Scribd
Upload
41 views3 pages

Homework #6 Notes

1) If x is a real number not equal to 0, then x squared is greater than 0. This is proven using two cases: if x is positive, then x squared is the product of two positive numbers, which is positive; if x is negative, multiplying both sides of the inequality by the negative number x reverses the inequality sign, again giving a positive result. 2) If xy is greater than 0, then either x and y are both positive or both negative. This is proven using two cases similar to the first proof. 3) If x is greater than or equal to 0, and x is less than or equal to any positive number ε, then x must equal 0. This is

Uploaded by

haris javed
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
41 views3 pages

Homework #6 Notes

1) If x is a real number not equal to 0, then x squared is greater than 0. This is proven using two cases: if x is positive, then x squared is the product of two positive numbers, which is positive; if x is negative, multiplying both sides of the inequality by the negative number x reverses the inequality sign, again giving a positive result. 2) If xy is greater than 0, then either x and y are both positive or both negative. This is proven using two cases similar to the first proof. 3) If x is greater than or equal to 0, and x is less than or equal to any positive number ε, then x must equal 0. This is

Uploaded by

haris javed
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Math 301 Analysis

Homework #6 Notes
3.2.3.e Claim: If and , then > .
Proof: By (O1) we know that exactly one of > 0, = 0, < 0 is the case. Since
we are assuming 0, we are left with the two cases > 0 and < 0.
Case 1: > 0.
We multiply both sides of the inequality > 0 by (axiom (O4) is applicable
since > 0) to get
>0
By Theorem 2.2.b we have 0 = 0. Also, 2 = is a definition. So we get
2 > 0
as required.
Case 2: < 0.
By Theorem 2.2.g we can multiply both sides of the inequality < 0 with the
negative number , and the sign will turn around:
>0
which gives, as above,
2 > 0
3.2.3.k If > , then either (i) > and > , or (ii) < and < .
Proof: Since > 0, by (O1) we know that 0, and by Theorem 2.2.e it
follows 0 and 0.
Case (i): > 0

By problem 3.i we then know > 0 and we can use (O4) to multiply both sides of

> 0 by to get

1
1
() > 0

1
( ) > 0

1>0
>0

( (3), 2.2. )
( (5))
( (4))

Case (ii): < 0


1

By problem 3.i we know < 0 and by Thm 2.2.g we can multiply both sides of
1

> 0 by and the sign will turn around:

1
1
() < 0

1
( ) < 0

1<0
<0

( (3), 2.2. )
( (5))
( (4))

3.2.4 Claim: If and for all > , then = .


Proof: We can use Theorem 2.8 (with = 0) to get: if for all > 0, then
0. Since we also assume 0, we must have = 0. QED.
Alternative proof: Assume 0 and for all > 0 and 0. [We want to
derive a contradiction.] From 0 and 0 we get > 0 (by (O1)). Define

= . Then > 0 and < , which contradicts our assumption .


2

[Here is a clean proof for the claim that < for > 0: We know 0 < 1 by
2

Problem 3.2.3.f; adding 1 to both sides (O3) gives 1 < 2. We know > 0 by
2

Problem 3.2.3.i and multiplying both sides of 1 < 2 with the positive number

1
2

gives
1

1
1
<2
2
2
1
<1
2

1
<1
2

<
2

( (4))
( (4), (5))
( (4), > 0)
( (4))

3.3.3/4.n Determine max,sup,min and inf of the set { }


This set consists of all the rational numbers between 5 and 5. Since these
two numbers are irrational, our set does not have a maximum nor a minimum.
Since the set is bounded, it must have a supremum and an infimum, by the
Completeness Axiom. In fact, the supremum is 5 and the infimum is 5. Even
if a set consists only of rational numbers, its supremum and infimum can be
irrational.

You might also like