x+2|x+2| term that arises from factoring x2x+2|x-2||x+2|, we make a preliminary restriction that δ1\delta \le 1. Given this restriction, which of the following represents a valid choice for δ\delta that completes the proof?

  1. δ=ϵ/5\delta = \epsilon/5
  2. δ=min(1,ϵ/4)\delta = \min(1, \epsilon/4)
  3. δ=min(1,ϵ/3)\delta = \min(1, \epsilon/3)
  4. δ=min(1,ϵ/5)\delta = \min(1, \epsilon/5) (correct answer)
Explanation: We need to bound x+2|x+2|. The restriction δ1\delta \le 1 implies x2<1|x-2| < 1, which means 1<x2<1-1 < x-2 < 1, or 1<x<31 < x < 3. For xx in this interval, x+2x+2 is between 3 and 5. Thus, we can bound x+2|x+2| by 5. Now we have x24=x2x+2<x25|x^2 - 4| = |x-2||x+2| < |x-2| \cdot 5. We want this to be less than ϵ\epsilon, so we need 5x2<ϵ5|x-2| < \epsilon, which means x2<ϵ/5|x-2| < \epsilon/5. Since we must satisfy both x2<1|x-2| < 1 and x2<ϵ/5|x-2| < \epsilon/5, we must choose δ=min(1,ϵ/5)\delta = \min(1, \epsilon/5).