.Proving Supremum of H: f(x)<d, [a,b]

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter solakis1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Supremum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the set H = {x: xε(a,b), f(x)

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that H is bounded above by b and seek to demonstrate that H is non-empty using the intermediate value theorem.
  • One participant questions the validity of using the intermediate value theorem in this context, suggesting that it may not be appropriate to rely on it for proving the existence of H.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the proof provided is valid, stating that H is non-empty and bounded above, thus a supremum must exist by the completeness property.
  • There is a concern raised about the clarity of the original post, with some participants feeling that the intent to prove the intermediate value theorem was not clearly communicated.
  • Some participants express frustration over the misunderstanding regarding the nature of the proof being discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the appropriateness of using the intermediate value theorem in the proof. While some maintain that the proof is valid, others argue that it relies on a theorem that should not be invoked in this context.

Contextual Notes

There is a lack of clarity regarding the initial intent of the original post, which may have contributed to misunderstandings among participants. The discussion reflects varying interpretations of the proof's requirements and the application of theorems.

solakis1
Messages
407
Reaction score
0
Given :

1) f : [a,b] => R

2) f is continuous over [a,b]

3) f(a)<d<f(b)

4) a<b

Then prove that the following,set: H ={x: xε(a,b),f(x)<d} has a supremum
 
Physics news on Phys.org
solakis said:
Given :
1) f : [a,b] => R
2) f is continuous over [a,b]
3) f(a)<d<f(b)
4) a<b
Then prove that the following,set: H ={x: xε(a,b),f(x)<d} has a supremum

Of course, this is an application of the theorem: Any non-emptyy set of real numbers that is bounded above has a least upper bound.

Clearly $H$ is bounded above by $b$. Now you want to show that $H\ne\emptyset$.

Apply the intermediate value theorem twice.

$\exists c\in (a,b)$ such that $f(c)=d$ or $f(a)<f(c)=d<f(b)$.

This means that $f(a)<\frac{d+f(a)}{2}<d$ so $\exists t\in (a,c)$ such that $f(t)=\frac{d+f(a)}{2}$.

How does that show that $H\ne\emptyset~?$
 
Plato said:
Of course, this is an application of the theorem: Any non-empty set of real numbers that is bounded above has a least upper bound.

Clearly $H$ is bounded above by $b$. Now you want to show that $H\ne\emptyset$.

Apply the intermediate value theorem twice.

$\exists c\in (a,b)$ such that $f(c)=d$ or $f(a)<f(c)=d<f(b)$.

This means that $f(a)<\frac{d+f(a)}{2}<d$ so $\exists t\in (a,c)$ such that $f(t)=\frac{d+f(a)}{2}$.

How does that show that $H\ne\emptyset~?$

So according to your proof :

$\exists t\in (a,c)$ such that $f(t)=\frac{d+f(a)}{2}<d \Longrightarrow t\in H\Longrightarrow H\neq\emptyset$.

But unfortunately i found the above at the beginning of a proof for the intermediate value theorem.

So any other suggestions for the above?
 
solakis said:
So according to your proof :

$\exists t\in (a,c)$ such that $f(t)=\frac{d+f(a)}{2}<d \Longrightarrow t\in H\Longrightarrow H\neq\emptyset$.

But unfortunately i found the above at the beginning of a proof for the intermediate value theorem.

So any other suggestions for the above?
There is no need for other suggestions. That is the proof.
$H$ is a non-empty set that is bounded above by $b$, by the completeness property
$\sup(H)$ must exist.
 
Plato said:
There is no need for other suggestions. That is the proof.
$H$ is a non-empty set that is bounded above by $b$, by the completeness property
$\sup(H)$ must exist.

No ,no .maybe you misunderstood me.

I was reading a proof for the intermediate value theorem and the author starts the proof by writing:

Let H be a set such that : for all xε(a,b) , f(x)<d.

Then he goes on saying : Clearly H has a supremum,since H is bounded above by b and $H\neq\emptyset$

Surely in proving the intermediate value theorem we cannot use the intermediate value for part of its proof.

That is why i asked for any other suggestions meaning other proof.
 
solakis said:
No ,no .maybe you misunderstood me.
You bet I misunderstood your OP, and it is your fault.
It the of OP, why did you not make it clear that you were proving the intermediate value theorem?

As written, the OP looks like an exercise that goes with that section a textbook.

Next time give all the information!
 
Last edited:
Plato said:
You bet I misunderstood your OP, and it is your fault.
It the of OP, why did you not make it clear that you were proving the intermediate value theorem?

As written, the OP looks like an exercise that goes with that section a textbook.

Next time give all the information!

I do apologize,but i did not realized that by simply asking for another solution to the problem could cause such a mental distress.I thought it was an easy problem just escaping my attention .Sorry for that.
 
It wasn't that you asked for another solution that caused any problem, it was the fact that you did not state up front that you were in fact attempting to prove the intermediate value theorem. This omission caused Plato to waste his time, and I hope you can see that this can be a source of frustration for our contributors.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K