I How Do Supremum and Infimum Relate When s < t for All s in S and t in T?

wang jia le
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Let S and T be subsets of R such that s < t for each s ∈ S and each t ∈ T. Prove carefully that sup S ≤ inf T.

Attempt:

I start by using the definition for supremum and infinum, and let sup(S)= a and inf(T)= b

i know that a> s and b< t for all s and t. How do i continue? , do i prove it directly starting from s< t or will it be easier to use proof by contradiction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
wang jia le said:
Let S and T be subsets of R such that s < t for each s ∈ S and each t ∈ T. Prove carefully that sup S ≤ inf T.

Attempt:

I start by using the definition for supremum and infinum, and let sup(S)= a and inf(T)= b

i know that a> s and b< t for all s and t. How do i continue? , do i prove it directly starting from s< t or will it be easier to use proof by contradiction?

Try contradiction.
 
Usually the definition of upper/lower bound would only imply s \leq \sup(S) for all s \in S and \inf(T) \leq t for all t \in T. In other words, the upper and lower bounds can be in the set themselves. The stated result should hold regardless though.

Just start with \inf(T) \lt \sup(S) and go from there. There must be an s \in S such that \inf(T) \lt s ( otherwise \inf(T) would be an upper bound of S that's less than \sup(S) ). But then, for similar reasons, there must be a t \in T such that t \lt s ( fill in the details ).
 
Last edited:
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Back
Top