Does Scalar Multiplication Preserve the Supremum in Simple Sets?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Seacow1988
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Supremum
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion confirms that for a set S defined as sup {Sn: n>N}, the equality kS = sup{kSn: n>N} holds true when k is any nonnegative scalar. Participants agree that the proof involves demonstrating that S serves as an upper bound and that no lower upper bound exists. This conclusion is established through logical reasoning and basic properties of supremum in mathematical analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of supremum and infimum concepts in real analysis
  • Familiarity with scalar multiplication in mathematical contexts
  • Basic knowledge of upper bounds and their properties
  • Experience with proof techniques in mathematics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of supremum and infimum in real analysis
  • Explore the implications of scalar multiplication on sets and their bounds
  • Learn about upper and lower bounds in mathematical proofs
  • Review examples of supremum preservation under various operations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of real analysis, and anyone interested in the properties of supremum and scalar multiplication in mathematical sets.

Seacow1988
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
If S=sup {Sn: n>N}, is it true that kS= sup{kSn: n>N} where k is any scalar?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Woops. I meant k is any nonnegative scalar.

Thanks!
 
Yes, I think that this is indeed true for nonnegative scalars k. The proof is not so hard: just show that S is an upper bound and that no lower upper bound exists.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K