Review methods of evaluating limits.
Remember limits?
We started last semester with the idea of a ‘limit’. Remember what that means.
the limit of as approaches is ,
written if the value of can be made as close as one wishes to for all sufficiently close, but not equal, to .
What happens at ? If is really close to , but larger than , then the output values . If is really close to , but less than , then the output values . This lead us to consider ‘one-sided limits’. We have and . (Does it matter that the circle at is not filled in?) What can we say about ?
We discussed several different methods for calculating limit values last semester, based on what we called the ‘Limit Laws’. We’ll recall them here.
These Limit Laws allow us to use limit values that we know, in order to calculate limit values of more complicated functions.For example, if we know and , then we can find something like .
From the Limit Laws, we saw that polynomial functions had a very important property for us. They were ‘continuous’.
That means to find the limit value we just have to ‘plug in ’. Most of our favorite functions have this property. Polynomials and exponential functions are continuous everywhere. Rational functions and trigonometric functions are continuous on their domain. Inverse functions of invertible continuous functions are continuous on their domain, so logarithms and radical functions are continuous on their domains. If we take a composition of continuous functions, the result is also a continuous function! Continuity gives us an efficient way of calculating limits!Try one on your own.
What if we get a function that isn’t continuous?
In this example, we were able to use our algebra skills to replace the function with a discontinuity at with a function that is continuous there. Try one on your own.
Algebra doesn’t always help, though. The function in the next example is not continuous at , but we cannot replace it by a function that is continuous there.
Let’s start with the right-hand limit : The numerator is continuous and positive near . In the denominator, is continuous and near (and negative) for near . The factor will be at , but for , is positive. That means the fraction will be , so
On to the left-hand limit : The numerator is continuous and positive near . In the denominator, is continuous and near (and negative) for near . The only possible change would come from the factor. Since we are looking at , we know is negative, so is negative. The fraction will be . Then
Putting these together we see that does not exist.
In all of the limits we’ve been talking about so far, the input variable is tending to a specific value. If instead we allow it to grow (in either direction) without bound, we are talking about ‘Limits at Infinity’ rather than just ‘Limits’. These limits at infinity are the tools we used to detect horizontal asymptotes.
With a little work, this trick also helps with functions that are not rational.
(Why instead of ? When would we have gotten instead?)
If the denominator were really , then we would divide the numerator and denominator by . Let’s see what happens if we do that anyway.
Let’s try one that looks a bit different.
Try one on your own.