Re: Request for Review/Tutorage of Amateur Proofs
- From: G. Frege <nomail@invalid>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:16:33 +0100
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:41:31 +0100, G. Frege <nomail@invalid> wrote:
Analogous:
We have a similar result in real analysis. Consider the
sequence (x_n) defined with
x_n = 1/(n+1) (n e N).
Now even though this sequence is decreasing, i.e.
x_n+1 <= x_n for all n e N,
and
x_n =/= 0 for all n e N,
the limit of this sequence is = 0.
Let X = {x_i : i e N} with x_i = {x e N : x > i} (i e N).
(x_i) is a decreasing sequence of sets (Ai e N : x_i+1 c= x_i).
Then (according to Halmos) the limit of this sequence exists, and
_ _
lim x_i = | |x_i (= | |X).
i i
Hence (see below)
lim x_i = 0
i
in this case, though Ai e N : x_i =/= 0 (Ax e X : x =/= 0).
Theorem:
Let X = {x_i : i e N} with x_i = {x e N : x > i} (i e N).
_
Then | |X = 0.
Proof:
_
Assume for an arbitrary a: a e | |X. Then Ax e X: a e x, or An e N:
a e x_n. Hence especially a e x_0. Hence a e N. Hence a !e x_a. Hence
En e N: a !e x_n, or Ex e X: a !e x. This is equivalent to ~Ax e X:
_
a e x. Hence a !e | |X. Contradiction!
_ _
Hence a !e | |X (by RAA). Hence Ax(x !e | |X) (since a was arbitrary).
_
With other words, | |X = 0. []
F.
--
E-mail: info<at>simple-line<dot>de
.
- References:
- Re: Request for Review/Tutorage of Amateur Proofs
- From: Scott
- Re: Request for Review/Tutorage of Amateur Proofs
- From: MoeBlee
- Re: Request for Review/Tutorage of Amateur Proofs
- From: G . Frege
- Re: Request for Review/Tutorage of Amateur Proofs
- Prev by Date: Re: Semantics of First-Order Languages
- Next by Date: Re: Largest Set in ZFC?
- Previous by thread: Re: Request for Review/Tutorage of Amateur Proofs
- Next by thread: Re: Request for Review/Tutorage of Amateur Proofs
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|