1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Cant understand this step in a bounded prove

  1. Mar 9, 2009 #1
    the question:
    f(x) continues on [tex](-\infty,a][/tex]
    and suppose that the border [tex] \lim_{x->-\infty}f(x)[/tex] exists and finite.
    prove that f(x) is bounded on [tex](-\infty,a][/tex] and/or that exists
    [tex]x_0\epsilon(-\infty,a]=\lim _{x->-\infty }f(x)[/tex]
    so
    [tex]\sup_{x\epsilon(-\infty,a]} f(x)[/tex]
    in other words prove that f(x) gets its highest value on [tex](-\infty,a][/tex]
    and the supremum is the maximum

    the non understood part:

    suppose
    [tex] \lim_{x->-\infty}f(x)=m_0[/tex]
    suppose [tex]m_0<a[/tex]
    and we check on the interval of [tex][m_0,a][/tex] where [tex][m_0,a]\subseteq (-\infty,a][/tex]

    they prove by a counter example that:
    "suppose the function is not bounded from the top then [tex]\forall n\epsilon N[/tex] and
    [tex]m_0\leq x_n\leq a[/tex]"

    i cant understand it.if a function is bounded by some epsilon then we take N for which after this N (n>N) f(x)<epsilon
    if its not bounded from the top then
    f(x) is bigger then epsilon for the whole interval

    this is not what they writee up there
    what are they writing there??
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2009
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 9, 2009 #2

    Office_Shredder

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What's xn, and why are you looking at all of them? I'm not sure I understand what's going on in your post
     
  4. Mar 9, 2009 #3
    how its supposed to be diverged?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Cant understand this step in a bounded prove
Loading...