Advanced Mathematics (WS22) Prof.

Christoph Vanberg

Problem Set 1 - Answer Key

(One Variable Calculus)

S&B 2.1
(i) increasing everywhere, no maxima or minima; (ii) decreasing everywhere,
no maxima or minima; (iii) decreasing on (−∞, 0), increasing on (0, ∞),
global min at x0 = 0.; (iv) increasing everywhere, no maxima or minima; (v)
increasing on (−∞, −1/2) and (1/2, ∞), decreasing on (−1/2, 1/2), local max
at x0 = 1/2, local min at x′0 = 1/2; (vi) decreasing on (−∞, 0), increasing
on (0, ∞), global min at x0 = 0

S&B 2.4
(a) D = R \ {1} because at x = 1 we would have a division by zero. (b)
D = (1, ∞) because for x = 1 we would have a division by zero and for x < 1
√
we would be taking the of a negative number. (c) D = R because x2 +1 > 0
for all x ∈ R. (d) D = R \ {−1, 1} (division by zero) (e) D = [−1, 1] because
√
outside of this interval we would be taking the of a negative number. (f)
D = [−1, 1] \ {0} (same as d and e combined).

(2)
Using f (x) = |x| and x0 = 0 we have
(
|x0 + h| − |x0 | |h| −1 h < 0
g(h) = = =
h h +1 h > 0
Note that g(h) is not defined at h0 = 0. We are not concerned about this, as
it is not relevant for the question at hand: does it have a limit as we approach
h0 = 0? To see that it does not, begin with the definition:

Definition. Let f be a function in R and let x0 , c ∈ R. We say that c is the

limit of f (x) as x tends to x0 if for any ϵ > 0 there exists a δ > 0 such that
x ∈ (x0 − δ, x0 + δ), x ̸= x0 ⇒ f (x) ∈ (c − ϵ, c + ϵ).

Then write out what this would mean in our context: c is the limit of g(h)
as h tends to 0 if for any ϵ > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that h ∈ (−δ, +δ), h ̸=
0 ⇒ g(h) ∈ (c − ϵ, c + ϵ). We want to show that this is NOT true for any
c ∈ R. Do not continue until you have convinced yourself that this means we
want to show the following:

Page 1 of 6
Advanced Mathematics (WS22) Prof. Christoph Vanberg

To show: For any c ∈ R, there exists ϵ > 0 such that for any δ > 0 there
exists h ∈ (−δ + δ), h ̸= 0, with g(h) ∈
/ (c − ϵ, c + ϵ).

Proof: Take any c ≥ 0. Fix ϵ = 1/2 and note that c − ϵ > −1. Take any
δ > 0 and consider h = −δ/2. Then h ∈ (−δ, +δ), h ̸= 0, and g(h) = −1 <
c − ϵ and so g(h) ∈
/ (c − ϵ, c + ϵ). For any c ≤ 0, an analogous argument can
be made.

S&B 2.16 (a)

We are given the function

(
x2 x≥0
f (x) =
−x2 x<0

Here is a graph. (See the sage math jupyter notebook for how this is gener-
ated.)

Continuous at x0 = 0:
To show: limx→0 f (x) = f (0) = 0, [Link] all ϵ > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that x ∈
(0 − δ, 0 + δ), x ̸= 0 ⇒ f (x) ∈ (0 − ϵ, 0 + ϵ)

Intuition: Think of this as a “closeness challenge”: You pick

any ϵ and and I have to specify (by choosing δ) how close x has
to be to x0 in order to make sure that f (x) is withing ϵ of f (x0 ).
(But I’m not responsible for what happens AT x0 , just close
by.) We want to show that I can always meet this challenge,
no matter how small you make ϵ.

Page 2 of 6
Advanced Mathematics (WS22) Prof. Christoph Vanberg

√
Proof: Take any ϵ > 0 and let δ = ϵ. For any x ∈ (−δ, 0), we have
f (x) = −x2 ∈ (−δ 2 , 0), and for any x ∈ (0, δ), we have f (x) = x2 ∈ (0, δ 2 ).
Thus

x ∈ (0 − δ, 0 + δ), x ̸= 0 ⇒ f (x) ∈ (0 − δ 2 , 0 + δ 2 ) = (0 − ϵ, 0 + ϵ)

Differentiable at x0 = 0:
To show: Define g(h) = f (0+h)−f h
(0)
. (Note that g(h) is not defined at
h = 0.) We want to show that limh→0 g(h) exist, i.e. there exists c ∈ R such
that limh→0 g(h) = c.
Note that for all h ̸= 0,
( 2 (
h −0
f (0 + h) − f (0) h > 0 h h>0
g(h) = = −hh2 −0 = = |h|
h h
h<0 −h h < 0

Thus, we want to show that limh→0 |h| exists. We can guess that limh→0 |h| =
0. To prove this, we need to show the following: for all ϵ > 0 there exists δ >
0 such that h ∈ (0 − δ, 0 + δ), h ̸= 0 ⇒ |h| ∈ (0 − ϵ, 0 + ϵ).

Proof: Take any ϵ > 0 and let δ = ϵ. Then h ∈ (0 − δ, 0 + δ), h ̸= 0 ⇒ h ∈

(0 − ϵ, 0 + ϵ), h ̸= 0 ⇒ |h| < ϵ ⇒ |h| ∈ (0 − ϵ, 0 + ϵ)

S&B 2.16 (b)

We are given the function (
x2 + 1 x≥0
f (x) = 2
−x − 1 x < 0
Here is a graph (note that Sage Math draws a vertical line at the dis-
continuity. This is a bit unfortunate. Of course, the value at zero is just
1.)

Page 3 of 6
Advanced Mathematics (WS22) Prof. Christoph Vanberg

Not continuous at x0 = 0:
To show: It is not the case that limx→0 f (x) = f (0) = 1. Thus we want
the opposite of the following statement:
for all ϵ > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that x ∈ (−δ, δ), x ̸= 0 ⇒ f (x) ∈ (1−ϵ, 1+ϵ).
And this is (make sure you agree!):
there exists ϵ > 0 such that for all δ > 0 there exists x ∈ (−δ, δ), x ̸= 0 with f (x) ∈
/ (1−ϵ, 1+ϵ)
Intuition: I cannot win the “closeness challenge”: You can pick an ϵ
small enough such that no matter how small I make δ > 0, there is some
value for x that is that close to x0 (and not equal to it) which f maps to
something too far away from f (x0 ) = 1.

Proof: Let ϵ = 1. Take any δ > 0 and let x = −δ/2. Then f (x) =
−x2 − 1 < −1 and so f (x) ∈
/ (1 − ϵ, 1 + ϵ) = (0, 2).

Not differentiable at x0 = 0:
(Note: By the fact to be proven in Problem 3, we know that f cannot be
differentiable at x0 because it is not continuous there, but let’s practice using
our definitions anyway.)
(
f (0+h)−f (0) h h>0
To show: Define g(h) = h
= 2
. (Note that g(h)
−h − h h < 0
is not defined at h = 0.) We want to show that limh→0 g(h) does not exist.
I.e. we want to show that the following statement is not true: “There exists
c ∈ R such that for all ϵ > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that h ∈ (−δ, δ), h ̸=
0 ⇒ g(h) ∈ (c − ϵ, c + ϵ).” Thus what we do want to show is:
For all c ∈ R there exists ϵ > 0 such that for all δ > 0
there exists h ∈ (−δ, δ), h ̸= 0 with g(h) ∈
/ (c − ϵ, c + ϵ)
Intuition: No matter what limit I propose for g(h), I cannot win the
corresponding “closeness challenge”: After I propose any ostensible limit
c, you can pick an ϵ small enough such that no matter how small I make
δ > 0, there is some value for h that is that close (but not equal) to 0 which
g maps to something too far away from c.

It may help to look at the graph of g(h) to get some intuition as to how
we can show what we want to show:

Page 4 of 6
Advanced Mathematics (WS22) Prof. Christoph Vanberg

Looking at the graph, we see that you can easily defeat me at the closeness
challenge: No matter what c I propose (a location on the vertical axis), you
can actually pick any (finite) ϵ such that for h close to zero and negative
g(h) > c + ϵ. Of course we can choose an ϵ that makes it easy to show this.

Proof: Fix any c ∈ R. Then fix any ϵ > max{0, −c}. (So that c + ϵ > 0.
We’ll see in a moment why this helps.) Finally, take any δ > 0. Then
2 2
consider h = max{−δ/2, − c+ϵ } < 0. Then h ∈ (−δ, 0) and h ≥ − c+ϵ .
2 2


Hence g(h) = −h − h > −2/h ≥ −2/ − c+ϵ = c + ϵ. Thus, there exists
h ∈ (−δ, δ) with g(h) ∈/ (c − ϵ, c + ϵ).

(3)
To show: If f : D → R is differentiable at x0 ∈ D then f is continuous at
x0 . Again the first step is to look up the relevant definitions:

Definition. A function f : D → R is differentiable at x0 ∈ D if the limit

limh→0 f (x0 +h)−f
h
(x0 )
exists.

and

Definition. A function f : D → R is continuous at x0 ∈ D if limx→x0 f (x) =

f (x0 ).
Suppose that f satisfies the first of these definitions, i.e. limh→0 f (x0 +h)−f
h
(x0 )

exists. Call it c. Note that this immediately implies that f is defined at x0

(otherwise the expression of which we are taking a limit is not defined). We
want to show: limx→x0 f (x) = f (x0 ). Note that this is equivalent to showing
that limx→x0 (f (x) − f (x0 )) = 0 (exercise: prove this).

Page 5 of 6
Advanced Mathematics (WS22) Prof. Christoph Vanberg

Note that we can write any x as x = x0 + h. Then

lim (f (x) − f (x0 )) = lim (f (x0 + h) − f (x0 ))

x→x0 h→0
 
f (x0 + h) − f (x0 )
= lim h ·
h→0 h
 
  f (x0 + h) − f (x0 )
= lim h · lim
h→0 h→0 h
= 0·c=0

Page 6 of 6