How Do Dedekind Cuts Prove Convergence of Rational Sequences?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jgens
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sequences
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving that every non-decreasing, bounded sequence of rational numbers converges to a real number using Dedekind cuts. The set α is defined as α = {x ∈ ℚ: x < a_n for n ∈ ℕ}, and the proof verifies that α satisfies the four properties required to be a real number. Key points include demonstrating that α is non-empty, not equal to ℚ, and contains no greatest element. The final goal is to articulate that α represents the limit of the converging sequence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Dedekind cuts in real analysis
  • Familiarity with sequences and convergence in mathematics
  • Knowledge of rational numbers and their properties
  • Basic proof techniques in mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Dedekind cuts in detail
  • Learn about the convergence of sequences in real analysis
  • Explore the completeness property of real numbers
  • Investigate epsilon-delta definitions of limits
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, particularly those studying real analysis, as well as educators and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of convergence and real numbers.

jgens
Gold Member
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
50

Homework Statement



Prove that every non-decreasing, bounded sequence of rational numbers converges to some real number using Dedekind cuts.

Homework Equations



A real number is a set [itex]\alpha[/itex], of rational numbers, with the following four properties:
  • If [itex]x \in \alpha[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex] is a rational number with [itex]y < x[/itex], then [itex]y \in \alpha[/itex].
  • [itex]\alpha \neq \emptyset[/itex]
  • [itex]\alpha \neq \mathbb{Q}[/itex]
  • There is no greatest element in [itex]\alpha[/itex]; in other words, if [itex]x \in \alpha[/itex], then there is some [itex]y \in \alpha[/itex] with [itex]y > x[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



This seems to be a straight forward proof, but I can't seem to complete it satisfactorily; any advice and/or suggestions are appreciated. Well, here goes nothing . . .

Let [itex]\{a_n\}[/itex] be a non-decreasing, bounded sequence of rational numbers and define the set [itex]\alpha \subset \mathbb{Q}[/itex] such that [itex]\alpha = \{x \in \mathbb{Q}: x < a_n \;\mathrm{where}\; n \in \mathbb{N}\}[/itex]. Now, to prove that [itex]\alpha[/itex] is a real number, we need only verify that our four conditions hold:
  • Suppose [itex]x\in\alpha[/itex]. Then [itex]x < a_n[/itex] for some [itex]n \in \mathbb{N}[/itex]. Now, let [itex]y < x[/itex], then [itex]y < a_n[/itex] and consequently [itex]y\in\alpha[/itex]
  • Clearly [itex]\alpha \neq \emptyset[/itex]
  • Since [itex]\{a_n\}[/itex] is bounded above, this means that there must be some rational number [itex]x > a_n[/itex] for all [itex]n\in\mathbb{N}[/itex]. Thus [itex]x \notin \alpha[/itex] and consequently [itex]\alpha \neq \mathbb{Q}[/itex]
  • Suppose [itex]x\in\alpha[/itex]. Then, for some [itex]n\in\mathbb{N}[/itex] we have that [itex]x < a_n[/itex]. Since [itex]x,a_n\in\mathbb{Q}[/itex] we know that [itex]\varepsilon = \frac{a_n - x}{2} \in \mathbb{Q}[/itex]. Consequently, [itex]x < x + \varepsilon < a_n[/itex]. Therefore, [itex]\alpha[/itex] contains no greatest element.
Now, I just need to prove that [itex]\alpha[/itex] is the real number that this sequence converges to. Intuitively, it seems like it should be, but how might I articulate an appropriate argument? Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
First show that every n, [itex]\alpha_n< \alpha[/itex]. Then show that for any [itex]epsilon[/itex], there exist n such that [itex]\alpha- \alpha_n< \epsilon[/itex].
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K