1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Proving on the completeness theorem of real number

  1. Aug 6, 2011 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
    Let A be a non empty subset of R that is bounded above

    Set D:={2a|a (belongs to) A}
    Is it necessarily true that the sup D = 2 sup A? Either prove or provide a counterexample.


    2. Relevant equations
    The completeness axiom


    3. The attempt at a solution
    I am seriously clueless on how to approach... but I still tried something
    Let sup D = y and sup A = x
    d=2a; d<=y; a<=x

    or can I say choose a as the largest value in A, so 2a=d is the largest value in D. Since both are the upper bound for each set and for all upper bound and real number, they are the smallest. so, d is sup D and a is sup A.
    Therefore, d=2a => sup D = 2 sup A


    But these method seems a bit weird...
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 6, 2011 #2

    HallsofIvy

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    No, you can't say "choose a as the largest value in A". The whole point of "sup" is that the set may not have a largest value. And you can't say "Let sup D = y and sup A = x d=2a; d<=y; a<=x" because you didn't say what "a" was.

    "sup" has two properties- it is an upper bound (so there are no member of the set larger than the sup) and there is no smaller upper bound (so there are members of the set within any "[itex]epsilon[/itex]" distance of the sup.

    Let S be the sup of set A. We can prove that 2S is an upper bound for 2A by contradiction:
    suppose there exist b in 2A such that b> 2S. But b= 2a for some a in A. That says 2a> 2S so that a> S which contradicts the fact that S is an upper bound for A.

    Similarly, you can prove by contradiction that there is no upper bound less than 2S.
     
  4. Aug 6, 2011 #3
    But how do we relate this to the prove of sup D = 2 sup A?

    Does 2S means D?

    Sorry, I'm a bit confused now
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Proving on the completeness theorem of real number
Loading...