Two Different Kinds of "Infinity" in a Limit
This concept covers two distinct situations that both involve the symbol ∞, and it's important to keep them apart:
- Infinite limits — x approaches a finite point, but f(x) itself grows without bound.
- Limits at infinity — x itself grows without bound (positively or negatively), and we ask what f(x) settles toward.
In both cases, ∞ is not a number — it is shorthand for "grows without bound." You cannot substitute it into an expression and do arithmetic with it. Every "∞" calculation in this concept is really an algebraic rewriting trick that avoids ever treating ∞ as an operand.
Infinite limits and vertical asymptotes
Consider f(x)=x21 near x=0. As x→0 from either side, f(x) grows without bound. We write
x21→∞ as x→0,
meaning the limit does not exist (there is no finite L) — but this particular flavour of non-existence is worth naming, because it tells us x=0 is a vertical asymptote.
Definitions 9.4 & 9.5 (informal). A neighbourhood of +∞ is any interval (M,∞) for large M>0; a neighbourhood of −∞ is any (−∞,K) for very negative K. We say f(x)→∞ as x→x0 if f(x) eventually lands in every such neighbourhood of +∞ as x gets close enough to x0 — and similarly for f(x)→−∞, and for one-sided versions (x→x0−, x→x0+).
General pattern for (x−a)n1:
- If n is even, (x−a)n1→+∞ as x→a from either side (both one-sided "limits" blow up the same way).
- If n is odd, (x−a)n1→−∞ as x→a− but →+∞ as x→a+ (the two sides disagree in sign — the two-sided limit fails to exist even in this loose infinite sense).
In every such case, the line x=a is a vertical asymptote of the graph.
Limits at infinity and horizontal asymptotes
Now let x itself run away to ±∞, and ask what f(x) approaches.
Definition 9.6. The line y=l is a horizontal asymptote of y=f(x) if x→−∞limf(x)=l or x→+∞limf(x)=l.
Illustration: tan−1x has two different horizontal asymptotes — limx→−∞tan−1x=−2π and limx→+∞tan−1x=2π — a reminder that a function can have (at most) two horizontal asymptotes, one per direction, and they need not agree.
The core technique: divide by the highest power of x
Trying to apply the ordinary limit laws to something like x2+4x+32x2+2x+3 as x→∞ produces ∞∞ — an indeterminate form: not a valid computation, just a signal that you must rewrite before proceeding.
The fix: divide numerator and denominator by the highest power of x appearing in the denominator. For the example above, dividing through by x2 gives
1+x4+x232+x2+x23⟶1+0+02+0+0=2(x→∞),
since every term of the form xkc→0 as x→∞.
Degree comparison for rational functions (§9.2.6)
For R(x)=q(x)p(x) as x→∞:
| Comparing degrees | Behaviour |
|---|
| degp>degq | R(x)→+∞ or −∞ (limit does not exist) |
| degp<degq | x→∞limR(x)=0 |