Prove x belongs to the set or is an accumulation point.

  • Thread starter Thread starter jrsweet
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Point Set
jrsweet
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let S be a nonempty set of real numbers bounded from above and let x=supS. Prove x either belongs to the set or is an accumulation point of S.


Homework Equations


x is an accumulation point of S iff each neighborhood of x contains a member of S different from x. That is, every neighborhood of x contains infinitely many points of S.


The Attempt at a Solution


So, do I need to prove that if x is not a member of S, then it is an accumulation point? I am a little confused about how to go about this.

So, there would obviously be two possibilities. Either x is a member of S, or it is not. If not, we need to prove x is an accumulation point. Wouldn't we need to know that S is infinite though? Is so, wouldn't it be much like the proof of the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem?

Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So, I might have got it...

I tried it by contradiction.
Assume x is not a member of S and assume it is not an accumulation point of S. If there is a neighborhood (x - epsilon, x + epsilon) containing x that does not have a point of S, then (x - epsilon) is an upper bound of S that's less than x. This contradicts x being the LEAST upper bound of S. Therefore, we have found a contradiction and x is indeed an accumulation point of S.

Just a thought. Let me know if it's right!
 
jrsweet said:
So, I might have got it...

I tried it by contradiction.
Assume x is not a member of S and assume it is not an accumulation point of S. If there is a neighborhood (x - epsilon, x + epsilon) containing x that does not have a point of S, then (x - epsilon) is an upper bound of S that's less than x. This contradicts x being the LEAST upper bound of S. Therefore, we have found a contradiction and x is indeed an accumulation point of S.

Just a thought. Let me know if it's right!

That's it exactly.
 
Thanks Dick! :)
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top