- #1

- 2,571

- 1

I just pulled a paragraph that's giving me a headache atm.

[PLAIN]http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/8697/unledwjt.png [Broken]

The LOP (Figure 2.1) they refer to is

[PLAIN]http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/9787/unledylv.png [Broken]

How on earth did they show that this feasible set is bounded? Yes I know they took a K, but how did they choose "20 to be the smallest"?

Why would K be the smallest? The inequality [tex]|x_j| \leq K[/tex] obviously says

[tex]|x_1| \leq K[/tex], [tex]|x_2| \leq K[/tex]

At first I thought they found an K through the contraints, i.e.

[tex]3|x_1| +5|x_2| \leq 8K \leq 90[/tex]

And they took [tex]K = \frac{90}{8} = 11.25[/tex]

I mean they said "a K", so it isn't unique, but this ugly number obviously is not true.

How would you do it if the constraints are

[PLAIN]http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/8697/unledwjt.png [Broken]

The LOP (Figure 2.1) they refer to is

[PLAIN]http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/9787/unledylv.png [Broken]

How on earth did they show that this feasible set is bounded? Yes I know they took a K, but how did they choose "20 to be the smallest"?

**How would you even show that it is bounded?**

Why would K be the smallest? The inequality [tex]|x_j| \leq K[/tex] obviously says

[tex]|x_1| \leq K[/tex], [tex]|x_2| \leq K[/tex]

At first I thought they found an K through the contraints, i.e.

[tex]3|x_1| +5|x_2| \leq 8K \leq 90[/tex]

And they took [tex]K = \frac{90}{8} = 11.25[/tex]

I mean they said "a K", so it isn't unique, but this ugly number obviously is not true.

How would you do it if the constraints are

**NOT**in [tex]\mathbb{R^2}[/tex]?
Last edited by a moderator: