Prove using the formal definition of limits: if `lim_(x->a) g(x)= oo` and g(x)≤ f(x) for x, then `lim_(x->a) f(x)=oo`

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

It is given that `lim_(x->a)g(x) =oo` and `f(x)>= g(x)` . It has to be shown that `lim_(x->a) f(x)` is also equal to `oo` .

If `f(x)>= g(x)` , `f(x) - g(x) >= 0`

Let `lim_(x->a) f(x) = A` and `lim_x(->a) g(x) = B`

Let `epsi = A - B` . `lim_(x->a)(f(x) - g(x)) = A - B` . By the definition of limits for every `epsi > 0` , there exists a `delta > 0` such that for all values of x, `0 < |x - a| < delta => |f(x) - g(x) - A + B| < epsi` .

As `epsi = A - B` ,

`|f(x) - g(x) - A + B| < epsi`

=> `(f(x) - g(x) - A + B) < epsi`

=> `(f(x) - g(x) - A + B) < A - B`

=> `f(x) - g(x) < 2*(A - B)`

But as `f(x) - g(x)` is positive `2*(A - B)` is also positive or `A - B > 0`

=> `A > B`

=> `lim_(x->a) f(x) > lim_x(->a) g(x)`

As `lim_(x->a) g(x) = oo` this is possible only if `lim_(x->a) f(x) = oo`

This proves that if `lim_(x->a)g(x) =oo` and `f(x)>= g(x)` , `lim_(x->a) f(x) = oo`

See eNotes Ad-Free

Start your 48-hour free trial to get access to more than 30,000 additional guides and more than 350,000 Homework Help questions answered by our experts.

Get 48 Hours Free Access
Approved by eNotes Editorial Team