Proof dealing with bounded sets

In summary, the conversation discusses how to prove that sup(A+B) = sup(A)+sup(B) for nonempty bounded subsets A and B of real numbers. The solution involves showing that sup(A)+sup(B) is an upper bound on A+B and that any other upper bound must be larger. The proof also addresses the case for finite sets and infinite sets.
  • #1
bonfire09
249
0
1. Homework Statement
Let A and B be nonempty bounded subsets of [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex], and let [itex] A + B [/itex] be the set of all sums [itex]a + b[/itex] where [itex]a ∈ A[/itex] and [itex]b ∈ B[/itex].
(a) Prove [itex] sup(A+B) = supA+supB [/itex].

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


Let Set [itex]A=(a_1,...,a_t: a_1<...a_i<a_t)[/itex] and let set [itex]B=(b_1,...,b_s: b_1<...<b_s)[/itex] Then set [itex]A+B=(a_i+b_k: 1≤ i≤ t \text{and} 1≤ k ≤ S)[/itex] It follows that [itex] a_t= sup(A)[/itex] and [itex] b_s=sup(B) [/itex] since [itex] a_i ≤a_s [/itex] and [itex] b_s ≥ b_k[/itex] for all [itex] a_i ε A [/itex] and [itex] b_k ε B [/itex] where [itex] 1≤ k ≤s[/itex] and [itex] 1≤ k ≤s[/itex]. Now [itex] sup(A+B) = a_t+b_s[/itex] since [itex] a_t+b_s≥ a_i+b_k [/itex]
Thus [itex] sup(A+B) = a_t+b_s= sup(A)+ sup (B) [/itex]. Now I don't know whether I should argue that [itex] a_t[/itex] and [itex] b_s [/itex] is the greatest least lower bound because I already have the elements in sets A and B are in increasing order. Other than that would my proof be correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I don't see anything in the hypothesis that A and B must be finite sets which your proof assumes. Also you seem to be assuming that sup(A) is in A and sup(B) is in B which is true for finite sets but not for infinite sets.

Basically, you want to prove that sup(A)+ sup(B) is the least upper bound of A+ B so you need to prove, first, that it is an upper bound on A+ B. Suppose x is in A+ B. Then, by definition of "A+ B", x= a+ b where a is in A and b is in B. [itex]a\le sup(A)[/itex] and [itex]b\le sup(A)[/itex] so that [itex]a+ b\le sup(A)+ sup(B)[/itex] showing that sup(A)+ sup(B) is an upper bound on A+ B.

It remains to show that any other upper bound on A+ B is larger than sup(A)+ sup(B).
 
  • #3
Thanks. I knew something was wrong. I should break it up into two cases then one for finite sets and one for infinite sets then.
 

FAQ: Proof dealing with bounded sets

1. What is a bounded set in mathematics?

A bounded set in mathematics is a set that has a finite upper and lower limit. In other words, there is a maximum and minimum value within the set. This is often represented by a closed interval, such as [a,b], where a is the lower bound and b is the upper bound.

2. How is boundedness proven for a set?

To prove that a set is bounded, we must show that there exists a finite upper and lower limit for all elements within the set. This can be done by finding a specific number that is greater than or equal to all elements in the set (the upper bound), and a number that is less than or equal to all elements in the set (the lower bound).

3. What is the importance of bounded sets in mathematics?

Bounded sets are important in mathematics because they allow us to define and analyze functions and equations within a specific range. This helps us to better understand the behavior and properties of these functions, and make predictions about their values.

4. Can a set be both bounded and unbounded?

No, a set cannot be both bounded and unbounded. A set is either bounded or unbounded, there is no in-between. If a set has a finite upper and lower limit, it is bounded. If there is no upper or lower limit, it is unbounded.

5. How does boundedness relate to continuity?

In mathematics, continuity is a property of a function that describes how small changes in the input result in small changes in the output. Boundedness is a necessary condition for continuity, as a function must have a finite range in order to be continuous. If a function is not bounded, it cannot be continuous.

Back
Top