Results 1 to 5 of 5

Math Help - Compactness: over the top?

  1. #1
    Member
    Joined
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    239

    Compactness: over the top?

    If  S = \{ x \in \mathbb{R}: x(x-3) \leq 0 \} and  T = \{x \in \mathbb{R}: x \geq 3 \} , then every element of  T is an upper bound for the set  S .

    So  S = [0,3] which is a compact set, and so closed and bounded. Consequently there exists a least upper bound, and  \sup S = 3 and so  T is a set of upper bounds for  S .

    Is this correct?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    is up to his old tricks again! Jhevon's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    From
    New York, USA
    Posts
    11,663
    Thanks
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by shilz222 View Post
    If  S = \{ x \in \mathbb{R}: x(x-3) \leq 0 \} and  T = \{x \in \mathbb{R}: x \geq 3 \} , then every element of  T is an upper bound for the set  S .

    So  S = [0,3] which is a compact set, and so closed and bounded. Consequently there exists a least upper bound, and  \sup S = 3 and so  T is a set of upper bounds for  S .

    Is this correct?
    the proof is ok, but i don't think compactness is needed here, it's a bit of an overkill. the completeness axiom which can be applied to any half-bounded set of real numbers could be used to draw the same conclusion.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Member
    Joined
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    239
    Oh ok, thanks. I just thought it would sort of nifty and neat.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    is up to his old tricks again! Jhevon's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    From
    New York, USA
    Posts
    11,663
    Thanks
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by shilz222 View Post
    Oh ok, thanks. I just thought it would sort of nifty and neat.
    yes, it is nifty. i just learnt about compactness the other day myself, cool stuff. but sometimes we want to be simple and economical. using compactness is fine, your proof will stand out from the rest of the pack. but it depends on what type of professor you have that will determine if that is good or bad
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Global Moderator

    Joined
    Nov 2005
    From
    New York City
    Posts
    10,616
    Thanks
    9
    Show that the infimum of T is larger then the supremum of S. Now since T is closed it contains it own infimum.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Compactness
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: March 11th 2010, 11:17 AM
  2. Compactness
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: January 19th 2010, 01:12 AM
  3. compactness
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 26th 2009, 11:26 AM
  4. Topological Compactness and Compactness of a Set
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: September 22nd 2009, 12:16 AM
  5. Compactness
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: August 16th 2007, 06:00 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum