Supremum
Let and
is the supremum of (also written as ) if
- for all                        ( is an upper bound of )
- If for all then    ( is the least upper bound of )
If has a supremum then is unique
Infimum
Let and
is the infimum of if
- for all                          ( is a lower bound of )
- If for all then      ( is the greatest lower bound of )
Properties of within subsets
Let be non-empty subsets of , with and with bounded above
Then
is bounded above
Proof
Since is bounded above then suppose it has upper bound
Then for all so we know that for all
Hence is an upper bound forAs are non-empty and bounded above so by completeness axiom then each have a supremum
Note that is an upper bound for hence also for so(since is the least upper bound for )
Relation between and
Let be non-empty and bounded below
Let
Then
is non-empty and bounded above
Furthermore exists and
Proof
Since is non-empty, so is
Let be a lower bound for , so for all
Then for all so for all
Hence is an upper bound for so is bounded aboveAs is non-empty and bounded above so by completeness axiom, it has a supremum
Then for all so for allHence is a lower bound for
If is a lower bound for then is an upper bound forHence (as is the least upper bound)
ThereforeHence is the greatest lower bound
So exists and
Link to originalMaximum
Let be non-empty
Take then is the maximum of if
- ( is an element of )
- for alll ( is an upper bound for )
TLDR maximum if
Useful propery
Let be non-empty and bounded above so by completeness axiom then exists
Then has a maximum if and only if
Also, if has a maximum then
Link to originalMinimum
Let be non-empty
Take then is the minimum of if
- ( is an element of )
- for alll ( is an lower bound for )
TLDR minimum if
Link to originalApproximation Property
Let be non-empty and bounded above
For any there exists such thatTLDR: There exists that is arbitrarily close to
Proof
Note that by definition of the supremum we have
Suppose for a contradiction that
Then is an upper bound for but
But this is a contradiction so there