Multivariable calculus
Limit of (x^3-y^3)/(x^2+y^2) at the Origin
The limit of (x^3 - y^3) / (x^2 + y^2) as (x, y) approaches the origin is 0. In polar coordinates the function equals r times (cos^3 theta minus sin^3 theta). That trigonometric factor never exceeds 2 in size, so the whole expression sits between -2r and 2r and is squeezed to 0.
The limit exists
| Path | Limit along it |
|---|---|
| along y = 0 | 0 |
| along x = 0 | 0 |
| along y = x | 0 |
The axes and the diagonal
Start with the two axes and the diagonal , since each of the three turns into a function of alone.
The diagonal gives exactly zero at every , not just in the limit, which looks like unusually strong evidence. It is not. Strength of agreement along one curve says nothing about the curves you did not try, and here the numerator was cancelled by the symmetry of the path before the limit was ever taken.
Polar coordinates and the triangle inequality
Substituting and , the numerator is degree three in and the denominator is degree two, so one factor of survives.
Bound the bracket with the triangle inequality: .
Both outer expressions tend to as , so is squeezed to . The constant is generous; the sharp value of is , attained at and . You do not need the sharp constant, because for any fixed .
The mistake: running the triangle inequality backwards
A frequent slip is to bound the numerator by writing , or to drop the second term entirely on the grounds that it is small. The triangle inequality points the other way: . The reversed version is false, and it can hand you a quantity that does not bound anything.
The second half of the mistake is finding a bound that still depends on and calling it done. A bound is only useful for a squeeze when the thing you compare against tends to zero on its own, with no reference to direction. Here that thing is , and is the distance to the origin.
Frequently asked questions
Why does polar work here when path testing does not?
A single polar computation covers every direction at once, because ranges over all of them while says precisely that the point approaches the origin. A path test fixes one relationship between and and stays silent about all the others.
What if the trigonometric factor had not been bounded?
The argument would collapse. The method depends on splitting into a factor that goes to zero, here , times a factor that merely stays bounded, here . If the second factor blew up, the product could tend to anything or to nothing.