Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Least upper bpunds

  1. Jun 19, 2009 #1
    Hallo,

    i read in Spivak that for every upper bounded non empty sets A and B,

    sup(A+B)=sup(A)+sup(B). but later he wrote other prove which claim that

    for every function f and g in a close interval exist sup(f+g)<=sup(f)+sup(g)

    and not necessarily sup(f+g)<=sup(f)+sup(g). how does it make sense?

    Thanks

    Omri
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 19, 2009 #2
    A+B is the set of all possible sums between elements of A and elements of B.
    Unfortunately, the set pertaining to the terms (f+g) is defined pointwise; it only contains elements of the form (f+g)(x), so suppose f and g are defined on [a, b] and sup(f) occurs at a and nowhere else in the interval and sup(g) occurs at b and nowhere else in the interval. Then sup(f+g) never equals sup(f) + sup(g).
    If, on the other hand, we were talking about all possible sums of elements in the range of f with elements in the range of g, then of course sup(f) + sup(g) would be one of those elements.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Least upper bpunds
  1. Least upper bound (Replies: 5)

  2. Least upper bound axiom (Replies: 18)

Loading...