Understanding Inf & Sup in Riemann Sums

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concepts of infimum (inf) and supremum (sup) in the context of Riemann sums and their mathematical definitions. Participants explore the distinctions between these terms and their implications in set theory, particularly regarding bounded and unbounded sets.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants explain that the supremum is the least upper bound of a set, while the infimum is the greatest lower bound.
  • Examples are provided to illustrate the concepts, such as the supremum of the set [0,1] being 1, and the infimum of the open interval (0,1) being 0.
  • There is a clarification that supremum and infimum are not synonymous with maximum and minimum; the supremum does not need to be an element of the set, unlike the maximum.
  • Questions are raised about the relationship between Riemann sums and definite integrals, specifically whether their equivalence has deeper implications or historical context prior to Riemann's contributions.
  • Some participants emphasize that sets can have infimum and supremum even if they do not have minimum or maximum elements.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions of infimum and supremum, but there is some contention regarding their relationship to minimum and maximum. The discussion about the implications of Riemann sums and definite integrals remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that certain texts may allow for -∞ as an infimum and ∞ as a supremum, indicating that a set does not need to be bounded to have these bounds.

Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5
I am currently reading about riemann sums and several different sources uses these abbreviations, inf and sup, and I am not certain what they mean. Could someone explain them to me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They are the infimum and the supremum.

The supremum of a set A is the least upper bound and the infimum is the greatest lower bound.

For example, consider the set [0,1]. This has many upper bounds. For example, 2, 10, 10020330 are all upper bounds. But 1 is the smallest such upper bound. Thus 1 is the supremum.

In the previous example, 1 was actually a maximum: that is, the greatest element contained in the set. But a supremum does not need to be contained in the set. For example, ]0,1[ (or (0,1) in other notation) also has 1 as smallest upper bound. Every element smaller than 1 will not be an upper bound anymore. Thus 1 is the supremum of the set.

The same discussion holds for infima.
For example: inf ]0,2[ = 0 or somewhat more complicated inf \{1/n~\vert~n\in \mathbb{N}\}=0 (note that I take 0\in \mathbb{N}).
 
So, are the words, in a way, synonymous to minimum and maximum?
 
Also, since this particular thread pertains to riemann sums, is the reason why the definite integral is defined as the limit of the riemann sum simply because they produce the same result, or is there some deeper meaning? And what was the definite integral defined as before Bernhard Riemann came along?
 
Bashyboy said:
So, are the words, in a way, synonymous to minimum and maximum?

No! That was the entire point. The supremum is a generalization of the maximum.
When I say that an element x is the maximum of A, then this means that x is the greatest element contained in A. So it is implied that x is an element of A.
But with the supremum, x does not need to be an element of A. For example sup ]0,1[ = 1, but 1 is not an element of ]0,1[.
 
For example, the open interval, (0, 1)= {x| 0< x< 1}, does not have a "minimum" or maximum. But its inf (also called "greatest lower bound") is 0 and its sup (also called "least upper bound") is 1.

If a set has a "minimum" then its infimum is that minimum. Similarly, if a a set has a "maximum" then its supremum is that maximum. But any set with a lower bound has an infimum but not necessarily a "minimum" and any set with an upper bound has a supremum but not necessarily a "maximum".

(Some texts allow "-\infty" as an infimum and "\infty" as a supremum so that a set does not have to be bounded to have infimum and supremum.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
8K