MHB About showing a function : not unbounded on B

  • Thread starter Thread starter bw0young0math
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that the function k, defined on the interval A=(0,∞), is unbounded on any open interval B contained within A. The initial proof attempts to show boundedness but ultimately leads to a contradiction, confirming that k is indeed unbounded. A preferred direct proof approach is suggested, emphasizing the need to find a point in B where k exceeds any positive number N by selecting a prime number n greater than N. The conversation also addresses how to handle intervals with infinite length by considering finite subintervals. The participants confirm the validity of the proofs and clarify the reasoning behind their strategies.
bw0young0math
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Hello, I have a problem. I think this problem about 5 hours. But I couldn't finish this.
In fact, I solve a little. But I don't know whether it is right or not.
If you check this problem, I really appreciate you..

*This is the problem from Bartle 5.1 #14.

Let $A=(0,∞)$, $k:A→\Bbb R$ is given by $$k(x)=\begin{cases}0& (x∈A∩\Bbb Q^c)\\n &(x∈A∩\Bbb Q, x = \frac{m}{n}, (m,n)=1) \end{cases}$$
Let $B$ be an arbitrary open interval in A ($B⊂A$).
Show that function $k$ is unbounded on $B$.* My solution:
There exists $B=(a,b)⊂A=(0,∞)$ such that $k$ is bounded on $B$.
So,there exist $M>0$ such that $\forall x\in B$, $\lvert k(x)\rvert \leq M$
ⅰ)$a,b\in \Bbb R$
Let $C=(a,\min\{a+1,b\})$
Let $D=\{x\in C|x=m/n ,(m,n)=1, n\leq M\}$. Then $D$ is finite set.
Let $c_1$=the smallest number in D and $c_2$ is next number in $D$ ($c_1<c_2$)
Then by $\Bbb Q$-density, there exist a rational number $c$ in interval ($c_1, c_2$). Then, $c=q/p$, $(p,q)=1$, $p>M$.
So $k(c)=p>M$ and $c \in (c_1,c_2) \subset C = (a,\min\{a+1,b\})\subset B=(a,b)\subset A=(0,∞)$.
Thus this is contradiction to "$k$ is bounded on $B$."
Thus $k$ is not bounded on arbitrary open intervals included in $A$.

ⅱ)$a,b\in \Bbb R \cup \{∞\}$
Let $C=(a,a+1)$. Then Let's do something similar way to ⅰ).



Thus $k$ is not bounded on arbitrary open intervals included in $A$.

How about my inference? Please check above, and if you have good solution, let me know it... Thank you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
bw0young0math said:
Hello, I have a problem. I think this problem about 5 hours. But I couldn't finish this.
In fact, I solve a little. But I don't know whether it is right or not.
If you check this problem, I really appreciate you..

*This is the problem from Bartle 5.1 #14.

A=(0,∞) k:A→R(real numbers) ,k(x)=0 (x∈A∩Q^c) k(x)=n (x∈A∩Q,x=m/n (m,n)=1 )
Let B : arbitrary open interval in A (B⊂A)
Show that function k is unbounded on B.* My solution:
There exists B=(a,b)⊂A=(0,∞) such that k is bounded on B.
So,there exist M>0 such that ∀x∈B=(a,b), |k(x)|≤M
ⅰ)(a,b∈R)
Let C=(a,min{a+1,b})
Let D={x∈C|x=m/n,(m,n)=1, n≤M}. Then D is finite set.
Let c1=the smallest number in D and c2 is next number in D (c1<c2)
Then by Q-density, there exist a rational number c in interval (c1,c2). Then, c=q/p (p,q)=1, p>M.
So k(c)=p>M & c∈(c1,c2)⊂C=(a,min{a+1,b})⊂B=(a,b)⊂A=(0,∞).
Thus this is contradiction to "k is bounded on B."
Thus k is not bounded on arbitrary open intervals included in A.

ⅱ)(a,b∈R∪{∞})
Let C=(a,a+1). Then Let's do something similar way to ⅰ)(a,b∈R)



Thus k is not bounded on arbitrary open intervals included in A.

How about my inference? Please check above& If you have good solution, let me know it... Thank you.
Your proof is correct. (Yes)

As a matter of personal choice, I would prefer to use a direct proof rather than a proof by contradiction. In fact, the definition of unboundedness says that given a positive number $N$, we must find a point $x$ in $B$ such that $k(x) > N$. To do that, choose a prime number $n > N$ such that $1/n$ is less than half the length of the interval $B$.

Since $n$ is prime, $k(m/n) = n$ whenever $m$ is not a multiple of $n$. But since $1/n$ is less than half the length of $B$, it follows that $B$ contains at least two points of the form $m/n$. For at least one of those points, $m$ will not be a multiple of $n$, and so the function $k$ will take the value $n$ at that point. Since $n>N$, this shows that the definition of unboundedness is satisfied for the function $k$ on the interval $B$.
 
Opalg said:
Your proof is correct. (Yes)

As a matter of personal choice, I would prefer to use a direct proof rather than a proof by contradiction. In fact, the definition of unboundedness says that given a positive number $N$, we must find a point $x$ in $B$ such that $k(x) > N$. To do that, choose a prime number $n > N$ such that $1/n$ is less than half the length of the interval $B$.

Since $n$ is prime, $k(m/n) = n$ whenever $m$ is not a multiple of $n$. But since $1/n$ is less than half the length of $B$, it follows that $B$ contains at least two points of the form $m/n$. For at least one of those points, $m$ will not be a multiple of $n$, and so the function $k$ will take the value $n$ at that point. Since $n>N$, this shows that the definition of unboundedness is satisfied for the function $k$ on the interval $B$.
Thank you for your reply.:D
Um.. I have a question. If interval B=(a,b)(b=∞), length of B is infinite. Then how can I prove this?(Because I cannot define an half of the length B when length of B is infinite.)

&

How did you think of an half of length of B? I wonder the inference.
 
bw0young0math said:
If interval B=(a,b)(b=∞), length of B is infinite. Then how can I prove this?(Because I cannot define an half of the length B when length of B is infinite.)
You essentially dealt with this in your original post. If the length of $B$ is infinite, you can replace $B$ by a subinterval of finite length, say a subinterval of length $1$. If the function is unbounded on that subinterval then it is certainly unbounded on the whole interval.

bw0young0math said:
How did you think of an half of length of B? I wonder the inference.
I wanted to ensure that there would be at least two consecutive multiples of $1/n$ in the interval. For that, it is necessary to choose $n$ so that $1/n$ is less than half the length of the interval.
 
Opalg said:
You essentially dealt with this in your original post. If the length of $B$ is infinite, you can replace $B$ by a subinterval of finite length, say a subinterval of length $1$. If the function is unbounded on that subinterval then it is certainly unbounded on the whole interval.I wanted to ensure that there would be at least two consecutive multiples of $1/n$ in the interval. For that, it is necessary to choose $n$ so that $1/n$ is less than half the length of the interval.

Thank you so much!Thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K