Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This is equivalent to the side-angle-side rule for determining that two triangles are congruent; if the angles uxz and u'x'z' are congruent (there exist congruent triangles xuz and x'u'z'), and the two pairs of incident sides are congruent (xu ≡ x'u' and xz ≡ x'z'), then the remaining pair of sides is also congruent (uz ≡ u'z').
has an upper bound in Q, but does not have a least upper bound in Q (since the square root of two is irrational). The construction of the real numbers using Dedekind cuts takes advantage of this failure by defining the irrational numbers as the least upper bounds of certain subsets of the rationals.
The reverse triangle inequality is an equivalent alternative formulation of the triangle inequality that gives lower bounds instead of upper bounds. For plane geometry, the statement is: [19] Any side of a triangle is greater than or equal to the difference between the other two sides. In the case of a normed vector space, the statement is:
The new axiom is Lobachevsky's parallel postulate (also known as the characteristic postulate of hyperbolic geometry): [75] Through a point not on a given line there exists (in the plane determined by this point and line) at least two lines which do not meet the given line. With this addition, the axiom system is now complete.
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 <).
On the other hand, / is a positive infinitesimal, since by the definition of least upper bound there must be an infinitesimal between / and , and if / < / then is not infinitesimal. But 1 / ( 4 n ) < c / 2 {\displaystyle 1/(4n)<c/2} , so c / 2 {\displaystyle c/2} is not infinitesimal, and this is a contradiction.
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 ...
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 ...