Another Question on Upper and Lower Limits .... Denlinger, Theorem 2.9.6 (a)

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limits Theorem
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the proof of Theorem 2.9.6 (a) from Charles G. Denlinger's "Elements of Real Analysis," specifically regarding the relationship between upper and lower limits of sequences. The theorem states that for all natural numbers \( m \) and \( n \), the inequalities \( \underline{x_n} \leq \underline{x_{n + m}} \leq \overline{x_{n + m}} \leq \overline{x_m} \) imply that \( \text{sup} \{ \underline{x_n} \} \leq \text{inf} \{ \overline{x_n} \} \). The proof demonstrates that \( \overline{x_m} \) serves as an upper bound for the sequence \( \{ \underline{x_n} \} \), leading to the conclusion that the supremum of the lower limits is less than or equal to the infimum of the upper limits.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of sequences in real analysis
  • Familiarity with the concepts of supremum and infimum
  • Knowledge of notation for upper and lower limits
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical proofs and inequalities
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the definitions and properties of supremum and infimum in real analysis
  • Review Chapter 2 of Denlinger's "Elements of Real Analysis" for deeper insights on sequences
  • Explore additional examples of upper and lower limits in sequences
  • Practice proving inequalities involving sequences and their limits
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in real analysis, mathematicians focusing on sequences and limits, and anyone seeking to understand the foundational concepts of upper and lower limits in mathematical proofs.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Charles G. Denlinger's book: "Elements of Real Analysis".

I am focused on Chapter 2: Sequences ... ...

I need help with the proof of Theorem 2.9.6 (a)Theorem 2.9.6 reads as follows:
View attachment 9250
View attachment 9251
In the above proof of part (a) we read the following:

" ... $$ \forall \ m, n \in \mathbb{N}, \ \underline{x_n} \leq \underline{ x_{n + m} } \leq \overline{ x_{n + m} } \leq \overline{ x_m }$$. Thus, $$\text{sup} \{ \underline{x_n} \ : \ n \in \mathbb{N} \} \leq \text{inf} \{ \overline{x_n} \ : \ n \in \mathbb{N} \}$$... ... "
My question is as follows:Can someone explain exactly why $$ \ \underline{x_n} \leq \underline{ x_{n + m} } \leq \overline{ x_{n + m} } \leq \overline{ x_m } \ $$ implies that $$ \ \text{sup} \{ \underline{x_n} \ : \ n \in \mathbb{N} \} \leq \text{inf} \{ \overline{x_n} \ : \ n \in \mathbb{N} \}$$ ... ... Hope that someone can help ...

Peter
===============================================================================

It may help MHB readers to have access to Denlinger's definitions and notation regarding upper and lower limits ... so I am providing access to the same ... as follows:
View attachment 9252
View attachment 9253
Hope that helps ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Denlinger - 1 - Theorem 2.9.6 - PART 1 ... .png
    Denlinger - 1 - Theorem 2.9.6 - PART 1 ... .png
    23.8 KB · Views: 150
  • Denlinger - 2 - Theorem 2.9.6 - PART 2 ... .png
    Denlinger - 2 - Theorem 2.9.6 - PART 2 ... .png
    6.2 KB · Views: 145
  • Denlinger - 1 - Start of Section 2.9  - PART 1 ... .png
    Denlinger - 1 - Start of Section 2.9 - PART 1 ... .png
    23.2 KB · Views: 147
  • Denlinger - 2 - Start of Section 2.9  - PART 2 .png
    Denlinger - 2 - Start of Section 2.9 - PART 2 .png
    22.5 KB · Views: 146
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
Can someone explain exactly why $$ \ \underline{x_n} \leq \underline{ x_{n + m} } \leq \overline{ x_{n + m} } \leq \overline{ x_m } \ $$ implies that $$ \ \text{sup} \{ \underline{x_n} \ : \ n \in \mathbb{N} \} \leq \text{inf} \{ \overline{x_n} \ : \ n \in \mathbb{N} \}$$ ... ...
Leaving out the two intermediate parts in that string of inequalities, you see that $\underline{x_n} \leqslant \overline{ x_m }$ (for all $m$ and $n$ in $\Bbb{N}$). Keeping $m$ fixed and letting $n$ vary, it follows that $\overline{ x_m }$ is an upper bound for the sequence $\{ \underline{x_n}\}$. Therefore $\sup\{ \underline{x_n}\} \leqslant \overline{ x_m }$.

Now let $m$ vary. That last inequality shows that $\sup\{ \underline{x_n}\}$ is a lower bound for the sequence $\{\overline{ x_m }\}$, and therefore $\sup\{ \underline{x_n}\} \leqslant \inf \{\overline{ x_m }\}$.
 
Last edited:
Opalg said:
Leaving out the two intermediate parts in that string of inequalities, you see that $\underline{x_n} \leqslant \overline{ x_m }$ (for all $m$ and $n$ in $\Bbb{N}$). Keeping $m$ fixed and letting $n$ vary, it follows that $\overline{ x_m }$ is an upper bound for the sequence $\{ \underline{x_n}\}$. Therefore $\sup\{ \underline{x_n}\} \leqslant \overline{ x_m }$.

Now let $m$ vary. That last inequality shows that $\sup\{ \underline{x_n}\}$ is a lower bound for the sequence $\{\overline{ x_m }\}$, and therefore $\sup\{ \underline{x_n}\} \leqslant \inf \{\overline{ x_m }\}$.

Thanks Opalg ...

Appreciate your help ...

Peter
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K