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

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves the set S defined as S={2−(1/n) :n∈N} and requires proving that the supremum of S is equal to 2. The subject area pertains to real analysis, specifically the concept of supremum and upper bounds.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various approaches to proving that 2 is the least upper bound for the set S. Suggestions include proof by contradiction and demonstrating that for any epsilon > 0, there exists an element in S that is greater than b - epsilon.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants offering different strategies for proving the supremum. There is recognition that establishing 2 as an upper bound is a necessary step, and some participants are questioning how to incorporate this into their proofs.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of proving supremum in this context, particularly when examples typically do not require proving to a specific number. There is an implied need for clarity on the definitions and properties of upper bounds.

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
2K
  • · 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