← Back to course

Limits from Graphs and Tables

You’ll be able to

The limit does not care about the point

This is the idea the whole unit rests on, and it is worth stating in its blunt form: lim f(x) as x → a has nothing to do with f(a). The limit describes where the outputs are heading as the inputs close in on a; the function value at a is a separate fact. So a graph can show an open circle at (2, 5) with a filled dot at (2, 1), and the limit as x → 2 is 5 while f(2) = 1. Both statements are true simultaneously. On a graph-reading question, trace along the curve toward a from each side and read the height the curve approaches, deliberately ignoring any dot sitting at x = a.

The two-sided limit exists only if the two one-sided limits agree

Write it as a rule you apply mechanically: lim(x→a) f(x) = L if and only if lim(x→a⁻) f(x) = L and lim(x→a⁺) f(x) = L. Approaching from the left means x values slightly less than a, so read the graph moving rightward toward a. Approaching from the right means x values slightly greater, so read moving leftward toward a. If those two heights differ, the two-sided limit does not exist — and saying "the limit is both 3 and 7" is not an answer. A piecewise-defined function is the standard vehicle for this, and the exam will hand you one whose two branches happen to disagree exactly at the breakpoint.

Three distinct ways a limit fails

Precision here separates a scored answer from a vague one. A limit fails to exist when: (1) the one-sided limits disagree — a jump, as in a piecewise function or a step function; (2) the outputs grow without bound — the function increases or decreases without bound, which is an infinite behavior and a vertical asymptote, and writing "the limit is ∞" is shorthand for "no finite limit exists"; or (3) the outputs oscillate without settling, the standard example being sin(1/x) as x → 0, which crosses every value in [−1, 1] infinitely often no matter how close you look. Naming which of the three is happening is frequently the actual question.

Existence of a two-sided limit
lim(x→a) f(x) = L ⟺ lim(x→a⁻) f(x) = L and lim(x→a⁺) f(x) = L
Both one-sided limits must exist AND be equal. The value f(a) is irrelevant to whether the limit exists.
Worked example

A table of values for f gives f(1.9) = 4.61, f(1.99) = 4.9601, f(1.999) = 4.996001, f(2.001) = 5.004001, f(2.01) = 5.0401, f(2.1) = 5.41. Estimate lim(x→2) f(x), and state what the table cannot tell you.

  1. 1.Read the left side: as x increases through 1.9, 1.99, 1.999, the outputs rise through 4.61, 4.9601, 4.996001 — heading toward 5.
  2. 2.Read the right side: as x decreases through 2.1, 2.01, 2.001, the outputs fall through 5.41, 5.0401, 5.004001 — also heading toward 5.
  3. 3.The two one-sided estimates agree, so the limit appears to be 5.
  4. 4.State the limitation: a table samples finitely many points, so it can never prove a limit. A function could behave normally at every tabulated value and do something else between them.
  5. 5.Also note what is absent: the table contains no value at x = 2, so it says nothing whatever about f(2), which may be 5, may be something else, or may be undefined.
Answer: lim(x→2) f(x) ≈ 5. The table gives strong numerical evidence but cannot prove the limit, and it provides no information at all about f(2).
On the exam

A table suggests a limit; it never establishes one. If a free-response question asks you to justify a limit, use algebra or a theorem — never "the table shows it approaches 5." Conversely, if a question says estimate or approximate, the table is exactly what it wants.

Checkpoint

A graph shows f approaching height 3 as x → 4 from the left, approaching height 3 from the right, and a filled dot at (4, 7). What is lim(x→4) f(x)?

Checkpoint

For which reason does lim(x→0) sin(1/x) fail to exist?

Answer the 2 checkpoints as you read.

Sign in to save your progress