Proving Subdivision and Refinement: Is it as Simple as it Seems?

  • Thread starter TheyCallMeMini
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary, the person is trying to show that E := D1 u D2 is a subdivision, but is having trouble with the proof. They say that if you prove "1." first, that works. See I was thinking more along the lines if we had x an element of A then its simple enough to just say X is in A u B?
  • #1
TheyCallMeMini
5
0
I understand this isn't a homework area but there is always so much more traffic in this forum rather than the homework. All I'm looking for is a clarification that my ideas to prove both parts are in fact accurate.


Homework Statement



If each of D1 and D2 is a subdivision of [a,b], then...
1. D1 u D2 is a subdivision of [a,b], and
2. D1 u D2 is a refinement of D1.


Homework Equations



**Definition 1: The statement that D is a subdivision of the interval [a,b] means...
1. D is a finite subset of [a,b], and
2. each of a and b belongs to D.


**Definition 2: The statement that K is a refinement of the subdivision D means...
1. K is a subdivision of [a,b], and
2. D is a subset of K.



The Attempt at a Solution



My problem is that I've taken a lot of logic courses in the past so when I see the union of two variables I only need to prove that one is actually true. In this particular situation both are true so its obvious but I don't know how to state that fact.

For the 2nd part of the proof, wouldn't I just say that D1 is a subset of itself, and its already given that D1 is a subdivision of [a,b]? It just seems too easy...


I also had questions about proofs I've already turned in that I did poorly on but I didn't want to flood this place with questions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
My problem is that I've taken a lot of logic courses in the past so when I see the union of two variables I only need to prove that one is actually true.
This is not a logical "or".

Consider a simple setup:
A={1}
B={2}
The statement "the set has exactly one element" is true for both A and B, but not for their union C={1,2}.

To show that E := D1 u D2 is a subdivision, you have to show that E is a finite subset of [a,b] and a and b are in E.

For the 2nd part of the proof, wouldn't I just say that D1 is a subset of itself, and its already given that D1 is a subdivision of [a,b]? It just seems too easy...
If you prove "1." first, that works.
 
  • #3
See I was thinking more along the lines if we had x an element of A then its simple enough to just say X is in A u B?

Because it doesn't matter if X is in B since we can just add another set, regardless its still in A. I'm just lost how to incorporate the union into the proof, I guess I'll spend more time on that.

Haha. See within 5 minutes I get a reply in this one and not the homework =P. Thank you!
 
  • #4
TheyCallMeMini said:
See I was thinking more along the lines if we had x an element of A then its simple enough to just say X is in A u B?
##x \in A \Rightarrow x \in (A \cup B)##, and I think you can use this as it is very elementary.
 
  • #5
I didn't see the drop down menu for the element, union, and implication arrows. Where are those?
 
  • #6
They are written with the [itex]-tags and LaTeX codes. See the FAQ entry for details, or quote my post to see its code.
 

1. What is the purpose of subdivision/refinement proof?

Subdivision/refinement proof is used to prove the convergence of a sequence or series by breaking it down into smaller pieces and showing that each piece converges.

2. How is subdivision/refinement proof different from other proof techniques?

Subdivision/refinement proof is different from other proof techniques because it involves breaking the original sequence or series into smaller pieces and proving convergence for each piece individually, rather than proving convergence for the entire sequence or series at once.

3. Can subdivision/refinement proof be used for all types of sequences and series?

Yes, subdivision/refinement proof can be used for all types of sequences and series, as long as they are convergent.

4. What are some common examples of subdivision/refinement proof?

One common example of subdivision/refinement proof is the proof of the convergence of the geometric series. Another example is the proof of the convergence of the infinite series for the natural logarithm function.

5. Are there any limitations to subdivision/refinement proof?

One limitation of subdivision/refinement proof is that it can be time-consuming and laborious, especially for more complex sequences or series. Additionally, it may not always be the most efficient or intuitive method for proving convergence.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
328
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
5
Views
199
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
151
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
800
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
367
Back
Top