Difference between revisions of "Greater than or equal to"

From Maths
Jump to: navigation, search
m
m (See also)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
==Definition==
 
==Definition==
 
''Greater than or equal to'' is a [[relation]] (specifically a [[partial ordering]]) on {{M|\mathbb{R} }} (and thus {{M|\mathbb{Q} }}, {{M|\mathbb{Z} }} and {{M|\mathbb{N} }}).
 
''Greater than or equal to'' is a [[relation]] (specifically a [[partial ordering]]) on {{M|\mathbb{R} }} (and thus {{M|\mathbb{Q} }}, {{M|\mathbb{Z} }} and {{M|\mathbb{N} }}).
{{Todo|Link with [[ordered integral domain]] (as that is where the ordering is induced)}}
+
{{Todo|Link with [[ordered integral domain]] (as that is where the ordering is induced) '''THE STRUCTURE ON {{M|\mathbb{R} }} IS VERY IMPORTANT. For example the epsilon form below requires addition, subtraction, so forth'''}}
 
==Alternative forms==
 
==Alternative forms==
 
{{Begin Inline Theorem}}
 
{{Begin Inline Theorem}}
Line 13: Line 13:
 
** [[Strictly less than]]
 
** [[Strictly less than]]
 
* [[Strictly greater than]]
 
* [[Strictly greater than]]
 +
* [[Lower bound]]
 +
** [[Infimum]]
 +
* [[Upper bound]]
 +
** [[Supremum]]
 +
 
==References==
 
==References==
 
<references/>
 
<references/>

Latest revision as of 15:56, 9 April 2016

(Unknown grade)
This page is a stub
This page is a stub, so it contains little or minimal information and is on a to-do list for being expanded.The message provided is:
I made this page just so I could document the epsilon form

Definition

Greater than or equal to is a relation (specifically a partial ordering) on [ilmath]\mathbb{R} [/ilmath] (and thus [ilmath]\mathbb{Q} [/ilmath], [ilmath]\mathbb{Z} [/ilmath] and [ilmath]\mathbb{N} [/ilmath]).


TODO: Link with ordered integral domain (as that is where the ordering is induced) THE STRUCTURE ON [ilmath]\mathbb{R} [/ilmath] IS VERY IMPORTANT. For example the epsilon form below requires addition, subtraction, so forth


Alternative forms

Epsilon form: [ilmath]x\ge y\iff\forall\epsilon>0[x+\epsilon>y][/ilmath]



[ilmath]x\ge y\implies\forall\epsilon>0[x+\epsilon>y][/ilmath]

  • Let [ilmath]\epsilon > 0[/ilmath] be given
    • As [ilmath]\epsilon>0[/ilmath] we see [ilmath]x+\epsilon>0+x=x[/ilmath]
      • But by hypothesis [ilmath]x\ge y[/ilmath]
    • So [ilmath]x+\epsilon>x\ge y[/ilmath]
    • Thus [ilmath]x+\epsilon>y[/ilmath]
  • This completes this part of the proof.

[ilmath]\forall\epsilon>0[x+\epsilon>y]\implies x \ge y[/ilmath] (this will be a proof by contrapositive)

  • We will show: [ilmath]x<y\implies\exists\epsilon>0[x+\epsilon < y][/ilmath] Warning:I wrongly negated [ilmath]>[/ilmath], it should be [ilmath]\le[/ilmath] not [ilmath]<[/ilmath] - in light of this I might be able to get away with [ilmath]\epsilon=y-x[/ilmath]
    • As [ilmath]x<y[/ilmath] we know [ilmath]0<y-x[/ilmath].
    • Choose [ilmath]\epsilon:=\frac{y-x}{2}[/ilmath] (which we may do for both [ilmath]\mathbb{R} [/ilmath] and [ilmath]\mathbb{Q} [/ilmath])
    • Now [ilmath]x+\epsilon=\frac{2x}{2}+\frac{y-x}{2}=\frac{x+y}{2}[/ilmath]
      • But by hypothesis [ilmath]x<y[/ilmath] so [ilmath]x+y<y+y=2y[/ilmath], so:
    • [ilmath]x+\epsilon=\frac{x+y}{2}<\frac{2y}{2}=y[/ilmath]
  • We have shown [ilmath]\exists\epsilon >0[x+\epsilon<y][/ilmath]

This completes this part of the proof.


TODO: Fix warning. Note that [ilmath]x+\epsilon < y\implies x+\epsilon \le y[/ilmath] so this content isn't wrong, but it requires multiplication by [ilmath]\frac{1}{2} [/ilmath] which you cannot do in the ring [ilmath]\mathbb{Z} [/ilmath] for example.



See also

References