pantin
- 20
- 0
The thm says:
Every bded monotone sequence in R is convergent.
The proof:
suppose {x_k} is a bded increasing sequence. Let M be the sup of the set of values {x_1, x_2,...} I claim that x_k -> M.
Since M is an upper bd, we have x_k <= M for all k. (***)
on the other hand, since M is the least upper bd, for any epislon >0, there is some K for which x_K > M - epislon. Since the x_k's increase with k, we also have x_k > M - epislon for all k > K.
therefore M - epislon < x_k <= M for all k > K, and this shows that x_k -> M
-------------------------------------
my question is here, I understand most of the proof, but what I want to ask is , why don't we just stop at the line ending with (***) sign above, if we just show M is the least upper bd and x_k is increasing, then we are done, why do we need to show M-epislon < x_k as well?
Every bded monotone sequence in R is convergent.
The proof:
suppose {x_k} is a bded increasing sequence. Let M be the sup of the set of values {x_1, x_2,...} I claim that x_k -> M.
Since M is an upper bd, we have x_k <= M for all k. (***)
on the other hand, since M is the least upper bd, for any epislon >0, there is some K for which x_K > M - epislon. Since the x_k's increase with k, we also have x_k > M - epislon for all k > K.
therefore M - epislon < x_k <= M for all k > K, and this shows that x_k -> M
-------------------------------------
my question is here, I understand most of the proof, but what I want to ask is , why don't we just stop at the line ending with (***) sign above, if we just show M is the least upper bd and x_k is increasing, then we are done, why do we need to show M-epislon < x_k as well?