| 
December 13th, 2008, 04:11 PM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3
Country: Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | Lower and Upper Darboux Sums Let ![f(x) : [a,b] -> R f(x) : [a,b] -> R](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/e61d33eeac02589d40724058d50c77fe-1.gif) be a bounded function such that  for any partition P of [a,b].
Prove that there exists a constant c such that  for any x in [a,b] (by contradiction) .
Appreciate if someone could help on this one. Thanks... | 
December 13th, 2008, 05:25 PM
|  | The Lord of The Rings! | | Join Date: May 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,995
Country: Thanks: 237
Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,078 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by seniorcalculus Let ![f(x) : [a,b] -> R f(x) : [a,b] -> R](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/1aa2ec2bb1ac4c91b312f19472acfa26-1.gif) be a bounded function such that  for any partition P of [a,b].
Prove that there exists a constant c such that  for any x in [a,b] (by contradiction) .
Appreciate if someone could help on this one. Thanks... | it's really trivial! let  let ![M=\sup_{x \in [a,b]}f(x), \ m=\inf_{x \in [a,b]}f(x). M=\sup_{x \in [a,b]}f(x), \ m=\inf_{x \in [a,b]}f(x).](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/35cce3e76c8d5d9f1880719ca540c957-1.gif) then:  thus  which means  is constant. | 
December 13th, 2008, 05:46 PM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3
Country: Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | Okay, thanks. But that's a direct proof, right? I kinda need help for proof by contradiction though. | 
December 13th, 2008, 06:09 PM
|  | The Lord of The Rings! | | Join Date: May 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,995
Country: Thanks: 237
Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,078 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by seniorcalculus Okay, thanks. But that's a direct proof, right? I kinda need help for proof by contradiction though. | it's the same proof! let  be as above. suppose  is not constant. then  but  thus  contradiction! | | The following users thank NonCommAlg for this useful post: | |  | 
December 13th, 2008, 06:28 PM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3
Country: Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | Okay, I understand it now. Thanks, NonCommAlg 
But, I realized that you have picked an instance of a partition in this case, which is P={a,b}. But in the proof we have to show that for any partition interval. Shouldn't we have to assume for any partition P? | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:16 AM. | | |
 | |  |