Let A be a nonempty subset of real numbers which is bounded below. Let -A={-x|x is an element of A). Prove that: inf(A)=-sup(-A).
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
decohen
Printable View
Let A be a nonempty subset of real numbers which is bounded below. Let -A={-x|x is an element of A). Prove that: inf(A)=-sup(-A).
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
decohen
Let http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?x\epsilon(-A). Then http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?(-x)\epsilonA. So -xhttp://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\geqinf(A). This implies that xhttp://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\leq-inf(A).
So -inf(A) is an upper bound of -A.
Now let y be any upper bound of -A.
Let xhttp://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\epsilonA. Then (-x)http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\epsilon(-A). Because y is an upper bound of -A, -xhttp://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\leqy. This implies that xhttp://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\geq-y. This means that -y is a lower bound of A. Now, since inf(A) is the greatest lower bound of A, it follows that -yhttp://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\leqinf(A), which implies that yhttp://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\geq-inf(A).
In this way we have proved:
1) -inf(A) is an upper bound of -A
2) -inf(A) is smaller than any other upper bound of -A
This means, by definition, that sup(-A)= -inf(A).
Ifthen
.
That means thatis bounded above so
.
Now suppose thatthen it follows that
.
BUT this means that: CONTRADICTION.