Question

Prove that a function g has a limit and find it. (full question and answer will be attached)

Answer 1

@Kainui here it is

Answer 2

Which function? It already gives the steps for solving in an intuitive way. Do you want the delta-epsilon proof?

Answer 3

I was reading and following the example. done this two styles. one with just evaluate the limit on scratch paper which I got 1/2 and the other way which requires the conjugate and usage of theorem 2.4. I also ended with up 1/2. WHy the heck does another book say -1? That doesn't make sense.
The function is the g(x) that is the first snippet @ChillOut

Answer 4

first style as in calculus i... no words required. seemed faster but I know I gotta write. xD

Answer 5

Can you show me where it shows it is -1?

Answer 6

yeah sure hold on. I'll attach another screenshot

Answer 7

sorry my typing is messed up. it's 1 (looking at it again) , but still I don't see how that happens

Answer 8

weird... since x times x is x^2 -_-

Answer 9

plus when I was reading the example, it didn't do that >:/ and I was following the example before doing that problem

Answer 10

even Mr. Wolfy from Wolfram Alpha Inc says that the limit is 1/2

Answer 11

You are doing \(g(x)^2\), whereas in the example he multiplies by the conjugate.

Answer 12

Woops!

Answer 13

I didn't check the signal... All right. But you cannot modify the function... You should multiply by the conjugate both in the denominator and in the numerator

Answer 14

I did that -_- see my attempt on #18 I did use the conjugate

Answer 15

the 11111111111 file is from a study guide which is sometimes notorious for errors.

Answer 16

I have done this... calc 1 style... THIS and then check with Mr.Wolfy all of them is 1/2
how they got 1 is b******t

Answer 17

You should multiply by \(\large \frac{\sqrt{x+1}+1}{\sqrt{x+1}+1}\)

Answer 18

I did that already. first image where it says section 2.3 is my attempt which is modeled off the example.

Answer 19

what was done in the book is the correct way. what I found in a study guide was ridiculous because the denominator is already messed up.