I am supposed to prove the continuity of function: $$\varphi (x) = \left\{\begin{align} 1 &, \quad x\in\mathbb{Q} \\ -1 &, \quad x\in\mathbb{R}\setminus \mathbb{Q} \end{align}\right.$$ Can anyone help me?
-
What have you tried? – Arthur Oct 02 '19 at 15:05
-
@Arthur I tried to draw it, but it did not help me – Oct 02 '19 at 15:06
-
Did you mean $\mathbb{R}\setminus\mathbb{Q}$? – 79037662 Oct 02 '19 at 15:16
-
I supposed you used the usual metric on $\mathbb{R}$ ? And in what sense you should study its continuity ? I mean can you deal with open sets? – Nizar Oct 02 '19 at 15:17
-
HINT: The function is discontinuous everywhere. To prove this, it suffices to show for any $x\in\mathbb{R}$ and $\varepsilon>0$ there exists $x'\in(x-\varepsilon, x+\varepsilon)$ and $\varphi(x)\neq\varphi(x')$. – 79037662 Oct 02 '19 at 15:20
-
@Nizar yes, I can. There is also a question connected with it, if it is Riemann and Newton integrable – Oct 02 '19 at 15:27
-
@79037662 yes, I edited it – Oct 02 '19 at 15:28
-
What difficulties do you have in following the definition of continuity? – Oct 02 '19 at 15:29
-
If you actually want to ask the (Riemann) integrability of this function: see Is Dirichlet function Riemann integrable? – Oct 02 '19 at 15:33
-
@MartinN.:Sorry, I don't understand your comment. What do you mean by "take as $t$"? – Oct 02 '19 at 15:39
-
Definition of contnuity as it is write below is :∀ε>0∃δ>0∀t∈R(|t−x|<δ⟹|φ(t)−φ(x)|<ε and I did not know what to take as t – Oct 02 '19 at 15:42
1 Answers
I'll use the "definition" of continuity (using $\varepsilon-\delta$) to prove that $\varphi$ is discontinuous; I will also use the fact that $\mathbb Q$ is dense (and hence $\mathbb R\setminus\mathbb Q$).
The definition tells you that $\varphi$ is continuous at a point $x\in\mathbb R$ if and only if
$$\forall\varepsilon>0\;\exists\delta>0\;\forall t\in\mathbb R(|t-x|<\delta\;\Longrightarrow\;|\varphi(t)-\varphi(x)|<\varepsilon);$$
thus, $\varphi$ is discontinuous at a point $x\in\mathbb R$ if and only if
$$\exists\varepsilon>0\;\forall\delta>0\;\exists t\in\mathbb R(|t-x|<\delta\;\wedge\;|\varphi(t)-\varphi(x)|\geqslant\varepsilon).$$
So, take any $0<\varepsilon\leqslant2$ and let $x\in\mathbb R.$ If $x$ is rational, and if $\delta>0,$ take any irrational $t\in(x-\delta,x+\delta)$ (whose existence follows from the density of irrationals in $\mathbb R$). Then $|\varphi(t)-\varphi(x)|=2\geqslant\varepsilon.$ A similar process applies if $x$ is rational
-
-
1@MartinN. $2 = \max |f(x) - f(y)|$. This is used in the second last statement. "Then $|\varphi(t) - \varphi(x)| = 2 \geqslant \varepsilon$." – Sera Gunn Oct 02 '19 at 15:42
-
@MartinN. Because that's the distance between the two possible distinct values of $\varphi.$ By how it is defined, intuitively, that's what you have to focus on – Carlos Israel Jalpa Rico Oct 02 '19 at 15:43
-
1