Proving Closure of Set of Operators w/ Property P Under Addition

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around how to prove that a set of operators with a specific property P is closed under addition. Participants explore techniques and concepts related to this proof, considering the implications of the set being infinite.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests hints or suggestions for proving closure under addition for operators with property P.
  • Another participant notes that the approach depends on the specific set of operators and the nature of property P, suggesting that one could show that the sum of two operators satisfies property P.
  • A third participant expresses that the previous suggestion is too general and seeks more specific techniques for the proof.
  • A fourth participant comments on the generality of the original question, implying that all techniques for proving closure relate to the broader definition of closure in mathematics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as there are multiple competing views on the specificity and applicability of techniques for proving closure under addition.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the generality of the question and the need for more specific information regarding the operators and property P to provide a focused approach to the proof.

Crot
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Could you please give me a hint on how to show that a set of operators with a property P is closed under addition? In other words, how one could prove that a sum of any two operators from the set still possesses this property P. The set is assumed to be infinite.

Any references, comments, suggestions, etc. will be kindly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


It depends on the set of operators and on P.

One general concept: Take an arbitrary sum of two operators, show that the sum is an operator which satisfies P.
 


Thank you for your answer. But, this concept is really too general.
Are there any other techniques?
 


Your question is extremely general. Just one step more general would be "how do you prove a mathematical statement".

All techniques are some sort of this proof, as it is the definition of "closed".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K