4.4.2 · D4Multivariable Calculus

Exercises — Limits and continuity in 2D — path-dependence issue

1,731 words8 min readBack to topic

This page assumes you have read the parent topic on path-dependence. If any symbol below feels unfamiliar, that note builds it. We also lean on the Squeeze Theorem, Polar Coordinates, and the Epsilon-Delta Definition.


Level 1 — Recognition

(Read off the behaviour; minimal computation.)

L1·Q1

Evaluate along the -axis and the -axis: Do the two axis-limits agree?

Recall Solution

Along -axis set : Along -axis set : WHAT we did: collapsed to 1D twice. WHY: cheapest paths first. They give and . Verdict: two paths disagree limit DNE.

L1·Q2

True or false: for because the numerator has higher degree than the denominator, the limit is .

Recall Solution

True. Numerator degree , denominator degree , so heuristically it behaves like . We confirm with a bound in L3, but as a recognition call the answer is . (This is a forecast, not yet a proof.)

L1·Q3

For , guess the limit at the origin (degree count only).

Recall Solution

Numerator degree , denominator degree : behaves like . Forecast: . (Proved in L2.)


Level 2 — Application

(Run the standard machinery to a clean answer.)

L2·Q1

Prove or disprove:

Recall Solution

Use the same idea as . Since , we have . Then As , . By the Squeeze Theorem the limit is . Forecast confirmed.

L2·Q2

Evaluate

Recall Solution

Polar: . WHY polar: the in the denominator cancels cleanly, exposing an in front. Since for every , we get . The bound is -independent, so the limit is .

L2·Q3

Show that

Recall Solution

Polar: numerator ; denominator . Since , we get . Limit .


Level 3 — Analysis

(Find the path that breaks it, or prove nothing can.)

L3·Q1

Decide with proof whether the limit exists:

Recall Solution

Polar: WHAT this shows: the value is pure — no left. So walking in along direction you land on . Along -axis (): value . Along -axis (): value . Different directions → different values → limit DNE.

L3·Q2

The classic trap. Show does not exist, even though every straight line gives .

Recall Solution

All lines : Every line says . Curve : WHY : it makes numerator and denominator the same order () — the "balanced" path lines cannot see. Lines give , curve gives limit DNE. See figure: the two paths and their level values.

Figure — Limits and continuity in 2D — path-dependence issue

L3·Q3

Investigate

Recall Solution

All lines : (for ; gives too). Curve (chosen to balance orders — denominator terms both become ): Lines give , curve gives limit DNE.


Level 4 — Synthesis

(Combine continuity, piecewise values, and multiple tools.)

L4·Q1

Define Is continuous at the origin? Prove it.

Recall Solution

Continuity needs three things: exists (it's ), the limit exists, and they match. From the parent Worked Example 3, , so the limit is . Since , is continuous at the origin.

L4·Q2

Define Is there any value making continuous at the origin?

Recall Solution

Continuity requires the limit to exist first. But has, in polar, value — pure , so along it is and along it is . Limit DNE. Since no single exists, no choice of can make continuous. ✗ Key point: continuity cannot repair a path-dependent limit — the defect is in the surface, not in the assigned value.

L4·Q3

Let for . What value at the origin makes continuous?

Recall Solution

Substitute . As , , and (the standard 1D limit — allowed here because depends on only through , so no direction can matter). Thus the limit is , and is continuous at the origin iff we set .


Level 5 — Mastery

(Full rigour: build the argument from bounds / .)

L5·Q1

Give a rigorous $\varepsilon$–$\delta$ proof that

Recall Solution

Goal: given , find with Bound: , so Choose . Then forces . This holds on the whole disk of radius , not merely on paths — so it is airtight.

L5·Q2

Construct a function that is along every straight line through the origin but whose limit at the origin is . (Generalise the trap.)

Recall Solution

Take Wait — verify. Lines : Every line gives . ✔ Curve : Along this parabola the value is constantly . ✔ So is on all lines yet reaches on — the limit DNE, and in particular it is not . This is the exact mechanism of the L3·Q2 trap, tuned to hit value . See figure.

Figure — Limits and continuity in 2D — path-dependence issue

L5·Q3

Prove that does not exist, being careful to test the axes AND the diagonal.

Recall Solution

Along -axis (): numerator , denominator , so . Along -axis (): numerator , so . Along the diagonal : then , so WHY the diagonal: the term vanishes exactly on , killing the "spoiler" in the denominator and leaving . Axes give , diagonal gives limit DNE.


Connections

  • Multivariable Calculus — parent chapter
  • Squeeze Theorem — proves the "limit exists" problems (L2, L4, L5)
  • Polar Coordinates — the test used throughout L2–L3
  • Epsilon-Delta Definition — rigour engine for L5·Q1
  • Differentiability in 2D — needs the continuity established in L4