Properties of 'less than" and "less than or equals"

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Properties
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Theorem 1.2.9 from Ethan D. Bloch's "The Real Numbers and Real Analysis," specifically addressing the implications of the relationships between the inequalities "less than" (##a < b##) and "less than or equal to" (##a = b##). Participants clarify that if ##a < b## and ##a = b##, then it leads to a contradiction with the theorem's principles, particularly Part (1) which states that no number is less than itself (##a < a##). The conversation emphasizes the logical structure of the theorem and the importance of understanding the definitions of the inequalities involved.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of real number properties and inequalities
  • Familiarity with Theorem 1.2.9 from "The Real Numbers and Real Analysis"
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical logic and proof techniques
  • Concept of transitive relations in mathematics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of transitive relations in inequalities
  • Review the definitions and properties of "less than" and "less than or equal to" in real analysis
  • Examine other theorems in "The Real Numbers and Real Analysis" for deeper insights
  • Practice constructing proofs involving inequalities and their properties
USEFUL FOR

Students of real analysis, mathematicians, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of inequalities and their logical implications in mathematical proofs.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Ethan D. Bloch's book: The Real Numbers and Real Analysis ...

I am currently focused on Chapter 1: Construction of the Real Numbers ...

I need help/clarification with an aspect of Theorem 1.2.9 (6) ...

Theorem 1.2.9 reads as follows:
?temp_hash=cd0435e2e2ade0b058500f4b7df2618f.png

?temp_hash=cd0435e2e2ade0b058500f4b7df2618f.png


In the above proof of (6) we read the following:

" ... ... Suppose that ##a \lt b## and ##a = b##. It then follows from Part (3) of this theorem that ##a \lt a## ... ... "Can someone please explain how Part (3) of Theorem 1.2.9 leads to the statement that ##a \lt b## and ##a = b \Longrightarrow a \lt a## ... ...

... ... ...

Further ... why can't we argue this way ...

... because ##a = b## we can replace ##b## by ##a## in ##a \lt b## giving ##a \lt a## ... which contradicts Part (1) of the theorem ...
Hope someone can help ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Bloch - 1 - Theorem 1.2.9 (6) - PART 1 ... ....png
    Bloch - 1 - Theorem 1.2.9 (6) - PART 1 ... ....png
    33.6 KB · Views: 564
  • Bloch - 2 - Theorem 1.2.9 (6) - PART 2 ... ....png
    Bloch - 2 - Theorem 1.2.9 (6) - PART 2 ... ....png
    44.9 KB · Views: 563
Physics news on Phys.org
According to part(3) of theorem 1.2.9
for all a,b,c ∈ ℕ: if a<b and b<=c then a<c.
b = c implies b<=c , and you can substitute a for c.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Thanks for the post, willem2 ...

Appreciate your help ...

Peter
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K