Cantor's set and function

February 9, 2016*

*Last modified 11-Nov-19

Tags: math, Cantor, analysis, teaching

I wrote these notes in February 2016 for an Analysis 2 tutorial when I was a teaching assistant at McGill, and always intended to put them here eventually; before August 2018 though, I hadn’t translated them to something web-friendly and only had posted a PDFThe web version has slightly improved wording in some parts.

.

Cantor’s Set

Cantor’s set is an interesting subset of [0,1][0,1], with properties that help illuminate concepts in analysis. It can often serve as a counter-example or edge-case on which to test ideas, and to construct further unusual objects; one such object is the Cantor function, which we’ll define here as well. To me, one of the most immediate clarifications provided by the Cantor set is the idea that looking at on object in different ways yields different notions of size, and these do not have to play nicely with each other. As we will see, the Cantor set is nowhere dense, yet uncountable.

Construction

We will define a sequence of sets {En}n=0[0,1]\{E_n\}_{n=0}^\infty \subseteq [0,1], and define the Cantor set (or “Cantor ternary set”) as K=n=0EnK = \bigcap_{n=0}^\infty E_n.

E_0.

E0E_0.

To start, take E0=[0,1].\begin{aligned} E_0 = [0,1]. \end{aligned}

E_1.

E1E_1.

Divide the interval in three equal pieces and throw away the middle one to define E1=[0,13][23,1].\begin{aligned} E_1 = [0,\tfrac{1}{3}] \cup [\tfrac{2}{3},1]. \end{aligned}

E_2.

E2E_2.

Repeat this process by throwing away the middle third of each interval in E1E_1 to obtain E2=[0,19][29,39][69,79][89,1].\begin{aligned} E_2 = [0,\frac{1}{9}]\cup [\frac{2}{9},\frac{3}{9}]\cup [\frac{6}{9},\frac{7}{9}]\cup [\frac{8}{9},1]. \end{aligned}

From top to bottom, E_0 to E_4.

From top to bottom, E0E_0 to E4E_4.

In general, we recursively define EnE_n in terms En1E_{n-1} by discarding the middle third of the intervals which constitute En1E_{n-1}. We may write this definition as En=En13(23+En13),E0=[0,1]\begin{aligned} E_n = \frac{E_{n-1}}{3}\cup \left( \frac{2}{3}+ \frac{E_{n-1}}{3} \right), \qquad E_0 = [0,1] \end{aligned}

where we are using the notation of multipling and adding to sets by multiplying and adding to their elements: for a set ARA\subset \mathbb{R} and c,dRc,d\in \mathbb{R}, cA+d:={ca+d:aA}.\begin{aligned} cA + d := \{ca+d: a\in A\}.\end{aligned}

In this way, we create a decreasing sequences of sets E0E1En.E_0 \supset E_1 \supset \ldots \supset E_n \supset \ldots.

Note: By construction, EnE_n is the disjoint union of 2n2^n intervals, each of length 3n3^{-n}. This is a key property we will use in our proofs of the properties of the Cantor set.

Properties

Let K:=n=0En.K := \bigcap_{n=0}^\infty E_n. KK is called the Cantor set, and satisfies the following properties.

Theorem 1

  1. KK is closed.

  2. intK=\operatorname{int}K = \emptyset.

  3. KK has no isolated points: that is, xK,ϵ>0, yK\forall x \in K, \forall \epsilon >0, \exists\ y \in K such that yxy\neq x and yB(x,ϵ)y\in B(x,\epsilon), where B(x,ϵ):=(xϵ,x+ϵ)B(x,\epsilon):=(x-\epsilon,x+\epsilon) is the open ball (interval) of radius ϵ\epsilon around xx.

  4. xKx=i=1ak3kx\in K \iff x = \sum_{i=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} where (ak)(a_k) is a sequence with each ak{0,2}a_k \in \{ 0,2\}.

  5. KK is uncountable.

Note: a set is called nowhere dense if it’s closure has empty interior. Thus (1) and (2) imply KK is nowhere dense. In contrast, Q[0,1]\mathbb{Q}\cap [0,1] has empty interior, but is dense in [0,1][0,1].

  1. EnE_n is closed for each nn so K=n=0EnK =\bigcap_{n=0}^\infty E_n is closed as well.

  2. (By contradiction). Assume intK\operatorname{int}K \neq \emptyset. Then xintK\exists x \in \operatorname{int}K. Thus, for some δ>0\delta>0, B(x,δ)intKK.B(x,\delta)\subseteq \operatorname{int}K \subseteq K. Choose nNn\in \mathbb{N} large enough such that 3n<2δ3^{-n} < 2\delta. We have (xδ,x+δ)KEn.\begin{aligned} (x-\delta,x+\delta) \subseteq K \subseteq E_n. \end{aligned} But EnE_n is a disjoint union of intervals of length 3n<2δ3^{-n} < 2\delta. This is a contradiction.

  3. Key observation: endpoints of intervals in EnE_n are not removed in subsequent EmE_m (for m>nm>n). All endpoints, {0,1,13,23,}K\{ 0,1,\tfrac{1}{3},\tfrac{2}{3},\ldots \} \subset K.

    Let xKx\in K and ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 be given. We choose nn large enough so that 3n<ϵ3^{-n} < \epsilon. Then xEnx[a,b]x\in E_n \implies x\in [a,b] for an interval [a,b]En[a,b] \subset E_n which is one of the 2n2^n intervals making up EnE_n. Since the length of each interval is 3n3^{-n}, we have ba<ϵb-a < \epsilon. Then we have both xb<ϵ,xa<ϵ.|x-b| < \epsilon, \qquad |x-a| < \epsilon. Hence, even if x=ax=a or x=bx=b, we have found yxy\neq x so that yKB(x,ϵ)y \in K\cap B(x,\epsilon).

  4. We want to show xKx=k=1ak3kx\in K \iff x = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} for ak{0,2}a_k \in \{ 0,2\}.

    First, let us notice and deal with a point of confusionfor Eric

    . Consider 13K\tfrac{1}{3} \in K. Then 13=k=1ak3\tfrac{1}{3} = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3}. We could obtain such ternary expansion by a1=1a_1 = 1 and an=0a_n = 0 for n>1n >1, which doesn’t fit our criteria. But we can choose other coefficients: Note we have used the geometric series k=0ak=11a \sum_{k=0}^\infty a^k = \frac{1}{1-a} which converges absolutely for a<1|a| < 1; we will use this several times.

    k=223n=2(19)k=0(13)k=23211(1/3)=13.\sum_{k=2}^\infty \frac{2}{3^n} = 2\left(\frac{1}{9}\right) \sum_{k=0}^\infty \left(\frac{1}{3}\right)^k = \frac{2}{3^2} \frac{1}{1-(1/3)} = \frac{1}{3} . In other words, ternary expansions are not unique. However, ternary expansions which only contain 00’s and 22’s are unique. That is the content of the following lemma

    Lemma 1 If k=1ak3k=k=1bk3k\begin{aligned} \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{b_k}{3^k}\end{aligned} where each ak,bk{0,2}a_k,b_k \in \{0,2\}, then ak=bka_k=b_k for all kNk\in \mathbb{N}.

    Suppose not; then there is a minimal NN such that anbna_n\neq b_n. Then one of ana_n or bnb_n is zero and the other two; wlog take an=0a_n=0, bn=2b_n=2. Expanding our sums, k=1N1ak3k+0+k=N+1ak3k=k=1N1bk3k+23N+k=N+1bk3k. \sum_{k=1}^{N-1} \frac{a_k}{3^k} +0 + \sum_{k=N+1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} = \sum_{k=1}^{N-1} \frac{b_k}{3^k} + \frac{2}{3^N}+\sum_{k=N+1}^\infty \frac{b_k}{3^k}. Using ak=bka_k=b_k for k<Nk<N, k=N+1ak3k=23N+k=N+1bk3k.(1) \sum_{k=N+1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} = \frac{2}{3^N}+\sum_{k=N+1}^\infty \frac{b_k}{3^k}. \qquad(1) But k=N+1ak3k2k=N+13k=23N1k=03k=23N111(1/3)=3N. \sum_{k=N+1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} \leq 2 \sum_{k=N+1}^\infty 3^{-k} = 2\cdot3^{-N-1} \sum_{k=0}^\infty 3^{-k} =2\cdot 3^{-N-1} \frac{1}{1-(1/3)}=3^{-N}. So, returning to (1), we have 23N+k=N+1bk3k13Nk=N+1bk3k13N, \frac{2}{3^N} + \sum_{k=N+1}^\infty \frac{b_k}{3^k} \leq \frac{1}{3^N} \implies \sum_{k=N+1}^\infty \frac{b_k}{3^k} \leq -\frac{1}{3^N}, which of course is a contradiction, since bk{0,2}b_k\in\{0,2\}.

    Now, let S={k=1ak3k:ak{0,2}}S = \{ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k}: a_k \in \{0,2\} \}. Note that SS is the set of numbers which have a ternay expansion without any 1’s, not the set of numbers for which every ternary expansion contains no 1’s.

    If xSx\in S, then x=k=1ak3kx = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} for some ak{0,2}a_k\in\{0,2\}. Let xn=k=1nak3kx_n= \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{a_k}{3^k} be the nthn^{\text{th}} partial sum.

    Lemma 2 For each nn, the partial sum xnx_n is a left-endpoint of an interval of EnE_n.

    By induction on nn. Either x1=0 or 23x_1 = 0 \text{ or } \frac{2}{3}, either of which is a left endpoint of E1E_1.

    Assume that xn1x_{n-1} is a left endpoint of En1E_{n-1}. Then [xn1,xn1+13n1]En1.[x_{n-1},x_{n-1} + \frac{1}{3^{n-1}} ] \subset E_{n-1}. Then by construction of EnE_n, we can take out the middle thirds to obtain intervals of EnE_n: [xn1,xn1+13n][xn1+23n,xn1+13n1=33n]En.[x_{n-1},x_{n-1} + \frac{1}{3^n}] \cup [x_{n-1} + \frac{2}{3^n}, x_{n-1} + \underbrace{\frac{1}{3^{n-1}}}_{=\frac{3}{3^n}} ] \subset E_n. So xn=xn1+an3nx_n = x_{n-1} + \frac{a_n}{3^n} is a left endpoint of an interval in EnE_n, whether an=0a_n=0 or an=2a_n=2.

    Now, since each xnx_n is a left-endpoint of EnE_n and we don’t remove endpoints, we have xnKx_n\in K for all nn. But KK is closed so it contains all its limit points, and we have x:=limnxnKx:= \lim_{n\to\infty}x_n \in K. Thus, SKS \subset K.

    To show that KSK\subset S, we will prove the contrapositive x̸Sx̸K, x\not\in S \implies x \not \in K, in order to access properties of SS. First notice the following property.

    Lemma 3 The intervals removed to obtain KK are all of the form Ik,m=(3k+13m,3k+23m):mN,0k3m11.I_{k,m} = \left( \frac{3k+1}{3^m}, \frac{3k+2}{3^m} \right): \quad m\in \mathbb{N}, \quad 0 \leq k \leq 3^{m-1} - 1. In fact, [0,1]En=m=1nk=03m11Ik,m.\begin{aligned} [0,1] \setminus E_n = \bigcup_{m=1}^n \bigcup_{k=0}^{3^{m-1}-1} I_{k,m}.\end{aligned}

    The proof, by induction on nn, is left as an exercise.

    Let us proceed to the proof of the contrapositive. Suppose x̸Sx \not \in S. Suppose xx contains a ‘1’ in its nthn^{\text{th}} digit of its ternary expansion, i.e. x=k=1n1ak3k+13n+k=n+1ak3k.x = \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \frac{a_k}{3^k} + \frac{1}{3^n} + \sum_{k=n+1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k}. We will take nn to be the first digit which is ‘1’, if there are more than one.

    Lemma 4 We have that 0<k=n+1ak3k<13n0<\sum_{k=n+1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} < \frac{1}{3^n}.

    If ak=0a_k = 0 for all k>nk>n, then our number written in ternary is of the form x=0.1000x=0.\star1000\dotsm, where \star represents the arbitrary first n1n-1 digits (each in {0,2}\{0,2\}). Then we could choose the expansion x=0.02222x=0.\star02222\dotsm instead, and avoid having a 1. In other words, xSx\in S. Similarly, if ak=2a_k=2 for all k>nk>n, then we are writing x=0.1222x=0.\star1222\dotsm, so xx admits the expansion x=0.2222x=0.\star2222\dotsm (using our geometric series again), and hence, xSx\in S. Thus, since x̸Sx\not \in S, this tail condition holds.

    Now, we may rewrite k=1n1ak3k=k=1n13(3nk1ak)3n=3λ3n\sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \frac{a_k}{3^k} = \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \frac{ 3(3^{n - k -1} a_k)}{3^n} = \frac{ 3 \lambda}{3^n} where λ=k=1n13nk1akN{0}\lambda = \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} 3^{n-k-1}a_k \in \mathbb{N}\cup \{0\}. With this definition, Lemma 4 yields 3λ+13n<x<3λ+23n.\frac{3\lambda + 1}{3^n} < x < \frac{3 \lambda + 2}{3^n}.

    So xIλ,nx \in I_{\lambda, n} and thus x̸Kx \not \in K by Lemma 3, as we wanted.

  5. KK is uncountable. i.e. K=[0,1]| K | = |[0,1]|. We already know K[0,1]K\subset [0,1], so we know K[0,1]|K| \leq |[0,1]|. Hence, we need to find a surjection from K[0,1]K \to [0,1] to complete the proof.

    We define a function F:K[0,1]F : K \to [0,1], such that FF takes xKx\in K and changes all of the 2’s in its ternary expansion to 1s and then outputs the number with corresponding binary expansion. We have that K={k=1ak3k:ak{0,2}}.K = \{ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k}: a_k \in \{0,2\} \}. For xKx\in K, we write x=k=1ak3kx= \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} where ak{0,2}a_k\in\{0,2\}. Then we define F(x)=k=1ak212kF( x) = \sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{a_k}{2} \frac{1}{2^k} Since by Lemma 1 we have a unique ternary expansion of xx that contains no 2’s, we have a well-defined function (there is no ambiguity in how to compute F(x)F(x) given xx). Note: the lower bound of FF on KK is 00 (all ak=0a_k =0) and the upper bound is 11, achieved when all the aka_k are 1s, using 12k=1\sum \frac{1}{2^k} = 1.

    Let y[0,1]y \in [0,1]. Then yy admits a binary expansion: y=k=1bk2ky = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{b_k}{2^k} for bk{0,1}b_k \in \{0,1\}. Then let x=k=12bk3kx = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{2 b_k}{3^k}, so that F(x)=k=1bk2k=yF(x) = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{b_k}{2^k} = y.

    So we are done.

Let’s notice that the binary expansion of yy does have ambiguity, and thus FF is not injective. For example, 12=0.0111\frac{1}{2}=0.0111\dotsm in binary, and 12=0.100\frac{1}{2}=0.100\dotsm in binary. Thus x1=0.022x_1= 0.022\dotsm in ternary and x2=0.200x_2 = 0.200\dotsm in ternary each have F(x1)=F(x2)=12F(x_1) = F(x_2) = \frac{1}{2}. But x1=13x_1 = \frac{1}{3} and x2=23x_2 = \frac{2}{3}. This is not a problem; we only needed to find a surjection from KK to [0,1][0,1].

Cantor’s function

We defined F:K[0,1]F: K\to [0,1], and we wish to extend it to the whole interval [0,1][0,1]. Let xx and yy be the left and right endpoints respectively of the same removed interval (x,y)(x,y) which was removed in step nn. Then, by Lemma 3Recall our ternary expansion excludes 1s, so we expand 13m=k=m+13k\frac{1}{3^m} = \sum_{k=m+1}^\infty 3^{-k}.

, x=k=1nak3k+03n+k=n+123k,y=k=1nak3k+23n+k=n+103k.\begin{aligned} x &= \sum_{k=1}^n a_k 3^{-k} + 0\cdot 3^{-n} + \sum_{k=n+1}^\infty 2\cdot 3^{-k},\\ y&= \sum_{k=1}^n a_k 3^{-k}+ 2\cdot 3^{-n} + \sum_{k=n+1}^\infty 0\cdot 3^{-k}.\end{aligned} Then, F(x)=k=1nak22k+02n+k=n+112k. F(x) = \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{a_k}{2} 2^{-k} + 0\cdot 2^{-n} + \sum_{k=n+1}^\infty 1\cdot 2^{-k}. But k=n+12k=2n\sum_{k=n+1}^\infty 2^{-k}=2^{-n}, so F(x)=k=1nak22k+2n.F(y)=k=1nak22k+12n+k=n+102k=F(x) \begin{aligned} F(x)&=\sum_{k=1}^n \frac{a_k}{2} 2^{-k} + 2^{-n}. \\ F(y) &=\sum_{k=1}^n \frac{a_k}{2} 2^{-k}+ 1\cdot 2^{-n} + \sum_{k=n+1}^\infty 0\cdot 2^{-k}\\ &= F(x) \end{aligned}

So FF takes on the same values on the endpoints of the removed intervals. But KK together with the removed intervals is [0,1][0,1].

Cantor’s function; image taken from wikimedia.

Cantor’s function; image taken from wikimedia.

This leads to a natural extension simply by taking FF constant on the removed intervals. That is, we may define a function C:[0,1][0,1]C: [0,1]\to [0,1] as C(x)=F(x)C(x)=F(x) for xKx\in K, and if y(a,b)y\in (a,b) a removed interval, C(y)=F(a)=F(b)C(y) = F(a)=F(b). This is Cantor’s function. See Figure 5 for a plot of C(x)C(x).

We will prove three properties of CC, as follows.

Theorem 2

  1. CC is increasing,

  2. CC is continuous,

  3. CC has zero derivative on [0,1]K[0,1]\setminus K.

  1. First we will show that CC is increasing on KK, and then extend to [0,1][0,1].

    Let x,yKx,y\in K with x<yx<y and set x=k=1xk3kx = \sum_{k=1}^\infty x_k 3^{-k} and y=k=1yk3ky = \sum_{k=1}^\infty y_k 3^{-k} their canonical ternary expansionsMeaning expansions with xk{0,2}x_k\in \{0,2\} for all kNk\in \mathbb{N}.

    . If x<yx<y then they lie in the same interval until some nn, and at that point yy is in a later interval. That is, for some nn, xn<ynx_n < y_n, and for all k<nk< n, xk=ykx_k = y_k. But if xn<ynx_n < y_n, since both are contained in {0,2}\{0,2\}, then xn=0x_n=0 and yn=2y_n=2. So we have C(x)=k=1xk22k=k=1n1xk22k+k=n+1xk22k,k=1n1yk22k+2n,k=1n1yk22k+2n+k=n+1yk22k=C(y).\begin{aligned} C(x) &= \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{x_k}{2} 2^{-k} = \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \frac{x_k}{2} 2^{-k} + \sum_{k=n+1}^{\infty} \frac{x_k}{2} 2^{-k}, \\ &\leq \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \frac{y_k}{2} 2^{-k} + 2^{-n}, \\ &\leq \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \frac{y_k}{2} 2^{-k} + 2^{-n} +\sum_{k=n+1}^{\infty} \frac{y_k}{2} 2^{-k} = C(y).\end{aligned} Now, let x,y[0,1]x,y \in [0,1], with x<yx<y and assume C(x)>C(y)C(x)>C(y). We know then there is some x,yKx',y' \in K with C(x)=C(x)C(x) = C(x') and C(y)=C(y)C(y) = C(y'), choosing xx' to be the left endpoint of the removed interval to which xx belongs, and similarly with yy'. Then, since C(x)C(y)C(x)\neq C(y), xx' and yy' must not correspond to the endpoints of the same interval.

    We know x' and y' are endpoints of different removed intervals, and each removed interval is of length 3^{-n}. We set x'' and y'' to denote the other endpoints of those removed intervals, as pictured, for clarity. We see that necessarily x<y if x'<y'.

    We know xx' and yy' are endpoints of different removed intervals, and each removed interval is of length 3n3^{-n}. We set xx'' and yy'' to denote the other endpoints of those removed intervals, as pictured, for clarity. We see that necessarily x<yx<y if x<yx'<y'.

    So then since x<yx<y, we must have x<yx'<y' as shown in Figure 6. But then since x,yKx',y'\in K we must have C(x)=C(x)C(y)=C(y)C(x)= C(x') \leq C(y') = C(y), since we showed CC was increasing on KK. This is a contradiction. Hence, for x,yKx,y\in K with x<yx < y, we have C(x)C(y)C(x)\leq C(y); that is, CC is increasing.

  2. Next, CC is continuous on [0,1][0,1]. Clearly, CC is continuous at x[0,1]Kx\in [0,1]\setminus K, because there on a neighborhood of xx, CC is constant.

    So, let xKx\in K. We will first show that if yKy\in K is close to xx, then C(x)C(x) is close to C(y)C(y). WLOG, take y>xy>x and yx<3my-x < 3^{-m}, then, choosing {xk}\{x_k\} and {yk}\{y_k\} as the respective coefficients of xx and yy’s canonical ternary expansions, we have yx=k=1(ykxk)3k<3m\begin{aligned} y-x &= \sum_{k=1}^\infty (y_k - x_k) 3^{-k} < 3^{-m} \\\end{aligned}

    Then we must have for all k<mk< m, xk=ykx_k = y_k. To see this, suppose not; let <m\ell < m be the minimal index such that xyx_\ell \neq y_\ell. We have two cases. First, let x=2x_\ell = 2, y=0y_\ell = 0. Then yx=0+23+k=+123+3<0\begin{aligned} y - x&= 0 + -2 \cdot 3^{-\ell} + \sum_{k=\ell+1}^\infty \leq -2 \cdot 3^{-\ell} + 3^{-\ell} < 0\end{aligned} which is a contradiction. On the other hand, if y=2y_\ell =2 and x=0x_\ell=0, yx=23+k=+1233=3>3m,\begin{aligned} y-x &= 2\cdot 3^{-\ell} + \sum_{k=\ell+1}^\infty \geq 2 \cdot 3^{-\ell} - 3^{-\ell}= 3^{-\ell} > 3^{-m},\end{aligned} a contradiction.

    Using this, C(y)C(x)=k=112(ykxk)2k=k=m12(ykxk)2k2m\begin{aligned} C(y) - C(x) &= \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2}(y_k - x_k) 2^{-k} = \sum_{k=m}^\infty \frac{1}{2}(y_k - x_k) 2^{-k} \leq 2^{-m} \end{aligned} Clearly then, for any ϵ>0\epsilon>0, we can choose mm large enough such that 2m<ϵ2^{-m}<\epsilon.

    Now, if y̸Ky\not \in K, then we know there exists yKy'\in K such that C(y)=C(y)C(y) = C(y') and xyxy|x-y'|\leq |x-y|, by choosing yy' to be the endpoint of the removed interval that yy resides within; there are two such endpoints, so we choose the one closer to xx so that xyxy|x-y'|\leq |x-y|; see Figure 7. But then for ϵ>0\epsilon>0 we know there is a δ>0\delta>0 such that if xy<δ|x-y'|< \delta, then C(x)C(y)<ϵ|C(x)-C(y')|<\epsilon. But C(y)=C(y)C(y)=C(y'), so just take xy<δ|x-y|<\delta.

    We choose x' to be the endpoint closer to y than x.

    We choose xx' to be the endpoint closer to yy than xx.

  3. For the third property, if we take x[0,1]Kx\in [0,1]\setminus K, we notice that CC is constant on an open interval around xx, so has derivative zero: limt0C(x+t)C(t)t=limt00t=0.\begin{aligned} \lim_{t\to 0} \left| \frac{C(x+t) - C(t)}{t} \right| = \lim_{t\to 0} \left| \frac{0}{t} \right|=0.\end{aligned}