For any open interval containing limsup s_n, there exists infinitely many s_n .

  • Thread starter Thread starter fmam3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interval
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem concerning the properties of a bounded sequence in real numbers, specifically focusing on the concept of limsup and its relationship with open intervals. The original poster seeks to understand the implications of the statement regarding the existence of infinitely many terms within any open interval that contains the limsup of the sequence.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the significance of using an open interval versus a closed interval in the context of the limsup. Questions arise regarding whether the statement would hold true if a closed interval were used instead.

Discussion Status

Participants have engaged in clarifying the reasoning behind the use of open intervals, with some suggesting that using closed intervals could lead to trivial cases. The discussion appears to be productive, with contributions that deepen the understanding of the problem without reaching a consensus.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing examination of the definitions and implications of open versus closed intervals, particularly in relation to the properties of sequences and their limits. The original poster's inquiry reflects a desire to understand the nuances of these mathematical concepts.

fmam3
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
For any open interval containing limsup s_n, there exists infinitely many s_n...

Hi all! I'm new to this fantastic forum! Please help me with the following problem! Thanks in advance!

Homework Statement


Suppose that the sequence (s_n) is bounded in \mathbb{R}. Prove: Given any open interval containing \limsup s_n, there exists infinitely many n with s_n inside that interval.


Homework Equations


In light of the given statement, what is the issue with "open interval"? That is, does this statement hold (or not hold) if it said "closed interval" instead? And why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A singleton is a closed interval which is not an infinite set, and thus can't contain an infinite set. Every non-singleton real interval contains an open interval, so the theorem holds for this more convoluted object. It is much easier to say open interval.
 
Call your limsup L. The point to saying the interval is open is that you then can find an epsilon such that (L-epsilon,L+epsilon) is contained in the interval. Suppose that subinterval contains only finitely many sn's. Then can L really be the limsup?
 
@Dick
I understand perfectly the (L - \varepsilon, L + \varepsilon) argument --- in fact, that was how I proved the original (unmodified) statement. But thanks for the input :)

@slider142
Ahh... I see, so the only reason of using the phrase "open interval" is to avoid trivial cases where a closed interval is a singleton / contains only one point. Great! Thanks :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K