Proving Real Number x Exists Between Integers a & b

  • Thread starter bonfire09
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Integers
In summary: It's possible to define the floor function as above, provided you demonstrate that there is such an integer and it is unique. Furthermore, it remains to provide a formula for b, and to show that it satisfies requirements.
  • #1
bonfire09
249
0
The problem is "For every real number x, there exists integers a and b such that a≤x≤b
and b-a=1"
I am stuck on the first part of the proof. So in my proof I let a=x and b=x+1. Then x+1-x=1=b-a. But what I don't get why is that is safe for me assume here that a and b are not always going to be integers since x is a real number? I was thinking that even when the hypothesis is false the implication always true vacuously.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I'm unclear what you're saying in the last couple of sentences, but your proof does not work because, as you say, if x is not an integer then your a and b won't be.
You just need to find a better choice for a and b.
 
  • #3
I'm stuck. Like take for example x=2.5. Since a≤x then a can equal x which is 2.5 which is not an integer. If a=2.5 then b has to equal 3.5 in order for b-a=1 but a and b are not integers. I don't know how to get around it?
 
  • #4
bonfire09 said:
The problem is "For every real number x, there exists integers a and b such that a≤x≤b
and b-a=1"
I am stuck on the first part of the proof. So in my proof I let a=x and b=x+1. Then x+1-x=1=b-a. But what I don't get why is that is safe for me assume here that a and b are not always going to be integers since x is a real number?
It isn't safe for you to assume that. Part of the hypothesis is "there exist[STRIKE]s[/STRIKE] integers a and b such that ..."
bonfire09 said:
I was thinking that even when the hypothesis is false the implication always true vacuously.

An implication is true by definition when the hypothesis is false, no matter what the concluson is. For example, "if 1 = 2, then my dog has five legs" is a true statement, but it's neither useful or interesting.

What the theorem you're trying to prove is that any real number x is straddled by two successive integers. If x happens to be an integer, then you can let a = x and b = x + 1.
 
  • #5
bonfire09 said:
I'm stuck. Like take for example x=2.5. Since a≤x then a can equal x which is 2.5 which is not an integer. If a=2.5 then b has to equal 3.5 in order for b-a=1 but a and b are not integers. I don't know how to get around it?
No. a cannot be 2.5 .

Reread the statement of your problem (bold for emphasis).
"For every real number x, there exists integers a and b such that a≤x≤b and b-a=1"​

Is 2.5 an integer?
 
  • #6
bonfire09 said:
I'm stuck. Like take for example x=2.5. Since a≤x then a can equal x
You seem to be misreading the question as "for all a and b s.t. a≤x≤b...". You only have to show that for any given x there exists some pair a and b such that etc. So e.g., given x = 2.5, what pair of integers surrounds it?
 
  • #7
Well 2 and 3 surround it. So in my proof I should say "When x is an integer then let a=x and b=x+1. x+1-x=1=b-a. Otherwise when x is not an integer then there exists integers a and b where b=a+1. Thus a<x<a+1 and a+1-a=1=b-a. Hence for every real number x there exists integers a and b where a≤x≤b and b-a=1."
 
  • #8
You can tighten up the part where x is not an integer by using the greatest integer function ## \lfloor x \rfloor##. This function evaluates to the largest integer that is less than or equal to x.

In essence, it strips off any fractional part of a number, so that, for example,
##\lfloor 2.35\rfloor = 2##.
 
  • #9
Mark44 said:
You can tighten up the part where x is not an integer by using the greatest integer function ## \lfloor x \rfloor##. This function evaluates to the largest integer that is less than or equal to x.
To complete the proof, there are a couple more details.
Shouldn't really assume the floor function is an accepted and well-defined function. What is to be proved here is very low level so the proof should only make use of the simplest tools. You can define the floor function as above, provided you demonstrate that there is such an integer and it is unique.
Secondly, it remains to provide a formula for b, and to show that it satisfies requirements.
 
  • #10
haruspex said:
To complete the proof, there are a couple more details.
Shouldn't really assume the floor function is an accepted and well-defined function.
Why not? It seems to be accepted enough that there is notation for it. As I recall, the first I heard of it was in a college-level math class.
haruspex said:
What is to be proved here is very low level so the proof should only make use of the simplest tools. You can define the floor function as above, provided you demonstrate that there is such an integer and it is unique.
Secondly, it remains to provide a formula for b, and to show that it satisfies requirements.
The OP has done that. Once you find a, by whatever means, all you need to do to get b is to add 1 to a.
 
  • #11
Mark44 said:
Why not? It seems to be accepted enough that there is notation for it. As I recall, the first I heard of it was in a college-level math class.
If bonfire09 has been introduced to the floor function, fine, but that has not been established.
The OP has done that.
Not in the context of a being set to floor(x). Besides, it only takes one line to complete the proof.
 
  • #12
You will need the Archimedean property: if x is any real number, there exist an integer n greater than x

and the well-ordered property of the integers: if a non-empty set of integers has a lower bound, then it contains a smallest member.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #13
Mark44 said:
The OP has done that. Once you find a, by whatever means, all you need to do to get b is to add 1 to a.

haruspex said:
Not in the context of a being set to floor(x).
Which is precisely why I wrote "by whatever means".
haruspex said:
Besides, it only takes one line to complete the proof.
 
  • #14
I've seen the floor and ceiling function In a programming class but I have never seen it been used in my proofs class. I realize i tend to gloss over a detaail which messed me up. I tend to do this sometimes since proofs requiire a great deal of attention to details.
 
  • #15
bonfire09 said:
I've seen the floor and ceiling function In a programming class but I have never seen it been used in my proofs class. I realize i tend to gloss over a detaail which messed me up. I tend to do this sometimes since proofs requiire a great deal of attention to details.
I suggest you look at HallsofIvy's post (Post #13) which I quote below.

HallsofIvy said:
You will need the Archimedean property: if x is any real number, there exist an integer n greater than x

and the well-ordered property of the integers: if a non-empty set of integers has a lower bound, then it contains a smallest member.
 
  • #16
Instead of using the well ordering principle. Couldn't I just say ""When x is an integer then let a=x and b=x+1. x+1-x=1=b-a. When x is not an integer then a<x<b since a and b are integers. Thus a<x<a+1 when b=a+1. Hence there exists an integer greater than every real number x."
 
  • #17
Mark44 said:
You can tighten up the part where x is not an integer by using the greatest integer function ## \lfloor x \rfloor##. This function evaluates to the largest integer that is less than or equal to x.

In essence, it strips off any fractional part of a number, so that, for example,
##\lfloor 2.35\rfloor = 2##.

I think the question is essentially asking for a proof of the existence of the floor function. If we know we can write x as n + r (, n = integer, 0 <= r < 1) then, of course, we can write floor(x) = n. Naturally, in many courses the floor function will be introduced and used, but without ever really proving it exists (which is intuitively obvious, anyway).

RGV
 
  • #18
So in other wards like this "

Case 1: Assume x is an integer then let a=x and b=x+1. x+1-x=1=b-a.

Case:2 Assume x is not an integer then let a=⌊x⌋ and b=⌊x⌋+1. This becomes ⌊x⌋<x<⌊x⌋+1 and b-a=1.
 
Last edited:

1. How do you prove the existence of a real number between two integers?

To prove the existence of a real number between two integers, you can use the intermediate value theorem. This theorem states that if a continuous function takes on two values at two different points, then it must take on every value in between those two points. Therefore, by showing that a function takes on two different values at the integers a and b, you can prove that there must be a real number between them.

2. Can you provide an example of proving the existence of a real number between two integers?

Sure, let's say we want to prove that there is a real number between 3 and 4. We can use the function f(x) = x^2. At x=3, f(x) = 9, and at x=4, f(x) = 16. Since the function is continuous, it must take on every value between 9 and 16, including all real numbers between 3 and 4.

3. Are there other methods for proving the existence of a real number between two integers?

Yes, there are other methods such as the squeeze theorem, which uses the fact that if a function is always between two other functions, then it must also be between the two values of those functions. Another method is using the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem, which states that any bounded and infinite set of real numbers must contain at least one limit point, which can be used to show the existence of a real number between two integers.

4. Do all intervals between integers contain at least one real number?

Yes, all intervals between integers contain at least one real number. This is because the real number line is continuous, meaning that there are no gaps or jumps between numbers. Therefore, for any two integers a and b, there will always be a real number between them.

5. Why is it important to prove the existence of a real number between two integers?

Proving the existence of a real number between two integers is important because it allows us to have a better understanding of the real number system. It also helps us to make more accurate calculations and predictions in mathematics and science. Additionally, it can be used to prove the existence of solutions to equations and to show the continuity of functions.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
979
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
465
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
455
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
869
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
761
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
414
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
25
Views
2K
Back
Top