Thread Closed

negation of this statement

 
Share Thread Thread Tools
Jan30-08, 07:31 PM   #1
 

negation of this statement


I am stuck in trying to take the negation of this statement:

[tex](\forall \varepsilon>0)(\exists N \in N)(\forall n,m\geq N)(\forall x \in R [|f_n(x)-f_m(x)|< \varepsilon][/tex]

One of my thoughts was that in order to move the negation inside the brackets, all I need to do is say [tex](\exists \varepsilon \leq 0)[/tex]...and everything else remains unchanged.

However, my other thought was to somehow move the statement [tex]\varepsilon > 0[/tex] to the end of the original statement and make it: [tex](\varepsilon > 0 \Rightarrow |f_n(x)-f_m(x)|< \varepsilon)[/tex]

If you can help me in anyway, it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!
PhysOrg.com
PhysOrg
science news on PhysOrg.com

>> Galaxies fed by funnels of fuel
>> The better to see you with: Scientists build record-setting metamaterial flat lens
>> Google eyes emerging markets networks
Feb1-08, 07:48 PM   #2
 
Recognitions:
Science Advisor Science Advisor
It seems like you need something like there exists an eps >0 for which there is no N for the property (a Cauchy sequence in the sup norm topology).
Feb1-08, 10:06 PM   #3
 
I figured it out...here is the solution for anyone who is curious.

[tex](\exists \varepsilon>0)(\forall N \in N)(\exists n,m\geq N)(\exists x \in R [|f_n(x)-f_m(x)| \geq \varepsilon][/tex]

Thanks for the help!
Thread Closed
Thread Tools


Similar Threads for: negation of this statement
Thread Forum Replies
Negation of Limit Calculus & Beyond Homework 5
Proposition Negation Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 6
Negation Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 3
Proper Negation Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 24
What is the negation of the statement Introductory Physics Homework 2