Thanks for your help!Proving the Equivalence of |a|≤ b and -b≤|a|≤ b

  • Thread starter Thread starter SithsNGiggles
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the equivalence of the statement |a| ≤ b and -b ≤ a ≤ b, as outlined in "Passage to Abstract Mathematics" by Watkins and Meyer. The proof involves analyzing the definition of absolute value, which states |x| = x if x ≥ 0 and |x| = -x if x < 0. The user successfully demonstrates both directions of the proof, confirming that for b ≥ 0, the conditions hold true. Additional clarification on the logical interpretation of the absolute value definition is also sought.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of absolute value definitions in mathematics
  • Familiarity with symbolic logic and logical equivalence
  • Basic knowledge of inequalities and their properties
  • Experience with mathematical proofs and reasoning
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of absolute values in real analysis
  • Learn about logical equivalences and their applications in proofs
  • Explore more complex inequalities and their proofs
  • Practice constructing mathematical proofs using the definitions of functions
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, particularly those studying real analysis or mathematical proofs, as well as educators seeking to reinforce concepts of absolute value and logical reasoning in their curriculum.

SithsNGiggles
Messages
183
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm working through "Passage to Abstract Mathematics," Watkins and Meyer, over break. I think I have some idea on how to approach this proof, but I'm not very confident with my work thus far.

Homework Statement


Let b \geq 0. Prove that |a| \leq b \Leftrightarrow -b \leq a \leq b.

Homework Equations


The definition for the absolute value function provided in the book is
|x| = \begin{cases} x, &amp; \mbox{if } x \geq 0 \\ -x, &amp; \mbox{if } x &lt; 0 \end{cases}

I have a relevant side question. Prior to this section, the book covers some symbolic logic and logical equivalence. Am I to understand this definition as an "and" or an "or" definition? Meaning,
|x| := (a \: \mbox{for} \: a \geq 0) \wedge (-a \: \mbox{for} \: a &lt; 0), or
|x| := (a \: \mbox{for} \: a \geq 0) \vee (-a \: \mbox{for} \: a &lt; 0)

The Attempt at a Solution


(1) Left to right: Assume |a| \leq b.

|a| is defined to be
|a| = \begin{cases} a, &amp; \mbox{if } a \geq 0 \\ -a, &amp; \mbox{if } a &lt; 0 \end{cases}.

If a \geq 0, we have
|a| = a \leq b.

If a &lt; 0, we have
|a| = -a \leq b, or equivalently,
a \geq -b.

From here, I conclude that -b \leq a \leq b, but I'm not sure if this would be accepted if this were actually assigned. I have a feeling that I should also show what happens when b = 0 and b > 0, but I'm not sure it's necessary.

(2) Right to left: Assume -b \leq a \leq b.

Suppose b = 0.
-0 \leq a \leq 0 \Rightarrow a = 0 \Rightarrow |a| = b​

Suppose b &gt; 0.
  1. a = 0 \Rightarrow |a| = 0 \Rightarrow |a| &lt; b
  2. a &gt; 0 \Rightarrow |a| = a &gt; 0 \Rightarrow 0 &lt; |a| &lt; b \Rightarrow |a| &lt; b
  3. a &lt; 0 \Rightarrow |a| = -a &gt; 0 \Rightarrow |a| &lt; b

Therefore, for b \geq 0, |a| \leq b.

Thanks for any input!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For the first part, you might want to show the step between your use of the definition and your conclusion. For example:

b ≥ 0 => -b ≤ 0 => -b ≤ 0 ≤ b. Now assume |a| ≤ b, if a ≥ 0 then |a| = a and we have 0 ≤ |a| = a ≤ b => -b ≤ 0 ≤ a ≤ b => -b ≤ a ≤ b, which is what was desired.

Same for a < 0.
 
Oh, I see. Thanks. But other than that, everything else is fine?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K