One function caught between two others
Some limits cannot be found by substituting or by rewriting. Take as . At x = 0 the expression has no value, because is undefined, and cannot be factored away.
What can be said is that sin of any number lies between −1 and 1. So for every . Multiply through by , which is positive for , so the inequality signs stay as they are: .
So the graph of f lies between the parabola above and the parabola below, touching each wherever is 1 or −1.
The gold curve is , between the dashed parabolas and . Away from 0 it swings slowly; close to 0 it swings faster and faster, always inside the two parabolas.
The middle has nowhere else to go
The squeeze theorem: if for every x near c, except perhaps at c itself, and g(x) and h(x) both tend to the same limit L as , then f(x) tends to L as well.
Here and , and both tend to 0 as . Every value of f lies between them, so f(x) is never further from 0 than is. At x = 0.1 the bounds are , and f(0.1) = 0.01 × sin 10 = −0.00544. At x = 0.01 the bounds are , and f(0.01) = −0.0000506. Taking x close enough to 0 makes , and with it every value of f, as close to 0 as you like.
So as is 0. The theorem says nothing about f at 0 itself, and needs nothing: f has no value there, and the limit is still 0.
δ = 0.6: −x² ≤ f(x) ≤ x², so inside the clamp f is within 0.72 of 0; closing the clamp closes the gap, and a function held between two things that meet must meet them too
Close the clamp to δ = 0.1 and read the gap
in gold between the dashed parabolas and . The two upright bars clamp the strip , and inside it every value of f lies between and . Close the clamp to : the jaws are then apart, and they close to nothing as does.
Endless swings, one limit
is 0 whenever is a multiple of , that is at , , and so on: 0.318, 0.159, 0.106, 0.0796, and on toward 0. Between each pair f swings up to the upper parabola or down to the lower one. There are infinitely many of these swings between 0 and any positive x, so no drawing can show all of them.
The swinging never stops, but its size does: the swing at x is at most either way. A limit is about how far the values are from L, not about whether they stay still, so the swings do not prevent the limit 0.
The same three curves close to the origin, from x = −0.4 to 0.4. The dashed parabolas pinch together at (0, 0), and the gold curve between them is pinched with them.
Both conditions are needed
The bounds must hold for every x near c. A bound that holds at a few points, or only far from c, says nothing about the limit.
The two bounds must also have the same limit. itself lies between −1 and 1, but those bounds tend to −1 and 1, two different numbers, so they leave a gap of 2 for to move in. It does: it is 1 at and −1 at for every whole number k, as close to 0 as you like, so has no limit at 0.
The product law cannot be used for either. It needs both factors to have limits, and has none. The squeeze avoids that factor’s limit altogether by bounding it.
A squeeze far out
The theorem works for too, with "near c" read as "for all large x". For x > 0, dividing by the positive number x gives . Both bounds tend to 0 as , so . At x = 100 it is −0.00506, inside the bounds .
The usual mistakes
Adding the two limits. If both bounds tend to 5, f tends to 5, not 10: f sits between them, and between 5 and 5 there is only 5.
Multiplying an inequality by a negative number without reversing it. Multiplying by is safe because is positive; multiplying by a negative x would turn the signs round.
Concluding that there is no limit because the function oscillates. swings forever near 0 and still tends to 0.
Using bounds with different limits, such as −1 and 1 for . They are true bounds but they prove nothing; and are the bounds that close together.
A lathe and a tapering pin
The application below has exactly this function as the error in a machined surface, mm at a distance x mm from the tip, and uses the same bound to say how far out the surface can be near the tip.
Worked example: The Ripple a Lathe Leaves Near the Tip of a Tapering Pin: An Error Trapped Between Two Curves
Question A lathe cuts a long tapering pin. At a distance x mm from the tip the surface is out by e(x) = x2 sin1x mm, a ripple whose spacing tightens toward the tip; at the tip itself the model has no value. (a) Use the squeeze theorem to find limx → 0 e(x). (b) Within 0.3 mm of the tip, give a bound on how far out the surface can be, using |sin| ≤ 1.
1.The sine of any number lies between −1 and 1, so −1 ≤ sin1x ≤ 1 for every x except 0. The awkward part of the model is inside those bounds, however fast it swings.
However fast sin1x swings, it stays between −1 and 1. 2.Multiply the inequality through by x2. That is a positive number for x ≠ 0, so the inequality signs stay as they are: −x2 ≤ e(x) ≤ x2.
Multiplying by x2, which is positive, keeps the inequality: −x2 ≤ e(x) ≤ x2. 3.Both bounding curves have the same limit at the tip: limx → 0 (−x2) = 0 and limx → 0 x2 = 0. The error is trapped between two curves that arrive at the same place.
Both bounding curves tend to 0 at the tip, and the model itself has no value there. 4.(a) By the squeeze theorem, limx → 0 e(x) = 0. The ripple dies away at the tip: the model has no value at x = 0, but every value near it is near 0, so the surface is true there.
(a) By the squeeze theorem limx → 0 e(x) = 0: the ripple dies away at the tip. 5.(b) The same bound answers this. For 0 < x ≤ 0.3, the error is at most x2, and x2 is at most 0.32 = 0.09. So the surface is out by at most 0.09 mm. Check: at x = 0.3 the model gives e(0.3) = 0.09 sin 3.33 = −0.017 mm, which is well inside the bound.
(b) For 0 < x ≤ 0.3 the error is at most x2 ≤ 0.32 = 0.09 mm.
Answer: (a) limx → 0 e(x) = 0 mm, so the ripple dies away at the tip; (b) at most 0.09 mm
Common mistakes
- Trying to find the limit by substituting x = 0. Then sin1x has nothing to be the sine of, since 10 is undefined, and the product law for limits needs both factors to have a limit. The squeeze theorem gets round the factor altogether by bounding it.
- Saying that the limit does not exist because sin1x swings faster and faster near the tip. The swinging never stops, but its size is cut down by the x2 in front of it, and it is the size, not the swinging, that a limit is about.