Need someone to verify my logic

  • Thread starter Thread starter quasar_4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logic
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding the supremum and infimum of two sets defined by the functions |x|/(1+|x|) for all real numbers x and x/(1+x) for x greater than -1. The supremum of the first set is established as 1, with an infimum of 0, which is also its minimum element. The second set does not share the same properties due to the restriction on x, leading to the conclusion that it does not have a lower bound, as values can approach negative infinity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of supremum and infimum definitions
  • Familiarity with the Order Axioms and Field Axioms for real numbers
  • Basic knowledge of limits and continuity in real analysis
  • Ability to manipulate and analyze rational functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of supremum and infimum in real analysis
  • Learn about the behavior of rational functions near their boundaries
  • Explore the concept of limits and how they apply to sets
  • Investigate the implications of restrictions on domains in function analysis
USEFUL FOR

Students in real analysis, mathematicians exploring set theory, and anyone interested in understanding the properties of functions and their limits.

quasar_4
Messages
273
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Find the supremum and infimum of the following sets and test whether these sets have a maximum or minimum:

(a) { |x|/(1+|x|) s.t. x is in R}

(b) { x/ (1+x) s.t. x > -1}


Homework Equations



Order Axioms and Field Axioms for the real numbers; infimum and supremum definitions; min and max definitions.

The Attempt at a Solution



I just don't see why these aren't effectively the same in terms of their supremums and infimums, min and max. Since |x|> 0 for nonzero x, |x| will always be positive, so this ratio will always be positive. Furthermore, it follows immediately that |x| < 1 + |x| for the same reason. Since the denominator is always bigger, the ratio is always less than 1. So I would argue that the supremum of (a) is 1. Now since we can include any x in R, the set also contains 0, and none of these can ever be less than 0. So 0 should be the infimum and serve as the minimum element of the set (since it is contained in the set).

Now I can see how (b) would differ for all x in R, but we are now restricting x > -1, i.e.,
x = 0, ... So it would seem that we have the exact same set - no negative x, the ratio is always less than 1, etc. So wouldn't this be exactly the same? What am I missing, if not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would think the are very obviously NOT the same. If x= -1.00001, what is x/(x+ 1)?
 
oh yeah, I guess there are a bunch of negative reals between -1 and 0... wow that should have been obvious. I knew I was missing something simple. It always seems to be the case for me in analysis...

since we could go "closer and closer" each time to -1, does that mean that this set doesn't have a lower bound? I mean, if you put in something like -0.99, then we get -0.99/(1-0.99) = -99, but then we could try x= -0.9999 and get something even smaller, and then we could keep going forever.
I'm sorry if it's trivial.. I'm pretty dumb when it comes to this stuff.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
8K