Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
More generally, one may define upper bound and least upper bound for any subset of a partially ordered set X, with “real number” replaced by “element of X ”. In this case, we say that X has the least-upper-bound property if every non-empty subset of X with an upper bound has a least upper bound in X.
This is a consequence of the least upper bound property, but it can also be used to prove the least upper bound property if treated as an axiom. (The definition of continuity does not depend on any form of completeness, so there is no circularity: what is meant is that the intermediate value theorem and the least upper bound property are ...
Then has an upper bound (, for example, or ) but no least upper bound in : If we suppose is the least upper bound, a contradiction is immediately deduced because between any two reals and (including and ) there exists some rational , which itself would have to be the least upper bound (if >) or a member of greater than (if <).
An axiomatic definition of the real numbers consists of defining them as the elements of a complete ordered field. [2] [3] [4] This means the following: The real numbers form a set, commonly denoted , containing two distinguished elements denoted 0 and 1, and on which are defined two binary operations and one binary relation; the operations are called addition and multiplication of real ...
The seldom-considered dual notion to a dcpo is the filtered-complete poset. Dcpos with a least element ("pointed dcpos") are one of the possible meanings of the phrase complete partial order (cpo). If every subset that has some upper bound has also a least upper bound, then the respective poset is called bounded complete. The term is used ...
The notion of complete lattice generalizes the least-upper-bound property of the reals. One completion of S is the set of its downwardly closed subsets, ordered by inclusion . A related completion that preserves all existing sups and infs of S is obtained by the following construction: For each subset A of S , let A u denote the set of upper ...
In its simplest form, it says that a non-decreasing bounded-above sequence of real numbers ... converges to its smallest upper bound, its supremum. Likewise, a non-increasing bounded-below sequence converges to its largest lower bound, its infimum. In particular, infinite sums of non-negative numbers converge to the supremum of the partial sums ...
Then, by the well-ordering principle, there is a least element ; cannot be prime since a prime number itself is considered a length-one product of primes. By the definition of non-prime numbers, n {\displaystyle n} has factors a , b {\displaystyle a,b} , where a , b {\displaystyle a,b} are integers greater than one and less than n ...