18.

100A PS14
Author: Eric Emer April 8, 2013

Reading 12 and 13 of Mattuck Collaborators: None.

Exercise 12.1 #1

We seek to prove that a continuous function whose values are always rationals is in fact a constant function. Proof. Suppose that f is a continuous function whose values are always rationals. We suppose for the sake of contradiction that f is not a constant function. This means that for all k R, f (k ) = q for some q Q. Consider a compact interval [a, b] on f , where a < b with a, b R and this subinterval is not constant. A non-constant function must have some non-constant subinterval. We know that f must be continuous on [a, b] because f is a continuous function. Because we assumed that f is not constant, it must be that f (a) f (b). Suppose j [f (a), f (b)] (or j [f (b), f (a)]) is an irrational number. There is an irrational number between every two rationals. By the intermediate value theorem, j = f (c) for some c [a, b]. However, f is supposed to be a continuous function whose values are always rationals. This is a contradiction. So in fact, f must be a constant function.

Exercise 12.2 #1

We seek to understand why this works. Consider a circle drawn on the topographic map. Start at some point on the circle x. We let the point diametrically opposite x on the circle be d(x). We dene the elevation dierence to be h(x) h(d(x)). Now, we move x around the circle until we reach d(x). At this point, the elevation dierence is h(d(x)) h(d(d(x))) = h(d(x)) h(x). We note that if h(x) h(d(x)) is positive then h(d(x)) h(x) is negative. This means that at some point as we moved x to d(x), the dierence in elevation was 0. This is inherent by the Intermediate Value Theorem.

Exercise 12.2 #3

The goal of this problem is to show that there are innitely many solutions to the equation f (x) = x tan x. This means that there are innitely many x where x = tan x. Proof. We see that the function tan x is periodic with period P = 2 . In addition, tan x has n vertical asymptotes and is undened at x = +2 for all n Z. As a result, tan x is continuous 2 (2n1) (2n+1) and unbounded on every interval In = ( 2 , ). Consider some x In . We know that: 2
x(
(2n1) + ) 2

lim lim

tan x = tan x = +

x(

(2n+1) ) 2

1) Therefore, within the interval In , knowing ( (2n ) to be nite, as x approaches the right end of 2 the interval tan x >> x, and as x approaches the left end of the interval tan x << x. Therefore, within every In , there exists x1 In such that x1 tan x1 < 0, and there also exists a dierent x2 such that x2 tan x2 > 0. By Bolzanos Theorem, because f (x) = x tan x is continuous and changes sign within the interval In , f (x) must have a zero on In . Because there are innitely many n Z, we can conclude that there are innitely many In , and therefore innitely many solutions to f (x).

We are also expected to come up with a simple function f (n) such that xn f (n) 0 as n . Notably, this function is the right end of our interval In : f (n) = (2n + 1) 2

Problem 12-2

Proof. Assume for the sake of contradiction that f (x) is not strictly increasing. By denition of strictly increasing, for not-strictly-increasing f (x), there exist x1 , x2 [a, b] with a < x1 < x2 < b such that f (x1 ) f (x2 ). We notice that the event of f (x1 ) = f (x2 ) does not satisfy the constraint that f (x) does not repeat any values. Therefore, we only explore the possibility of f (x1 ) > f (x2 ). Given the interval f (I ) = [f (a), f (b)] and the fact that f (x) never repeats a value, it must be that f (a) < f (x2 ), because f (a) is the minimum on interval I . Putting these together, we have: f (a) < f (x2 ) < f (x1 ) We know that f is continuous, therefore, by applying the IVT to the interval [a, x1 ], there must exist some c (a, x1 ) for which f (c) = f (x2 ). However, this is a contradiction, because it violates the constraint that f (x) must not repeat any values. Therefore, in fact, f (x) is strictly increasing.

5
5.1

Exercise 13.3 #1
a

We seek to prove that f (x) has no minimum on I . Proof. Suppose for the sake of contradiction that f (x) has minimum m. We notice that as limx f (x) = 0, and that f (x) > 0 for all x. Therefore, 0 is by denition the greatest lower bound of f (x), and also the inmum. By denition of a minimum, a minimum m only exists if m = inf I f (x) and m {f (x)}. We know that 0 / {f (x)}. Therefore, we have our minimum m, m = 0 = inf I f (x). This is a contradiction. As a result, indeed, f (x) has no minimum.

5.2

Proof. A function which does not have limx f (x) = + is bounded above. Therefore, f (x) must have some supremum, or lowest upper bound, M = sup f (x). Suppose for the sake of contradiction that the function f does not have a maximum, and only has supremum M . Then, either limx f (x) = M or limx f (x) = M . However, we already know that limx f (x) = limx f (x) = 0, and f (x) > 0 for all x. This is a contradiction. Indeed, f (x) does have a maximum M = supI f (x).

5.3

Proof. A function which does not have limx f (x) = + is bounded above. Therefore, f (x) must have some supremum, or lowest upper bound, M = sup f (x). Because limx f (x) = limx+ f (x), there must be some a 1 and some b 1 such that f (a) = f (b). Putting this

together, we have f continuous, f (a) = f (b), and a Theorem, there exist x1 , x2 [a, b] such that:

1 < 1

b. Therefore, by the Maximum

f (x2 ) f (x) f (x1 ) for all x [a, b]. And, f (x1 ) = M = sup[a,b] f (x). We see that the only case where this does not hold is for |a|, |b| 1. However, we note that if M is the maximum of [a, b], then it is also the maximum of any subset of [a, b]. Therefore, for suciently large positive b, and suciently large negative a, there exists an M = supI f (x), the maximum of f (x).