Let be $f:(0,1)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. For all $x\in (0,1)$ I have that $\lim_n{f(\frac{x}{n})}=0$.
It's true that $lim_{x\to0}f(x)=0$?
And if $f$ is continuous?
For the second point I just use the definition of continuity and limits: Let be $x_0\in(0,1)$ and let be the succession $\{f(\frac{x_0}{n})\}$, and I know that for all $\varepsilon_1>0$ $\exists N>0$ such that if $n>N$ then $|f(\frac{x_0}{n})|<\varepsilon_1$.
$f$ is continuos in $\frac{x_0}{n}$, so for all $\varepsilon_2>0$ $\exists \delta_2>0$ such that if $|x-\frac{x_0}{n}|<\delta_2$ then $|f(x)-f(\frac{x_0}{n})|<\varepsilon_2$.
So I have that $|x|\le|x-\frac{x_0}{n}|+|\frac{x_0}{n}|<\delta_2+|\frac{x_0}{n}|=\delta^*$, because $x_0$ is fixed.
On the other hand $|f(x)|\le|f(x)-f(\frac{x_0}{n})|+|f(\frac{x_0}{n})|<\varepsilon_1+\varepsilon_2$.
But I don't know how solve the second. I try to prove that is false using many non-continuous function. but I failed.
(Sorry for my bad English, I'm Italian)
This is wrong. As a counterexample, take a function $f$ which is zero except at points $1/\sqrt{p}$ for $p$ prime, where the function takes the value 1 instead.
More generally, define $f(x)=1$ for $x\in A,$ and $f(x)=0$ for $x\notin A,$ where $A$ is any set which does not contain $0,$ has $0$ as an accumulation point, and has the property that $x\in A$ and $n\in\mathbb{N}$ with $n>1$ implies $x/n \notin A.$