|
|
| Line 14: |
Line 14: |
|
| |
|
| ===liminf vs limsup=== | | ===liminf vs limsup=== |
| | |
| | (Notation from Tao's ''Analysis I''.) |
|
| |
|
| Let <math>(a_n)_{n=m}^\infty</math> be a sequence of real numbers. Let <math>L^- := \liminf_{n\to\infty} a_n</math> and let <math>L^+ := \limsup_{n\to\infty} a_n</math>. Then we have <math>L^- \leq L^+</math>. | | Let <math>(a_n)_{n=m}^\infty</math> be a sequence of real numbers. Let <math>L^- := \liminf_{n\to\infty} a_n</math> and let <math>L^+ := \limsup_{n\to\infty} a_n</math>. Then we have <math>L^- \leq L^+</math>. |
Revision as of 22:57, 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