Least upper bound analysis proof

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving properties of bounded sets, specifically focusing on two nonempty sets A and B, where A is bounded above and B is a subset of A. The participants are tasked with demonstrating that B is also bounded above and that the least upper bound of B is less than or equal to that of A.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of set containment and boundedness, questioning the sufficiency of their arguments. They discuss the definitions of upper bounds and least upper bounds, and some suggest a more mathematical phrasing of the arguments presented.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the reasoning behind the relationships between the sets A and B. Some participants have offered clarifications and suggestions for improvement, particularly regarding the expression of arguments and the potential use of indirect reasoning. The discussion is productive, with participants actively engaging in refining their understanding.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the completeness of their arguments and the clarity of their mathematical expressions. There is a noted desire for more detailed reasoning in the proofs being constructed.

dancergirlie
Messages
194
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Assume that A and B are nonempty sets, that A is bounded above, and that B is contained in A. Prove that B is bounded above and that the least upper bound of B is less than or equal to the least upper bound of A.

Homework Equations



Definition: Least Upper bound: Let s be the least upper bound then:
1)s is an upper bound (a set A contained in R is bounded above if there exists an element b in R such that a is less than or equal to b for all elements a in A.)
2)if b is any upper bound of A then s is less than or equal to b.

The Attempt at a Solution


a
Assume A and B are nonempty sets and that A is bounded above. Meaning, A is contained in R and that there exists an element c in R so that c is greater than or equal to a, for all a in A.
Now assume that B is contained in A, meaning every element in B is also an element of A. Since A has an upper bound (c) and every element of B is also an element of A, that means c is also an upper bound for for B. Therefore B is bounded above
**not sure if this is a good argument or not**

If B is contained in A that means, that there are no element in B that are greater than any of the elements in A. Therefore, the least upper bound of B must be less than or equal to the least upper bound of A.

**this seems rather short, I feel like i need to say more**


Any help/tips would be appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dancergirlie said:

Homework Statement



Assume that A and B are nonempty sets, that A is bounded above, and that B is contained in A. Prove that B is bounded above and that the least upper bound of B is less than or equal to the least upper bound of A.

Homework Equations



Definition: Least Upper bound: Let s be the least upper bound then:
1)s is an upper bound (a set A contained in R is bounded above if there exists an element b in R such that a is less than or equal to b for all elements a in A.)
2)if b is any upper bound of A then s is less than or equal to b.

The Attempt at a Solution


a
Assume A and B are nonempty sets and that A is bounded above. Meaning, A is contained in R and that there exists an element c in R so that c is greater than or equal to a, for all a in A.
Now assume that B is contained in A, meaning every element in B is also an element of A. Since A has an upper bound (c) and every element of B is also an element of A, that means c is also an upper bound for for B. Therefore B is bounded above
**not sure if this is a good argument or not**

If B is contained in A that means, that there are no element in B that are greater than any of the elements in A. Therefore, the least upper bound of B must be less than or equal to the least upper bound of A.

**this seems rather short, I feel like i need to say more**


Any help/tips would be appreciated!

Your first paragraph is correct but I would phrase it more mathematically. You are given:

B \subset A \subset R.

c is an upper bound for A means that for all a \in A, a \leq c.

Now suppose b \in B. Then b \in A since B \subset A. Therefore b <= c since c is an upper bound for A. Hence c is an upper bound for B.

Notice that I haven't changed your argument at all, just expressed it more mathematically.

For the second part, your statement "If B is contained in A that means, that there are no element in B that are greater than any of the elements in A" is very imprecise. You might have better luck with an indirect argument. Start by assuming by way of contradiction that the least upper bound of B is greater than that of A and see what goes wrong.
 
You don't need an indirect argument for the second part. What you've essentially shown in the first part is that any upper bound for A is going to be an upper bound for B. In particular, the least upper bound of A is an upper bound of A and hence an upper bound for B. Now what can you say about the least upper bound for B?
 
Let \alpha be the least upper bound for A. Then \alpha is an upper bound for A. Since B is a subset of A, \alpha is an upper bound for B. Therefore, the least upper bound for B is ...

That's even shorter!
 
thanks for the help everyone, it makes a lot more sense now :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K