|
|
| Line 26: |
Line 26: |
|
| |
|
| (Notation from Tao's ''Analysis I''.) | | (Notation from Tao's ''Analysis I''.) |
| | |
| | Let <math>I</math> be a bounded interval on the real line, and let <math>f : I \to \mathbf R</math>. |
|
| |
|
| We have | | We have |
Revision as of 23:04, 17 December 2018
This page describes a trick that is sometimes helpful in analysis.
Satement
Let
and
be bounded subsets of the real line. Suppose that for every
and
we have
. Then
.
Actually, do
and
have to be bounded? I think they can even be empty!
Proof
Let
and
be arbitrary. We have by hypothesis
. Since
is arbitrary, we have that
is an upper bound of the set
, so taking the superemum over
we have
(remember,
is the least upper bound, whereas
is just another upper bound). Since
was arbitrary, we see that
is a lower bound of the set
. Taking the infimum over
, we have
, as required.
Applications
liminf vs limsup
(Notation from Tao's Analysis I.)
Let
be a sequence of real numbers. Let
and let
. Then we have
.
Consider the sequences
and
defined by
and
.
Now consider the sets
and
. If we can show that
for arbitrary
, then we can apply the trick to these sets to conclude that
.
Lower and upper Riemann integral
(Notation from Tao's Analysis I.)
Let
be a bounded interval on the real line, and let
.
We have
We want to show
.
Define
Then we have
and
. To apply the trick all we need to do is to let
be a p.c. function on
that majorizes
, and let
be a p.c. function on
that minorizes
, and show that
.