This set is due Monday, September 16, at the beginning of lecture.

Recall that . Given a sequence of nonnegative real numbers, for a finite subset of , the expression

has what is hopefully the obvious meaning: If is the increasing enumeration of the elements of , then

,

with the (standard) convention that if is empty, then .

For an arbitrary subset of (so may be finite or infinite), define

provided that the supremum exists. There is a small ambiguity here, in that if is finite, we have defined in two potentially conflicting ways.

1. Show that both definitions coincide if is finite.

2. Give an example of a sequence and a set such that is not defined. Show that for any and any , if is not defined, then neither is .

3. Show that, if is defined, then

.

More generally, show that, as long as is defined, then

and that, if this supremum exists, then so does , and the displayed equality holds.

4. Fix a positive integer . Show that if is such that, for every , has the form where then, for any , is defined, and is a number in the interval .

5. Show that for every and every positive integer there is some as in item 4. such that Describe as precisely as possible all the quadruples such that is an integer, , are sequences as in 4., and yet

Hopefully it is clear that all we are describing is the base representation of any number .

6. Indicate how to extend the above so any real has a base representation (for any ).

7. Given , let be the sequence with -th term for all . Show that is the only value of such that there are with Describe all such pairs . Show that for all there is some as in 4., with the same “failure of injectivity” property.

The above gives us that in the sense that there is an injection .

8. Make this explicit, that is, give an example of such an injection , hopefully related to these sums we are considering.

One can also show that and in fact there is a bijection between these two sets, though you do not need to do this here.

As indicated in item 7., when the function given by is not an injection.

9. For this , show that the collection of sets such that there is a set with is countable. Show that if is countable, then there is a bijection between and so, in particular, even allows us to verify that .

This entry was posted on Thursday, September 5th, 2013 at 11:21 am and is filed under 414/514: Analysis I. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Craig: For a while, there was some research on improving bounds on the number of variables or degree of unsolvable Diophantine equations. Unfortunately, I never got around to cataloging the known results in any systematic way, so all I can offer is some pointers to relevant references, but I am not sure of what the current records are. Perhaps the first pape […]

Yes. Consider, for instance, Conway's base 13 function $c$, or any function that is everywhere discontinuous and has range $\mathbb R$ in every interval. Pick continuous bijections $f_n:\mathbb R\to(-1/n,1/n)$ for $n\in\mathbb N^+$. Pick a strictly decreasing sequence $(x_n)_{n\ge1}$ converging to $0$. Define $f$ by setting $f(x)=0$ if $x=0$ or $\pm x_n […]

(1) Patrick Dehornoy gave a nice talk at the Séminaire Bourbaki explaining Hugh Woodin's approach. It omits many technical details, so you may want to look at it before looking again at the Notices papers. I think looking at those slides and then at the Notices articles gives a reasonable picture of what the approach is and what kind of problems remain […]

The description below comes from József Beck. Combinatorial games. Tic-tac-toe theory, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 114. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, MR2402857 (2009g:91038). Given a finite set $S$ of points in the plane $\mathbb R^2$, consider the following game between two players Maker and Breaker. The players alternat […]

Yes. This is a consequence of the Davis-Matiyasevich-Putnam-Robinson work on Hilbert's 10th problem, and some standard number theory. A number of papers have details of the $\Pi^0_1$ sentence. To begin with, take a look at the relevant paper in Mathematical developments arising from Hilbert's problems (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Northern Illinois Un […]

It is easy to see without choice that if there is a surjection from $A$ onto $B$, then there is an injection from ${\mathcal P}(B)$ into ${\mathcal P}(A)$, and the result follows from Cantor's theorem that $B

Only noticed this question today. Although the selected answer is quite nice and arguably simpler than the argument below, none of the posted answers address what appeared to be the original intent of establishing the inequality using the Arithmetic Mean-Geometric Mean Inequality. For this, simply notice that $$ 1+3+\ldots+(2n-1)=n^2, $$ which can be easily […]

First of all, $f(z)+e^z\ne 0$ by the first inequality. It follows that $e^z/(f(z)+e^z)$ is entire, and bounded above. You should be able to conclude from that.

Yes. The standard way of defining these sequences goes by assigning in an explicit fashion to each limit ordinal $\alpha$, for as long as possible, an increasing sequence $\alpha_n$ that converges to $\alpha$. Once this is done, we can define $f_\alpha$ by diagonalizing, so $f_\alpha(n)=f_{\alpha_n}(n)$ for all $n$. Of course there are many possible choices […]

I disagree with the advice of sending a paper to a journal before searching the relevant literature. It is almost guaranteed that a paper on the fundamental theorem of algebra (a very classical and well-studied topic) will be rejected if you do not include mention on previous proofs, and comparisons, explaining how your proof differs from them, etc. It is no […]

I’ve posted the TeX file for the homework, in case it is useful.

Note that on problem , is it implied that .

E.g.

For , , if we say , , we have

Oh, yes, that question came up not as intended. Thanks for noticing it. I’ve fixed the text.

Thank you!