Calculus. Limit Question
I have a piece wise function
2x^3 - 3, x is less than and equal to 1 6x-4, x is greater than 1
Which of the following statements is true? I. Limit as x approaches 1 f(x) exists II. Limit as x approaches 1 f ' (x) exists III. F'(1) exists. Sorry that should be a lower case f
Statement one is false since when I sub (1) Into both I get 2 difference values -1 and 2
When I take the derivative of each one and I sub 1 I get the same number which is 6
Nice, and what is the problem ?
Not sure about third statement
If there is no point at x=1, how can there be an insta nteneous slope at x=1?
Cool. Ok so statement 2 is the only true one, correct?
Yes. For something to be differentiable, it has to be continuous. Here, you noted that this function isn't really continuous.
yes, so while your f'(x) approaches the same value as x=1, your derivative exactly at x=1 is not defined (simply because there is no point at x=1, and thus you don't have an instanteneous slope (the derivative) at x=1).
clear on that ?
No point at \(x=1\)? What does that mean? \(f(1) =-1\).
Guess I got confused because I am testing out a new graphing calculator and the piece wise function looks continuous.
Parth, \(\color{#000000}{ \displaystyle 6(1)-4=6-4=2 }\) \(\color{#000000}{ \displaystyle 2(1)^3-2=2-3=-1 }\)
Also, got confused because of some theorem that states if a function is differentiable then it is continuous
But I do have to look at all of the pieces of a piece wise function to make sure they connect at the same location
Yes, that is exactly true, precal. We can explain the theorem if you lie ...
if you like, (not lie, sorry)
Sure
The function is defined as \(-1\) at \(x=1\). I don't understand by "no point at x=1".
Also, in the inequality the equal sign is on the first equation 2x^3 - 3. Note x equals 1 and x is less than 1
PatthKohle, you have a piece wise function that consists of two peaces. 2x^3 - 3, x≤1 6x-4, x>1 for the first peace f(1)=2(1)^2-3=2-3=-1 for the second peace f(1)=6(1)-4=2
Now, as far as that theorem is concerned ...
why are you using the second piece for x = 1? that is only applicable to x > 1
@ParthKohli because if those numbers aren't the same that means there is a break in the graph
yes, that's what discontinuity is. but that doesn't mean that the function isn't defined at x=1.
Would the limit of f(x) as x-->1 exist? No, not a 2-sided limit. Would the limit of f'(x) as x-->1 exist? yes, we all agreed on that. Would f'(x) at x=1 exist? Tricky, but actually not.
You might have noticed when learning (for example) the mean vaue theorem that it demand that the function be continunous on [a,b] and differntiable on (a,b).... Why? bec ause end-points don't have instaneneous slope....
so finishinf off with III, your derivative f'(1) (if f(1)=f(1) from both sides) won't exist, since that endpoint will not have an instanteneous slope.
If \(\color{#000000}{ \displaystyle f(x) }\) is differentiable, then (by definition of "differentiable") an instanteneous slope on every point on \(\color{#000000}{ \displaystyle f(x) }\) exists. If each point has an instaneneous slope, then without a total continuity, there would be at least one point when instanteneous slope does not exist.
|dw:1459703057747:dw|
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!