Let S={2−(1/n) :n∈N}. Prove that sup S=2.

  • Thread starter Thread starter amanda_ou812
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving that the supremum of the set S={2−(1/n) :n∈N} is 2. Participants emphasize the need to establish that 2 is an upper bound for S, as well as to demonstrate that it is the least upper bound. A proof by contradiction is suggested, where one assumes an upper bound less than 2 and shows that for any epsilon > 0, there exists an element in S that exceeds this bound. The conclusion is that 2 is indeed the supremum of the set S.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of supremum and infimum concepts in real analysis
  • Familiarity with sequences and limits
  • Knowledge of epsilon-delta definitions in mathematical proofs
  • Experience with proof by contradiction techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of supremum and infimum in real analysis
  • Learn about sequences and their convergence in mathematical analysis
  • Explore epsilon-delta definitions and their applications in proofs
  • Practice proof by contradiction with various mathematical statements
USEFUL FOR

Students of real analysis, mathematics educators, and anyone looking to strengthen their understanding of supremum concepts and proof techniques.

amanda_ou812
Messages
48
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Let S={2−(1/n) :n∈N}.Prove that sup S=2.

Homework Equations


I have a hard time proving sups and all the examples that I have do not ask you to prove it to an actual number

I have started something but do not know how to complete it.

The Attempt at a Solution


Let b=sup S. The s<= b for all s in S. So b is an upper bound for S. (Next, I know that I need to prove that b is the least upper bound by proving that something else cannot be the least upper bound. But, how do I get the 2 into the proof?) Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try proof by contradiction. Assume that there exists an upper bound less than 2.
 
To show that b is the least upper bound, show that: given any epsilon > 0, there is an element s in the sequence S such that b - epsilon < s.
 
Both of those suggestions assume you have already proved that 2 is an upper bound for the sequence. That is, of course, obvious- for any n> 0, 1/n> 0, -1/n< 0 so 2- 1/n< 2.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K