Can We Prove ac < bd Under Given Conditions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter objectivesea
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inequality Proof
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 2K views
objectivesea
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that for all numbers a, b, c, d: if [tex]0 \leq a < b[/tex] and [tex]0 \leq c < d[/tex] then [tex]ac < bd[/tex].

This is problem 5 from chapter 1 of Michael Spivak's "Calculus", 4th Edition. It is the text for my real analysis course.

I should also mention that this is not a homework problem, though similar content will be on my exam tomorrow and I'm hoping to have a better understanding by then.

Thanks for your help!

Homework Equations



Use only the following axioms. For all numbers,

P1. [tex]a+(b+c)[/tex]

P2. [tex]a+0 = 0+a = a[/tex]

P3. [tex]a+(-a) = (-a)+(a)=0[/tex]

P4. [tex]a+b = b+a[/tex]

P5. [tex]a \cdot (b \cdot c) = (a \cdot b) \cdot c[/tex]

P6. [tex]a \cdot 1 = 1 \cdot a = a[/tex]

P7. [tex]a \neq 0 \rightarrow \exists a^{-1}[/tex], [tex]a \cdot a^{-1} = 1[/tex]

P8. [tex]a \cdot b = b \cdot a[/tex]

P9. [tex]a \cdot (b + c) = a \cdot b+b \cdot c[/tex]

Let [tex]P[/tex] be be a collection such that [tex]a \in P \leftrightarrow a > 0[/tex]
Then for all numbers,
P10. Only one of the following is true:
[tex] \begin{align}<br /> &a=0\\<br /> \textrm{or }& &a \in P\\<br /> \textrm{or }& &-a \in P<br /> \end{align}[/tex]
P11. [tex]a \in P \wedge b \in P \rightarrow (a+b) \in P[/tex]
P12. [tex]a \in P \wedge b \in P \rightarrow (a \cdot b) \in P[/tex]

"[tex]a > b[/tex]" is defined as the relation: [tex]: {(a,b): (a-b) \in P}[/tex]
"[tex]a < b[/tex]" is defined as the relation: [tex]: {(a,b): b > a}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



Only one of the following is true:
[tex]\begin{align}<br /> a&=0 &\wedge& &c &= 0\\<br /> a&>0 &\wedge& &c &= 0\\<br /> a&=0 &\wedge& &c &> 0\\<br /> a&>0 &\wedge& &c &> 0<br /> \end{align}[/tex]

Suppose that anyone of (1), (2), (3) are true, then

[tex]ac = 0[/tex].

From P12, [tex]bd \in P[/tex]. So By definition of [tex]P[/tex],
[tex]bd > 0 =ac[/tex]

Suppose that (4) is true, then
[tex]a \in P \wedge b \in P \wedge c \in P \wedge d \in P \wedge (b-a) \in P \wedge (d-c) \in P[/tex]

I'm not sure where to go from here...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Figured it out!

(1) Since [tex]b \in P[/tex] and [tex](d - c) \in P[/tex], we get [tex](bd - bc) \in P[/tex] using P12.

(2) Since [tex]c \in P[/tex] and [tex](b - a) \in P[/tex], we get [tex](bc - ac) \in P[/tex] using P12.

Then from (1) and (2) we get [tex](bd - bc + bc - ac) \in P[/tex] using P11.

Using P3 and P2 we get [tex](bd - ac) \in P[/tex], thus [tex]ac < bd[/tex]
 
A bit late, but...

You want to show that bd - ac > 0. We have

bd - ac = b(d - c) + c(b - a) > 0 + 0 = 0. QED