Understanding Superior Limits and Their Definition in Real Numbers - Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter radou
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the definition of a superior limit in real numbers, specifically for a sequence (an). A real number L is a superior limit if two conditions are met: (a) for every ε > 0, almost all terms of the sequence satisfy a_n < L + ε, and (b) for every ε > 0, there are infinitely many terms where L - ε < a_n. The term "almost all" indicates that all but a finite number of terms meet this criterion. The superior limit is also identified as the supremum of the set A, which consists of real numbers a that can be approached by a subsequence (bn) of (an) as n approaches infinity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of sequences and limits in real analysis
  • Familiarity with the concept of supremum in set theory
  • Knowledge of ε-δ definitions in calculus
  • Basic understanding of subsequences and convergence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the ε-δ definition of limits in real analysis
  • Explore the properties of supremum and infimum in ordered sets
  • Investigate subsequences and their convergence behaviors
  • Learn about the completeness property of real numbers
USEFUL FOR

Students of real analysis, mathematicians focusing on sequences and limits, and educators teaching advanced calculus concepts will benefit from this discussion.

radou
Homework Helper
Messages
3,149
Reaction score
8
So, my book says that the real number L is a superior limit of the sequence (an) iff the following holds:

a) [itex]\forall \epsilon > 0[/itex], [itex]a_{n} < L + \epsilon[/itex] holds, for almost all terms of the sequence,
b) [itex]\forall \epsilon > 0[/itex], [itex]L - \epsilon < a_{n}[/itex] holds, for an infinite number of terms of the sequence.

OK, the two facts confuse me. I know that "almost all terms of the sequence" means "all terms, except a finite number of terms". If L is a superior limit, then it is the supremum (by definition) of the set A of all real numbers [itex]a \in \textbf{R}[/itex] for which there exists a subsequence (bn) of the sequence (an) such that [itex]\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} b_{n} = a[/itex]. Hence, for every [itex]\epsilon' > 0[/itex], there exists an element x of A such that [itex]L - \epsilon' < x[/itex]. Because x belongs to A, for some [itex]\epsilon'' > 0[/itex], the interval [itex]<x - \epsilon'', x+ \epsilon''>[/itex] contains almost all elements of a subsequence of the sequence (an). This is where I'm stuck and highly confused.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you confused by the concept, or are you trying to prove something?
 
NateTG said:
Are you confused by the concept, or are you trying to prove something?

The concept (eg definition) is clear to me, I just don't understand how one arrives at a) and b).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K