User:IssaRice/Extreme value theorem: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
For <math>x \in [a,b]</math>, define <math>V_x = f([a,x]) = \{f(t) : a \leq t \leq x\}</math> to be the values that <math>f</math> takes on as the input ranges from <math>a</math> to <math>x</math> (inclusive). | For <math>x \in [a,b]</math>, define <math>V_x = f([a,x]) = \{f(t) : a \leq t \leq x\}</math> to be the values that <math>f</math> takes on as the input ranges from <math>a</math> to <math>x</math> (inclusive). | ||
Let <math>M = \sup\{f(x) : a \leq x \leq b\} = \sup V_b</math> and <math>X = \{x \in [a,b] : \sup V_x < M\}</math>. | Let <math>M = \sup\{f(x) : a \leq x \leq b\} = \sup V_b</math> (this number exists by the boundedness theorem) and <math>X = \{x \in [a,b] : \sup V_x < M\}</math>. | ||
Our goal now is to find some <math>x</math> such that <math>f(x) = M</math>. If <math>f(a)=M</math> this is easy. | Our goal now is to find some <math>x</math> such that <math>f(x) = M</math>. If <math>f(a)=M</math> this is easy. |
Revision as of 23:36, 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 values that takes on as the input ranges from to (inclusive).
Let (this number exists by the boundedness theorem) 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
- ↑ 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 .