The question is, "What is something that has never been discussed in my mother's kitchen?"Prove that the Least Upper Bound Property of the real number system R implies that R is complete. In other words, prove that in R every Cauchy sequence converges. (For the layman: with this result you can assume that there are no āholesā in R; the real numbers make up a solid line.)
I looked up Cauchy sequences and this lead me to a way to calculate square roots. I always wondered how this was done. Thanks for that. (I'm still not in my mother's kitchen.)Prove that the Least Upper Bound Property of the real number system R implies that R is complete. In other words, prove that in R every Cauchy sequence converges. (For the layman: with this result you can assume that there are no āholesā in R; the real numbers make up a solid line.)
Arenāt you supposed to be drinking German beer and brandy about now?Prove that the Least Upper Bound Property of the real number system R implies that R is complete. In other words, prove that in R every Cauchy sequence converges. (For the layman: with this result you can assume that there are no āholesā in R; the real numbers make up a solid line.)
Had a cake and coffee break not long ago.Arenāt you supposed to be drinking German beer and brandy about now?![]()
I looked up Cauchy sequences and this lead me to a way to calculate square roots. I always wondered how this was done. Thanks for that. (I'm still not in my mother's kitchen.)![]()
There were no doors only doorways. We are both allergic to cats... not sure if we are all dead alive or both.If the door to your motherās kitchen is closed, we can assume that you are both in the kitchen and outside the kitchen.
What about the greatest lower bound?Prove that the Least Upper Bound Property of the real number system R implies that R is complete. In other words, prove that in R every Cauchy sequence converges. (For the layman: with this result you can assume that there are no āholesā in R; the real numbers make up a solid line.)
Easy peasy. To show that the greatest lower bound of a non-empty set A always exists, define B to be the set of all members of A times -1. (If 5 is in A, then -5 is in B. If -8 is in A, then 8 is in B.) Find the least upper bound of B, say it is x. Then -x is the greatest lower bound of the original set A.What about the greatest lower bound?
Both your posts in this thread gave me a headache, and reminded me of why the highest level of math I taught was 6th grade.Easy peasy. To show that the greatest lower bound of a non-empty set A always exists, define B to be the set of all members of A times -1. (If 5 is in A, then -5 is in B. If -8 is in A, then 8 is in B.) Find the least upper bound of B, say it is x. Then -x is the greatest lower bound of the original set A.