A<b<c and, f is bounded on [a,b]

  • Thread starter Thread starter phydis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bounded
phydis
Messages
28
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


a<b<c and, f is bounded on [a,b] and f is bounded on [b,c] prove that f is bounded on [a,c]

The Attempt at a Solution


there exist M1≥0 s.t. for all x ε [a,b] |f(x)|≤M1
there exist M2≥0 s.t. for all x ε [b,c] |f(x)|≤M2

for x ε [a,b] and x ε [b,c]
Let M>0, and let M>M1 and M>M2
therefore
|f(x)|≤M1<M --> |f(x)|<M and |f(x)|≤M2<M --> |f(x)|<M
∴ there exist M>0 s.t. |f(x)|<M *
so f is bounded on [a,c]

is this proof correct? definition says f is bounded on [a,c] if M≥0 s.t. for all x ε [a,c] |f(x)|≤M
but what I have proven is, f is bounded on [a,c] since M>0 s.t. for all x ε [a,c] |f(x)|<M :rolleyes:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phydis said:

Homework Statement


a<b<c and, f is bounded on [a,b] and f is bounded on [b,c] prove that f is bounded on [a,c]

The Attempt at a Solution


there exist M1≥0 s.t. for all x ε [a,b] |f(x)|≤M1
there exist M2≥0 s.t. for all x ε [b,c] |f(x)|≤M2

for x ε [a,b] and x ε [b,c]
Let M>0, and let M>M1 and M>M2
therefore
|f(x)|≤M1<M --> |f(x)|<M and |f(x)|≤M2<M --> |f(x)|<M
∴ there exist M>0 s.t. |f(x)|<M *
so f is bounded on [a,c]

is this proof correct? definition says f is bounded on [a,c] if M≥0 s.t. for all x ε [a,c] |f(x)|≤M
but what I have proven is, f is bounded on [a,c] since M>0 s.t. for all x ε [a,c] |f(x)|<M :rolleyes:
Uh...if ##x\in[a,b]## and ##x\in[b,c]##, then ##x=b##. I think you meant ##x\in[a,c]##. :confused:
 
Mandelbroth said:
Uh...if ##x\in[a,b]## and ##x\in[b,c]##, then ##x=b##. I think you meant ##x\in[a,c]##. :confused:

Nope, I meant some ##x\inℝ## lies on [a,b] and some ##x\inℝ## lies on [b,c]
 
phydis said:
Nope, I meant some ##x\inℝ## lies on [a,b] and some ##x\inℝ## lies on [b,c]
That's not a good way to put it. It's confusing. Try using ##x_1## and ##x_2##.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
What you should say is "if x\in [a, c] then either x\in [a, b] or x\in [b, c]". (You shouldn't use "x" to mean two different numbers.)

Also where you say "Let M>0, and let M>M1 and M>M2" it looks as if you were "letting" M be three different numbers. Better would be "Let M> max(M1, M2)". Of course, since M1 and M2 are both positive, it follows that M> 0.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top