Proving inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T)

  • Thread starter faceblah
  • Start date
In summary: Yes, that is correct. You can use transitivity to show that (inf S)(inf T) < inf C + e, which then implies (inf S)(inf T) <= inf C. And yes, the ">" becomes a "=>" when invoking the fact that this is true for every positive real number \epsilon.
  • #1
faceblah
5
0

Homework Statement



Sets A and B are sets of positive real numbers. Define C = {st| s \in S and t \in T}
Prove inf(C) = inf(S)*inf(T)

The Attempt at a Solution



so I'm trying to prove inf(C) <= inf(S)*inf(T) and inf(C) >= inf(S)*inf(T).

i'll use e as epsilon. epsilon is positive

By definition there is an s in S such that: s < inf S + e. There is a t in T such that: t < inf T + e. Additionally, inf(C) <= st for all s in S and t in T by definition.

st < (inf S + e)(inf T + e) = (inf S)(inf T) + (inf S)*e + (inf T)*e + e^2

inf C <= st <= (inf S)(inf T) < inf S)(inf T) + (inf S)*e + (inf T)*e + e^2
(NOTE: I'm not sure about the middle inequality: "st <= (inf S)(inf T)" )

is this a correct way to go about this? I'm also not sure about proving the other direction
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
faceblah said:

Homework Statement



Sets A and B are sets of positive real numbers. Define C = {st| s \in S and t \in T}
Prove inf(C) = inf(S)*inf(T)

The Attempt at a Solution



so I'm trying to prove inf(C) <= inf(S)*inf(T) and inf(C) >= inf(S)*inf(T).

i'll use e as epsilon. epsilon is positive

By definition there is an s in S such that: s < inf S + e. There is a t in T such that: t < inf T + e. Additionally, inf(C) <= st for all s in S and t in T by definition.

st < (inf S + e)(inf T + e) = (inf S)(inf T) + (inf S)*e + (inf T)*e + e^2

inf C <= st <= (inf S)(inf T) < inf S)(inf T) + (inf S)*e + (inf T)*e + e^2
(NOTE: I'm not sure about the middle inequality: "st <= (inf S)(inf T)" )

is this a correct way to go about this? I'm also not sure about proving the other direction

No, the middle inequality is indeed not correct. Try it like this:

[tex]inf(C)\leq st<inf(S)inf(T)+inf(S)e+inf(T)e+e^2[/tex]

Because e is arbitrary, we can let e go to 0, thus

[tex]inf(C)<inf(S)\inf(T)[/tex]

For the other inequality, take [itex]st<inf(C)+e[/itex] and do something with it.
 
  • #3
faceblah said:
st < (inf S + e)(inf T + e) = (inf S)(inf T) + (inf S)*e + (inf T)*e + e^2

inf C <= st <= (inf S)(inf T) < inf S)(inf T) + (inf S)*e + (inf T)*e + e^2
(NOTE: I'm not sure about the middle inequality: "st <= (inf S)(inf T)" )
You're right to be unsure. You have
  • [itex]\inf C \leq st[/itex]
  • [itex]st < (\inf S)(\inf T) + (\inf S) \epsilon + (\inf T) \epsilon + \epsilon^2[/itex]
So you just put the two together:
[itex]\inf C \leq st< (\inf S)(\inf T) + (\inf S) \epsilon + (\inf T) \epsilon + \epsilon^2[/itex]​
well, what you really care about is just transitivity:
[itex]\inf C < (\inf S)(\inf T) + (\inf S) \epsilon + (\inf T) \epsilon + \epsilon^2[/itex]​
And then invoke what you can about the fact that this is true for every positive real number [itex]\epsilon[/itex].

(aside: micromass forgot that < turns into [itex]\leq[/itex] when doing limits)
 
  • #4
Hurkyl said:
(aside: micromass forgot that < turns into [itex]\leq[/itex] when doing limits)

Oh my, I'm still not fully awake :frown:
 
  • #5
For the other direction I'm guessing it's:

There is an st in C such that st < inf C + e.
By definition, inf S <= s for all s and inf T <= t for all t. So (inf S)(inf T) <= st.

So we have (inf C + e) > st => (inf S)(inf T). so (inf C + e) > (inf S)(inf T). (I need this to be a => though)

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "invoking what you know about e". Does this mean that the ">" becomes a "=>". See below for context

Hurkyl said:
well, what you really care about is just transitivity:
[itex]\inf C < (\inf S)(\inf T) + (\inf S) \epsilon + (\inf T) \epsilon + \epsilon^2[/itex]​
And then invoke what you can about the fact that this is true for every positive real number [itex]\epsilon[/itex].

(aside: micromass forgot that < turns into [itex]\leq[/itex] when doing limits)
 

What is the definition of inf(ST)?

The inf(ST) is the infimum, or greatest lower bound, of the set of all possible products of elements from the sets S and T.

What is the importance of proving inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T)?

Proving inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T) is important because it allows us to simplify calculations and make conclusions about the relationship between the infimums of two sets.

What is the process for proving inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T)?

The proof for inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T) typically involves using the definitions of infimum and product, as well as the properties of ordered sets and real numbers.

Are there any exceptions to the rule inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T)?

Yes, there are some cases where inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T) may not hold, such as when one or both of the sets S and T are empty or contain negative numbers.

How does proving inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T) relate to other mathematical concepts?

Proving inf(ST) = inf(S)*inf(T) is closely related to the concepts of infimum, supremum, and the order properties of real numbers. It also has applications in various fields such as analysis, calculus, and probability theory.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top