The Student Room Group

Prove a function is continuous

Let a be an irrational number. Show that f: Q to Q is continuous, where
f(x) = x ......if x<a
........ x+1 ..if x>a

Not really sure here, my idea is to maybe consider subsets S of Q, show f^-1 (S) is always closed (or open), maybe using the fact that an arbitrary union of closed sets is closed (not sure this works though as Q is infinite, or does the fact that Q is countably infinite make it work?)

Or should I be looking to use the epsilon- delta definition (if so does it matter which metric I equip Q with)?

Things with rationals and irrationals are not my fav, any help appreciated xx

@Gregorius
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Gome44
Let a be an irrational number. Show that f: Q to Q is continuous, where
f(x) = x if x<a
x+1 if x>a

Not really sure here, my idea is to maybe consider subsets S of Q, show f^-1 (S) is always closed (or open), maybe using the fact that an arbitrary union of closed sets is closed (not sure this works though as Q is infinite, or does the fact that Q is countably infinite make it work?)

Or should I be looking to use the epsilon- delta definition (if so does it matter which metric I equip Q with)?

Things with rationals and irrationals are not my fav, any help appreciated xx

@Gregorius


Im not sure why that would be continuous as imagine we have chosen the largest fraction p/q<a p/q < a . If we add 1 to it, we have p+qq>a \dfrac{p+q}{q} > a . But by our assumption of p/q is smallest fraction less than a, p+1q>a \dfrac{p+1}{q} >a suggesting there are other rationals in the interval [p+1q,p+qq] [\dfrac{p+1}{q} ,\dfrac{p+q}{q}] which we have missed out iff q1 q \not= 1 .
Reply 2
Original post by EnglishMuon
Im not sure why that would be continuous as imagine we have chosen the largest fraction p/q<a p/q < a . If we add 1 to it, we have p+qq>a \dfrac{p+q}{q} > a . But by our assumption of p/q is smallest fraction less than a, p+1q>a \dfrac{p+1}{q} >a suggesting there are other rationals in the interval [p+1q,p+qq] [\dfrac{p+1}{q} ,\dfrac{p+q}{q}] which we have missed out iff q1 q \not= 1 .


Yeah i thought that adding 1 would be too big of a jump when i first read the question but it says its continuous :frown:

its question 8 here for reference https://www0.maths.ox.ac.uk/system/files/coursematerial/2015/2859/22/Metric1.pdf
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Gome44
Yeah i thought that adding 1 would be too big of a jump when i first read the question but it says its continuous :frown:


hmm strange. do you have a link to the original question?
Reply 4
Original post by EnglishMuon
hmm strange. do you have a link to the original question?


yeah edited the post above :smile:
Reply 5
Let xQx \in \mathbb{Q}.
Suppose that x<ax < a, then f(x)=xf(x) = x. Then since ff is continuous, for all ε>0\varepsilon > 0, there exists δ>0\delta > 0 such that for all cQc \in \mathbb{Q} with xc<δ|x - c| < \delta, we have that xc<ε|x - c| < \varepsilon.
Let η:=min(ε,ax)>0\eta := \min(\varepsilon, a - x) > 0, then for all cQc \in \mathbb{Q} with xc<η|x - c| < \eta,
f(x)f(c)=xc<ε |f(x) - f(c)| = |x - c| < \varepsilon,
hence ff is continuous for x<ax < a

A similar argument gives ff continuous for x>ax > a. The key here is to note aQa \notin \mathbb{Q}, so the discontinuity that would occur in the reals never occurs in the rationals. The cQc \in \mathbb{Q} part of the proof is the single most important thing when proving any sort of continuity, especially when you move away from the real numbers.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Alex:
.

I think I understand your argument but how does that f(x) = x+1 ..if x>a affect it rather than f(x)=x?. Are we saying that the 'gap' caused by the x+1 and x doesnt effect the continuity? I understand that each segment for x<a and x>a is continuous separately but not sure why it is all together.
Reply 7
Original post by EnglishMuon
I think I understand your argument but how does that f(x) = x+1 ..if x>a affect it rather than f(x)=x?. Are we saying that the 'gap' caused by the x+1 and x doesnt effect the continuity? I understand that each segment for x<a and x>a is continuous separately but not sure why it is all together.


I realise it's quite unintuitive, but the gap that exists at a is at an irrational point. Just like how if we're proving continuity on [a,b]R[a,b] \subset \mathbb{R} and we don't have to consider anything below a or above b; we're proving continuity on QR\mathbb{Q} \subset \mathbb{R}, so we don't consider any irrational numbers in the domain.

The function is well defined and we can approach a as close as we wish, but we never reach it, and hence never reach the discontinuity that is in the irrationals.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Alex:
I realise it's quite unintuitive, but the gap that exists at a is at an irrational point. Just like how if we're proving continuity on [a,b]R[a,b] \subset \mathbb{R} and we don't have to consider anything below a or above b; we're proving continuity on QR\mathbb{Q} \subset \mathbb{R}, so we don't consider any irrational numbers in the domain.

The function is well defined and we can approach a as close as we wish, but we never reach it, and hence never reach the discontinuity that is in the irrationals.

edit: nvm I was misreading the thing and thinking the domain was the range hence my confusion!
(edited 7 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest