Ask your own question, for FREE!
Mathematics 16 Online
OpenStudy (anonymous):

explain this proof in real analysis

OpenStudy (anonymous):

OpenStudy (anonymous):

What is Def 1.8?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I don't quite understand their explanation either. We know \(L\) contains all lower bounds of \(B\): \[y \in L\iff \forall x \in B \quad y \leq x\]This consequentially means elements in \(B\) are upper bounds of \(L\):\[ \forall x \in B\quad \forall y \in L \quad y\leq x \]We know \(B\) is bounded below: \[\exists \lambda\quad \lambda \in L\land \lambda \in B\]Because \(\lambda \in B\), it is an upper bound of \(L\). Any element \(m<\lambda\) can't be an upper bound of \(L\), because \(\lambda\) is in \(L\). Any element \(m>\lambda\) can't be the supremum, because the supremum is the minimum upper bound. Therefore, \(\lambda = \sup L\).

Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!
Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!