Proof of $A\subseteq B\implies\sup A\le\sup B$

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter alexmahone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The proof demonstrates that if \( A \subseteq B \), then \( \sup A \leq \sup B \). By definition, every element \( x \) in set \( A \) is also in set \( B \), which establishes that \( \sup B \) serves as an upper bound for \( A \). Since \( \sup A \) is defined as the least upper bound of \( A \), it follows that \( \sup A \) must be less than or equal to \( \sup B \). Additionally, the discussion emphasizes the necessity of the Axiom of Completeness and specifies that both sets \( A \) and \( B \) must be non-empty subsets of \( \mathbb{R} \) that are bounded above for the proof to hold.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of set theory, specifically the definition of subsets.
  • Knowledge of supremum and least upper bound concepts in real analysis.
  • Familiarity with the Axiom of Completeness in real numbers.
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical notation and logic.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Axiom of Completeness in detail and its implications in real analysis.
  • Explore proofs involving supremum and infimum in various contexts.
  • Learn about bounded sets and their properties in real number theory.
  • Investigate the relationship between subsets and their bounds in mathematical analysis.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in real analysis, particularly those studying properties of sets and bounds in mathematical proofs.

alexmahone
Messages
303
Reaction score
0
Prove: $A\subseteq B\implies\sup A\le\sup B$

---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:03 PM ----------

By the definition of subset,

$x\in A\implies x\in B$

$\sup B$ is an upper bound of $B$.

$x\in B\implies x\le\sup B$

So, $x\in A\implies x\le\sup B$

ie $\sup B$ is an upper bound of $A$.

But $\sup A$ is the least upper bound of $A$.

So, $\sup A\le\sup B$

-----------------------------------------------------

Is the above proof ok?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Alexmahone said:
Prove: $A\subseteq B\implies\sup A\le\sup B$

---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:03 PM ----------

By the definition of subset,

$x\in A\implies x\in B$

$\sup B$ is an upper bound of $B$.

$x\in B\implies x\le\sup B$

So, $x\in A\implies x\le\sup B$

ie $\sup B$ is an upper bound of $A$.

But $\sup A$ is the least upper bound of $A$.

So, $\sup A\le\sup B$

-----------------------------------------------------

Is the above proof ok?
Yes, but above your prove, say a word about the Axiom of completeness.
 
this looks fine to me. But the problem should state that A and B are non empty subsets of \( \mathbb{R}\) that are bounded above. Only in that case , it makes sense to talk about supremum's...

Edit: it seems somebody already said what I wanted to...hmm
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K