Spivak's calculus: is my proof wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnnyies
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a proof concerning the relationship between two positive numbers, a and b, specifically addressing the implication that if a² < b², then a < b. The context is rooted in the principles of real analysis as presented in Spivak's calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the inequality a² < b² and its connection to the positivity of the differences (b - a) and (b + a). There is a focus on the validity of using properties of positive numbers and the trichotomy law in the proof.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants questioning the correctness of the original proof and clarifying the application of the properties of positive numbers. Some guidance has been offered regarding the assumptions made in the proof, particularly concerning the implications of the product of two numbers being positive.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the application of property P12 and its converse, as well as the conditions under which products of negative numbers can yield positive results. Participants are also considering the implications of the hypothesis that (b + a) is non-negative.

johnnyies
Messages
93
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If a, b > 0, and a2 < b2, then a < b.

Homework Equations


P is the collection of all positive numbers, n > 0

(P10) Trichotomy law: For every number a, one and only one of the following holds:
(i) a = 0
(ii) a is in the collection P
(iii) -a is in the collection P

(P11) If a and b are in P, then a + b are in P
(P12) If a and b are in P, then a x b is in P.

The Attempt at a Solution



If a2 < b2, then 0 < b2 - a2, hence b2 - a2 is in the collection P

0 < b2 - a2 which is the same as 0 < (b - a)(b + a)

by (P12), (b - a) and (b + a) are both in P,

if (b - a) is in P, this means b - a > 0, hence, b > a

this isn't the answer in the book, I will post that after dinner, but my proof seems sound but at the same time I can't tell if it's correct or wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
johnnyies said:
by (P12), (b - a) and (b + a) are both in P,
That's not P12. The statement you used is
If a x b is in P, then a and b are in P​
which is the converse of P12, and is only true half the time.
 
I got it. If ab is in P then it's possible a and b are not in P, since it can be said: a < 0, b < 0 ,ab > 0 (product of two negatives). I missed that. Thanks.
 
But can I say that if (b-a)(b+a) > 0, either (b-a) and (b+a) have to be positive, or either negative, and, as I know by hypothesis that (b+a) >= 0, (b-a) must be in P, hence (b-a) > 0, so b > a?
 
carlosbgois said:
But can I say that if (b-a)(b+a) > 0, either (b-a) and (b+a) have to be positive, or either negative

You will need to prove this...
Otherwise it's correct.

and, as I know by hypothesis that (b+a) >= 0, (b-a) must be in P, hence (b-a) > 0, so b > a?
 
Sure, but that is the easy part hehe. Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K