Proof of Froda's Theorem (explanation)
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Theorem: Let $f$ be a real valued function of real variable defined on open interval $(a,b)$ and let $f$ be monotonic. Then the set of all discontinuities is at most countable.
I would like an explanation for several steps in the proof given here
The proof:
WLOG let $f$ be monotonic increasing and let $x_0$ be a point of discontinuity, because $f$ is discontinuous at $x_0$, it follows that $lim_{xto x_0}f(x)neq f(x_0)$. Denote
$$f(x_0^-)=lim_{xto x_0^-}f(x)$$
$$f(x_0^+)=lim_{xto x_0 ^+}f(x)$$
Because $f$ is increasing, it follows that $f(x_0^-)<f(x_0^+)$ (Because $f$ is discontinuous, the strict ienquality holds.) Define intervals for each $x_i$ (the point of discontinuity)
$$S(x_i)={ymid f(x_i^-)<y<f(x_i^+)}$$
Now, the system of $S(x_i)$'s is pairwise disjoint and each of $S(x_i)$ is contained in compact interval $[f(a),f(b)]$. Now, it sufficies to pick a random rational number from each $S(x_i)$ thus associating each $x_i$ with some number $qinmathbb{Q}$ thus making an injection $psi:bigcup S(x_i)rightarrow mathbb{Q}$. Thus $bigcup S(x_i)$ is at most countable.
My questions:
- What about the case when the one sided limits would go to infinity?
Is this a rigorous-enough explanation?
It is clear that if any left-sided limit goes to $+infty$ at some point, say $x_i$, then in the interval $(x_i,b)$ is atleast one more point, say $r_1$ for which the value $f(r_1)>infty$ (because $f$ is monotonic increasing), but that's not possible, since nothing is above $infty$.
Simillarly, if any left-sided limit goes to $-infty$ at some point, say $x_j$, then in the inrval $(a,x_i)$ there is some $r_2$ such that $f(r_2)<-infty$...etc.
Is my reasoning correct?
real-analysis continuity proof-explanation monotone-functions
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Theorem: Let $f$ be a real valued function of real variable defined on open interval $(a,b)$ and let $f$ be monotonic. Then the set of all discontinuities is at most countable.
I would like an explanation for several steps in the proof given here
The proof:
WLOG let $f$ be monotonic increasing and let $x_0$ be a point of discontinuity, because $f$ is discontinuous at $x_0$, it follows that $lim_{xto x_0}f(x)neq f(x_0)$. Denote
$$f(x_0^-)=lim_{xto x_0^-}f(x)$$
$$f(x_0^+)=lim_{xto x_0 ^+}f(x)$$
Because $f$ is increasing, it follows that $f(x_0^-)<f(x_0^+)$ (Because $f$ is discontinuous, the strict ienquality holds.) Define intervals for each $x_i$ (the point of discontinuity)
$$S(x_i)={ymid f(x_i^-)<y<f(x_i^+)}$$
Now, the system of $S(x_i)$'s is pairwise disjoint and each of $S(x_i)$ is contained in compact interval $[f(a),f(b)]$. Now, it sufficies to pick a random rational number from each $S(x_i)$ thus associating each $x_i$ with some number $qinmathbb{Q}$ thus making an injection $psi:bigcup S(x_i)rightarrow mathbb{Q}$. Thus $bigcup S(x_i)$ is at most countable.
My questions:
- What about the case when the one sided limits would go to infinity?
Is this a rigorous-enough explanation?
It is clear that if any left-sided limit goes to $+infty$ at some point, say $x_i$, then in the interval $(x_i,b)$ is atleast one more point, say $r_1$ for which the value $f(r_1)>infty$ (because $f$ is monotonic increasing), but that's not possible, since nothing is above $infty$.
Simillarly, if any left-sided limit goes to $-infty$ at some point, say $x_j$, then in the inrval $(a,x_i)$ there is some $r_2$ such that $f(r_2)<-infty$...etc.
Is my reasoning correct?
real-analysis continuity proof-explanation monotone-functions
Regarding the use of the name "Froda", see Brian S. Thomson's answer to Proof of Froda's theorem and my answer to A search for theorems which appear to have very few, if any hypotheses.
– Dave L. Renfro
Nov 15 at 6:55
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Theorem: Let $f$ be a real valued function of real variable defined on open interval $(a,b)$ and let $f$ be monotonic. Then the set of all discontinuities is at most countable.
I would like an explanation for several steps in the proof given here
The proof:
WLOG let $f$ be monotonic increasing and let $x_0$ be a point of discontinuity, because $f$ is discontinuous at $x_0$, it follows that $lim_{xto x_0}f(x)neq f(x_0)$. Denote
$$f(x_0^-)=lim_{xto x_0^-}f(x)$$
$$f(x_0^+)=lim_{xto x_0 ^+}f(x)$$
Because $f$ is increasing, it follows that $f(x_0^-)<f(x_0^+)$ (Because $f$ is discontinuous, the strict ienquality holds.) Define intervals for each $x_i$ (the point of discontinuity)
$$S(x_i)={ymid f(x_i^-)<y<f(x_i^+)}$$
Now, the system of $S(x_i)$'s is pairwise disjoint and each of $S(x_i)$ is contained in compact interval $[f(a),f(b)]$. Now, it sufficies to pick a random rational number from each $S(x_i)$ thus associating each $x_i$ with some number $qinmathbb{Q}$ thus making an injection $psi:bigcup S(x_i)rightarrow mathbb{Q}$. Thus $bigcup S(x_i)$ is at most countable.
My questions:
- What about the case when the one sided limits would go to infinity?
Is this a rigorous-enough explanation?
It is clear that if any left-sided limit goes to $+infty$ at some point, say $x_i$, then in the interval $(x_i,b)$ is atleast one more point, say $r_1$ for which the value $f(r_1)>infty$ (because $f$ is monotonic increasing), but that's not possible, since nothing is above $infty$.
Simillarly, if any left-sided limit goes to $-infty$ at some point, say $x_j$, then in the inrval $(a,x_i)$ there is some $r_2$ such that $f(r_2)<-infty$...etc.
Is my reasoning correct?
real-analysis continuity proof-explanation monotone-functions
Theorem: Let $f$ be a real valued function of real variable defined on open interval $(a,b)$ and let $f$ be monotonic. Then the set of all discontinuities is at most countable.
I would like an explanation for several steps in the proof given here
The proof:
WLOG let $f$ be monotonic increasing and let $x_0$ be a point of discontinuity, because $f$ is discontinuous at $x_0$, it follows that $lim_{xto x_0}f(x)neq f(x_0)$. Denote
$$f(x_0^-)=lim_{xto x_0^-}f(x)$$
$$f(x_0^+)=lim_{xto x_0 ^+}f(x)$$
Because $f$ is increasing, it follows that $f(x_0^-)<f(x_0^+)$ (Because $f$ is discontinuous, the strict ienquality holds.) Define intervals for each $x_i$ (the point of discontinuity)
$$S(x_i)={ymid f(x_i^-)<y<f(x_i^+)}$$
Now, the system of $S(x_i)$'s is pairwise disjoint and each of $S(x_i)$ is contained in compact interval $[f(a),f(b)]$. Now, it sufficies to pick a random rational number from each $S(x_i)$ thus associating each $x_i$ with some number $qinmathbb{Q}$ thus making an injection $psi:bigcup S(x_i)rightarrow mathbb{Q}$. Thus $bigcup S(x_i)$ is at most countable.
My questions:
- What about the case when the one sided limits would go to infinity?
Is this a rigorous-enough explanation?
It is clear that if any left-sided limit goes to $+infty$ at some point, say $x_i$, then in the interval $(x_i,b)$ is atleast one more point, say $r_1$ for which the value $f(r_1)>infty$ (because $f$ is monotonic increasing), but that's not possible, since nothing is above $infty$.
Simillarly, if any left-sided limit goes to $-infty$ at some point, say $x_j$, then in the inrval $(a,x_i)$ there is some $r_2$ such that $f(r_2)<-infty$...etc.
Is my reasoning correct?
real-analysis continuity proof-explanation monotone-functions
real-analysis continuity proof-explanation monotone-functions
asked Nov 14 at 23:28
Michal Dvořák
831415
831415
Regarding the use of the name "Froda", see Brian S. Thomson's answer to Proof of Froda's theorem and my answer to A search for theorems which appear to have very few, if any hypotheses.
– Dave L. Renfro
Nov 15 at 6:55
add a comment |
Regarding the use of the name "Froda", see Brian S. Thomson's answer to Proof of Froda's theorem and my answer to A search for theorems which appear to have very few, if any hypotheses.
– Dave L. Renfro
Nov 15 at 6:55
Regarding the use of the name "Froda", see Brian S. Thomson's answer to Proof of Froda's theorem and my answer to A search for theorems which appear to have very few, if any hypotheses.
– Dave L. Renfro
Nov 15 at 6:55
Regarding the use of the name "Froda", see Brian S. Thomson's answer to Proof of Froda's theorem and my answer to A search for theorems which appear to have very few, if any hypotheses.
– Dave L. Renfro
Nov 15 at 6:55
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
$f$ is given to be real valued. There is no way $f(x-)$ or $f(x+)$ can be $infty$ or $-infty$ at any point. For example $f(y)leq f(x)$ if $a<y<x$ so $f(x-) leq f(x)<infty$ . Similarly, $f(x-) geq f(y)>-infty$ for any $y in (a,x)$, etc. Your argument for countability of the set of discontinuity points is correct.
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
$f$ is given to be real valued. There is no way $f(x-)$ or $f(x+)$ can be $infty$ or $-infty$ at any point. For example $f(y)leq f(x)$ if $a<y<x$ so $f(x-) leq f(x)<infty$ . Similarly, $f(x-) geq f(y)>-infty$ for any $y in (a,x)$, etc. Your argument for countability of the set of discontinuity points is correct.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
$f$ is given to be real valued. There is no way $f(x-)$ or $f(x+)$ can be $infty$ or $-infty$ at any point. For example $f(y)leq f(x)$ if $a<y<x$ so $f(x-) leq f(x)<infty$ . Similarly, $f(x-) geq f(y)>-infty$ for any $y in (a,x)$, etc. Your argument for countability of the set of discontinuity points is correct.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
$f$ is given to be real valued. There is no way $f(x-)$ or $f(x+)$ can be $infty$ or $-infty$ at any point. For example $f(y)leq f(x)$ if $a<y<x$ so $f(x-) leq f(x)<infty$ . Similarly, $f(x-) geq f(y)>-infty$ for any $y in (a,x)$, etc. Your argument for countability of the set of discontinuity points is correct.
$f$ is given to be real valued. There is no way $f(x-)$ or $f(x+)$ can be $infty$ or $-infty$ at any point. For example $f(y)leq f(x)$ if $a<y<x$ so $f(x-) leq f(x)<infty$ . Similarly, $f(x-) geq f(y)>-infty$ for any $y in (a,x)$, etc. Your argument for countability of the set of discontinuity points is correct.
answered Nov 14 at 23:46
Kavi Rama Murthy
41.3k31751
41.3k31751
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2998964%2fproof-of-frodas-theorem-explanation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Regarding the use of the name "Froda", see Brian S. Thomson's answer to Proof of Froda's theorem and my answer to A search for theorems which appear to have very few, if any hypotheses.
– Dave L. Renfro
Nov 15 at 6:55