DOCSLIB.ORG

Real Analysis: Part I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Real Analysis: Part I Real Analysis: Part I William G. Faris February 2, 2004 ii Contents 1 Mathematical proof 1 1.1 Logical language . 1 1.2 Free and bound variables . 3 1.3 Proofs from analysis . 4 1.4 Natural deduction . 6 1.5 Natural deduction strategies . 13 1.6 Equality . 16 1.7 Lemmas and theorems . 18 1.8 More proofs from analysis . 19 2 Sets 21 2.1 Zermelo axioms . 21 2.2 Comments on the axioms . 22 2.3 Ordered pairs and Cartesian product . 25 2.4 Relations and functions . 26 2.5 Number systems . 28 3 Relations, Functions, Dynamical Systems 31 3.1 Identity, composition, inverse, intersection . 31 3.2 Picturing relations . 32 3.3 Equivalence relations . 32 3.4 Generating relations . 32 3.5 Ordered sets . 33 3.6 Functions . 33 3.7 Relations inverse to functions . 34 3.8 Dynamical systems . 34 3.9 Picturing dynamical systems . 35 3.10 Structure of dynamical systems . 35 4 Functions, Cardinal Number 39 4.1 Functions . 39 4.2 Picturing functions . 40 4.3 Indexed sums and products . 40 4.4 Cartesian powers . 41 iii iv CONTENTS 4.5 Cardinality . 41 5 Ordered sets and completeness 45 5.1 Ordered sets . 45 5.2 Order completeness . 46 5.3 Sequences in a complete lattice . 47 5.4 Order completion . 48 5.5 The Knaster-Tarski fixed point theorem . 49 5.6 The extended real number system . 49 6 Metric spaces 51 6.1 Metric space notions . 51 6.2 Normed vector spaces . 51 6.3 Spaces of finite sequences . 52 6.4 Spaces of infinite sequences . 52 6.5 Spaces of bounded continuous functions . 54 6.6 Open and closed sets . 54 6.7 Continuity . 55 6.8 Uniformly equivalent metrics . 57 6.9 Sequences . 58 7 Metric spaces and completeness 61 7.1 Completeness . 61 7.2 Uniform equivalence of metric spaces . 63 7.3 Completion . 63 7.4 The Banach fixed point theorem . 64 7.5 Coerciveness . 65 8 Metric spaces and compactness 67 8.1 Total boundedness . 67 8.2 Compactness . 68 8.3 Countable product spaces . 69 8.4 Compactness and continuous functions . 70 8.5 Semicontinuity . 71 8.6 Compact sets of continuous functions . 71 8.7 Curves of minimum length . 73 9 Vector lattices 75 9.1 Positivity . 75 9.2 Integration of regulated functions . 76 9.3 The Riemann integral . 76 9.4 Step functions . 77 9.5 Coin tossing . 79 9.6 Vector lattices . 81 9.7 Elementary integrals . 82 9.8 Integration on a product of finite spaces . 82 CONTENTS v 10 The integral 85 10.1 The Daniell construction . 85 10.2 Stage one . 87 10.3 Stage two . 88 10.4 Example: Coin tossing . 88 10.5 Example: Lebesgue measure . 91 11 Measurable functions 95 11.1 Monotone classes . 95 11.2 Generating monotone classes . 96 11.3 Sigma-algebras of functions . 97 11.4 Generating sigma-algebras . 99 11.5 Sigma-rings of functions . 100 11.6 Rings and algebras of sets . 102 12 The integral on measurable functions 105 12.1 Integration . 105 12.2 Uniqueness of integrals . 107 12.3 Existence of integrals . 108 12.4 Probability and expectation . 108 12.5 Image integrals . 109 12.6 The Lebesgue integral . 111 12.7 The Lebesgue-Stieltjes integral . 112 12.8 Integrals on a σ-ring . 116 13 Integrals and measures 117 13.1 Terminology . 117 13.2 Convergence theorems . 118 13.3 Measure . 120 13.4 Extended real valued measurable functions . 122 13.5 Fubini's theorem for sums and integrals . 122 13.6 Fubini's theorem for sums . 123 14 Fubini's theorem 127 14.1 Introduction . 127 14.2 Sigma-finite integrals . 129 14.3 Summation . 130 14.4 Product sigma-algebras . 131 14.5 The product integral . 132 14.6 Tonelli's theorem . 133 14.7 Fubini's theorem . 136 14.8 Semirings and rings of sets . 137 vi CONTENTS 15 Probability 139 15.1 Coin-tossing . 139 15.2 Weak law of large numbers . 140 15.3 Strong law of large numbers . 141 15.4 Random walk . 142 Chapter 1 Mathematical proof 1.1 Logical language There are many useful ways to present mathematics; sometimes a picture or a physical analogy produces more understanding than a complicated equation. However, the language of mathematical logic has a unique advantage: it gives a standard form for presenting mathematical truth. If there is doubt about whether a mathematical formulation is clear or precise, this doubt can be re- solved by converting to this format. The value of a mathematical discovery is considerably enhanced if it is presented in a way that makes it clear that the result and its proof could be stated in such a rigorous framework. Here is a somewhat simplified model of the language of mathematical logic. There may be function symbols. These may be 0-place function symbols, or constants. These stand for objects in some set. Example: 8. Or they may be 1-place functions symbols. These express functions from some set to itself, that is, with one input and one output. Example: square. Or they may be 2-place function symbols. These express functions with two inputs and one output. Example: +. Once the function symbols have been specified, then one can form terms. The language also has a collection of variables x; y; z; x0; y0; z0;:::. Each variable is a term. Each constant c is a term. If t is a term, and f is a 1-place function symbol, then f(t) is a term. If s and t are terms, and g is a 2-place function symbol, then g(s; t) or (sgt) is a term. Example: In an language with constant terms 1; 2; 3 and 2-place function symbol + the expression (x + 2) is a term, and the expression (3+(x+2)) is a term. Note: Sometimes it is a convenient abbreviation to omit outer parentheses. Thus 3 + (x + 2) would be an abbreviation for (3 + (x + 2)). The second ingredient is predicate symbols. These may be 0-place predicate symbols, or propositional symbols. They may stand for complete sentences. One useful symbol of this nature is ?, which is interpreted as always false. Or they may be 1-place predicate symbols. These express properties. Example: even. 1 2 CHAPTER 1. MATHEMATICAL PROOF Or they may be 2-place predicate symbols. These express relations. Example: <. Once the terms have been specified, then the atomic formulas are specified. A propositional symbol is an atomic formula. If p is a property symbol, and t is a term, then tp is an atomic formula. If s and t are terms, and r is a relation symbol, then srt is an atomic formula. Thus (x + 2) < 3 is an atomic formula. Note: This could be abbreviated x + 2 < 3. Finally there are logical symbols ^, _, ), 8, 9, and parentheses. Once the atomic formulas are specified, then the other formulas are obtained by logical operations. If A and B are formulas, then so are (A ^ B), (A _ B), and (A ) B). If x is a variable and A(x) is a formula, then so are 8x A(x) and 9x A(x). Thus 9x x + 2 < 3 is a formula. We shall often abbreviate (A )?) by :A. Thus facts about negation will be special cases of facts about implication. In writing a formula, we often omit the outermost parentheses. However this is just an abbreviation. Another useful abbreviation is (A , B) for ((A ) B) ^ (B ) A)). Some of the logical operations deserve special comment. The implication A ) B is also written if A, then B A only if B B if A. The equivalence A , B is.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (Terse) Introduction to Lebesgue Integration
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/stml/048 A (Terse) Introduction to Lebesgue Integration STUDENT MATHEMATICAL LIBRARY Volume 48 A (Terse) Introduction to Lebesgue Integration John Franks Providence, Rhode Island Editorial Board Gerald B. Folland Brad G. Osgood (Chair) Robin Forman Michael Starbird 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 28A20, 28A25, 42B05. The images on the cover are representations of the ergodic transformations in Chapter 7. The figure with the implied cardioid traces iterates of the squaring map on the unit circle. The “spirograph” figures trace iterates of an irrational rotation. The arc of + signs consists of iterates of an irrational rotation. I am grateful to Edward Dunne for providing the figures. For additional information and updates on this book, visit www.ams.org/bookpages/stml-48 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Franks, John M., 1943– A (terse) introduction to Lebesgue integration / John Franks. p. cm. – (Student mathematical library ; v. 48) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8218-4862-3 (alk. paper) 1. Lebesgue integral. I. Title. II. Title: Introduction to Lebesgue integra- tion. QA312.F698 2009 515.43–dc22 2009005870 Copying and reprinting. Individual readers of this publication, and nonprofit libraries acting for them, are permitted to make fair use of the material, such as to copy a chapter for use in teaching or research. Permission is granted to quote brief passages from this publication in reviews, provided the customary acknowledgment of the source is given. Republication, systematic copying, or multiple reproduction of any material in this publication is permitted only under license from the American Mathematical Society.
    [Show full text]
  • Finite Sum – Product Logic
    Theory and Applications of Categories, Vol. 8, No. 5, pp. 63–99. FINITE SUM – PRODUCT LOGIC J.R.B. COCKETT1 AND R.A.G. SEELY2 ABSTRACT. In this paper we describe a deductive system for categories with finite products and coproducts, prove decidability of equality of morphisms via cut elimina- tion, and prove a “Whitman theorem” for the free such categories over arbitrary base categories. This result provides a nice illustration of some basic techniques in categorical proof theory, and also seems to have slipped past unproved in previous work in this field. Furthermore, it suggests a type-theoretic approach to 2–player input–output games. Introduction In the late 1960’s Lambekintroduced the notion of a “deductive system”, by which he meant the presentation of a sequent calculus for a logic as a category, whose objects were formulas of the logic, and whose arrows were (equivalence classes of) sequent deriva- tions. He noticed that “doctrines” of categories corresponded under this construction to certain logics. The classic example of this was cartesian closed categories, which could then be regarded as the “proof theory” for the ∧ – ⇒ fragment of intuitionistic propo- sitional logic. (An excellent account of this may be found in the classic monograph [Lambek–Scott 1986].) Since his original work, many categorical doctrines have been given similar analyses, but it seems one simple case has been overlooked, viz. the doctrine of categories with finite products and coproducts (without any closed structure and with- out any extra assumptions concerning distributivity of the one over the other). We began looking at this case with the thought that it would provide a nice simple introduction to some techniques in categorical proof theory, particularly the idea of rewriting systems modulo equations, which we have found useful in investigating categorical structures with two tensor products (“linearly distributive categories” [Blute et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 of Concrete Abstractions: an Introduction to Computer
    Out of print; full text available for free at http://www.gustavus.edu/+max/concrete-abstractions.html CHAPTER TWO Recursion and Induction 2.1 Recursion We have used Scheme to write procedures that describe how certain computational processes can be carried out. All the procedures we've discussed so far generate processes of a ®xed size. For example, the process generated by the procedure square always does exactly one multiplication no matter how big or how small the number we're squaring is. Similarly, the procedure pinwheel generates a process that will do exactly the same number of stack and turn operations when we use it on a basic block as it will when we use it on a huge quilt that's 128 basic blocks long and 128 basic blocks wide. Furthermore, the size of the procedure (that is, the size of the procedure's text) is a good indicator of the size of the processes it generates: Small procedures generate small processes and large procedures generate large processes. On the other hand, there are procedures of a ®xed size that generate computa- tional processes of varying sizes, depending on the values of their parameters, using a technique called recursion. To illustrate this, the following is a small, ®xed-size procedure for making paper chains that can still make chains of arbitrary lengthÐ it has a parameter n for the desired length. You'll need a bunch of long, thin strips of paper and some way of joining the ends of a strip to make a loop. You can use tape, a stapler, or if you use slitted strips of cardstock that look like this , you can just slip the slits together.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1811.04966V3 [Math.NT]
    Descartes’ rule of signs, Newton polygons, and polynomials over hyperfields Matthew Baker and Oliver Lorscheid Abstract. In this note, we develop a theory of multiplicities of roots for polynomials over hyperfields and use this to provide a unified and conceptual proof of both Descartes’ rule of signs and Newton’s “polygon rule”. Introduction Given a real polynomial p ∈ R[T ], Descartes’ rule of signs provides an upper bound for the number of positive (resp. negative) real roots of p in terms of the signs of the coeffi- cients of p. Specifically, the number of positive real roots of p (counting multiplicities) is bounded above by the number of sign changes in the coefficients of p(T ), and the number of negative roots is bounded above by the number of sign changes in the coefficients of p(−T ). Another classical “rule”, which is less well known to mathematicians in general but is used quite often in number theory, is Newton’s polygon rule. This rule concerns polynomi- als over fields equipped with a valuation, which is a function v : K → R ∪{∞} satisfying • v(a) = ∞ if and only if a = 0 • v(ab) = v(a) + v(b) • v(a + b) > min{v(a),v(b)}, with equality if v(a) 6= v(b) for all a,b ∈ K. An example is the p-adic valuation vp on Q, where p is a prime number, given by the formula vp(s/t) = ordp(s) − ordp(t), where ordp(n) is the maximum power of p dividing a nonzero integer n. Another example is the T -adic valuation v on k(T), for any field k, given by v ( f /g) = arXiv:1811.04966v3 [math.NT] 26 May 2020 T T ordT ( f )−ordT (g), where ordT ( f ) is the maximum power of T dividing a nonzero polyno- mial f ∈ k[T].
    [Show full text]
  • Diagrammatics in Categorification and Compositionality
    Diagrammatics in Categorification and Compositionality by Dmitry Vagner Department of Mathematics Duke University Date: Approved: Ezra Miller, Supervisor Lenhard Ng Sayan Mukherjee Paul Bendich Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Mathematics in the Graduate School of Duke University 2019 ABSTRACT Diagrammatics in Categorification and Compositionality by Dmitry Vagner Department of Mathematics Duke University Date: Approved: Ezra Miller, Supervisor Lenhard Ng Sayan Mukherjee Paul Bendich An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Mathematics in the Graduate School of Duke University 2019 Copyright c 2019 by Dmitry Vagner All rights reserved Abstract In the present work, I explore the theme of diagrammatics and their capacity to shed insight on two trends|categorification and compositionality|in and around contemporary category theory. The work begins with an introduction of these meta- phenomena in the context of elementary sets and maps. Towards generalizing their study to more complicated domains, we provide a self-contained treatment|from a pedagogically novel perspective that introduces almost all concepts via diagrammatic language|of the categorical machinery with which we may express the broader no- tions found in the sequel. The work then branches into two seemingly unrelated disciplines: dynamical systems and knot theory. In particular, the former research defines what it means to compose dynamical systems in a manner analogous to how one composes simple maps. The latter work concerns the categorification of the slN link invariant. In particular, we use a virtual filtration to give a more diagrammatic reconstruction of Khovanov-Rozansky homology via a smooth TQFT.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion Problems 2
    CS103 Handout 11 Fall 2014 October 6, 2014 Discussion Problems 2 Problem One: Product Parities Suppose that you have n integers x₁, x₂, …, xₙ. Prove that the product x₁ · x₂ · … · xₙ is odd if and only if each number xᵢ is odd. You might want to use the following facts: the product of zero numbers is called the empty product and is, by definition, equal to 1, and any two true state- ments imply one another. Problem Two: Prime Numbers A natural number p ≥ 2 is called prime if it has no positive divisors except 1 and itself. A natural number is called composite if it is the product of two natural numbers m and n, where both m and n are greater than one. Every natural number greater than or equal to two is either prime or composite. Prove, by strong induction, that every natural number greater than or equal to two can be written as a product of prime numbers. Problem Three: Factorials! Multiplied together! The number n! is defined as 1 × 2 × … × n. We choose to define 0! = 1. Prove by induction that for any m, n ∈ ℕ, we have m!n! ≤ (m + n)!. Can you explain intuitively why this is true? Problem Four: Picking Coins Consider the following game for two players. Begin with a pile of n coins for some n ≥ 0. The first player then takes between one and ten coins out of the pile, then the second player takes between one and ten coins out of the pile. This process repeats until some player has no coins to take; at this point, that player loses the game.
    [Show full text]
  • Logic and Categories As Tools for Building Theories
    Logic and Categories As Tools For Building Theories Samson Abramsky Oxford University Computing Laboratory 1 Introduction My aim in this short article is to provide an impression of some of the ideas emerging at the interface of logic and computer science, in a form which I hope will be accessible to philosophers. Why is this even a good idea? Because there has been a huge interaction of logic and computer science over the past half-century which has not only played an important r^olein shaping Computer Science, but has also greatly broadened the scope and enriched the content of logic itself.1 This huge effect of Computer Science on Logic over the past five decades has several aspects: new ways of using logic, new attitudes to logic, new questions and methods. These lead to new perspectives on the question: What logic is | and should be! Our main concern is with method and attitude rather than matter; nevertheless, we shall base the general points we wish to make on a case study: Category theory. Many other examples could have been used to illustrate our theme, but this will serve to illustrate some of the points we wish to make. 2 Category Theory Category theory is a vast subject. It has enormous potential for any serious version of `formal philosophy' | and yet this has hardly been realized. We shall begin with introduction to some basic elements of category theory, focussing on the fascinating conceptual issues which arise even at the most elementary level of the subject, and then discuss some its consequences and philosophical ramifications.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1505.04809V5 [Math-Ph] 29 Sep 2016
    THE PERTURBATIVE APPROACH TO PATH INTEGRALS: A SUCCINCT MATHEMATICAL TREATMENT TIMOTHY NGUYEN Abstract. We study finite-dimensional integrals in a way that elucidates the mathemat- ical meaning behind the formal manipulations of path integrals occurring in quantum field theory. This involves a proper understanding of how Wick's theorem allows one to evaluate integrals perturbatively, i.e., as a series expansion in a formal parameter irrespective of convergence properties. We establish invariance properties of such a Wick expansion under coordinate changes and the action of a Lie group of symmetries, and we use this to study essential features of path integral manipulations, including coordinate changes, Ward iden- tities, Schwinger-Dyson equations, Faddeev-Popov gauge-fixing, and eliminating fields by their equation of motion. We also discuss the asymptotic nature of the Wick expansion and the implications this has for defining path integrals perturbatively and nonperturbatively. Contents Introduction 1 1. The Wick Expansion 4 1.1. The Morse-Bott case 8 2. The Wick Expansion and Gauge-Fixing 12 3. The Wick Expansion and Integral Asymptotics 19 4. Remarks on Quantum Field Theory 22 4.1. Change of variables in the path integral 23 4.2. Ward identities and Schwinger-Dyson equations 26 4.3. Gauge-fixing of Feynman amplitudes and path integrals 28 4.4. Eliminating fields by their equation of motion 30 4.5. Perturbative versus constructive QFT 32 5. Conclusion 33 References 33 arXiv:1505.04809v5 [math-ph] 29 Sep 2016 Introduction Quantum field theory often makes use of manipulations of path integrals that are without a proper mathematical definition and hence have only a formal meaning.
    [Show full text]
  • Indexed Collections Let I Be a Set (Finite of Infinite). If for Each Element
    Indexed Collections Let I be a set (finite of infinite). If for each element i of I there is an associated object xi (exactly one for each i) then we say the collection xi,i∈ I is indexed by I. Each element i ∈ I is called and index and I is called the index set for this collection. The definition is quite general. Usually the set I is the set of natural numbers or positive integers, and the objects xi are numbers or sets. It is important to remember that there is no requirement for the objects associated with different elements of I to be distinct. That is, it is possible to have xi = xj when i = j. It is also important to remember that there is exactly one object associated with each index. Technically, the above corresponds to having a set X of objects and a function i : I → X. Instead of writing i(x) for element of x associated with i, instead we write xi (just different notation). Examples of indexed collections. 1. With each natural number n, associate a real number an. Then the indexed collection a0,a1,a2,... is what we usually think of as a sequence of real numbers. 2. For each positive integer i, let Ai be a set. Then we have the indexed collection of sets A1,A2,.... n Sigma notation. Let a0,a1,a2,... be a sequence of numbers. The notation i=k ai stands for the sum ak + ak+1 + ak+2 + ···an. n If k>n, then i=k ai contains no terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Sums and Products
    1-27-2019 Sums and Products In this section, I’ll review the notation for sums and products. Addition and multiplication are binary operations: They operate on two numbers at a time. If you want to add or multiply more than two numbers, you need to group the numbers so that you’re only adding or multiplying two at once. Addition and multiplication are associative, so it should not matter how I group the numbers when I add or multiply. Now associativity holds for three numbers at a time; for instance, for addition, a +(b + c)=(a + b)+ c. But why does this work for (say) two ways of grouping a sum of 100 numbers? It turns out that, using induction, it’s possible to prove that any two ways of grouping a sum or product of n numbers, for n 3, give the same result. ≥ Taking this for granted, I can define the sum of a list of numbers a1,a2,...an recursively as follows. A sum of a single number is just the number: { } 1 ai = a1. i=1 X I know how to add two numbers: 2 ai = a1 + a2. i=1 X To add n numbers for n> 2, I add the first n 1 of them (which I assume I already know how to do), then add the nth: − n n−1 ai = ai + an. i=1 i=1 X X Note that this is a particular way of grouping the n summands: Make one group with the first n 1, and add it to the last term.
    [Show full text]
  • Theory of the Integral
    THEORY OF THE INTEGRAL Brian S. Thomson Simon Fraser University CLASSICALREALANALYSIS.COM This text is intended as a treatise for a rigorous course introducing the ele- ments of integration theory on the real line. All of the important features of the Riemann integral, the Lebesgue integral, and the Henstock-Kurzweil integral are covered. The text can be considered a sequel to the four chapters of the more elementary text THE CALCULUS INTEGRAL which can be downloaded from our web site. For advanced readers, however, the text is self-contained. For further information on this title and others in the series visit our website. www.classicalrealanalysis.com There are free PDF files of all of our texts available for download as well as instructions on how to order trade paperback copies. We also allow access to the content of our books on GOOGLE BOOKS and on the AMAZON Search Inside the Book feature. COVER IMAGE: This mosaic of M31 merges 330 individual images taken by the Ultravio- let/Optical Telescope aboard NASA’s Swift spacecraft. It is the highest-resolution image of the galaxy ever recorded in the ultraviolet. The image shows a region 200,000 light-years wide and 100,000 light-years high (100 arcminutes by 50 arcminutes). Credit: NASA/Swift/Stefan Immler (GSFC) and Erin Grand (UMCP) —http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/swift/bursts/uv_andromeda.html Citation: Theory of the Integral, Brian S. Thomson, ClassicalRealAnalysis.com (2013), [ISBN 1467924393 ] Date PDF file compiled: June 11, 2013 ISBN-13: 9781467924399 ISBN-10: 1467924393 CLASSICALREALANALYSIS.COM Preface The text is a self-contained account of integration theory on the real line.
    [Show full text]
  • Metric Spaces 2000, Lecture 17
    Metric Spaces Lecture 17 Homeomorphisms At the end of last lecture an example was given of a bijective continuous function f such that f −1 is not continuous. For another example, consider the sets T = [0, 2π) ⊆ R and S = { (x, y) ∈ R2 | x2 + y2 = 1 }, and let f: T → S be given by f(θ) = (cos θ, sin θ). It is trivial that f is bijective. Viewed geometrically, f wraps the interval T around the circle S, joining the ends together. We consider T as a subspace of R and S as a subspace of R2, using the usual (Euclidean) metrics on R and R2, so that the concept of continuity for functions between S and T is the familiar concept studied in calculus courses. The function f is thus clearly continuous, since its component functions, cos and sin, are differentiable and therefore continuous. Joining the ends of the interval together is thus perfectly compatible with continuity. However, the inverse function g: S → T cuts the circle open at the point (1, 0) and unwraps it. This is not a continuous operation: some points that are close together in S are mapped by g to points that are far apart in T . B A A0 B0 A00 π π 022 g S T In the diagram, A is the point (1, 0) in S, and g maps it to the point A0 in T . But points arbitrarily near to A that are below the x-axis are mapped to points in T that are near to A00 rather than A0.
    [Show full text]