Reading some of the analysis related posts, I have a question regarding the epsilon-delta language.
What we are taught is the inequality in the definition is strict. E.g $$\forall\varepsilon >0\ \exists\delta >0: \forall x\in D\left ( |x-a|<\delta \Longrightarrow |f(x)-f(a)|<\varepsilon \right )$$ ( definition of continuity at $a\in D$). If this is satisfied, we conclude for suitable choice of $x$ the difference between $f(x)$ and $f(a)$ is strictly less than any positive number hence it must be zero.
Intuitively, it also makes sense that it's sufficient if the inequality involving $\varepsilon$ is not strict. But how does one justify that?
Let $R(\varepsilon)$ represent a definition with strict $\varepsilon$ -inequality. Let $M(\varepsilon)$ be the same definition, but let $\varepsilon$-inequality be non-strict. Then $R(\varepsilon)$ is satisfied iff $M(\varepsilon)$ is satisfied?
The question really is if $M(\varepsilon)$ is satisfied, is then $R(\varepsilon)$ satisfied? Does one simply say that since $M\left (\frac{\varepsilon}{2}\right )$, then $R(\varepsilon)$?
I can almost be sure that we can't allow the inequality involving $\delta$ to be non-strict, otherwise we could potentially permit points where $f$ tends to infinity? [On second thought, just make $\delta$ smaller]