Can You Prove the Inequality of Supremums Theorem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter *melinda*
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inequality
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around proving the Inequality of Supremums Theorem, specifically that sup(A ∩ B) ≤ sup(A) for non-empty sets A and B of real numbers. A participant expresses difficulty in moving beyond intuitive pictorial representations to a formal proof. Suggestions are made to break the proof into two parts: first proving the equality case and then the inequality case. The conversation highlights the need for clarity in establishing the relationship between the supremums of the sets involved. Ultimately, participants seek guidance on structuring a rigorous mathematical proof.
*melinda*
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Theorem:

For every non empty set E of real numbers that is bounded above there exists a unique real number sup(E) such that

1. sup(E) is an upper bound for E.

2. if y is an upper bound for E then y \geq sup(E).


Prove:

sup(A\cap B)\leq sup(A)

I can show a special case of this,

if A\cap B=\emptyset, then sup(A\cap B)\leq sup(A).

Nothing is less than something, right?

Now here's my problem...
Beyond the trivial case, all I have been able to do is draw pictures of sets on a number line. The pictures make the inequality really obvious, but I don't think that pictorial intuition counts as a real proof.

Could anyone give me a pointer on how to set up a real proof?

thanks!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok break that inequality into two parts
first prove the equal to part. How would you do that . Assume the su pof A and B are something and that they are equal. That way you can prove the equality part
Then assume that the sup of A is greater than the Sup B. Now what is sup (a inter B) ? What is it less than?
 
Ok, this is what I have for the equality part if I'm understanding you right.

let sup(A)=sup(B)

then sup(A\cap B)=sup(A)


And the inequality would look like this?

let sup(B)\leq sup(A)

then sup(A\cap B)\leq sup(A)


Is that right?
It seems too simple...
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top