Inequalities in the real numbers

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around inequalities in the context of Dedekind Cuts and the square root of 2. Participants explore how to derive certain inequalities involving a variable epsilon and a parameter p, while also addressing the properties of Dedekind Cuts without directly referencing the square root of 2.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if ##\epsilon < 1##, then it follows that ##2p+\epsilon < 2p+1##, leading to the inequality ##\epsilon(2p+\epsilon) < \epsilon(2p+1)##.
  • Others argue that given ##\epsilon < \dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}##, it can be shown that ##\epsilon(2p+1) < 2-p^2##.
  • A participant expresses confusion regarding the implications of the inequalities and seeks clarification on how to prove that ##(p+\epsilon)^2 < 2## under the given conditions.
  • Some participants discuss the properties of Dedekind Cuts, particularly focusing on how to demonstrate that a number greater than p can also belong to the cut without directly referencing ##\sqrt{2}##.
  • There are multiple attempts to clarify the algebraic steps needed to show the inequalities hold, with some participants providing partial solutions and others expressing uncertainty about the reasoning.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the initial steps involving the inequalities but exhibit disagreement and confusion regarding the implications and the algebraic proof required to show that ##(p+\epsilon)^2 < 2##. The discussion remains unresolved as participants continue to seek clarification and further explanation.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of the inequalities and the properties of Dedekind Cuts. Some mathematical steps remain unresolved, particularly in demonstrating the implications of the inequalities involving epsilon.

mcastillo356
Gold Member
Messages
666
Reaction score
365
TL;DR
It's so a basic question that I feel shame.
I'm still not sure about this solved reasoning that involves inequalities
How do we get ##\epsilon(2p+\epsilon)<\epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2## from ##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}##?

Answer: As we have ##\epsilon<1##, we've got ##2p+\epsilon<2p+1##; therefore, ## \epsilon(2p+\epsilon)<\epsilon(2p+1) ##;
-as we have ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}##, we also have ##\epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2##. Is the red-coloured argue what I don't understand

Greetings, appreciated PF
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If ##\varepsilon < 1## then ##x+\varepsilon < x+1##. Set ##x=2p##. Then ##2p+\varepsilon <2p+1.## Now if ##a<b## then ##a\cdot \varepsilon < b\cdot \varepsilon ## because ##\varepsilon >0##. Now set ##a=2p+\varepsilon ## and ##b=2p+1## to get ##(2p+\varepsilon )\cdot \varepsilon < (2p+1)\cdot \varepsilon ##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
Fantastic, I never imagined it could be explained in so an easy way.
Thanks, fresh_42!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
Hi, PF, there is something more about this thread: I want to contextualize the question, and, by the way, ask another two questions. I beg you a pardon if this means to change the thread's place.

It's about Dedekind Cuts, concretely ## \sqrt 2 = \{r\in \mathbb Q\mid r<0\}\cup \{r\in \mathbb Q\mid r\geq 0,\ r^2<2\} ##

And the task is to prove ##\alpha=\sqrt 2## is a cut, without mentioning ##\sqrt 2##

1- As ##1^2<2<2^2##, it satisfies ##1\in\alpha## and ##2\in \mathbb Q\setminus\alpha##; so the first property of Dedekind Cuts is satisfied (for example, the proof that ##\alpha\neq \mathbb Q## is this: ##2\notin \alpha##, because it doesn't satisfy neither ##2<0## nor ## 2\geq 0 ## and ##2^2<2##).

2-If ##p\in\alpha## and ##q<p##, or ##q<0##, in which case ##p\in \alpha##, by definition, or ##0\leq q<p##; hence ##p^2<q^2<2##. Therefore, ##q\in \alpha##.
Why is that ##p^2<q^2<2##?

3- If ##p\in\alpha##, alternatively ##p\leq 0##, in which case ##p<1\in\alpha##, or ##p>0##, in which case ##p^2<2##. Let's see what must require a rational number ##\epsilon>0## so that ##p+\epsilon\in \alpha##:

##(p+\epsilon)^2=p^2+2p\epsilon+\epsilon^2<2##

This is equivalent to ##\epsilon(2p+\epsilon)<2-p^2##. If we take ##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}## then
##2(p+\epsilon)<\epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2##, so ##p<q=p+\epsilon\in \alpha##

Why this implication?

Greetings! Hope not to have treated too badly the english.
 
mcastillo356 said:
3- If ##p\in\alpha##, alternatively ##p\leq 0##, in which case ##p<1\in\alpha##, or ##p>0##, in which case ##p^2<2##. Let's see what must require a rational number ##\epsilon>0## so that ##p+\epsilon\in \alpha##:

##(p+\epsilon)^2=p^2+2p\epsilon+\epsilon^2<2##

This is equivalent to ##\epsilon(2p+\epsilon)<2-p^2##. If we take ##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}## then
##2(p+\epsilon)<\epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2##, so ##p<q=p+\epsilon\in \alpha##

Why this implication?

Greetings! Hope not to have treated too badly the english.
I don't understand the bit in red at the end. You have:

##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}##

Now you have to show that, with these bounds on ##\epsilon## we have ##(p + \epsilon)^2 < 2##. I.e. ##p + \epsilon \in \alpha##.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
Hello, PeroK
The target consists in suppose ##p\in \alpha##, this is, we have ##p## that satisfies ##p<0## or ##p\geq 0## and ##p``^2<2## (not mentioning ##\sqrt 2##), and I must find a ##q>p## that satisfies the same (whithout references to ##\sqrt 2##.
All I find in the proof is a dance of ##\epsilon##, ##p##, 0, 1, and 2.
Let's see, I think I understand:
##2(p+\epsilon)<(p+\epsilon)^2<2##: ##2(p+\epsilon)=q\in \alpha##
 
mcastillo356 said:
Hello, PeroK
The target consists in suppose ##p\in \alpha##, this is, we have ##p## that satisfies ##p<0## or ##p\geq 0## and ##p``^2<2## (not mentioning ##\sqrt 2##), and I must find a ##q>p## that satisfies the same (whithout references to ##\sqrt 2##.
All I find in the proof is a dance of ##\epsilon##, ##p##, 0, 1, and 2.
Let's see, I think I understand:
##2(p+\epsilon)<(p+\epsilon)^2<2##: ##2(p+\epsilon)=q\in \alpha##
I don't understand that at all.

You have to show that:

##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1} \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ (p + \epsilon)^2 < 2##

That should be quite simple.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
PS you could check it out for ##p = \frac 7 5##.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
It works, but, how can I prove it algebraically?
 
  • #10
mcastillo356 said:
It works, but, how can I prove it algebraically?
Using algebra! Starting with ##(p + \epsilon)^2 = p^2 + 2p\epsilon + \epsilon^2##
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
  • #11
Ok, processing...
 
  • #12
@mcastillo356, I revised your thread title slightly, changing "inequations" to "inequalities," which is what we call them in English. Inconsistent, but that's English for you.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
  • #13
PeroK said:
You have to show that:

##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1} \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ (p + \epsilon)^2 < 2##

That should be quite simple.

PeroK said:
Using algebra! Starting with ##(p + \epsilon)^2 = p^2 + 2p\epsilon + \epsilon^2##

I know only to prove this:
Dedekind Cuts, third property:
III If ##p\in\alpha## then ##p<r## for some ##r\in \alpha##
For example, the cut ##\sqrt 2 = \{r\in \mathbb Q\mid r\leq 0\}\cup \{r\in \mathbb Q\mid r> 0,\ r^2<2\}##. If ##p\in\alpha##, alternatively ##p\leq 0##, in which case ##p<1\in\alpha##, or ##p>0##, in which case ##p^2<2##. Let's see what must require a rational number ##\epsilon>0## so that ##p+\epsilon\in \alpha##:

##(p+\epsilon)^2=p^2+2p\epsilon+\epsilon^2<2##

This is equivalent to ##\epsilon(2p+\epsilon)<2-p^2##. If we take ##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}## then we've found the proper ##\epsilon##.
Problem solved?

##2(p+\epsilon)<\epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2## would be another way to express the two inequalities that bound ##\epsilon##
 
  • #14
mcastillo356 said:
If we take ##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}## then we've found the proper ##\epsilon##.
Problem solved?
I would still like to see a direct calculation that starts with that ##\epsilon## and shows that ##(p+\epsilon)^2 < 2##.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
  • #15
I will try. I'll answer tomorrow
 
  • #16
Hello, PeroK, PF
##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}\Rightarrow{(p+\epsilon)^2<2}##
##0<\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}##
##\Rightarrow{0<\epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2}##
##\Rightarrow{p^2<2}##
Dedekind Cuts, third property
##\therefore{(p+\epsilon)^2<2}##
:confused:
?
 
  • #17
mcastillo356 said:
Hello, PeroK, PF
##0<\epsilon<1## and ##\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}\Rightarrow{(p+\epsilon)^2<2}##
##0<\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}##
##\Rightarrow{0<\epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2}##
##\Rightarrow{p^2<2}##
Dedekind Cuts, third property
##\therefore{(p+\epsilon)^2<2}##
:confused:
?
We already knew that ##p^2 < 2##. It was ##(p+ \epsilon)^2 < 2## that must be shown.

I gave you the first step previously (which you ignored!): $$(p+\epsilon)^2 = p^2 + 2p\epsilon + \epsilon^2 = p^2 + \epsilon(2p + \epsilon)$$ The second step is: $$p^2 + \epsilon(2p + \epsilon) < p^2 + \epsilon(2p + 1) \ \ (\text{as} \ \ \epsilon <1)$$ Just two steps left for you now!
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
  • #18
Hi, PeroK, PF

$$(p+\epsilon)^2=p^2+2p\epsilon+\epsilon^2=p^2+\epsilon(2p+\epsilon)$$

$$\epsilon<1\Rightarrow p^2+\epsilon(2p+\epsilon)<p^2+\epsilon(2p+1)$$

$$\epsilon<\dfrac{2-p^2}{2p+1}\Rightarrow \epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2$$

$$p^2+\epsilon(2p+\epsilon)<p^2+\epsilon(2p+1)<2-p^2+p^2$$

$$\Rightarrow (p+\epsilon)^2<2\Rightarrow (p+\epsilon)\in \alpha$$

? :confused:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
  • #19
:partytime:
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K