Definitions of greatest and least elements in terms of strict orderings

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
3 replies · 3K views
hmb
Messages
15
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



State the definitions of greatest and least elements in terms of strict orderings.

Homework Equations



Let [tex]\leq[/tex] be an ordering of [tex]A[/tex] and [tex]<[/tex] be a strict ordering on [tex]A[/tex], and let [tex]B \subseteq A[/tex].

[tex]b \in B[/tex] is the greatest element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]\leq[/tex] if, for every [tex]x \in B[/tex], [tex]x \leq b[/tex].

[tex]b \in B[/tex] is the least element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]\leq[/tex] if, for every [tex]x \in B[/tex], [tex]b \leq x[/tex].

The Attempt at a Solution



[tex]b \in B[/tex] is the greatest element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]<[/tex] if, for every [tex]x \in B[/tex], [tex]x < b[/tex].

But then there is no greatest element, because [tex]x < b[/tex] implies [tex]x \neq b[/tex]. So maybe it should be:

[tex]b \in B[/tex] is the greatest element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]<[/tex] if, for every [tex]x \in B[/tex] and [tex]x \neq b[/tex], [tex]x < b[/tex]?

[tex]b \in B[/tex] is the least element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]<[/tex] if, for every [tex]x \in B[/tex], [tex]b < x[/tex].

But then there is no least element, because [tex]x < b[/tex] implies [tex]x \neq b[/tex]. So maybe it should be:

[tex]b \in B[/tex] is the least element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]<[/tex] if, for every [tex]x \in B[/tex] and [tex]x \neq b[/tex], [tex]b < x[/tex]?

While I am at it I might as well also check that I've got some other definitions right:

[tex]b \in B[/tex] is a maximal element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]<[/tex] if there exists no [tex]x \in B[/tex] such that [tex]b < x[/tex].

[tex]b \in B[/tex] is a minimal element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]<[/tex] if there exists no [tex]x \in B[/tex] such that [tex]x < b[/tex].

[tex]a \in A[/tex] is an upper bound of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordered set [tex](A, <)[/tex] if [tex]x < a[/tex] for all [tex]a \in B[/tex].

[tex]a \in A[/tex] is called a supremum of [tex]B[/tex] in [tex](A, <)[/tex] if it is the least element of the set of all upper bounds of [tex]B[/tex] in [tex](A, <)[/tex].

[tex]a \in A[/tex] is a lower bound of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordered set [tex](A, <)[/tex] if [tex]a < x[/tex] for all [tex]x \in B[/tex].

[tex]a \in A[/tex] is called an infimum of [tex]B[/tex] in [tex](A, <)[/tex] if it is the greatest element of the set of all lower bounds of [tex]B[/tex] in [tex](A, <)[/tex].

Let [tex]a, b \in A[/tex], and let [tex]<[/tex] be an ordering of [tex]A[/tex]. We say that [tex]a[/tex] and [tex]b[/tex] are comparable in the ordering [tex]<[/tex] if [tex]a < b[/tex] or [tex]b < a[/tex]. We say that [tex]a[/tex] and [tex]b[/tex] are incomparable if they are not comparable (i.e., if [tex]a \neq b[/tex] and neither [tex]a < b[/tex] nor [tex]b < a[/tex] .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hmb said:

[tex]b \in B[/tex] is the greatest element of [tex]B[/tex] in the ordering [tex]<[/tex] if, for every [tex]x \in B[/tex] and [tex]x \neq b[/tex], [tex]x < b[/tex]?


This is correct.
 
Great, thank you for your help. I will take it that the corresponding definition of "least element" is correct as well then.

Thanks again.