Proving c+1 is an Upper Bound of S with Completeness Axiom

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that \(c + 1\) is an upper bound for the set \(S = \{x | x \in \mathbb{R}, x \ge 0, x^2 < c\}\) using the Completeness Axiom. Participants clarify that if \(c < 1\), then \(1 + c\) serves as an upper bound, while if \(c > 1\), \(c + 1\) is confirmed as an upper bound. The logic hinges on the relationship between \(x^2\) and \(c\), emphasizing that an upper bound for \(x^2\) does not automatically imply an upper bound for \(x\). A proof by contradiction is suggested to solidify the argument.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Completeness Axiom in real analysis
  • Familiarity with Field Axioms and their implications
  • Knowledge of inequalities and their properties
  • Basic concepts of upper and lower bounds in set theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Completeness Axiom in detail to understand its applications
  • Learn about proof techniques, particularly proof by contradiction
  • Explore the properties of upper and lower bounds in real analysis
  • Investigate the implications of the Field Axioms on real numbers
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, particularly those studying real analysis, educators teaching foundational concepts in calculus, and anyone interested in the logical structure of mathematical proofs.

Päällikkö
Homework Helper
Messages
516
Reaction score
11
Let
S = \{x | x \in \mathbb{R}, x \ge 0, x^2 &lt; c\}

Show that c + 1 is an upper bound for S and therefore, by the Completeness Axiom, S has a least upper bound that we denote by b.

Pretty much the only tools I've got are the Field Axioms.
I think I'm supposed to do something like:
x2 \ge 0. Thus c > 0.
x2 < c < c + 1

Thus c + 1 is an upper bound.

By the Completeness axiom, S has a least upper bound that we denote by b.

QEDIt can't be just this, can it? I'm totally lost in maths, these things were dealt with ages ago and I still can't quite grasp the logic.

The part "Thus c + 1 is an upper bound" is where I think my logic fails. If this was the way (which I think is not the case) to prove c + 1 was an upper bound, couldn't we just have concluded that c is an upper bound, and thus b exists?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Remember that c is NOT an upper bound of S if c<1!

But in the case of c<1, you'll get that x<1<1+c, i.e, 1+c is an upper bound for S

If c>1, then x&lt;\sqrt{c}&lt;c&lt;c+1 and thus, c+1 is an upper bound for S.
 
Päällikkö said:
Let
S = \{x | x \in \mathbb{R}, x \ge 0, x^2 &lt; c\}

Show that c + 1 is an upper bound for S and therefore, by the Completeness Axiom, S has a least upper bound that we denote by b.

Pretty much the only tools I've got are the Field Axioms.
I think I'm supposed to do something like:
x2 \ge 0. Thus c > 0.
x2 < c < c + 1

Thus c + 1 is an upper bound.

No, you just proved that c+ 1 is larger than x2, not x.
Since, for some x, x2< x, it does not follow that an upper bound on x2 is an upper bound on x.

Try a proof by contradiction. Suppose c+ 1 is NOT an upper bound on S. That is, suppose there is x in S such that x> c+ 1. Now compare
x2 and c.
 
arildno said:
Remember that c is NOT an upper bound of S if c<1!
But in the case of c<1, you'll get that x<1<1+c, i.e, 1+c is an upper bound for S
If c>1, then x&lt;\sqrt{c}&lt;c&lt;c+1 and thus, c+1 is an upper bound for S.
I don't think I can do this, as I have yet to prove that there exists a c, so that x2 = c.

How's this:
x2 < c < (c+1)2
Thus x < c+1

Or by contradiction, maybe:
x > c+1
{ x2 > (c+1)2
{ x2 < c
(c+1)2 > c, so x > c+1 cannot hold.

In an unassisted problem, how do I come up with the upper bound (like the c+1 here)? Just make one up?
 
c is either less than one, equal to one, or greater than 1.
You can break up your proof in special cases.
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
12K
Replies
31
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K