User:IssaRice/Extreme value theorem: Difference between revisions

From Machinelearning
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 16: Line 16:
Now we can choose <math>M' = \max\{\sup V_{c-\delta/2}, f(c) + \epsilon\}</math>. Then whatever <math>t \in [a,c]</math> happens to be, we can say <math>f(t) \leq M'</math>.
Now we can choose <math>M' = \max\{\sup V_{c-\delta/2}, f(c) + \epsilon\}</math>. Then whatever <math>t \in [a,c]</math> happens to be, we can say <math>f(t) \leq M'</math>.


If <math>c < b</math> then  
If <math>c < b</math> then by continuity we can find points <math>t</math> to the right of <math>c</math> where <math>\sup V_t < M</math>, which contradicts the fact that <math>c</math> is an upper bound of such points.


 
Therefore, <math>c=b</math>, which implies that <math>M = \sup V_b = \sup V_c < M</math>, a contradiction. So the assumption that <math>f(c) < M</math> was false, and we conclude <math>f(c) = M</math>.
Therefore, <math>c=b</math>, which implies that . So the assumption that <math>f(c) < M</math> was false, and we conclude <math>f(c) = M</math>.
 
If <math>c=b</math> then <math>M = \sup V_b = \sup V_c < M</math>, a contradiction.


==Notes==
==Notes==


<references group="note" />
<references group="note" />

Revision as of 23:32, 1 June 2019

Working through the proof in Pugh's book by filling in the parts he doesn't talk about.

For , define to be the image of up to and including .

Let and .

Our goal now is to find some such that . If this is easy.

So now suppose . Then . We already know that is bounded above, for instance by the number . We can thus take the least upper bound of , say . We already know , so if we can just eliminate the possibility that , we will be done.

So suppose . We want to find such that for all . That would mean that . To do this, we split the interval into two parts. Choose with .[note 1] By continuity at , there exists a such that implies . So now pick a point like , and split the interval into and .

  • Since , there exists such that (otherwise would be a smaller upper bound for ). So . This means that for all .
  • But now if , then , so . This means .

Now we can choose . Then whatever happens to be, we can say .

If then by continuity we can find points to the right of where , which contradicts the fact that is an upper bound of such points.

Therefore, , which implies that , a contradiction. So the assumption that was false, and we conclude .

Notes

  1. It is important here that does not equal ; choosing this would be too weak and we would not be able to conclude , rather only that .