UMEP Mathematics Scotch College 2012

Dr Wendy Baratta Classes Tuesday: 3:30 5:30 Compulsory work 9 Assignments (1 per topic) 10% 2 end of year exams (3 hours for Topics 1-5 and 2 hours for Topics 6-9) 90% Suggested work Weekly take-home tutorials Suggested questions from exercise booklet Suggested past exam questions Consultations Tuesday: 3:20 3:30 and 5:30 6:00 Email me at wendy.baratta@scotch.vic.edu.au to ask questions or arrange an alternative consultation time
1 / 60

Course outline (approximate)

1. Number and proof (3 weeks) 2. Complex numbers (2 weeks) 3. Vectors and solid geometry (3 weeks) Term one break 4. Functions of several variables (4 weeks) 5. Linear equations and matrices (4 weeks) 6. 7. 8. 9. Mid-year exams and term two break Vector spaces (3 weeks) Inner product spaces (3 weeks) Linear transformations (2 weeks) Eigenvalues and eigenvectors (2 weeks)

Term three break 10. Finalise eigenvalues and eigenvectors (1 week) 11. Revision/practice exams (2 weeks) Exam (towards the end of November)
2 / 60

Topic 1: Number and Proof

3 / 60

In mathematics we may check a few cases or run an experiment to come up with a conjecture (a prediction). However, in mathematics experiments cannot replace proof. No matter how natural and obvious the conjecture is that the experiments support, without proof a conjecture can never be more than a guess. Look at our polynomial for example. . . n P(n) 1 41 2 43 3 47 4 53 5 61 6 71 7 83 8 97 9 113 10 131 11 151 ... ...

With this amount of information, we may be likely to conjecture that P (n) is prime for all natural numbers n. . . . but what about P (41) = 412 41 + 41 = 412 and is not prime!

4 / 60

The Goldbach conjecture, for example, which claims that every even number greater than 2 is the sum of two primes as, for example, 12 = 5 + 7 or 30 = 23 + 7. Although this conjecture has been checked for millions of cases, unless a proof is found we cannot be sure that the next case we check wont show our conjecture to be false. Proofs should be short, transparent, elegant and as insightful as possible. When followed, a proof should leave the reader absolutely convinced of the proposition in question. In our rst topic, number and proof, we will will encounter many proofs with these qualities. In my humble opinion proof is the essence and beauty of mathematics. Lets see what you think. . .

5 / 60

Numbers
Natural numbers N = {1, 2, 3, . . .}1 Integers Z = {. . . , 2, 1, 0, 1, 2, . . .} Rational numbers Q = {m/n : m, n Z and n = 0} Real numbers R = {a : a (, )} Complex numbers C = {a + ib : a, b R} (Note: i = 1)

Notation
The symbol means is an element of, the colon is used to mean such that and the ellipses are a mathematical way of saying and so on. Together we will work our way through the sets of numbers looking at the special properties of each set and using them as vehicle to introduce dierent types of proof.
There is debate as to whether 0 is natural number, in this course we assume it is not.
6 / 60 1

Natural numbers
Denition
For any n N, we say a N divides n if n = ab for some b N

Notation
If a divides n we write a|n

Examples
3|18, 3 |19

Denition
A natural number p = 1 is called a prime if only 1|p and p |p .

Notation
Let P denote the set of primes. We refer to P as a subset of N since the set P is contained within the set N, this is written mathematically as P N. Are there innitely many primes?
7 / 60

To work towards our rst theorem we need a preliminary mathematical result, referred to as a lemma.

Lemma
Every natural number n > 1 has a prime divisor.

Proof (direct2 ).
If n is a prime, we have the result, since n|n, otherwise n = ab for some a, b < n. If a or b is a prime we have the result, otherwise we keep factorising the current divisors, getting smaller and smaller divisors of n until the process stops. We can be certain that the process stops as there is no innite sequence of descending natural numbers (mathematically this means that the natural numbers are of nite descent). Consequently we will nd a prime divisor of n.
A direct proof involves some combinations of axioms, denitions, known facts and earlier theorems. Note: An axiom is an accepted assumption, to be used without proof. It is generally an elementary statement that is so fundamental that it seems to need no justication.
8 / 60 2

Theorem
There are innitely many primes.

Proof (by contradiction3 ).

Suppose there are only nitely many primes, say p1 , p2 , . . . , pn . Set N = p1 p2 . . . pn + 1. From the previous Lemma, N must have a prime divisor, p say. However, none of p1 , p2 , . . . , pn divide N , since each leaves a remainder of 1. Thus p is not one of p1 , p2 , . . . , pn and in contradiction to our assumption. Therefore we conclude that there are innitely many primes.

A proof by contradiction involves assuming the required result is not true and then showing that this leads to something absurd.
9 / 60

More useful properties of primes

gcd(a, b ) = ma + nb , for some m, n Z. Here gcd(a, b ) denotes the greatest common divisor of a and b If p |ab for p , a, b N and p prime, then p |a or p |b . For any n N, any factorisation of n into primes is unique up to re-ordering. Extension for those interested: If you are interested in primes and these above properties you may like to investigate the Euclidean Algorithm. The Euclidean algorithm is an ecient way to nd the greatest common divisor of two numbers. The most important consequence of the Euclidean algorithm is the rst property listed above, i.e. gcd(a, b ) = ma + nb , for some m, n Z (1)

This result leads to the prime divisor property and unique prime factorisation. The proofs of these theorems will be included but for details of the Euclidean algorithm and the proof of (1) I cheekily refer you to Wikipedia.
10 / 60

Theorem (Prime divisor property)

If a prime p divides a product ab of natural numbers, then p |a or p |b .

Proof (direct).
Suppose p |a, required to show p |b . Since p is prime and only has divisors p and 1 and p |a we must have gcd(p , a) = 1. By (1) we have 1 = gcd(p , a) = mp + na (2) Multiplying (2) by b gives b = bmp + bna Now p |bmp and p |bna (since p |ab is given). Therefore p divides the sum of bmp and bna. Therefore p |b as required.

11 / 60

Theorem (Unique prime factorisation)

For any n N, any factorisation of n into primes is unique up to re-ordering.

Proof (by contradiction).

Take any n N and suppose that the prime factorisation of n is not unique. Take 2 dierent prime factorisations of n (n =)r1 r2 . . . rt = s1 s2 . . . su (3)

Cancel o each prime occurring on both sides of (3). We obtain the equation p1 p2 . . . pk = q1 q2 . . . ql , (4) where p1 , . . . , pk , q1 , . . . , ql are primes, and pi = qj for all i , j . Since p1 divides the LHS, we have p1 |RHS = q1 (q2 . . . ql ). By the prime divisor property we must have p1 |q1 or p1 |q2 . . . ql = q2 (q3 . . . ql ). Continuing this argument we have p1 |q1 or p1 |q2 or . . . or p1 |ql . Since each qi is prime, its only divisors are 1 and itself. Therefore p1 |qi implies p1 = qi for some i , a contradiction to our assumption that p1 is not on the RHS of (4). Therefore n has a unique prime factorisation (up to reordering).
12 / 60

Proof by induction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W8hmfGP6RI Proof by induction is often used to show a statement is true for all natural numbers. Proof by induction requires three steps. 1. Set up the proof by explicitly writing what we want to prove. Dene P (n) 2. Show that the statement holds for the simplest case, referred to as the base case. Show P (1) is true, or an appropriately low n 3. Assume the statement is true for an arbitrary number k (i.e. k could be any natural number), and then show from this assumption that the statement is true for the next case, k + 1. Show P (k ) P (k + 1) 4. Conclusion. Therefore, by mathematical induction P (n) is true for all n N The best way to get your head around proof by induction is to see it in action.
13 / 60

Example
Using the principles of mathematical induction prove that 1 + 2 + ... + n = n(n + 1) 2

Solution
Set up: For n = 1, 2, . . . , n let P (n) be the statement 1 + 2 + ... + n = n(n + 1) 2

Base case: [Show P(n) is true for n = 1, or lowest suitable natural number.] LHS P (1) = 1, and RHS P (1) = P (1) is true.
1(1+1) 2

= 1. Therefore

14 / 60

Inductive step: [Assume P (k ) is true and show that this implies P (k + 1) is true.] Assume P (k ) is true, i.e. k (k + 1) 2 Required to show from this that P (k + 1) is true. 1 + 2 + ... + k = LHS P (k + 1) = 1 + 2 + . . . + k + (k + 1) k (k + 1) + (k + 1) From assumption P (k ) is true = 2 k 2 + 3k + 2 = 2 (k + 1)(k + 2) = 2 (k + 1)((k + 1) + 1) = Important step!! 2 = RHS P (k + 1) Therefore P (k + 1) is true.
15 / 60

Conclusion: Therefore, by mathematical induction P (n) is true for all n N.

Three tips for induction: 1. You will ALWAYS use your assumption when showing P (k + 1) is true. 2. It may help to work backwards from the RHS of P (k + 1) (generally by expanding) to see how you can get to it. 3. Make sure you actually SHOW P (k + 1) to be true, i.e. there is a dierence between (k+2) and (k+1)+1.

An aside: When using the method of proof by induction some people assume P (n) is true, rather than P (k ). To me it doesnt make sense to assume what we are trying to prove is true. Yet it does make sense to assume the proposition is true for some arbitrary k .
16 / 60

The summation style proposition we saw above (1 + 2 + . . . + n) is one of three types of statements you will be required to prove by induction. For another example of this type of proof see Eg. 2.8 in your Notes. To practice mathematical induction on these types of statements refer to exercise 28. in your exercise book (I recommend 28 (b) and 28 (c) in particular).

17 / 60

A divisibility-styled induction

Example
Use mathematical induction to show that 3 divides n3 + 2n for n = 1, 2, . . ..

Solution
Set up: For n = 1, 2, . . ., let P (n) be the statement that 3|n3 + 2n. Base case: P (1) states that 13 + 2(1) = 3 is divisible by 3. Therefore P (1) is true. Inductive step: Assume P (k ) is true, i.e. 3|k 3 + 2k . Required to show from this that P (k + 1) is true. We consider (k + 1)3 + 2(k + 1). (k + 1)3 + 2(k + 1) = k 3 + 3k 2 + 3k + 1 + 2k + 2 = (k 3 + 2k ) + (3k 2 + 3k + 3)
Note: The nal manipulation is made so we can use our assumption.
18 / 60

By the assumption we have that 3|k 3 + 2k , also 3|3(k 2 + k + 1). Therefore 3 divides (k 3 + 2k ) + (3k 2 + 3k + 3) and so P (k + 1) is true. Conclusion: Therefore, by mathematical induction P (n) is true for all n N. The nal type of statement we can prove by induction is a simple inequality.

Example
Use mathematical induction to show that n! > 2n for n = 4, 5, . . .

Solution
Set up: Let P (n) be the proposition that n! > 2n for n = 4, 5, . . . Base case: LHS P (4) = 4! = 24, RHS P (4) = 24 = 16. Since 24 > 16 P (4) is true.
19 / 60

Induction step: Assume that P (k ) is true for k 4, i.e. k ! > 2k . Required to show from this that P (k + 1) is true. LHS P (k + 1) = (k + 1)! = k !(k + 1) > 2k (k + 1) >2
k +1

by assumption since k 4, k + 1 5 > 2

Therefore P (k + 1) is true. Conclusion: Therefore, by mathematical induction P (n) is true for all n N. You are now ready to try exercises 29. 30. 31. and 33. (you will be able to do 32. soon). Induction takes practice to get the hang of, do as many as you need to feel condent with the method.
Note 1: Inductions questions almost always appear in the exam!! Note 2: Exercise 30. (d) requires strong induction, (please refer to notes).
20 / 60

21 / 60

The integers
Denitions
An integer e is called even if there exists a z Z such that e = 2z . An integer o is called odd if there exists a z Z such that o = 2z + 1.

Example
Prove that the product of an odd and even integer is even.

Solution (Proof (direct))

Assume that a is an odd integer and b is an even integer. Then a = 2n + 1, and b = 2m, for m, n Z. Now ab = (2n + 1)(2m) = 4mn + 2m = 2(2mn + m) = 2k where k = 2mn + m. As m, n, 2 Z, k Z. Thus ab is an even integer as required. Using the integers we will introduce the notion of countability. But rst we will need to equip ourselves with some mathematical tools.
22 / 60

Our toolbox
Denition
A function f : X Y is called injective (or one-to-one), if f (x ) = f (z ) x = z for all x, z X . called surjective (or onto), if for all y Y there exists x X such that f (x ) = y . I.e. Range (Y ) = Codomain called bijective if it is both injective and surjective.

23 / 60

Some examples
Example
Show that f (x ) = x + 3 is injective but g (x ) = x 2 is not

Solution
If f (x1 ) = f (x2 ) then x1 + 3 = x2 + 3, and so x1 = x2 and f (x ) is injective. If g (x ) = 9, then x = 3, and so g (x ) is not injective.

Example
Show that f : R R, f (x ) = x 3 is surjective, but g : R R, g (x ) = x 2 is not surjective.

Solution
Take y R, if x 3 = y then x = sqrt [3]y R and so f (x ) is surjective. g (x ) is not surjective since x 2 = 1 for any x R. The above examples show that to prove something is true you need to prove that it is true in general, though to prove something is not true you only need one counter example.

24 / 60

You may be surprised to know that you have been using bijections since a very young age, when counting. To count a set of objects we assign one number to each object (f : N O ), every object gets a number (therefore surjective) and no number is assigned to more than one object (therefore injective).

Denition
Let A be a non-empty set. Then A is nite if there is a bijection f : {1, 2, . . . , n} A. We say that A has cardinality n, or |A| = n. Clearly N is innite, but it is countable as we can count its elements in some sense. If we start at 1 we will eventually get to any given natural number.

Denition
A set A is countably innite is there exists a bijection between it and the natural numbers. A set A is countable if it is either nite or countably innite.
25 / 60

If you were to compare the cardinality (or size) of N to Z you would think that |Z| 2|N|. However, mathematically the sets have the same cardinality, i.e. they are both countable. Lets see why.

Theorem
The integers are countable.

Proof.
We map the natural numbers to the integers as follows. First we write down the integers and then pick up an ordering that will eventually include any given integer.

That is, we choose the map f : N Z to be 1 0 2 1 3 1 4 2 5 2 6 3 7 3 8 4 9 4 ... ...

26 / 60

or f (n ) =

n 2, 1n 2 ,

if n is even, if n is odd.

This is a bijection between N and Z and consequently Z is countable. Aside: We dene |N| = 0 . Where is pronounced aleph.

Before moving onto the rational numbers we will see one more proof technique that uses the injective property.

27 / 60

The pigeonhole principle

Denition The pigeonhole principle [Dirichlet, 1834] states that if n items are put into m pigeonholes with m < n that that at least one pigeonhole must contain more than one item. For example here we have 10 pigeons and only 9 pigeonholes, at least one pigeonhole must have more than one pigeon.

Mathematically the pigeonhole principle can be stated as: There does not exist an injective function on a nite set whose codomain is smaller than the domain.
28 / 60

Example
Use the pigeonhole principle to show that given 5 points in a equilateral triangle of side length 1 that there are two points that are no more than 0.5.

Solution
Firstly divide the triangle into 4 equal sized regions as below.

Now, we are given 4 regions and 5 points. By the pigeonhole principle, at least one region contains more than one point. Since the largest possible distance between two points of one small triangle is given by the length of its side which is 0.5, the distance between any two such points does not exceed 0.5 You are now set to try exercises 14. 15. 17. 18. 19. 23. 25. and 32.

29 / 60

The rational numbers

Theorem
The positive rational numbers are countable.

Proof.
Although we do not come up with a nice formula for a map from N to Q we can show that such a map exists by listing the rational numbers as below. You will notice that there are some duplicates 1 and 2 of numbers, for example 1 2 . We include the rst equivalent number in our list but leave out the rest (those coloured red).

We leave proving that the rational numbers are countable for the tutorial.

30 / 60

Properties of the rationals

A complete list of the properties of Q are included below, and will also be relevant when we discuss the algebra of matrices in topic 4. Properties of Addition (P1) (a + b ) + c = a + (b + c ) (P2) a + b = b + a (P 3) a + 0 = a (P 4) a + (a) = 0

Associativity of addition Commutivity of addition Existence of additive identity Existence of additive inverse

Properties of Multiplication (P 5) (a b ) c = a (b c ) (P 6) a b = b a (P 7) a 1 = a where a = 0 (P 8) a a1 = 1 provided a = 0

Associativity of multiplication Commutivity of multiplication Existence of multiplicative identity Existence of multiplicative inverse
31 / 60

Distribution (Connecting Multn and Addn) (P 9) a (b + c ) = a b + a c Multn Distributes over Addn Properties of Inequality (P 10) a > 0 or a < 0 or a = 0 (but only one) (P 11) a > 0 and b > 0 a + b > 0 (P 12) a > 0 and b > 0 a b > 0
a Operations on Q Dene b := (a, b ) Addition (a, b ) + (c , d ) = (ad + bc , bd ) Subtraction (a, b ) (c , d ) = (a, b ) + (c , d ) Multiplication (a, b ) (c , d ) = (ac , bd ) Division (a, b ) (c , d ) = (a, b ) (d , c )

Trichotomy Closure of addition Closure of multn

You are not required to memorise these properties, however you are required to use them sensibly in proofs. For example, see exercises 1. and 2. Note: 2. (a) has appeared in a past exam!
32 / 60

Using the properties to obtain facts

Example
Show that if rx + s = t then x =
(t s ) r .

Solution
rx + s = t (rx + s ) + (s ) = t + (s ) rx + (s + (s )) = t + (s ) rx + 0 = t + (s ) rx = t s r 1 rx = r 1 (t s ) 1x =r (t s ) (t s ) x= r
1

(P 4) (P 1) (P 4) (P 4) (P 8) (P 8) (P 7)
33 / 60

You may have noticed that the properties of the rational numbers does not include a 0 = 0. The reason for this is that we can actually prove this using the above rules.

Theorem
a0=0

Proof.
a 0 = a (0 + 0) =a0+a0 a 0 + ((a 0)) = a 0 + a 0 + ((a 0)) 0=a0+0 0=a0 (P 4) (P 3) (P 3) (P 9)

34 / 60

This actually explains why we cant divide by 0. The proposition above shows that there cant possibly be a number 01 such that 0 01 = 1. Heres another enlightening proof. . .

Theorem
(a) (b ) = a b

Proof.
To prove this we require the simpler result (a) b = (a b ) We have (a) b + a b = ((a) + a) b =0b =0 (a) b + a b + (a b ) = 0 + (a b ) (a) b + 0 = 0 + (a b ) (a) b = (a b ) (P 4) (P35 3) / 60 (P 9) (P 4) and above Thm (5)

Fields
Denition
A eld is a set S together with two operations of addition (+) and multiplication () such that the following properties hold: the set is closed under addition and multiplication, that is a + b S and a b S for all a, b S . Commutativity: a + b = b + a and a b = b a. Associativity: a + (b + c ) = (a + b ) + c and a (b c ) = (a b ) c . Distributivity: a (b + c ) = a b + a c . Identities: There are distinct elements in S , 0 and 1, such that a + 0 = a and a 1 = a for all a S . Inverse: For each a S there is an element a S such that (a) + (a) = 0 and if a = 0, there is an element 1 a S such that a 1 = a . a
36 / 60

Again, you arent required to memorise these facts, however you are required to understand and use them. The set of rational numbers is a eld. Can you see why? The sets N and Z are not elds. Can you give a dierent reason for each why it is not?

37 / 60

Real numbers

38 / 60

Theorem (Cantors diagonalisation argument)

The set of real numbers between 0 and 1 are not countable.

Proof (by contradiction).

Assume that the real numbers are countable. Therefore there is a bijection f : N R. This allows us to list the real numbers in the order given by this bijection. Say x1 , x2 , x3 , . . .. We now form a new number x = 0.a1 a2 a3 a4 . . . which therefore must be from our list of real numbers. Set a1 to be any number not equal to the rst decimal place of x1 , set a2 to be any number not equal to the second decimal place of x2 , continue in this way. This means that x diers from each of x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . in at least one place, and so x = xi for all i , a contradiction to x being from our list of real numbers. Therefore the set of real numbers between 0 and 1 are not countable. Note: An immediate consequence of this result is that R is not countable (since |N | < |[0, 1]| and [0, 1] R). Also, |R| = 1 .

39 / 60

Irrational numbers
The irrational numbers (I) are what extends the rational numbers to the reals. I.e R = Q I. Irrational numbers cannot not be expressed as fractions and therefore cannot be represented as terminating or periodic decimals, they are interesting in that they are dened by what they are not rather than what they are. The main proof you will be required to do for these numbers is prove that certain numbers (like 6 and log2 3) are irrational. Here are two examples.

40 / 60

Example
Prove that

6 is irrational

Solution (Proof by contradiction)

Assume 6 is rational. Therefore p 6= for p , q Z, where gcd(p , q ) = 1 q p2 23= 2 q 2 3 q2 = p2

There is an odd power of 2 on the left hand side and an even power of two on the right hand side, a contradiction and so 6 is irrational.

41 / 60

An alternate proof, with the same beginning

Proof.
Assume

6 is rational. Therefore p 6= for p , q Z, where gcd(p , q ) = 1 q p2 23= 2 q 2 3 q2 = p2

2|p 2 2|p (by the prime divisor property). Therefore p = 2k for some k Z and we have 2 3q 2 = 4k 2 3q 2 = 2k 2 2|q 2 2|q . A contradiction to the assumption that gcd(p , q ) = 1 and so 6 is irrational.

42 / 60

Example
Show that log2 3 is irrational

Proof.
Suppose, on the contrary, that log2 3 = Then a b fora, b Z, gcd(a, b ) = 1.
a

2 b = 3. Raising both sides to the power of b gives 2a = 3b The left hand side of this equation is always even, the right hand side is always odd. This is our contradiction, and so log2 3 is irrational. You can now try exercises 6. 20. 21. and 22. Note: These are a common questions!!
43 / 60

Absolute values and the triangle inequality

You would have come across the absolute value symbol in maths methods, where |x | gives the distance of x from the origin - or can be thought of as your optimistic friend who always turns things into a positive. Mathematically it is dened by |x | := x; x ; x 0 x <0

Examples
| 3| = (3) = 3, |4| = 4 and y = |x | looks like

44 / 60

The following examples will give you an indication of how to do exercises 9. and 10.

Example
Transform the inequality |3x 2| < 5 to an equivalent inequality free of the modulus sign a) in the form a < x < b and b) using set notation, as in |x | > 1 becomes (, 1) (1, +).

Solution
The initial working can be done many dierent ways, heres two. I prefer to draw the graph to give me an indication of what is going on.

45 / 60

Using the picture I nd the points of intersection, 3x 2 = 5 x = 7 3 and (3x 2) = 5 x = 1. Looking back 7 . at our picture we see that this indicates 1 < x < 3 Alternatively |3x 2| < 5 5 < 3x 2 < 5 1 < x < 7 3. a) 1 < x <
7 3

b) x (1, 7 3) There are more examples in your notes if you need them.

46 / 60

The triangle inequality

The triangle inequality is given by |x + y | |x | + |y |, for x , y R It can be extended in many ways (we will see the complex and vector extensions during this course). Before proving the triangle inequality we need two preliminary results (or lemmas).

Lemma
|x |2 = (x 2 ) x R

Proof.
If x 0 then |x |2 = (x )2 = x 2 . If x < 0 then |x |2 = (x )2 = x 2 .

Lemma
|xy | = |x ||y | I will leave the proof for you as an exercise (Hint: use the above Lemma).
47 / 60

Theorem (The triangle inequality)

For x , y R, |x + y | |x | + |y |

Proof.
|x + y |2 = (x + y )2 = x 2 + 2xy + y 2 = |x |2 + 2xy + |y |2 |x |2 + 2|xy | + |y |2 = |x |2 + 2|x ||y | + |y |2 = (|x | + |y |)
2

By above Lemma

By above Lemma

A corollary of the triangle inequality (i.e. a result that follows from it) is |x + y | |x | |y |, this is also left for you to prove as an exercise. The following leads to an application of the triangle inequality.
48 / 60

Whatsup with sup and inf?

Denition
A set S is bounded above if there exists a real number b such that x b for all x S . We call b an upper bound for S . If is an upper bound for S and if for all b such that b is an upper bound for S b then is the least upper bound or supremum (sup for short), we write = supS .

Denition
A set S is bounded below if there exists a real number b such that x b for all x S . We call b an lower bound for S . If is an lower bound for S and if for all b such that b is an lower bound for S b then is the greatest lower bound or inmum (inf for short), we write = inf S .

49 / 60

To prove that a number, say is the supremum (or inmum) of a set you need to prove two things 1. That is in fact an upper bound 2. That if for any b that is also an upper bound then . Lets see this in action.

Example
Prove that S = {x R : 0 x

6} has a real supremum R

all x S . That is 6 is an sup(S ) = 6, as clearly x 6 for upper bound for the set and since 6 S no lower number could be an upper bound for S .

Solution

50 / 60

Example
Prove that T = {x Q : 0 x supremum Q

6} does not have a rational

Solution
We show that T has many rational upper bounds. Suppose a is the least upper bound of T . By the previous example we know that a 6, however since a Q we must have a > 6 (as we recently proved that 6 is irrational). But by the density of Q there exists a c Q such that 6 < c < a. This means c is an upper bound of T , which contradicts our assumption that a is the upper bound of T . Hence T cannot have a rational least upper bound/supremum. You can now try exercise 11. in your exercise booklet.
Note 1: This example shows that the supremum (or inmum) does not need to be an element of the set. The maximum element of a set (if it exists) will be the supremum, but a set doesnt need a maximum to have a supremum. Note 2: A variation of these two examples was in last years exam..

51 / 60

Absolute values and upper bounds, together at last

Example
Assume that |x 5| < 2. Find an upper bound for x 2 + 5x + 2 x +6

Solution
Firstly we note that |x 5| < 2 3 < x < 7. To nd an upper bound for the function we need to nd an upper value for the numerator and a lower bound for the denominator. Using the triangle inequality we obtain |x 2 + 5x + 2| |x 2 | + |5x | + |2| 72 + 5 7 + 2 = 86
52 / 60

and |x + 6| |3 + 6| = 9 Therefore, for x such that |x 5| < 2, an upper bound for x 2 + 5x + 2 x +6 is 86/9.

Note 1: This answer is not unique, all we need to ensure is that the function does not get higher than 86/9 when |x 5| < 2. You can check this graphically if you wish.

Note 2: These types of ideas are used in higher level maths in nding limits of functions.
53 / 60

Additional notes:

These notes are required to answer all exercises in the exercises, though not often assessed on the exam. These will be set as additional reading.

54 / 60

Summation notation
You would have come across summation notation in Maths Methods. For example in probability we have E (X ) =
x

x .Pr (X = x )

Where

means to add up over all values.

Relating to our work in UMEP we have

n

1 + 2 + ... + n =
k =1

In this course you are required to know how to manipulate the summation notation to obtain results. Lets see what I mean by that. . .
55 / 60

Some general manipulations of summations

6

The variable Xi is as:

i =3

Xi = X3 + X4 + X5 + X6
i

S1. The role of the constant S2. Summing over a constant

N

kXi = k
N i =1 k

Xi

= kN
N N

S3. Summation of two sums

i =1

(Xi + Yi ) =
i =1 N p

Xi +
i =1 N

Yi

S4. Separating the summation

i =1

Xi =
i =1 N

Xi +

Xi
i =p +1

N +p

S5. Changing terminals

i =1

Xi =
i =1+p

Xi p

Using these manipulations we can reduce summations to polynomial expressions.

56 / 60

Example
Show that

(2k 1) = n2 . Hint: 2k 1 = k 2 (k 1)2

k =1

Solution
n n

(2k 1) =
k =1 k =1 n

k 2 (k 1)2
n

Using the hint Using S3. Using S1.

=
k =1 n

k2 +
k =1 n

((k 1)2 ) (k 1)2

k =1 n 1

=
k =1 n

k2 k2
k =1 n 1 k =0

k2
n1

Using S5. k 2 ) = n2
k =1

=
k =1

k 2 + n2 (0 +

Using S4.
57 / 60

The above example was taken from your exercise book. To ensure you have adequate practice I give you this additional exercise.

Exercise
27. (e) Show the following without using mathematical induction
n

(k 3)2 =
k =1

1 2n3 15n2 + 37n 6

Hint: Use 27. (c)

You are now ready to take on exercises 26. and 27.

58 / 60

Expressing periodic decimals as fractions

Theorem (From Tutorial 2)
1 = 0.999 . . .

Proof.
Let x = 0.999 . . .. Then = Thus x = 1.000 . . .. A similar proof can be used to show the following result (you can show me how in your rst assignment!) a a + ar + ar 2 + ar 3 + . . . = 1r This result will be very useful to us when nding fractions to represent periodic decimals. 10x = 9.999 . . . x = 0.999 . . . 9x = 9.000 . . .

59 / 60

Example
Express the number 3.009009009 . . . as a fraction.

Solution
3.009009009 . . . = 3 + 0.009 + 0.000009 + 0.000000009 + . . . = 3 + 9 103 + 9 106 + 9 109 + . . . 9 1 2 1 =3+ + + ... 1+ 1000 1000 1000 9 1 =3+ 1 1000 1 1000 9 =3+ 999 334 = 111 An additional example can be found in your notes (eg 1.5). For additional practice see exercises 7. and 8. in your exercise book.
60 / 60