Homework 5

Table of Contents

Exercise 10.2

Prove that bounded, decreasing sequences converge.

Solution.

Let (sn)\p{s_n} be a bounded, decreasing sequence. Then the set {snnN}\set{s_n \mid n \in \N} is non-empty and bounded below, so s=infSs = \inf S exists. We will show that snss_n \to s.

Let ε>0\varepsilon > 0. Then s+εs + \varepsilon is not a lower bound for (sn)\p{s_n}, so there exists NNN \in \N such that sN<s+εs_N < s + \varepsilon. Since (sn)\p{s_n} is decreasing, we get

snsN<s+εfor all nN.s_n \leq s_N < s + \varepsilon \quad\text{for all } n \geq N.

Moreover, sns0s_n - s \geq 0 by definition of ss, so for all nNn \geq N,

sns=sns<ε.\abs{s_n - s} = s_n - s < \varepsilon.

Exercise 11.7

Let (rn)\p{r_n} be an enumeration of the set Q\Q of all rational numbers. Show there exists a subsequence (rnk)\p{r_{n_k}} such that limkrnk=+\lim_{k\to\infty} r_{n_k} = +\infty.

Solution.

I will give two solutions--one that just uses a theorem, and one that's more explicit in the construction. Either is fine, of course, but I suggest you understand the explicit construction.

Solution 1 (by Theorem 11.2)

Q\Q is unbounded (e.g., NQ\N \subseteq \Q), so because (rn)\p{r_n} is an enumeration of Q\Q, it follows that (rn)\p{r_n} itself is unbounded. Thus, by THeorem 11.2(ii), there exists a subsequence which diverges to ++\infty.

Solution 2 (by construction)

Since (rn)\p{r_n} is unbounded, 11 is not an upper bound for (rn)\p{r_n}. Thus, there exists n1Nn_1 \in \N such that rn11r_{n_1} \geq 1.

We proceed by induction. Suppose we have chosen n1<n2<<nkn_1 < n_2 < \cdots < n_k such that rnkkr_{n_k} \geq k. Notice that

SkQ{r1,r2,,rnk}S_k \coloneqq \Q \setminus \set{r_1, r_2, \ldots, r_{n_k}}

is still an unbounded set since we only remove finitely many elements. Thus, in particular, k+1k + 1 is not an upper bound for SkS_k, so there exists rnk+1Skr_{n_{k+1}} \in S_k such that rnk+1k+1r_{n_{k+1}} \geq k + 1. By definition of SkS_k, we immediately have nk+1>nkn_{k+1} > n_k as well.

Thus, we have shown that there exists a subsequence (rnk)\p{r_{n_k}} such that rnkkr_{n_k} \geq k, which implies rnk+r_{n_k} \to +\infty.

Exercise 11.9

  1. Show the closed interval [a,b]\br{a, b} is a closed set.
  2. Is there a sequence (sn)\p{s_n} such that (0,1)\p{0, 1} is its set of subsequential limits?
Solution.
  1. Let (sn)\p{s_n} be a convergent sequence of elements in [a,b]\br{a, b} and let s=limnsns = \lim_{n\to\infty} s_n. By definition, asnba \leq s_n \leq b, so by the lemma from discussion, asba \leq s \leq b, which means s[a,b]s \in \br{a, b}.

  2. No. Suppose there were such a sequence (sn)\p{s_n}. Recall that

    lim supnsn=sup(0,1)=1.\limsup_{n\to\infty} s_n = \sup{\p{0, 1}} = 1.

    But we also showed that lim supnsn\limsup_{n\to\infty} s_n itself is a subsequential limit, which means 1(0,1)1 \in \p{0, 1}, which is impossible.