Proofs of the four type of intervals

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the classification of bounded intervals in real numbers, specifically verifying that a bounded interval must be one of four types: open, closed, or half-open intervals. Participants are exploring the definitions and properties of these intervals.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the definitions of bounded intervals and the implications of including or excluding endpoints. There is discussion about whether to verify the inclusion of endpoints in the interval and how to approach proving the types of intervals.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants sharing their interpretations and clarifying the requirements of the problem. Some have suggested that the task may not require a rigorous proof, while others are considering the implications of completeness in relation to the problem.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing exploration of the definitions of supremum and infimum, as well as the relevance of these concepts to the types of intervals being discussed. Participants are also reflecting on the nature of the problem and the expectations set by the wording "verify that."

Kernul
Messages
211
Reaction score
7

Homework Statement


Verify that if an interval is bounded it must be one of the four following types: ##(a, b)##, ##[a, b]##, ##(a, b]##, or ##[a, b)##.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I don't quite get what I should actually prove here.
Do I have to see if, for ##A \subseteq S##, we have ##\forall x \in S, a < x < b##, with ##a## and ##b## being the lower and upper bound of ##A##? (this is for the first type ##(a, b)##)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Kernul said:

Homework Statement


Verify that if an interval is bounded it must be one of the four following types: ##(a, b)##, ##[a, b]##, ##(a, b]##, or ##[a, b)##.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I don't quite get what I should actually prove here.
Do I have to see if, for ##A \subseteq S##, we have ##\forall x \in S, a < x < b##, with ##a## and ##b## being the lower and upper bound of ##A##? (this is for the first type ##(a, b)##)
How does your book define "bounded interval"?

For an interval of finite length, each endpoint either is or is not included in the interval.
 
Mark44 said:
How does your book define "bounded interval"?

For an interval of finite length, each endpoint either is or is not included in the interval.
The book says "A given subset of R, and in particular an interval, is called bounded if it has both an upper and lower bound."
So I have to see if the endpoints ##a## and ##b## are the lower and the upper bound of the interval?
 
Kernul said:
The book says "A given subset of R, and in particular an interval, is called bounded if it has both an upper and lower bound."
So I have to see if the endpoints ##a## and ##b## are the lower and the upper bound of the interval?
You can assume that a is the lower bound and b is the upper bound. Now, is a included in the interval or is it not included? Is b included in the interval or is it not included? How many different interval types are we talking about here?
 
What is an interval?
 
Mark44 said:
You can assume that a is the lower bound and b is the upper bound. Now, is a included in the interval or is it not included? Is b included in the interval or is it not included? How many different interval types are we talking about here?
Oh, so I start by assuming they are already a lower and upper bound and then prove if they are included in the interval or not. This means that I have to prove if the inequalities are ##<## or ##\leq##.
The types are 4, right? Unless we just take the first and the third, since the other two are basically the opposite of the others.

fresh_42 said:
What is an interval?
An interval is a subset ##I## of ##\mathbb{R}## where whenever ##a## and ##b## belong to ##I## and ##a \leq c \leq b##, then ##c## also belongs to ##I##.
 
I would start with a given set ##S## that is bounded, i.e. there are numbers ##A## and ##B## such that ##A \leq s \leq B## for all ##s\in S##.
Next I would define supremum and infimum of these bounds, say ##B_S## and ##A_I##, and proceed by what @Mark44 has said: they are either in or out of ##S##. Finally there should be an argument, why there cannot be holes between ##B_S## and ##A_I##, i.e. elements outside of ##S##.
 
I'm not sure that a full-fledged proof is required here.
Kernul said:
Verify that if an interval is bounded...
Because of this wording, I believe "verify that ... " does not require the same rigor as "prove that ..." would need.
fresh_42 said:
Next I would define supremum and infimum of these bounds
Posting in the Precalc section, the OP might not be familiar with these terms.
 
fresh_42 said:
I would start with a given set ##S## that is bounded, i.e. there are numbers ##A## and ##B## such that ##A \leq s \leq B## for all ##s\in S##.
Next I would define supremum and infimum of these bounds, say ##B_S## and ##A_I##, and proceed by what @Mark44 has said: they are either in or out of ##S##. Finally there should be an argument, why there cannot be holes between ##B_S## and ##A_I##, i.e. elements outside of ##S##.
I get it. So I would find out if ##B_S## and ##A_I## are in or out of this set ##S##.
The argument you're talking about is the axiom of completeness, right?

Mark44 said:
I'm not sure that a full-fledged proof is required here.

Because of this wording, I believe "verify that ... " does not require the same rigor as "prove that ..." would need.
Posting in the Precalc section, the OP might not be familiar with these terms.
So, what should I do when it says "verify that"? Simply see if they are in the interval or not?
Supremum and infimum are, respectively, the least upper bound and the greatest lower bound, right?
 
  • #10
Kernul said:
I get it. So I would find out if ##B_S## and ##A_I## are in or out of this set ##S##.
The argument you're talking about is the axiom of completeness, right?
I'm not sure, if we really needed completeness, because I think, it should work for rational numbers as well: the left and right points of an interval are either in our out. But I might have overlooked a loophole for there are some really nasty sets out there. ##B_S## is simply the lowest upper bound of all possible and ##A_I## the largest lower bound of all possible. Completeness makes it easy, yes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kernul
  • #11
Kernul said:
I get it. So I would find out if ##B_S## and ##A_I## are in or out of this set ##S##.
The argument you're talking about is the axiom of completeness, right?
IMO, not needed for this problem.
Kernul said:
So, what should I do when it says "verify that"? Simply see if they are in the interval or not?
"they" being the endpoints -- how many ways can you specify an interval of finite length (i.e., a bounded interval) where the two endpoints either are or are not include? I believe that's all this problem is asking for.
Kernul said:
Supremum and infimum are, respectively, the least upper bound and the greatest lower bound, right?
 
  • #12
Mark44 said:
"they" being the endpoints -- how many ways can you specify an interval of finite length (i.e., a bounded interval) where the two endpoints either are or are not include? I believe that's all this problem is asking for.
By saying that the endpoints are equal or greater than the lower bound and equal or lower than the upper bound.
Let's say ##a, b## are the endpoints. The least upper bound is ##L## and the greatest lower bound is ##l##. Then I should have ##a \geq l## and ##b \leq L##. Am I right?
 
  • #13
Kernul said:
By saying that the endpoints are equal or greater than the lower bound and equal or lower than the upper bound.
Let's say ##a, b## are the endpoints. The least upper bound is ##L## and the greatest lower bound is ##l##. Then I should have ##a \geq l## and ##b \leq L##. Am I right?
No, that's not at all what I am saying, which has nothing to do with least upper bounds or greatest lower bounds. If you have an interval, is the left endpoint included? Yes or no?
Is the right endpoint included? Yes or no?
The yes/no answers determine four kinds of intervals.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kernul
  • #14
Mark44 said:
No, that's not at all what I am saying, which has nothing to do with least upper bounds or greatest lower bounds. If you have an interval, is the left endpoint included? Yes or no?
Is the right endpoint included? Yes or no?
The yes/no answers determine four kinds of intervals.
Oh. So it's really just that.
Sorry, I think I was trying to do something so simple in a complicated way.
Thank you.
 

Similar threads

Questions about proof of upper and lower bound theorem for polynomials
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Addition problem in Serge Lang Basic Mathematics
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Find the values of a real number ##a## for an inequality to hold
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Upper & Lower Bounds Real Zeros-Polynomial Division, Proofs?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
An inequality involving ##x## on both sides: ##\sqrt{x+2}\ge x##
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
High School Topological neigborhoods that are not intervals in the real line?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Interval notation of function's domain question
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Is Proof of A Subset of Union of Family Valid?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
A formula involving the sum of cosines of the angles of a triangle
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Solving an inequality involving absolute values
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K