Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In the case of two dimensions, the intuition is as follows: For any line segment xy, consider the possible range of lengths of xv, where v is any point on the perpendicular bisector of xy. It is apparent that while there is no upper bound to the length of xv, there is a lower bound, which occurs when v is the midpoint of xy.
A real number x is the least upper bound (or supremum) for S if x is an upper bound for S and x ≤ y for every upper bound y of S. The least-upper-bound property states that any non-empty set of real numbers that has an upper bound must have a least upper bound in real numbers.
Two lines that are parallel to the same line are also parallel to each other. In a right-angled triangle, the square of the hypotenuse equals the sum of the squares of the other two sides (Pythagoras' theorem). [6] [7] The law of cosines, a generalization of Pythagoras' theorem. There is no upper limit to the area of a triangle. (Wallis axiom) [8]
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 ...
If (,) is a partially ordered set, such that each pair of elements in has a meet, then indeed = if and only if , since in the latter case indeed is a lower bound of , and since is the greatest lower bound if and only if it is a lower bound. Thus, the partial order defined by the meet in the universal algebra approach coincides with the original ...
In particular, it satisfies a sort of least-upper-bound axiom that says, in effect: Every nonempty internal set that has an internal upper bound has a least internal upper bound. Countability of the set of all internal numbers (in conjunction with the fact that those form a densely ordered set) implies that that set does not satisfy the full ...
The rational number line Q does not have the least upper bound property. An example is the subset of rational numbers = {<}. This set has an upper bound. However, this set has no least upper bound in Q: the least upper bound as a subset of the reals would be √2, but it does not exist in Q.
We can state the above axiom briefly by saying that every segment can be laid off upon a given side of a given point of a given straight line in at least one way. If a segment AB is congruent to the segment A ′ B ′ and also to the segment A ″ B ″, then the segment A ′ B ′ is congruent to the segment A ″ B ″; that is, if AB ≅ A ...