MHB How can we prove the inequality for the supremum and infimum of f*g and f*g?

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the inequality for the supremum and infimum of the product of two functions, f and g. The user seeks assistance with Theorem 6.2.8 from Duistermaat and Kolk's work, specifically regarding Riemann integrable functions with compact support. They reference definitions of supremum and infimum from Joseph L. Taylor's book, as they cannot find the original definitions in D&K. A participant outlines a proof strategy, demonstrating that the supremum of the product fg is less than or equal to the product of the supremums of f and g, and similarly for the infimum, which helps the original poster in formulating their proof. This exchange highlights collaborative problem-solving in mathematical analysis.
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading J. J. Duistermaat and J. A. C. Kolk: Multidimensional Analysis Vol.II Chapter 6: Integration ...

I need help with the proof of Theorem 6.2.8 Part (iii) ...The Definition of Riemann integrable functions with compact support and Theorem 6.2.8 and a brief indication of its proof reads as follows:
D&K ... Defn 6.2.7 and Theorem 6.2.8 .png

D&K ... Defn 6.2.7 and Theorem 6.2.8  ... PART II .png
The definition of supremum and infimum are given in the following text from D&K Vol. I ...
D&K ... Theorem 1.6.1 including Defn of Sup A .png

I cannot locate D&K's definition of sup and inf for functions so I am taking the definition from Joseph L. Taylor's book, "Foundations of Analysis".

Taylor's definition reads as follows:

If [math]f: X \to \mathbb{R}[/math] is a real-valued function and [math] A \subset X [/math] ... ... ...

... then we define ..

[math] \text{ sup}_B = \text{sup} \{ f(x) \ | \ x \in B \} [/math]

and

[math] \text{ inf}_B = \text{inf} \{ f(x) \ | \ x \in B \} [/math]
I need help to formulate a detailed, formal and rigorous proof that [math] \text{ sup}_B \ fg - \text{ inf}_B \ fg \leq \text{ sup}_B \ f \text{ sup}_B \ g \ - \ \text{ inf}_B \ f \text{ inf}_B \ g [/math]I have been unable to make a meaningful start on this proof ...Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
For every $x\in B$, $f(x) \leqslant \sup_B f$ and $g(x) \leqslant \sup_B g$. Therefore $(fg)(x) = f(x)g(x) \leqslant \sup_B f \sup_B g$. Now take the sup over $B$ to get $\sup_B fg \leqslant \sup_B f \sup_B g$. A similar argument shows that $\inf_B fg \geqslant \inf_B f \inf_B g$ and so $-\inf_B fg \leqslant -\inf_B f \inf_B g$.
 
Thanks Opalg …

… very much appreciate your help …

Just reflecting on what you have written …

Peter
 
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K