id
stringlengths
11
15
title
stringlengths
7
171
problem
stringlengths
9
4.33k
solution
stringlengths
6
19k
problem_wikitext
stringlengths
9
4.42k
solution_wikitext
stringlengths
7
19.1k
proof_title
stringlengths
9
171
theorem_url
stringlengths
34
198
proof_url
stringlengths
36
198
categories
listlengths
0
9
theorem_references
listlengths
0
36
proof_references
listlengths
0
253
proofwiki-16700
Lindelöf's Lemma/Lemma 1
Let $C$ be a set of open real sets. Then there is a countable subset $D$ of $C$ such that: :$\ds \bigcup_{O \mathop \in D} O = \bigcup_{O \mathop \in C} O$
=== Lemma $2$ === {{:Lindelöf's Lemma/Lemma 2}}{{qed|lemma}} Let $\ds U = \bigcup_{O \mathop \in C} O$. Let $x$ be an arbitrary point in $U$. Since $U$ is the union of the sets in $C$, the point $x$ belongs to a set in $C$. Name such a set $O_x$. Since $O_x$ is open, $O_x$ contains an open interval $I_x$ that contains ...
Let $C$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Open Set of Real Numbers|open real sets]]. Then there is a [[Definition:Countable Set|countable]] [[Definition:Subset|subset]] $D$ of $C$ such that: :$\ds \bigcup_{O \mathop \in D} O = \bigcup_{O \mathop \in C} O$
=== [[Lindelöf's Lemma/Lemma 2|Lemma $2$]] === {{:Lindelöf's Lemma/Lemma 2}}{{qed|lemma}} Let $\ds U = \bigcup_{O \mathop \in C} O$. Let $x$ be an arbitrary point in $U$. Since $U$ is the [[Definition:Set Union|union]] of the [[Definition:Set|set]]s in $C$, the point $x$ belongs to a [[Definition:Set|set]] in $C$. ...
Lindelöf's Lemma/Lemma 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Lindelöf's_Lemma/Lemma_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Lindelöf's_Lemma/Lemma_1
[ "Lindelöf's Lemma" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Open Set/Real Analysis/Real Numbers", "Definition:Countable Set", "Definition:Subset" ]
[ "Lindelöf's Lemma/Lemma 2", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Open Set/Real Analysis/Real Numbers", "Definition:Real Interval/Open", "Between two Real Numbers exists Rational Number", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Real Interval/Endpoints", "Definit...
proofwiki-16701
Linear Second Order ODE/y'' - 4 y = x^2 - 3 x - 4
The second order ODE: :$(1): \quad y'' - 4 y = x^2 - 3 x - 4$ has the general solution: :$y = C_1 e^{2 x} + C_2 e^{-2 x} - \dfrac {x^2} 4 + \dfrac {3 x} 4 + \dfrac 7 8$
It can be seen that $(1)$ is a nonhomogeneous linear second order ODE with constant coefficients in the form: :$y'' + p y' + q y = \map R x$ where: :$p = 0$ :$q = -4$ :$\map R x = x^2 - 3 x - 4$ First we establish the solution of the corresponding constant coefficient homogeneous linear second order ODE: :$y'' - 4 y = ...
The [[Definition:Second Order ODE|second order ODE]]: :$(1): \quad y'' - 4 y = x^2 - 3 x - 4$ has the [[Definition:General Solution to Differential Equation|general solution]]: :$y = C_1 e^{2 x} + C_2 e^{-2 x} - \dfrac {x^2} 4 + \dfrac {3 x} 4 + \dfrac 7 8$
It can be seen that $(1)$ is a [[Definition:Nonhomogeneous Linear Second Order ODE|nonhomogeneous linear second order ODE]] with [[Definition:Constant|constant]] [[Definition:Coefficient|coefficients]] in the form: :$y'' + p y' + q y = \map R x$ where: :$p = 0$ :$q = -4$ :$\map R x = x^2 - 3 x - 4$ First we establish...
Linear Second Order ODE/y'' - 4 y = x^2 - 3 x - 4
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Linear_Second_Order_ODE/y''_-_4_y_=_x^2_-_3_x_-_4
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Linear_Second_Order_ODE/y''_-_4_y_=_x^2_-_3_x_-_4
[ "Examples of Constant Coefficient LSOODEs", "Examples of Method of Undetermined Coefficients" ]
[ "Definition:Second Order Ordinary Differential Equation", "Definition:Differential Equation/Solution/General Solution" ]
[ "Definition:Nonhomogeneous Linear Second Order ODE", "Definition:Constant", "Definition:Coefficient", "Definition:Homogeneous Linear Second Order ODE with Constant Coefficients", "Linear Second Order ODE/y'' - 4 y = 0", "Definition:Differential Equation/Solution/General Solution", "Method of Undetermine...
proofwiki-16702
Linear Second Order ODE/y'' + 2 y' + y = x exp -x
The second order ODE: :$(1): \quad y'' + 2 y' + y = x e^{-x}$ has the general solution: :$y = e^{-x} \paren {C_1 + C_2 x + \dfrac {x^3} 6}$
It can be seen that $(1)$ is a nonhomogeneous linear second order ODE in the form: :$y'' + p y' + q y = \map R x$ where: :$p = 2$ :$q = 1$ :$\map R x = x e^{-x}$ First we establish the solution of the corresponding constant coefficient homogeneous linear second order ODE: :$y'' + 2 y' + y = 0$ From Linear Second Order ...
The [[Definition:Second Order ODE|second order ODE]]: :$(1): \quad y'' + 2 y' + y = x e^{-x}$ has the [[Definition:General Solution to Differential Equation|general solution]]: :$y = e^{-x} \paren {C_1 + C_2 x + \dfrac {x^3} 6}$
It can be seen that $(1)$ is a [[Definition:Nonhomogeneous Linear Second Order ODE|nonhomogeneous linear second order ODE]] in the form: :$y'' + p y' + q y = \map R x$ where: :$p = 2$ :$q = 1$ :$\map R x = x e^{-x}$ First we establish the solution of the corresponding [[Definition:Constant Coefficient Homogeneous Lin...
Linear Second Order ODE/y'' + 2 y' + y = x exp -x
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Linear_Second_Order_ODE/y''_+_2_y'_+_y_=_x_exp_-x
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Linear_Second_Order_ODE/y''_+_2_y'_+_y_=_x_exp_-x
[ "Examples of Constant Coefficient LSOODEs", "Examples of Method of Undetermined Coefficients" ]
[ "Definition:Second Order Ordinary Differential Equation", "Definition:Differential Equation/Solution/General Solution" ]
[ "Definition:Nonhomogeneous Linear Second Order ODE", "Definition:Homogeneous Linear Second Order ODE with Constant Coefficients", "Linear Second Order ODE/y'' + 2 y' + y = 0", "Definition:Differential Equation/Solution/General Solution", "Definition:Differential Equation/Solution/Particular Solution", "Me...
proofwiki-16703
Linear Second Order ODE/y'' + 2 y' + 5 y = x sin x
The second order ODE: :$(1): \quad y'' + 2 y' + 5 y = x \sin x$ has the general solution: :$y = e^{-x} \paren {C_1 \cos 2 x + C_2 \sin 2 x} + \ldots$
It can be seen that $(1)$ is a nonhomogeneous linear second order ODE in the form: :$y'' + p y' + q y = \map R x$ where: :$p = 2$ :$q = 5$ :$\map R x = x \sin x$ First we establish the solution of the corresponding constant coefficient homogeneous linear second order ODE: :$y'' + 2 y' + 5 y = 0$ From Linear Second Orde...
The [[Definition:Second Order ODE|second order ODE]]: :$(1): \quad y'' + 2 y' + 5 y = x \sin x$ has the [[Definition:General Solution to Differential Equation|general solution]]: :$y = e^{-x} \paren {C_1 \cos 2 x + C_2 \sin 2 x} + \ldots$
It can be seen that $(1)$ is a [[Definition:Nonhomogeneous Linear Second Order ODE|nonhomogeneous linear second order ODE]] in the form: :$y'' + p y' + q y = \map R x$ where: :$p = 2$ :$q = 5$ :$\map R x = x \sin x$ First we establish the solution of the corresponding [[Definition:Constant Coefficient Homogeneous Lin...
Linear Second Order ODE/y'' + 2 y' + 5 y = x sin x
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Linear_Second_Order_ODE/y''_+_2_y'_+_5_y_=_x_sin_x
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Linear_Second_Order_ODE/y''_+_2_y'_+_5_y_=_x_sin_x
[ "Examples of Constant Coefficient LSOODEs", "Examples of Method of Undetermined Coefficients" ]
[ "Definition:Second Order Ordinary Differential Equation", "Definition:Differential Equation/Solution/General Solution" ]
[ "Definition:Nonhomogeneous Linear Second Order ODE", "Definition:Homogeneous Linear Second Order ODE with Constant Coefficients", "Linear Second Order ODE/y'' + 2 y' + 5 y = 0", "Definition:Differential Equation/Solution/General Solution", "Definition:Differential Equation/Solution/Particular Solution", "...
proofwiki-16704
Angular Momentum Commutation Rules
Let $J_x$, $J_y$ and $J_z$ denote the angular momentum operators. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \sqbrk {J_x, J_y} | r = i J_z }} {{eqn | l = \sqbrk {J_y, J_z} | r = i J_x }} {{eqn | l = \sqbrk {J_z, J_x} | r = i J_y }} {{end-eqn}} where $\sqbrk {\, \cdot, \cdot \,}$ denotes the commutator operator.
{{ProofWanted|Got a lot to work through before we get this far}}
Let $J_x$, $J_y$ and $J_z$ denote the [[Definition:Angular Momentum Operator|angular momentum operators]]. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \sqbrk {J_x, J_y} | r = i J_z }} {{eqn | l = \sqbrk {J_y, J_z} | r = i J_x }} {{eqn | l = \sqbrk {J_z, J_x} | r = i J_y }} {{end-eqn}} where $\sqbrk {\, \cdot, \...
{{ProofWanted|Got a lot to work through before we get this far}}
Angular Momentum Commutation Rules
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Angular_Momentum_Commutation_Rules
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Angular_Momentum_Commutation_Rules
[ "Physics" ]
[ "Definition:Angular Momentum Operator", "Definition:Commutator" ]
[]
proofwiki-16705
P-adic Norm of P-adic Expansion is determined by First Nonzero Coefficient
Let $p$ be a prime number. Let $\struct {\Q_p, \norm {\,\cdot\,}_p}$ be the $p$-adic numbers. Let $\ds \sum_{i \mathop = m}^\infty d_i p^i$ be a $p$-adic expansion. Let $a$ be the $p$-adic number, that is left coset, in $\Q_p$ containing $\ds \sum_{i \mathop = m}^\infty d_i p^i$. Let $l$ be the index of the first non-z...
For all $n \ge m$, let: :$\alpha_n = \ds \sum_{i \mathop = m}^n d_i p^i$ By assumption: :$\sequence{\alpha_n}$ is a representative of $a$ By definition of the induced norm: :$\norm a_p = \ds \lim_{n \mathop \to \infty} \norm {\alpha_n}_p$ From Eventually Constant Sequence Converges to Constant it is sufficient to show:...
Let $p$ be a [[Definition:Prime Number|prime number]]. Let $\struct {\Q_p, \norm {\,\cdot\,}_p}$ be the [[Definition:Valued Field of P-adic Numbers|$p$-adic numbers]]. Let $\ds \sum_{i \mathop = m}^\infty d_i p^i$ be a [[Definition:P-adic Expansion|$p$-adic expansion]]. Let $a$ be the [[Definition:P-adic Number|$p$-...
For all $n \ge m$, let: :$\alpha_n = \ds \sum_{i \mathop = m}^n d_i p^i$ By assumption: :$\sequence{\alpha_n}$ is a [[Definition:Representative of P-adic Number|representative]] of $a$ By definition of the [[Definition:Induced Norm on Quotient of Cauchy Sequences|induced norm]]: :$\norm a_p = \ds \lim_{n \mathop \to...
P-adic Norm of P-adic Expansion is determined by First Nonzero Coefficient
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/P-adic_Norm_of_P-adic_Expansion_is_determined_by_First_Nonzero_Coefficient
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/P-adic_Norm_of_P-adic_Expansion_is_determined_by_First_Nonzero_Coefficient
[ "P-adic Number Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Prime Number", "Definition:Valued Field of P-adic Numbers", "Definition:P-adic Expansion", "Definition:P-adic Number", "Definition:Coset/Left Coset", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Summation/Index Variable", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Power Series/Coefficient", "Definiti...
[ "Definition:P-adic Number/Representative", "Definition:Induced Norm on Quotient of Cauchy Sequences", "Eventually Constant Sequence Converges to Constant", "Definition:Divisor", "Power Function on Base between Zero and One is Strictly Decreasing", "Definition:P-adic Expansion", "Definition:P-adic Norm" ...
proofwiki-16706
Eventually Constant Sequence Converges to Constant
:$\ds \lim_{n \mathop \to \infty} x_n = \lambda$
Let $\sequence {y_n}$ be the subsequence of $\sequence {\norm {x_n} }$ defined as: :$\forall n: y_n = x_{N + n}$ The $\sequence {y_n}$ is the constant sequence $\tuple {\lambda, \lambda, \lambda, \dotsc}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \lim_{n \mathop \to \infty} x_n | r = \lim_{n \mathop \to \infty} y_n ...
:$\ds \lim_{n \mathop \to \infty} x_n = \lambda$
Let $\sequence {y_n}$ be the [[Definition:Subsequence|subsequence]] of $\sequence {\norm {x_n} }$ defined as: :$\forall n: y_n = x_{N + n}$ The $\sequence {y_n}$ is the constant [[Definition:Sequence|sequence]] $\tuple {\lambda, \lambda, \lambda, \dotsc}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \lim_{n \mathop \to \infty} ...
Eventually Constant Sequence Converges to Constant
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Eventually_Constant_Sequence_Converges_to_Constant
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Eventually_Constant_Sequence_Converges_to_Constant
[ "Sequences", "Normed Division Rings" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Subsequence", "Definition:Sequence", "Limit of Subsequence equals Limit of Sequence/Normed Division Ring", "Constant Sequence Converges to Constant in Normed Division Ring", "Category:Sequences", "Category:Normed Division Rings" ]
proofwiki-16707
Non-Zero Complex Numbers under Multiplication form Group
Let $\C_{\ne 0}$ be the set of complex numbers without zero, that is: :$\C_{\ne 0} = \C \setminus \set 0$ The structure $\struct {\C_{\ne 0}, \times}$ is a group.
Taking the group axioms in turn:
Let $\C_{\ne 0}$ be the set of [[Definition:Complex Number|complex numbers]] without [[Definition:Zero (Number)|zero]], that is: :$\C_{\ne 0} = \C \setminus \set 0$ The [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with One Operation|structure]] $\struct {\C_{\ne 0}, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Group|group]].
Taking the [[Axiom:Group Axioms|group axioms]] in turn:
Non-Zero Complex Numbers under Multiplication form Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Zero_Complex_Numbers_under_Multiplication_form_Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Zero_Complex_Numbers_under_Multiplication_form_Group
[ "Complex Multiplication", "Examples of Groups" ]
[ "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Algebraic Structure/One Operation", "Definition:Group" ]
[ "Axiom:Group Axioms" ]
proofwiki-16708
Real Numbers under Addition form Group
Let $\R$ be the set of real numbers. The structure $\struct {\R, +}$ is a group.
Taking the group axioms in turn:
Let $\R$ be the set of [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]]. The [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with One Operation|structure]] $\struct {\R, +}$ is a [[Definition:Group|group]].
Taking the [[Axiom:Group Axioms|group axioms]] in turn:
Real Numbers under Addition form Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Numbers_under_Addition_form_Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Numbers_under_Addition_form_Group
[ "Additive Group of Real Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Algebraic Structure/One Operation", "Definition:Group" ]
[ "Axiom:Group Axioms" ]
proofwiki-16709
Complex Numbers under Addition form Group
Let $\C$ be the set of complex numbers. The structure $\struct {\C, +}$ is a group.
Taking the group axioms in turn:
Let $\C$ be the set of [[Definition:Complex Number|complex numbers]]. The [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with One Operation|structure]] $\struct {\C, +}$ is a [[Definition:Group|group]].
Taking the [[Axiom:Group Axioms|group axioms]] in turn:
Complex Numbers under Addition form Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Numbers_under_Addition_form_Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Numbers_under_Addition_form_Group
[ "Additive Group of Complex Numbers", "Complex Addition", "Examples of Groups" ]
[ "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Algebraic Structure/One Operation", "Definition:Group" ]
[ "Axiom:Group Axioms" ]
proofwiki-16710
Unitary Group is Group
The set of unitary $n \times n$ matrices forms a group under (conventional) matrix multiplication.
Let $\mathbf A$ and $\mathbf B$ be $n \times n$ unitary matrices.
The [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Unitary Matrix|unitary $n \times n$ matrices]] forms a [[Definition:Group|group]] under [[Definition:Matrix Product (Conventional)|(conventional) matrix multiplication]].
Let $\mathbf A$ and $\mathbf B$ be $n \times n$ [[Definition:Unitary Matrix|unitary matrices]].
Unitary Group is Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Unitary_Group_is_Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Unitary_Group_is_Group
[ "Unitary Groups", "Unitary Matrices", "Examples of Groups" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Unitary Matrix", "Definition:Group", "Definition:Matrix Product (Conventional)" ]
[ "Definition:Unitary Matrix", "Definition:Unitary Matrix", "Definition:Unitary Matrix", "Definition:Unitary Matrix" ]
proofwiki-16711
General Linear Group is not Abelian
Let $K$ be a field whose zero is $0_K$ and unity is $1_K$. Let $\GL {n, K}$ be the general linear group of order $n$ over $K$. Then $\GL {n, K}$ is not an abelian group.
Let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = A | r = \begin {pmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \end {pmatrix} }} {{eqn | l = B | r = \begin {pmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 \end {pmatrix} }} {{end-eqn}} Both $A$ and $B$ are elements of the general linear group. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = A B | r = \begin {pmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0 & ...
Let $K$ be a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] whose [[Definition:Ring Zero|zero]] is $0_K$ and [[Definition:Unity of Field|unity]] is $1_K$. Let $\GL {n, K}$ be the [[Definition:General Linear Group|general linear group of order $n$ over $K$]]. Then $\GL {n, K}$ is not an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abel...
Let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = A | r = \begin {pmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \end {pmatrix} }} {{eqn | l = B | r = \begin {pmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 1 & 1 \end {pmatrix} }} {{end-eqn}} Both $A$ and $B$ are [[Definition:Element|elements]] of the [[Definition:General Linear Group|general linear group]]. Then: {{begin-e...
General Linear Group is not Abelian/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/General_Linear_Group_is_not_Abelian
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/General_Linear_Group_is_not_Abelian/Proof_2
[ "General Linear Group is not Abelian", "General Linear Group", "Abelian Groups" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Ring Zero", "Definition:Multiplicative Identity", "Definition:General Linear Group", "Definition:Abelian Group" ]
[ "Definition:Element", "Definition:General Linear Group", "Definition:General Linear Group", "Definition:Abelian Group" ]
proofwiki-16712
Group of Unitary Matrices under Multiplication is not Abelian
Let $n > 1$ be a natural number. Let $\map U n$ denote the unitary group. Then $\map U n$ is not abelian.
;Proof by Counterexample {{Recall|Unitary Group}} {{:Definition:Unitary Group}} The matrices: :$A = \begin {pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1 \end {pmatrix}$ and :$B = \begin {pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end {pmatrix}$ are both real and symmetric. Hence, by Real Symmetric Matrix is Hermitian, both are Hermitian. Furthermore, both ...
Let $n > 1$ be a [[Definition:Natural Number|natural number]]. Let $\map U n$ denote the [[Definition:Unitary Group|unitary group]]. Then $\map U n$ is not [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian]].
;[[Proof by Counterexample]] {{Recall|Unitary Group}} {{:Definition:Unitary Group}} The [[Definition:Matrix|matrices]]: :$A = \begin {pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1 \end {pmatrix}$ and :$B = \begin {pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end {pmatrix}$ are both [[Definition:Real Matrix|real]] and [[Definition:Symmetric Matrix|symmetric]...
Group of Unitary Matrices under Multiplication is not Abelian
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Group_of_Unitary_Matrices_under_Multiplication_is_not_Abelian
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Group_of_Unitary_Matrices_under_Multiplication_is_not_Abelian
[ "Unitary Groups", "Abelian Groups" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Unitary Group", "Definition:Abelian Group" ]
[ "Proof by Counterexample", "Definition:Matrix", "Definition:Real Matrix", "Definition:Symmetric Matrix", "Real Symmetric Matrix is Hermitian", "Definition:Hermitian Matrix", "Definition:Inverse Matrix", "Definition:Unitary Matrix", "Definition:Matrix Product", "Definition:Commutative/Operation", ...
proofwiki-16713
Complex Numbers form Vector Space over Themselves
The set of complex numbers $\C$, with the operations of addition and multiplication, forms a vector space.
Let the field of complex numbers be denoted $\struct {\C, +, \times}$. By Complex Numbers under Addition form Infinite Abelian Group, $\struct {\C, +}$ is an abelian group. From Complex Multiplication Distributes over Addition: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall x, y, z \in \C | l = x \times \paren {y + z} |...
The [[Definition:Complex Number|set of complex numbers]] $\C$, with the operations of [[Definition:Complex Addition|addition]] and [[Definition:Complex Multiplication|multiplication]], forms a [[Definition:Vector Space|vector space]].
Let the [[Definition:Field of Complex Numbers|field of complex numbers]] be denoted $\struct {\C, +, \times}$. By [[Complex Numbers under Addition form Infinite Abelian Group]], $\struct {\C, +}$ is an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]]. From [[Complex Multiplication Distributes over Addition]]: {{begin-eqn}...
Complex Numbers form Vector Space over Themselves
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Numbers_form_Vector_Space_over_Themselves
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Numbers_form_Vector_Space_over_Themselves
[ "Linear Algebra", "Complex Numbers", "Examples of Vector Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Addition/Complex Numbers", "Definition:Multiplication/Complex Numbers", "Definition:Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Field of Complex Numbers", "Complex Numbers under Addition form Infinite Abelian Group", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Complex Multiplication Distributes over Addition", "Complex Multiplication is Associative", "Complex Multiplication Identity is One", "Definition:Vector Space" ]
proofwiki-16714
Quaternions form Vector Space over Reals
Let $\R$ be the set of real numbers. Let $\H$ be the set of quaternions. Then the $\R$-module $\H$ is a vector space.
Recall that Real Numbers form Field. Thus $\R$ is a division ring {{afortiori}}. Thus we only need to show that $\R$-module $\H$ is a unitary module, by demonstrating the unitary (left) module axioms: {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = \text {UM} 1 | q = x, y \in \H: \forall \lambda \in \R | ml= \lambda \par...
Let $\R$ be the set of [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]]. Let $\H$ be the set of [[Definition:Quaternion|quaternions]]. Then the [[Definition:Module over Ring|$\R$-module]] $\H$ is a [[Definition:Vector Space|vector space]].
Recall that [[Real Numbers form Field]]. Thus $\R$ is a [[Definition:Division Ring|division ring]] {{afortiori}}. Thus we only need to show that [[Definition:Module over Ring|$\R$-module]] $\H$ is a [[Definition:Unitary Module over Ring|unitary module]], by demonstrating the [[Axiom:Unitary Left Module Axioms|unitary...
Quaternions form Vector Space over Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Quaternions_form_Vector_Space_over_Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Quaternions_form_Vector_Space_over_Reals
[ "Quaternions", "Examples of Vector Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Quaternion", "Definition:Module over Ring", "Definition:Vector Space" ]
[ "Real Numbers form Field", "Definition:Division Ring", "Definition:Module over Ring", "Definition:Unitary Module over Ring", "Axiom:Unitary Left Module Axioms", "Quaternion Multiplication Distributes over Addition", "Quaternion Multiplication is Associative", "Multiplicative Identity for Quaternions",...
proofwiki-16715
Quaternions form Vector Space over Themselves
The set of quaternions $\H$, with the operations of addition and multiplication, forms a vector space.
Let the set of quaternions be denoted $\struct {\H, +, \times}$. From Quaternions form Skew Field, the algebraic structure $\struct {\H, +, \times}$ is a skew field. By definition, a skew field is a division ring. {{ProofWanted}}
The [[Definition:Quaternion|set of quaternions]] $\H$, with the operations of [[Definition:Quaternion Addition|addition]] and [[Definition:Quaternion Multiplication|multiplication]], forms a [[Definition:Vector Space|vector space]].
Let the [[Definition:Quaternion|set of quaternions]] be denoted $\struct {\H, +, \times}$. From [[Quaternions form Skew Field]], the [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with Two Operations|algebraic structure]] $\struct {\H, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Skew Field|skew field]]. By definition, a [[Definition:Skew Field|...
Quaternions form Vector Space over Themselves
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Quaternions_form_Vector_Space_over_Themselves
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Quaternions_form_Vector_Space_over_Themselves
[ "Linear Algebra", "Quaternions", "Examples of Vector Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Quaternion", "Definition:Quaternion/Addition", "Definition:Quaternion/Multiplication", "Definition:Vector Space" ]
[ "Definition:Quaternion", "Quaternions form Skew Field", "Definition:Algebraic Structure/Two Operations", "Definition:Skew Field", "Definition:Skew Field", "Definition:Division Ring" ]
proofwiki-16716
Set of Matrices under Entrywise Addition forms Vector Space
Let $m, n \in \Z_{>0}$ be (strictly) positive integers. Let $\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}$ be the $m \times n$ matrix space over a field $\GF$. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}, +}$ denote the abelian group formed from $\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}$ under matrix entrywise addition. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}, +, \times}_...
It is to be demonstrated that $\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}$ satisfies all the vector space axioms. First we note that from Matrix Entrywise Addition forms Abelian Group, $\struct {\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}, +}$ is indeed an abelian group. Hence the underlying group axioms $\text G 0$ to $\text G 3$ and $\text C$ are satisfied.
Let $m, n \in \Z_{>0}$ be [[Definition:Strictly Positive Integer|(strictly) positive integers]]. Let $\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}$ be the [[Definition:Matrix Space|$m \times n$ matrix space]] over a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] $\GF$. Let $\struct {\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}, +}$ denote the [[Definition:Abelian...
It is to be demonstrated that $\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}$ satisfies all the [[Axiom:Vector Space Axioms|vector space axioms]]. First we note that from [[Matrix Entrywise Addition forms Abelian Group]], $\struct {\map {\MM_\GF} {m, n}, +}$ is indeed an [[Definition:Abelian Group|abelian group]]. Hence the [[Axiom:Underly...
Set of Matrices under Entrywise Addition forms Vector Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Matrices_under_Entrywise_Addition_forms_Vector_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Matrices_under_Entrywise_Addition_forms_Vector_Space
[ "Set of Matrices under Entrywise Addition forms Vector Space", "Vector Spaces of Matrices", "Examples of Vector Spaces", "Matrix Entrywise Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Definition:Matrix Space", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Definition:Matrix Entrywise Addition", "Definition:Unitary Module over Ring", "Definition:Matrix Scalar Product", "Definition:Vector Space" ]
[ "Axiom:Vector Space Axioms", "Matrix Entrywise Addition forms Abelian Group", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Axiom:Underlying Group Axioms", "Axiom:Vector Space Axioms" ]
proofwiki-16717
Simple Events are Mutually Exclusive
Let $\EE$ be an experiment. Let $e_1$ and $e_2$ be distinct simple events in $\EE$. Then $e_1$ and $e_2$ are mutually exclusive.
By definition of simple event: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = e_1 | r = \set {s_1} }} {{eqn | l = e_2 | r = \set {s_2} }} {{end-eqn}} for some elementary events $s_1$ and $s_2$ of $\EE$ such that $s_1 \ne s_2$. It follows that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = e_1 \cap e_2 | r = \set {s_1} \cap \set {s_2} |...
Let $\EE$ be an [[Definition:Experiment|experiment]]. Let $e_1$ and $e_2$ be [[Definition:Distinct Objects|distinct]] [[Definition:Simple Event|simple events]] in $\EE$. Then $e_1$ and $e_2$ are [[Definition:Mutually Exclusive Events|mutually exclusive]].
By definition of [[Definition:Simple Event|simple event]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = e_1 | r = \set {s_1} }} {{eqn | l = e_2 | r = \set {s_2} }} {{end-eqn}} for some [[Definition:Elementary Event|elementary events]] $s_1$ and $s_2$ of $\EE$ such that $s_1 \ne s_2$. It follows that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn ...
Simple Events are Mutually Exclusive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Simple_Events_are_Mutually_Exclusive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Simple_Events_are_Mutually_Exclusive
[ "Events" ]
[ "Definition:Experiment", "Definition:Distinct/Plural", "Definition:Event/Simple Event", "Definition:Disjoint Events" ]
[ "Definition:Event/Simple Event", "Definition:Elementary Event", "Definition:Disjoint Events" ]
proofwiki-16718
Non-Trivial Event is Union of Simple Events
Let $\EE$ be an experiment. Let $e$ be an event in $\EE$ such that $e \ne \O$. That is, such that $e$ is non-trivial. Then $e$ can be expressed as the union of a set of simple events in $\EE$.
By definition of event, $e$ is a subset of the sample space $\Omega$ of $\EE$. By hypothesis: :$e \ne \O$ and so: :$\exists s \in \Omega: s \in e$ Let $S$ be the set defined as: :$S = \set {\set s: s \in e}$ By Union is Smallest Superset: Set of Sets it follows that: :$\ds \bigcup S \subseteq e$ Let $x \in e$. Then by ...
Let $\EE$ be an [[Definition:Experiment|experiment]]. Let $e$ be an [[Definition:Event|event]] in $\EE$ such that $e \ne \O$. That is, such that $e$ is [[Definition:Non-Trivial Event|non-trivial]]. Then $e$ can be expressed as the [[Definition:Set Union|union]] of a [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Simple Eve...
By definition of [[Definition:Event|event]], $e$ is a [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of the [[Definition:Sample Space|sample space]] $\Omega$ of $\EE$. [[Definition:By Hypothesis|By hypothesis]]: :$e \ne \O$ and so: :$\exists s \in \Omega: s \in e$ Let $S$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] defined as: :$S = \set {\set s: ...
Non-Trivial Event is Union of Simple Events
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Trivial_Event_is_Union_of_Simple_Events
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Non-Trivial_Event_is_Union_of_Simple_Events
[ "Events" ]
[ "Definition:Experiment", "Definition:Event", "Definition:Non-Trivial Event", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Event/Simple Event" ]
[ "Definition:Event", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Sample Space", "Definition:By Hypothesis", "Definition:Set", "Union is Smallest Superset/Set of Sets", "Singleton of Element is Subset", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Equality" ]
proofwiki-16719
Sample Space is Union of All Distinct Simple Events
Let $\EE$ be an experiment. Let $\Omega$ denote the sample space of $\EE$. Then $\Omega$ is the union of the set of simple events in $\EE$.
By Set is Subset of Itself: :$\Omega \subseteq \Omega$ That is, $\Omega$ is itself an event in $\EE$. The result as an application of Non-Trivial Event is Union of Simple Events. {{qed}}
Let $\EE$ be an [[Definition:Experiment|experiment]]. Let $\Omega$ denote the [[Definition:Sample Space|sample space]] of $\EE$. Then $\Omega$ is the [[Definition:Set Union|union]] of the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Simple Event|simple events]] in $\EE$.
By [[Set is Subset of Itself]]: :$\Omega \subseteq \Omega$ That is, $\Omega$ is itself an [[Definition:Event|event]] in $\EE$. The result as an application of [[Non-Trivial Event is Union of Simple Events]]. {{qed}}
Sample Space is Union of All Distinct Simple Events
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sample_Space_is_Union_of_All_Distinct_Simple_Events
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sample_Space_is_Union_of_All_Distinct_Simple_Events
[ "Events" ]
[ "Definition:Experiment", "Definition:Sample Space", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Event/Simple Event" ]
[ "Set is Subset of Itself", "Definition:Event", "Non-Trivial Event is Union of Simple Events" ]
proofwiki-16720
Equivalence of Definitions of Probability Measure
Let $\EE$ be an experiment. {{TFAE|def = Probability Measure}}
{{ProofWanted}} Category:Probability Measures 3h2zo3dlivx9v7189tggd120brw05hd
Let $\EE$ be an [[Definition:Experiment|experiment]]. {{TFAE|def = Probability Measure}}
{{ProofWanted}} [[Category:Probability Measures]] 3h2zo3dlivx9v7189tggd120brw05hd
Equivalence of Definitions of Probability Measure
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Probability_Measure
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Probability_Measure
[ "Probability Measures" ]
[ "Definition:Experiment" ]
[ "Category:Probability Measures" ]
proofwiki-16721
Total Probability Theorem/Conditional Probabilities
Let $\struct {\Omega, \Sigma, \Pr}$ be a probability space. Let $\set {B_1, B_2, \ldots}$ be a partition of $\Omega$ such that $\forall i: \map \Pr {B_i} > 0$. Let $C \in \Sigma$ be an event independent to any of the $B_i$. Let $\map \Pr C > 0$. Then: :$\ds \forall A \in \Sigma: \condprob A C = \sum_i \condprob A {C \c...
First define $Q_C := \condprob {\, \cdot} C$. Then, from Conditional Probability Defines Probability Space, $\struct {\Omega, \Sigma, Q_C}$ is a probability space. Moreover: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall i | l = \map {Q_C} {B_i} | r = \map \Pr {B_i \mid C} }} {{eqn | r = \map \Pr {B_i} | c = $C$ a...
Let $\struct {\Omega, \Sigma, \Pr}$ be a [[Definition:Probability Space|probability space]]. Let $\set {B_1, B_2, \ldots}$ be a [[Definition:Partition (Probability Theory)|partition of $\Omega$]] such that $\forall i: \map \Pr {B_i} > 0$. Let $C \in \Sigma$ be an event independent to any of the $B_i$. Let $\map \Pr ...
First define $Q_C := \condprob {\, \cdot} C$. Then, from [[Conditional Probability Defines Probability Space]], $\struct {\Omega, \Sigma, Q_C}$ is a [[Definition:Probability Space|probability space]]. Moreover: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall i | l = \map {Q_C} {B_i} | r = \map \Pr {B_i \mid C} }} {{eqn...
Total Probability Theorem/Conditional Probabilities
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Total_Probability_Theorem/Conditional_Probabilities
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Total_Probability_Theorem/Conditional_Probabilities
[ "Total Probability Theorem" ]
[ "Definition:Probability Space", "Definition:Partition (Probability Theory)" ]
[ "Conditional Probability Defines Probability Space", "Definition:Probability Space", "Definition:Independent Events/Definition 1", "Total Probability Theorem", "Total Probability Theorem", "Definition:Fraction/Numerator", "Definition:Fraction/Denominator", "Definition:Independent Events/Definition 1",...
proofwiki-16722
Product Space is Product in Category of Topological Spaces
Let $\mathbf {Top}$ be the category of topological spaces. Let $\family {\struct {X_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of topological spaces where $I$ is an arbitrary index set. Let $\struct {\XX, \tau}$ be the product space of $\family {\struct {X_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$. Then $\struct {\XX, ...
{{ProofWanted|Use Continuous Mapping to Product Space/General Result}} Category:Category of Topological Spaces Category:Product Topology Category:Products (Category Theory) auofr2hdeswk67x1womd9iyj6pl1yki
Let $\mathbf {Top}$ be the [[Definition:Category of Topological Spaces|category of topological spaces]]. Let $\family {\struct {X_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]] where $I$ is an arbitrary [[Definition:Indexing Set...
{{ProofWanted|Use [[Continuous Mapping to Product Space/General Result]]}} [[Category:Category of Topological Spaces]] [[Category:Product Topology]] [[Category:Products (Category Theory)]] auofr2hdeswk67x1womd9iyj6pl1yki
Product Space is Product in Category of Topological Spaces
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_Space_is_Product_in_Category_of_Topological_Spaces
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_Space_is_Product_in_Category_of_Topological_Spaces
[ "Category of Topological Spaces", "Product Topology", "Products (Category Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Category of Topological Spaces", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Product Space (Topology)", "Definition:Product (Category Theory)" ]
[ "Continuous Mapping to Product Space/General Result", "Category:Category of Topological Spaces", "Category:Product Topology", "Category:Products (Category Theory)" ]
proofwiki-16723
Strictly Positive Rational Numbers are Closed under Addition
Let $\Q_{>0}$ denote the set of strictly positive rational numbers: :$\Q_{>0} := \set {x \in \Q: x > 0}$ where $\Q$ denotes the set of rational numbers. The algebraic structure $\struct {\Q_{>0}, +}$ is closed in the sense that: :$\forall a, b \in \Q_{>0}: a + b \in \Q_{>0}$ where $+$ denotes rational addition.
Let $a$ and $b$ be expressed in canonical form: :$a = \dfrac {p_1} {q_1}, b = \dfrac {p_2} {q_2}$ where $p_1, p_2 \in \Z$ and $q_1, q_2 \in \Z_{>0}$. As $\forall a, b \in \Q_{>0}$ it follows that $p_1, p_2 \in \Z_{>0}$. By definition of rational addition: :$\dfrac {p_1} {q_1} + \dfrac {p_2} {q_2} = \dfrac {p_1 q_2 + p_...
Let $\Q_{>0}$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Strictly Positive Rational Number|strictly positive rational numbers]]: :$\Q_{>0} := \set {x \in \Q: x > 0}$ where $\Q$ denotes the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. The [[Definition:Algebraic Structure|algebraic ...
Let $a$ and $b$ be expressed in [[Definition:Canonical Form of Rational Number|canonical form]]: :$a = \dfrac {p_1} {q_1}, b = \dfrac {p_2} {q_2}$ where $p_1, p_2 \in \Z$ and $q_1, q_2 \in \Z_{>0}$. As $\forall a, b \in \Q_{>0}$ it follows that $p_1, p_2 \in \Z_{>0}$. By definition of [[Definition:Rational Addition|...
Strictly Positive Rational Numbers are Closed under Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Strictly_Positive_Rational_Numbers_are_Closed_under_Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Strictly_Positive_Rational_Numbers_are_Closed_under_Addition
[ "Rational Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Addition/Rational Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number/Canonical Form", "Definition:Addition/Rational Numbers", "Integers form Ordered Integral Domain" ]
proofwiki-16724
Strictly Positive Rational Numbers are Closed under Multiplication
:$\forall a, b \in \Q_{>0}: a b \in \Q_{>0}$
Let $a$ and $b$ be expressed in canonical form: :$a = \dfrac {p_1} {q_1}, b = \dfrac {p_2} {q_2}$ where $p_1, p_2 \in \Z$ and $q_1, q_2 \in \Z_{>0}$. As $\forall a, b \in \Q_{>0}$ it follows that $p_1, p_2 \in \Z_{>0}$. By definition of rational multiplication: :$\dfrac {p_1} {q_1} \times \dfrac {p_2} {q_2} = \dfrac {p...
:$\forall a, b \in \Q_{>0}: a b \in \Q_{>0}$
Let $a$ and $b$ be expressed in [[Definition:Canonical Form of Rational Number|canonical form]]: :$a = \dfrac {p_1} {q_1}, b = \dfrac {p_2} {q_2}$ where $p_1, p_2 \in \Z$ and $q_1, q_2 \in \Z_{>0}$. As $\forall a, b \in \Q_{>0}$ it follows that $p_1, p_2 \in \Z_{>0}$. By definition of [[Definition:Rational Multiplic...
Strictly Positive Rational Numbers are Closed under Multiplication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Strictly_Positive_Rational_Numbers_are_Closed_under_Multiplication
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Strictly_Positive_Rational_Numbers_are_Closed_under_Multiplication
[ "Rational Multiplication", "Algebraic Closure" ]
[]
[ "Definition:Rational Number/Canonical Form", "Definition:Multiplication/Rational Numbers", "Integers form Ordered Integral Domain" ]
proofwiki-16725
Set of Rationals Less than Root 2 has no Greatest Element
Let $A$ be the set of all positive rational numbers $p$ such that $p^2 < 2$. Then $A$ has no greatest element.
{{AimForCont}} $p \in A$ is the greatest element of $A$. Then by definition of $A$: :$p^2 < 2$ Let $h \in \Q$ be a rational number such that $0 < h < 1$ such that: :$h < \dfrac {2 - p^2} {2 p + 1}$ This is always possible, because by definition $2 - p^2 > 0$ and $2 p + 1 > 0$. Let $q = p + h$. Then $q > p$, and: {{begi...
Let $A$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Positive Rational Number|positive rational numbers]] $p$ such that $p^2 < 2$. Then $A$ has no [[Definition:Greatest Element|greatest element]].
{{AimForCont}} $p \in A$ is the [[Definition:Greatest Element|greatest element]] of $A$. Then by definition of $A$: :$p^2 < 2$ Let $h \in \Q$ be a [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] such that $0 < h < 1$ such that: :$h < \dfrac {2 - p^2} {2 p + 1}$ This is always possible, because by definition $2 - p^2 ...
Set of Rationals Less than Root 2 has no Greatest Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rationals_Less_than_Root_2_has_no_Greatest_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rationals_Less_than_Root_2_has_no_Greatest_Element
[ "Rational Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Positive/Rational Number", "Definition:Greatest Element" ]
[ "Definition:Greatest Element", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Contradiction", "Definition:Greatest Element", "Definition:Greatest Element" ]
proofwiki-16726
Set of Rationals Greater than Root 2 has no Smallest Element
Let $B$ be the set of all positive rational numbers $p$ such that $p^2 > 2$. Then $B$ has no smallest element.
{{AimForCont}} $p \in B$ is the smallest element of $B$. Then by definition of $B$: :$p^2 > 2$ Let $q = p - \dfrac {p_2 - 2} {2 p}$. Then $q > p$, and: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = q | r = p - \dfrac {p_2 - 2} {2 p} | c = }} {{eqn | r = \dfrac p 2 + \dfrac 1 p | c = }} {{end-eqn}} Hence: :$0 < q < p$ a...
Let $B$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Positive Rational Number|positive rational numbers]] $p$ such that $p^2 > 2$. Then $B$ has no [[Definition:Smallest Element|smallest element]].
{{AimForCont}} $p \in B$ is the [[Definition:Smallest Element|smallest element]] of $B$. Then by definition of $B$: :$p^2 > 2$ Let $q = p - \dfrac {p_2 - 2} {2 p}$. Then $q > p$, and: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = q | r = p - \dfrac {p_2 - 2} {2 p} | c = }} {{eqn | r = \dfrac p 2 + \dfrac 1 p | c = ...
Set of Rationals Greater than Root 2 has no Smallest Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rationals_Greater_than_Root_2_has_no_Smallest_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rationals_Greater_than_Root_2_has_no_Smallest_Element
[ "Rational Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Positive/Rational Number", "Definition:Smallest Element" ]
[ "Definition:Smallest Element", "Definition:Contradiction", "Definition:Smallest Element", "Definition:Smallest Element" ]
proofwiki-16727
Rational Number Not in Cut is Greater than Element of Cut
Let $\alpha$ be a cut. Let $p \in \alpha$. Let $q \in \Q$ such that $q \notin \alpha$. Then $q > p$.
We have been given that $p \in \alpha$ while $q \notin \alpha$. {{AimForCont}} $q \le p$. If $q = p$ then $q \in \alpha$ immediately. If $q < p$ then $q \in \alpha$ by property $(2)$ of the definition of cut. In either case $q \in \alpha$ which contradicts $q \notin \alpha$. Hence by Proof by Contradiction it follows t...
Let $\alpha$ be a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Let $p \in \alpha$. Let $q \in \Q$ such that $q \notin \alpha$. Then $q > p$.
We have been given that $p \in \alpha$ while $q \notin \alpha$. {{AimForCont}} $q \le p$. If $q = p$ then $q \in \alpha$ immediately. If $q < p$ then $q \in \alpha$ by property $(2)$ of the definition of [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. In either case $q \in \alpha$ which [[Definition:Contradiction|contradicts]] ...
Rational Number Not in Cut is Greater than Element of Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Not_in_Cut_is_Greater_than_Element_of_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Not_in_Cut_is_Greater_than_Element_of_Cut
[ "Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Contradiction", "Proof by Contradiction" ]
proofwiki-16728
Rational Cut has Smallest Upper Number
Let $r \in \Q$ be rational. Let $\alpha$ be the rational cut consisting of all rational numbers $p$ such that $p < r$. Then $\alpha$ is indeed a cut, and has a smallest upper number that is $r$.
That $\alpha$ fulfils conditions $(1)$ and $(2)$ of the definition of a cut follows directly from that definition. Then it is noted that if $p \in \alpha$ then from Mediant is Between: :$p < \dfrac {p + r} 2 < r$ and so $p$ cannot be the greatest element of $\alpha$. Hence it is seen that $\alpha$ fulfils all condition...
Let $r \in \Q$ be [[Definition:Rational Number|rational]]. Let $\alpha$ be the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] consisting of all [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] $p$ such that $p < r$. Then $\alpha$ is indeed a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]], and has a [[Definition:Smallest Element|smalles...
That $\alpha$ fulfils conditions $(1)$ and $(2)$ of the definition of a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]] follows directly from that definition. Then it is noted that if $p \in \alpha$ then from [[Mediant is Between]]: :$p < \dfrac {p + r} 2 < r$ and so $p$ cannot be the [[Definition:Greatest Element|greatest element]...
Rational Cut has Smallest Upper Number
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Cut_has_Smallest_Upper_Number
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Cut_has_Smallest_Upper_Number
[ "Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Smallest Element", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Upper Number" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Mediant is Between", "Definition:Greatest Element", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Upper Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Upper Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Upper Number", "Proof by Contradiction", "Defin...
proofwiki-16729
Natural Basis of Product Topology
Let $\family {\struct {X_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of topological spaces where $I$ is an arbitrary index set. Let $X$ be the cartesian product of $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$: :$\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ Then the natural basis on $X$ is the set $\BB$ of cartesian products of ...
Let $\NN$ denote the natural basis on $X$. By definition of the natural basis, $\NN$ is the basis generated by: :$\SS = \set {\pr_i^{-1} \sqbrk U: i \in I, \, U \in \tau_i}$ where for each $i \in I$, $\pr_i: X \to X_i$ denotes the $i$th projection on $X$: :$\forall \family {x_j}_{j \mathop \in I} \in X: \map {\pr_i} {\...
Let $\family {\struct {X_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]] where $I$ is an arbitrary [[Definition:Indexing Set|index set]]. Let $X$ be the [[Definition:Cartesian Product of Family|cartesian product]] of $\family {X_...
Let $\NN$ denote the [[Definition:Natural Basis of Product Topology|natural basis]] on $X$. By definition of the [[Definition:Natural Basis of Product Topology|natural basis]], $\NN$ is the [[Synthetic Basis formed from Synthetic Sub-Basis|basis generated]] by: :$\SS = \set {\pr_i^{-1} \sqbrk U: i \in I, \, U \in \tau...
Natural Basis of Product Topology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Basis_of_Product_Topology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Basis_of_Product_Topology
[ "Product Topology", "Natural Basis of Product Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Cartesian Product/Family of Sets", "Definition:Product Topology/Natural Basis", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cartesian Product", "Definition:Index" ]
[ "Definition:Product Topology/Natural Basis", "Definition:Product Topology/Natural Basis", "Synthetic Basis formed from Synthetic Sub-Basis", "Definition:Projection (Mapping Theory)/Family of Sets", "Synthetic Basis formed from Synthetic Sub-Basis", "Synthetic Basis formed from Synthetic Sub-Basis" ]
proofwiki-16730
Natural Basis of Product Topology/Finite Product
Let $n \in \N$. For all $k \in \set {1, \ldots, n}$, let $\struct {X_k, \tau_k}$ be topological spaces. Let $\ds X = \prod_{k \mathop = 1}^n X_k$ be the (finite) cartesian product of $X_1, \ldots, X_n$. Then the natural basis on $X$ is: :$\BB = \set {\ds \prod_{k \mathop = 1}^n U_k : \forall k : U_k \in \tau_k}$
From Natural Basis of Product Topology, the natural basis on $X$ is the set $\BB$ of cartesian products of the form: :$\ds \prod_{i \mathop \in I} U_i$ where: :for all $k = 1, \dots, n: U_k \in \tau_i$ :for all but finitely many indices $k : U_k = X_k$ Let: :$\BB' = \set {\ds \prod_{k \mathop = 1}^n U_k : \forall k : U...
Let $n \in \N$. For all $k \in \set {1, \ldots, n}$, let $\struct {X_k, \tau_k}$ be [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]]. Let $\ds X = \prod_{k \mathop = 1}^n X_k$ be the [[Definition:Finite Cartesian Product|(finite) cartesian product]] of $X_1, \ldots, X_n$. Then the [[Definition:Natural Basis of P...
From [[Natural Basis of Product Topology]], the [[Definition:Natural Basis of Product Topology|natural basis]] on $X$ is the [[Definition:Set|set]] $\BB$ of [[Definition:Cartesian Product|cartesian products]] of the form: :$\ds \prod_{i \mathop \in I} U_i$ where: :for all $k = 1, \dots, n: U_k \in \tau_i$ :for all but ...
Natural Basis of Product Topology/Finite Product
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Basis_of_Product_Topology/Finite_Product
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Natural_Basis_of_Product_Topology/Finite_Product
[ "Natural Basis of Product Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Cartesian Product/Finite", "Definition:Product Topology/Natural Basis" ]
[ "Natural Basis of Product Topology", "Definition:Product Topology/Natural Basis", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cartesian Product", "Definition:Index", "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Index", "Definition:Set Equality", "Category:Natural Basis of Product Topology" ]
proofwiki-16731
Box Topology may not be Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous
Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an $I$-indexed family of topological spaces. Let $X$ be the cartesian product of $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$, that is: :$\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ Let $\tau$ be the box topology on $X$. For each $i \in I$, let $\pr_i: X \to X_i$ denote the $i$t...
From Projection from Box Topology is Continuous, the projections $\family{\pr_i} _{i \mathop \in I}$ are continuous. From Product Topology is Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous, the product topology is the coarsest topology such that the projections $\family{\pr_i} _{i \mathop \in I}$ are continuous...
Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|$I$-indexed family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]]. Let $X$ be the [[Definition:Cartesian Product of Family|cartesian product]] of $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$, that is: :$\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \i...
From [[Projection from Box Topology is Continuous]], the [[Definition:Projection|projections]] $\family{\pr_i} _{i \mathop \in I}$ are [[Definition:Continuous|continuous]]. From [[Product Topology is Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous]], the [[Definition:Product Topology|product topology]] is the [...
Box Topology may not be Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Box_Topology_may_not_be_Coarsest_Topology_such_that_Projections_are_Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Box_Topology_may_not_be_Coarsest_Topology_such_that_Projections_are_Continuous
[ "Box Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Cartesian Product/Family of Sets", "Definition:Box Topology", "Definition:Projection (Mapping Theory)/Family of Sets", "Definition:Coarser Topology", "Definition:Projection", "Definition:Continuous" ]
[ "Projection from Box Topology is Continuous", "Definition:Projection", "Definition:Continuous", "Product Topology is Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous", "Definition:Product Topology", "Definition:Coarser Topology", "Definition:Projection", "Definition:Continuous", "Definition:Pr...
proofwiki-16732
Box Topology may not form Categorical Product in the Category of Topological Spaces
Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an $I$-indexed family of topological spaces. Let $X$ be the cartesian product of $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$, that is: :$\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ Let $\tau$ be the box topology on $X$. Then $\struct{X, \tau}$ may not be the categorical product...
There exists such a $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ that the box topology $\tau$ on $X$ differs from the product topology, since: :Box Topology may not be Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous :Product Topology is Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous Then $\struct{X...
Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|$I$-indexed family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]]. Let $X$ be the [[Definition:Cartesian Product of Family|cartesian product]] of $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$, that is: :$\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \i...
There exists such a $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ that the [[Definition:Box Topology|box topology]] $\tau$ on $X$ differs from the [[Definition:Product Topology|product topology]], since: :[[Box Topology may not be Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous]] :[[Product Topology is Coar...
Box Topology may not form Categorical Product in the Category of Topological Spaces
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Box_Topology_may_not_form_Categorical_Product_in_the_Category_of_Topological_Spaces
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Box_Topology_may_not_form_Categorical_Product_in_the_Category_of_Topological_Spaces
[ "Box Topology", "Products (Category Theory)" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Cartesian Product/Family of Sets", "Definition:Box Topology", "Definition:Product (Category Theory)", "Definition:Category of Topological Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Box Topology", "Definition:Product Topology", "Box Topology may not be Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous", "Product Topology is Coarsest Topology such that Projections are Continuous", "Definition:Product (Category Theory)", "Product Space is Product in Category of Topolog...
proofwiki-16733
Ordering on Cuts satisfies Trichotomy Law
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts. Then exactly one of the following applies: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | n = 1 | l = \alpha | o = < | r = \beta }} {{eqn | n = 2 | l = \alpha | r = \beta }} {{eqn | n = 3 | l = \alpha | o = > | r = \beta }} {{end-eqn}} where $<$ and so $>$ denote...
Let $\alpha = \beta$. By definition of equality of cuts: :$p \in \alpha \iff p \in \beta$ By definition of strict ordering of cuts it follows that neither $\alpha < \beta$ or $\alpha > \beta$. {{AimForCont}} both $\alpha < \beta$ and $\alpha > \beta$. Because $\alpha < \beta$ there exists $p \in \Q$ such that: :$p \in ...
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Then exactly one of the following applies: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | n = 1 | l = \alpha | o = < | r = \beta }} {{eqn | n = 2 | l = \alpha | r = \beta }} {{eqn | n = 3 | l = \alpha | o = > | r = \beta }} {{end-e...
Let $\alpha = \beta$. By definition of [[Definition:Equality of Cuts|equality of cuts]]: :$p \in \alpha \iff p \in \beta$ By definition of [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering of cuts]] it follows that neither $\alpha < \beta$ or $\alpha > \beta$. {{AimForCont}} both $\alpha < \beta$ and $\alpha > \b...
Ordering on Cuts satisfies Trichotomy Law
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_satisfies_Trichotomy_Law
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_satisfies_Trichotomy_Law
[ "Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Total Ordering" ]
[ "Definition:Equality of Cuts", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Rational Number Not in Cut is Greater than Element of Cut", "Rational Numbers form Totally Ordered Field", "Proof by Contradiction", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Equality of Cuts" ]
proofwiki-16734
Ordering on Cuts is Transitive
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be cuts. Let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | n = 1 | l = \alpha | o = < | r = \beta }} {{eqn | n = 2 | l = \beta | o = < | r = \gamma }} {{end-eqn}} where $<$ denotes the strict ordering of cuts: :$\alpha < \beta \iff \exists p \in \Q: p \in \alpha, p \notin...
We have that: :$\alpha < \beta$ By definition of strict ordering of cuts: :$\exists p \in \Q: p \in \beta, p \notin \alpha$ Similarly, we have that: :$\beta < \gamma$ and so: :$\exists q \in \Q: q \in \gamma, q \notin \beta$ We have by definition of a cut that: :$p \in \beta$ and $q \notin \beta$ implies that $p < q$ T...
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | n = 1 | l = \alpha | o = < | r = \beta }} {{eqn | n = 2 | l = \beta | o = < | r = \gamma }} {{end-eqn}} where $<$ denotes the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering o...
We have that: :$\alpha < \beta$ By definition of [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering of cuts]]: :$\exists p \in \Q: p \in \beta, p \notin \alpha$ Similarly, we have that: :$\beta < \gamma$ and so: :$\exists q \in \Q: q \in \gamma, q \notin \beta$ We have by definition of a [[Definition:Cut (Analys...
Ordering on Cuts is Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_is_Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_is_Transitive
[ "Cuts", "Examples of Transitive Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Transitive Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict" ]
proofwiki-16735
Ordering on Cuts is Total
Let $\CC$ denote the set of cuts. Let $<$ denote the strict ordering on cuts defined as: :$\forall \alpha, \beta \in \CC: \alpha < \beta \iff \exists p \in \Q: p \in \alpha, p \notin \beta$ Then $<$ is a (strict) total ordering on $\CC$.
Let $\struct {\CC, <}$ denote the relational structure defined from the above. From Ordering on Cuts is Transitive, $<$ is a transitive relation on $\CC$. From Ordering on Cuts satisfies Trichotomy Law, we have that: :$\alpha < \beta \implies \lnot \paren {\beta < \alpha}$ demonstrating that $<$ is asymmetric. Hence, b...
Let $\CC$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let $<$ denote the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering on cuts]] defined as: :$\forall \alpha, \beta \in \CC: \alpha < \beta \iff \exists p \in \Q: p \in \alpha, p \notin \beta$ Then $<$ is a [[Definition:Strict Total...
Let $\struct {\CC, <}$ denote the [[Definition:Relational Structure|relational structure]] defined from the above. From [[Ordering on Cuts is Transitive]], $<$ is a [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive relation]] on $\CC$. From [[Ordering on Cuts satisfies Trichotomy Law]], we have that: :$\alpha < \beta \impl...
Ordering on Cuts is Total
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_is_Total
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_is_Total
[ "Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Strict Total Ordering" ]
[ "Definition:Relational Structure", "Ordering on Cuts is Transitive", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Ordering on Cuts satisfies Trichotomy Law", "Definition:Asymmetric Relation", "Definition:Strict Ordering", "Ordering on Cuts satisfies Trichotomy Law", "Definition:Non-Comparable Elements", "Defi...
proofwiki-16736
Sum of Cuts is Cut
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts. Let $\gamma$ be the set of all rational numbers $r$ such that: :$\exists p \in \alpha, q \in \beta: r = p + q$ Then $\gamma$ is also a cut. Thus the operation of addition on the set of cuts is closed.
By definition of cut, neither $\alpha$ nor $\beta$ are empty. Hence there exist $p \in \alpha$ and $q \in \beta$. Hence there exists $r = p + q$ and so $\gamma$ is likewise not empty. Let $s, t \in \Q$ such that $s \notin \alpha$ and $t \notin \beta$, where $\Q$ denotes the set of rational numbers. Such $s$ and $t$ are...
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let $\gamma$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] $r$ such that: :$\exists p \in \alpha, q \in \beta: r = p + q$ Then $\gamma$ is also a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Thus the operation of [[Definiti...
By definition of [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]], neither $\alpha$ nor $\beta$ are [[Definition:Empty Set|empty]]. Hence there exist $p \in \alpha$ and $q \in \beta$. Hence there exists $r = p + q$ and so $\gamma$ is likewise not [[Definition:Empty Set|empty]]. Let $s, t \in \Q$ such that $s \notin \alpha$ and $t...
Sum of Cuts is Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sum_of_Cuts_is_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sum_of_Cuts_is_Cut
[ "Cuts", "Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Rational Numbers form Totally Ordered Field", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Greatest Elemen...
proofwiki-16737
Addition of Cuts is Commutative
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts. Let the operation of $\alpha + \beta$ be the sum of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\alpha + \beta = \beta + \alpha$
$\alpha + \beta$ is the set of all rational numbers of the form $p + q$ such that $p \in \alpha$ and $q \in \beta$. Similarly, $\beta + \alpha$ is the set of all rational numbers of the form $q + p$ such that $p \in \alpha$ and $q \in \beta$. From Rational Addition is Commutative we have that: :$p + q = q + p$ The resu...
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let the operation of $\alpha + \beta$ be the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|sum]] of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\alpha + \beta = \beta + \alpha$
$\alpha + \beta$ is the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] of the form $p + q$ such that $p \in \alpha$ and $q \in \beta$. Similarly, $\beta + \alpha$ is the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] of the form $q + p$ such that $p \in \al...
Addition of Cuts is Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Addition_of_Cuts_is_Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Addition_of_Cuts_is_Commutative
[ "Cuts", "Addition", "Examples of Commutative Operations" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Addition of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Rational Addition is Commutative" ]
proofwiki-16738
Addition of Cuts is Associative
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be cuts. Let the operation of $\alpha + \beta$ be the sum of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\paren {\alpha + \beta} + \gamma = \alpha + \paren {\beta + \gamma}$
$\paren {\alpha + \beta} + \gamma$ is the set of all rational numbers of the form $\paren {p + q} + r$ such that $p \in \alpha$, $q \in \beta$ and $r \in \gamma$. Similarly, $\alpha + \paren {\beta + \gamma}$ is the set of all rational numbers of the form $p + \paren {q + r}$ such that $p \in \alpha$, $q \in \beta$ and...
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let the operation of $\alpha + \beta$ be the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|sum]] of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\paren {\alpha + \beta} + \gamma = \alpha + \paren {\beta + \gamma}$
$\paren {\alpha + \beta} + \gamma$ is the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] of the form $\paren {p + q} + r$ such that $p \in \alpha$, $q \in \beta$ and $r \in \gamma$. Similarly, $\alpha + \paren {\beta + \gamma}$ is the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Rational N...
Addition of Cuts is Associative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Addition_of_Cuts_is_Associative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Addition_of_Cuts_is_Associative
[ "Cuts", "Addition", "Examples of Associative Operations" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Addition of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Rational Addition is Associative" ]
proofwiki-16739
Identity Element for Addition of Cuts
Let $\alpha$ be a cut. Let $0^*$ be the rational cut associated with the (rational) number $0$: :$0^* = \set {r \in \Q: r < 0}$ Then: :$\alpha + 0^* = \alpha$ where $+$ denotes the operation of addition of cuts.
Let $r \in \alpha + 0^*$. $\alpha + 0^*$ is the set of all rational numbers of the form $p + q$ such that $p \in \alpha$, $q \in 0^*$, that is, $q < 0$. It follows that: :$p + q < p$ and so: :$p + q \in \alpha$ that is: :$r \in \alpha$ Let $r \in \alpha$. Let $s \in \Q$ be a rational number such that $s > r$ and $s \in...
Let $\alpha$ be a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Let $0^*$ be the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] associated with the [[Definition:Zero (Number)|(rational) number $0$]]: :$0^* = \set {r \in \Q: r < 0}$ Then: :$\alpha + 0^* = \alpha$ where $+$ denotes the operation of [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|additi...
Let $r \in \alpha + 0^*$. $\alpha + 0^*$ is the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] of the form $p + q$ such that $p \in \alpha$, $q \in 0^*$, that is, $q < 0$. It follows that: :$p + q < p$ and so: :$p + q \in \alpha$ that is: :$r \in \alpha$ Let $r \in \alpha$. Let $s \i...
Identity Element for Addition of Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Identity_Element_for_Addition_of_Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Identity_Element_for_Addition_of_Cuts
[ "Cuts", "Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Addition of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Greatest Element", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Set Equality" ]
proofwiki-16740
Existence of Upper and Lower Numbers of Cut whose Difference equal Given Rational
Let $\alpha$ be a cut. Let $r \in \Q_{>0}$ be a (strictly) positive rational number. Then there exist rational numbers $p$ and $q$ such that: :$p \in \alpha, q \notin \alpha$ :$q - p = r$ such that $q$ is not the smallest upper number of $\alpha$.
Let $s \in \alpha$ be a rational number. For $n = 0, 1, 2, \ldots$ let $s_n = s + n r$. Then there exists a unique integer $m$ such that: :$s_m \in \alpha$ and: :$s_{m + 1} \notin \alpha$ If $s_{m + 1}$ is not the smallest upper number of $\alpha$, take: :$p = s_m$ :$q = s_{m + 1}$ If $s_{m + 1}$ ''is'' the smallest up...
Let $\alpha$ be a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Let $r \in \Q_{>0}$ be a [[Definition:Strictly Positive Rational Number|(strictly) positive rational number]]. Then there exist [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] $p$ and $q$ such that: :$p \in \alpha, q \notin \alpha$ :$q - p = r$ such that $q$ is no...
Let $s \in \alpha$ be a [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]]. For $n = 0, 1, 2, \ldots$ let $s_n = s + n r$. Then there exists a [[Definition:Unique|unique]] [[Definition:Integer|integer]] $m$ such that: :$s_m \in \alpha$ and: :$s_{m + 1} \notin \alpha$ If $s_{m + 1}$ is not the [[Definition:Smallest Elem...
Existence of Upper and Lower Numbers of Cut whose Difference equal Given Rational
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Existence_of_Upper_and_Lower_Numbers_of_Cut_whose_Difference_equal_Given_Rational
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Existence_of_Upper_and_Lower_Numbers_of_Cut_whose_Difference_equal_Given_Rational
[ "Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Rational Number", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Smallest Element", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Upper Number" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Unique", "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Smallest Element", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Upper Number", "Definition:Smallest Element", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Upper Number" ]
proofwiki-16741
Existence of Unique Inverse Element for Addition of Cuts
Let $\alpha$ be a cut. Let $0^*$ be the rational cut associated with the (rational) number $0$: :$0^* = \set {r \in \Q: r < 0}$ Then there exists a unique cut $\beta$ such that: :$\alpha + \beta = 0^*$ where $+$ denotes the operation of addition of cuts.
=== Proof of Uniqueness === Suppose $\alpha + \beta_1 = \alpha + \beta_2 = 0^*$. We have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \beta_2 | r = 0^* + \beta_2 | c = Identity Element for Addition of Cuts }} {{eqn | r = \paren {\alpha + \beta_1} + \beta_2 | c = Definition of $\beta_1$ }} {{eqn | r = \paren {\alpha + \...
Let $\alpha$ be a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Let $0^*$ be the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] associated with the [[Definition:Zero (Number)|(rational) number $0$]]: :$0^* = \set {r \in \Q: r < 0}$ Then there exists a [[Definition:Unique|unique]] [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]] $\beta$ such that: ...
=== Proof of Uniqueness === Suppose $\alpha + \beta_1 = \alpha + \beta_2 = 0^*$. We have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \beta_2 | r = 0^* + \beta_2 | c = [[Identity Element for Addition of Cuts]] }} {{eqn | r = \paren {\alpha + \beta_1} + \beta_2 | c = Definition of $\beta_1$ }} {{eqn | r = \paren {\al...
Existence of Unique Inverse Element for Addition of Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Existence_of_Unique_Inverse_Element_for_Addition_of_Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Existence_of_Unique_Inverse_Element_for_Addition_of_Cuts
[ "Cuts", "Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Unique", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Addition of Cuts" ]
[ "Identity Element for Addition of Cuts", "Addition of Cuts is Commutative", "Addition of Cuts is Associative", "Identity Element for Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Unique" ]
proofwiki-16742
Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be cuts. Let the operation of $\alpha + \beta$ be the sum of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Let $\beta < \gamma$ denotes the strict ordering on cuts defined as: :$\beta < \gamma \iff \exists p \in \Q: p \in \beta, p \notin \gamma$ Then: :$\beta < \gamma \implies \alpha + \beta < \alpha + \gamm...
By definition of the strict ordering on cuts and addition of cuts: :$\alpha + \beta \le \alpha + \gamma$ {{explain|Details needed for the above}} Suppose $\alpha + \beta = \alpha + \gamma$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \beta | r = 0^* + \beta | c = Identity Element for Addition of Cuts }} {{eqn | r = \pa...
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let the operation of $\alpha + \beta$ be the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|sum]] of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Let $\beta < \gamma$ denotes the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering on cuts]] defined as: :$\beta < \gamma \iff \exists ...
By definition of the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering on cuts]] and [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|addition of cuts]]: :$\alpha + \beta \le \alpha + \gamma$ {{explain|Details needed for the above}} Suppose $\alpha + \beta = \alpha + \gamma$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \beta | r = 0^*...
Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_is_Compatible_with_Addition_of_Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_is_Compatible_with_Addition_of_Cuts
[ "Cuts", "Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Identity Element for Addition of Cuts" ]
proofwiki-16743
Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts/Corollary
Let $0^*$ denote the rational cut associated with the (rational) number $0$. If: :$\alpha > 0^*$ and $\gamma > 0^*$ then: :$\alpha + \gamma > 0^*$
From Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts :$0^* + 0^* < 0^* + \alpha$ :$\alpha + 0^* < \alpha + \gamma$ The result follows from Ordering on Cuts is Transitive. {{qed}}
Let $0^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] associated with the [[Definition:Zero (Number)|(rational) number $0$]]. If: :$\alpha > 0^*$ and $\gamma > 0^*$ then: :$\alpha + \gamma > 0^*$
From [[Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts]] :$0^* + 0^* < 0^* + \alpha$ :$\alpha + 0^* < \alpha + \gamma$ The result follows from [[Ordering on Cuts is Transitive]]. {{qed}}
Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_is_Compatible_with_Addition_of_Cuts/Corollary
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_on_Cuts_is_Compatible_with_Addition_of_Cuts/Corollary
[ "Cuts", "Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)" ]
[ "Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts", "Ordering on Cuts is Transitive" ]
proofwiki-16744
Existence of Unique Difference between Cuts
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts. Then there exists exactly one cut $\gamma$ such that: :$\alpha + \gamma = \beta$
From Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts: :$\gamma_1 \ne \gamma_2 \implies \alpha + \gamma_1 \ne \alpha + \gamma_2$ That demonstrates uniqueness. Let: :$\gamma = \beta + \paren {-\alpha}$ where $-\alpha$ is the negative of $\alpha$. Then by Identity Element for Addition of Cuts: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l...
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Then there exists [[Definition:Unique|exactly one]] [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]] $\gamma$ such that: :$\alpha + \gamma = \beta$
From [[Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts]]: :$\gamma_1 \ne \gamma_2 \implies \alpha + \gamma_1 \ne \alpha + \gamma_2$ That demonstrates [[Definition:Unique|uniqueness]]. Let: :$\gamma = \beta + \paren {-\alpha}$ where $-\alpha$ is the [[Definition:Negative of Cut|negative of $\alpha$]]. Then by [...
Existence of Unique Difference between Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Existence_of_Unique_Difference_between_Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Existence_of_Unique_Difference_between_Cuts
[ "Cuts", "Subtraction" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Unique", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)" ]
[ "Ordering on Cuts is Compatible with Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Unique", "Definition:Negative of Cut", "Identity Element for Addition of Cuts", "Addition of Cuts is Commutative", "Addition of Cuts is Associative", "Existence of Unique Inverse Element for Addition of Cuts", "Identity Element for Ad...
proofwiki-16745
Set of Cuts under Addition forms Abelian Group
Let $\CC$ denote the set of cuts. Let $\struct {\CC, +}$ denote the algebraic structure formed from $\CC$ and the operation $+$ of addition of cuts. Then $\struct {\CC, +}$ forms an abelian group.
In the below, $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ denote arbitrary cuts. Taking the abelian group axioms in turn:
Let $\CC$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let $\struct {\CC, +}$ denote the [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with One Operation|algebraic structure]] formed from $\CC$ and the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|operation $+$ of addition of cuts]]. Then $\struct {\CC, +}$ forms an ...
In the below, $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ denote arbitrary [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Taking the [[Axiom:Abelian Group Axioms|abelian group axioms]] in turn:
Set of Cuts under Addition forms Abelian Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Cuts_under_Addition_forms_Abelian_Group
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Cuts_under_Addition_forms_Abelian_Group
[ "Cuts", "Examples of Abelian Groups" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Algebraic Structure/One Operation", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Abelian Group" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Axiom:Abelian Group Axioms", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Axiom:Abelian Group Axioms" ]
proofwiki-16746
Product of Positive Cuts is Positive Cut
Let $0^*$ denote the rational cut associated with the (rational) number $0$. Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts such that $\alpha \ge 0^*$ and $\beta \ge 0^*$, where $\ge$ denotes the ordering on cuts. Let $\gamma$ be the set of all rational numbers $r$ such that either: :$r < 0$ or: :$\exists p \in \alpha, q \in \beta: ...
By definition of $\gamma$, we have that $r < 0 \implies r \in \gamma$. Hence $\gamma$ is not empty. First suppose that either $\alpha = 0^*$ or $\beta = 0^*$. Then by definition of cut: :$p \in \alpha \implies p < 0$ :$q \in \beta \implies q < 0$ and so there exist no $r \in \gamma$ such that $r = p q$. Thus $\gamma$ c...
Let $0^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] associated with the [[Definition:Zero (Number)|(rational) number $0$]]. Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]] such that $\alpha \ge 0^*$ and $\beta \ge 0^*$, where $\ge$ denotes the [[Definition:Ordering of Cuts|ordering on cuts]]. ...
By definition of $\gamma$, we have that $r < 0 \implies r \in \gamma$. Hence $\gamma$ is not [[Definition:Empty Set|empty]]. First suppose that either $\alpha = 0^*$ or $\beta = 0^*$. Then by definition of [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]: :$p \in \alpha \implies p < 0$ :$q \in \beta \implies q < 0$ and so there ...
Product of Positive Cuts is Positive Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Positive_Cuts_is_Positive_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Positive_Cuts_is_Positive_Cut
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Multiplication of Positive Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Positive Cut", "D...
[ "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Greatest Element", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Ration...
proofwiki-16747
Product of Cuts is Cut
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts. Let $\alpha \beta$ denote the product of cuts. Then $\alpha \beta$ is also a cut. Thus the operation of multiplication on the set of cuts is closed.
{{ProofWanted}} Category:Cuts Category:Multiplication m4f4p5wp4vizxgz4w7o28tg6sd15z9z
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let $\alpha \beta$ denote the [[Definition:Multiplication of Cuts|product]] of [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Then $\alpha \beta$ is also a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Thus the operation of [[Definition:Multiplication of Cuts|multiplicatio...
{{ProofWanted}} [[Category:Cuts]] [[Category:Multiplication]] m4f4p5wp4vizxgz4w7o28tg6sd15z9z
Product of Cuts is Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Cuts_is_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Cuts_is_Cut
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure" ]
[ "Category:Cuts", "Category:Multiplication" ]
proofwiki-16748
Factorisation of z^n+a
Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a (strictly) positive integer. Let $a \in \C$ be a complex number. Then: :$z^n + a = \ds \prod_{k \mathop = 0}^{n - 1} \paren {z - \alpha_k b}$ where: :$\alpha_k$ are the complex $n$th roots of negative unity :$b$ is any complex number such that $b^n = a$.
From $z^n + a = 0$ we have that: :$z^n = - a$ Let $b = a^{1 / n}$, hence $b^n = a$, with $a, b \in \C$. From Roots of Complex Number: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = z^{1 / n} | r = \set {a^{1 / n} e^{i \paren {\theta + 2 k \pi} / n}: k \in \set {0, 1, 2, \ldots, n - 1}, \theta = \arg -a} | c = $z^n = -a$ so we n...
Let $n \in \Z_{>0}$ be a [[Definition:Strictly Positive Integer|(strictly) positive integer]]. Let $a \in \C$ be a [[Definition:Complex Number|complex number]]. Then: :$z^n + a = \ds \prod_{k \mathop = 0}^{n - 1} \paren {z - \alpha_k b}$ where: :$\alpha_k$ are the complex $n$th roots of negative unity :$b$ is any ...
From $z^n + a = 0$ we have that: :$z^n = - a$ Let $b = a^{1 / n}$, hence $b^n = a$, with $a, b \in \C$. From [[Roots of Complex Number]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = z^{1 / n} | r = \set {a^{1 / n} e^{i \paren {\theta + 2 k \pi} / n}: k \in \set {0, 1, 2, \ldots, n - 1}, \theta = \arg -a} | c = $z^n = -a$ s...
Factorisation of z^n+a
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Factorisation_of_z^n+a
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Factorisation_of_z^n+a
[ "Algebra", "Complex Roots" ]
[ "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Definition:Complex Number", "Definition:Complex Number" ]
[ "Roots of Complex Number", "Definition:Root of Polynomial", "Polynomial Factor Theorem/Corollary/Complex Numbers", "Definition:Monic Polynomial", "Category:Algebra", "Category:Complex Roots" ]
proofwiki-16749
Multiplication of Cuts is Commutative
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts. Let the $\alpha \beta$ be the product of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\alpha \beta = \beta \alpha$
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, \...
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let the $\alpha \beta$ be the [[Definition:Multiplication of Cuts|product]] of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\alpha \beta = \beta \alpha$
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, ...
Multiplication of Cuts is Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Cuts_is_Commutative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Cuts_is_Commutative
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication", "Examples of Commutative Operations" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Absolute Value of Cut", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Rational Multiplic...
proofwiki-16750
Multiplication of Cuts is Associative
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be cuts. Let $\alpha \beta$ denote the product of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\paren {\alpha \beta} \gamma = \alpha \paren {\beta \gamma}$
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, \...
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let $\alpha \beta$ denote the [[Definition:Multiplication of Cuts|product]] of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\paren {\alpha \beta} \gamma = \alpha \paren {\beta \gamma}$
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, ...
Multiplication of Cuts is Associative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Cuts_is_Associative
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Cuts_is_Associative
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication", "Examples of Associative Operations" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Absolute Value of Cut", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Rational Multiplication is Associative" ]
proofwiki-16751
Multiplication of Cuts Distributes over Addition
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be cuts. Let: :$\alpha + \beta$ denote the sum of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. :$\alpha \beta$ denote the product of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\alpha \paren {\beta + \gamma} = \alpha \beta + \alpha \gamma$
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, \...
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let: :$\alpha + \beta$ denote the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|sum]] of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. :$\alpha \beta$ denote the [[Definition:Multiplication of Cuts|product]] of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Then: :$\alpha \paren {\beta + \gamma} = \alpha \b...
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, ...
Multiplication of Cuts Distributes over Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Cuts_Distributes_over_Addition
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Cuts_Distributes_over_Addition
[ "Cuts", "Addition", "Multiplication", "Examples of Distributive Operations" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Absolute Value of Cut", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Rational Multiplication Distributes over Addition" ]
proofwiki-16752
Product of Cut with Zero Cut equals Zero Cut
Let $\alpha$ be a cut. Let $0^*$ denote the rational cut associated with the (rational) number $0$. Then: :$\alpha 0^* = 0^*$ where $\alpha 0^*$ denotes the product of $\alpha$ and $0^*$.
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, \...
Let $\alpha$ be a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Let $0^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] associated with the [[Definition:Zero (Number)|(rational) number $0$]]. Then: :$\alpha 0^* = 0^*$ where $\alpha 0^*$ denotes the [[Definition:Multiplication of Cuts|product]] of $\alpha$ and $0^*$.
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, ...
Product of Cut with Zero Cut equals Zero Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Cut_with_Zero_Cut_equals_Zero_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Cut_with_Zero_Cut_equals_Zero_Cut
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Absolute Value of Cut", "Definition:Multiplication of Positive Cuts", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Absolute Value of Cut is Zero iff Cut is Zero", "Absolute Value of Cut is Greater Than or Equal To Zero Cut", "Definition:Multiplication of Positive Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Ra...
proofwiki-16753
Product of Cuts is Zero Cut iff Either Factor equals Zero Cut
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts. Let $0^*$ denote the rational cut associated with the (rational) number $0$. Then: :$\alpha \beta = 0^*$ {{iff}}: :$\alpha = 0^*$ or $\beta = 0^*$ where $\alpha \beta$ denotes the product of $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, \...
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let $0^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] associated with the [[Definition:Zero (Number)|(rational) number $0$]]. Then: :$\alpha \beta = 0^*$ {{iff}}: :$\alpha = 0^*$ or $\beta = 0^*$ where $\alpha \beta$ denotes the [[Definition:Mu...
By definition, we have that: :$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha < 0^*, ...
Product of Cuts is Zero Cut iff Either Factor equals Zero Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Cuts_is_Zero_Cut_iff_Either_Factor_equals_Zero_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Cuts_is_Zero_Cut_iff_Either_Factor_equals_Zero_Cut
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Absolute Value of Cut", "Definition:Multiplication of Positive Cuts", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Absolute Value of Cut is Zero iff Cut is Zero", "Definition:Multiplication of Positive Cuts" ]
proofwiki-16754
Cut Associated with 1 is Identity for Multiplication of Cuts
Let $\alpha$ be a cut. Let $1^*$ denote the rational cut (rational) number $1$. Then: :$\alpha 1^* = \alpha$ where $\alpha 1^*$ denote the product of $\alpha$ and $1^*$.
By definition, we have that: :<nowiki>$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha ...
Let $\alpha$ be a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Let $1^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] [[Definition:Rational Number|(rational) number]] $1$. Then: :$\alpha 1^* = \alpha$ where $\alpha 1^*$ denote the [[Definition:Multiplication of Cuts|product]] of $\alpha$ and $1^*$.
By definition, we have that: :<nowiki>$\alpha \beta := \begin {cases} \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha < 0^*, \beta \ge 0^* \\ -\paren {\size \alpha \, \size \beta} & : \alpha \ge 0^*, \beta < 0^* \\ \size \alpha \, \size \beta & : \alpha...
Cut Associated with 1 is Identity for Multiplication of Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cut_Associated_with_1_is_Identity_for_Multiplication_of_Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Cut_Associated_with_1_is_Identity_for_Multiplication_of_Cuts
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Absolute Value of Cut", "Definition:Multiplication of Positive Cuts", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Absolute Value of Cut", "Definition:Multiplication of Positive Cuts" ]
proofwiki-16755
Multiplication of Positive Cuts preserves Ordering
Let $0^*$ denote the rational cut associated with the (rational) number $0$. Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be cuts such that: :$0^* < \alpha < \beta$ :$0^* < \gamma$ where $<$ denotes the strict ordering on cuts. Then :$\alpha \gamma < \beta \gamma$ where $\alpha \gamma$ denotes the product of $\alpha$ and $\gamma...
{{ProofWanted|bored with this}}
Let $0^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] associated with the [[Definition:Zero (Number)|(rational) number $0$]]. Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]] such that: :$0^* < \alpha < \beta$ :$0^* < \gamma$ where $<$ denotes the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|...
{{ProofWanted|bored with this}}
Multiplication of Positive Cuts preserves Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Positive_Cuts_preserves_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Multiplication_of_Positive_Cuts_preserves_Ordering
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts" ]
[]
proofwiki-16756
Sum of Rational Cuts is Rational Cut
Let $p \in\ Q$ and $q \in \Q$ be rational numbers. Let $p^*$ and $q^*$ denote the rational cuts associated with $p$ and $q$. Then: :$p^* + q^* = \paren {p + q}^*$ Thus the operation of addition on the set of rational cuts is closed.
From Sum of Cuts is Cut, $p^* + q^*$ is a cut. Let $r \in p^* + q^*$. Then: :$r = s + t$ where $s < p$ and $t < q$ Thus: :$r < p + q$ and so: :$r \in \paren {p + q}^*$ Hence: :$p^* + q^* \subseteq \paren {p + q}^*$ {{qed|lemma}} Let $r \in \paren {p + q}^*$. Then: :$r < p + q$ Let: :$h = p + q - r$ :$s = p - \dfrac h 2...
Let $p \in\ Q$ and $q \in \Q$ be [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Let $p^*$ and $q^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cuts]] associated with $p$ and $q$. Then: :$p^* + q^* = \paren {p + q}^*$ Thus the operation of [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|addition]] on the [[Definition:Set|set]] ...
From [[Sum of Cuts is Cut]], $p^* + q^*$ is a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Let $r \in p^* + q^*$. Then: :$r = s + t$ where $s < p$ and $t < q$ Thus: :$r < p + q$ and so: :$r \in \paren {p + q}^*$ Hence: :$p^* + q^* \subseteq \paren {p + q}^*$ {{qed|lemma}} Let $r \in \paren {p + q}^*$. Then: :$r < p + q$ ...
Sum of Rational Cuts is Rational Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sum_of_Rational_Cuts_is_Rational_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sum_of_Rational_Cuts_is_Rational_Cut
[ "Cuts", "Addition" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure" ]
[ "Sum of Cuts is Cut", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Set Equality" ]
proofwiki-16757
Product of Rational Cuts is Rational Cut
Let $p \in\ Q$ and $q \in \Q$ be rational numbers. Let $p^*$ and $q^*$ denote the rational cuts associated with $p$ and $q$. Then: :$p^* q^* = \paren {p q}^*$ Thus the operation of multiplication on the set of rational cuts is closed.
From Product of Cuts is Cut, $p^* q^*$ is a cut. {{ProofWanted}}
Let $p \in\ Q$ and $q \in \Q$ be [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Let $p^*$ and $q^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cuts]] associated with $p$ and $q$. Then: :$p^* q^* = \paren {p q}^*$ Thus the operation of [[Definition:Multiplication of Cuts|multiplication]] on the [[Definition:Se...
From [[Product of Cuts is Cut]], $p^* q^*$ is a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. {{ProofWanted}}
Product of Rational Cuts is Rational Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Rational_Cuts_is_Rational_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Product_of_Rational_Cuts_is_Rational_Cut
[ "Cuts", "Multiplication" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Multiplication of Cuts", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure" ]
[ "Product of Cuts is Cut", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)" ]
proofwiki-16758
Ordering of Rational Cuts preserves Ordering of Associated Rational Numbers
Let $p \in\ Q$ and $q \in \Q$ be rational numbers. Let $p^*$ and $q^*$ denote the rational cuts associated with $p$ and $q$. Then: :$p^* < q^* \iff p < q$ where $p^* < q^*$ denotes the strict ordering on cuts defined as: :$\beta < \gamma \iff \exists p \in \Q: p \in \beta, p \notin \gamma$
Let $p < q$. Then $p \notin p^*$ but $q \in q^*$. Thus $p^* < q^*$ by definition of the strict ordering on cuts . Let $p^* < q^*$. Then: :$\exists r \in \Q: r \notin p^*, r \in q^*$ Hence: :$p \le r < q$ and so: :$p < q$ {{qed}}
Let $p \in\ Q$ and $q \in \Q$ be [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Let $p^*$ and $q^*$ denote the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cuts]] associated with $p$ and $q$. Then: :$p^* < q^* \iff p < q$ where $p^* < q^*$ denotes the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering on cuts]] defined a...
Let $p < q$. Then $p \notin p^*$ but $q \in q^*$. Thus $p^* < q^*$ by definition of the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering on cuts]] . Let $p^* < q^*$. Then: :$\exists r \in \Q: r \notin p^*, r \in q^*$ Hence: :$p \le r < q$ and so: :$p < q$ {{qed}}
Ordering of Rational Cuts preserves Ordering of Associated Rational Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_of_Rational_Cuts_preserves_Ordering_of_Associated_Rational_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordering_of_Rational_Cuts_preserves_Ordering_of_Associated_Rational_Numbers
[ "Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict" ]
proofwiki-16759
Exists Rational Cut Between two Cuts
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be cuts. Let $\alpha < \beta$, where $<$ denotes the strict ordering on cuts. Then there exists a rational cut $r^*$ associated with the rational number $r$ such that: :$\alpha < r^* < \beta$
Let $\alpha < \beta$. Then there exists a rational number $p$ such that $p \in \beta$ and $p \notin \alpha$. Let $r \in \Q$ such that $r > p$ and $r \in \beta$. Because $r \in \beta$ and $r \notin r^*$, we have that $r^* < \beta$. Because $p \in r^*$ and $p \notin \alpha$, we have that $\alpha < r^*$. {{qed}}
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let $\alpha < \beta$, where $<$ denotes the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering on cuts]]. Then there exists a [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] $r^*$ associated with the [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] $r$ such th...
Let $\alpha < \beta$. Then there exists a [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] $p$ such that $p \in \beta$ and $p \notin \alpha$. Let $r \in \Q$ such that $r > p$ and $r \in \beta$. Because $r \in \beta$ and $r \notin r^*$, we have that $r^* < \beta$. Because $p \in r^*$ and $p \notin \alpha$, we have tha...
Exists Rational Cut Between two Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exists_Rational_Cut_Between_two_Cuts
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exists_Rational_Cut_Between_two_Cuts
[ "Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Rational Number" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number" ]
proofwiki-16760
Condition for Rational Cut to be Less than Given Cut
Let $\alpha$ be a cut. Let $p^*$ be the rational cut associated with a rational number $p$. Then: :$p \in \alpha$ {{iff}}: :$p^* < \alpha$ where $<$ denotes the strict ordering on cuts.
Let $p$ be a rational number such that $p \in \alpha$. Then by definition of rational cut: :$p \notin p^*$ Thus: :$p \in \alpha \implies p^* < \alpha$ {{qed|lemma}} Let $p^* < \alpha$. Then there exists a rational number $q$ such that $q \in \alpha$ and $q \notin p$. Thus $q \ge p$. But as $q \in \alpha$ it follows tha...
Let $\alpha$ be a [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cut]]. Let $p^*$ be the [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]] associated with a [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] $p$. Then: :$p \in \alpha$ {{iff}}: :$p^* < \alpha$ where $<$ denotes the [[Definition:Strict Ordering of Cuts|strict ordering on cuts]].
Let $p$ be a [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] such that $p \in \alpha$. Then by definition of [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cut]]: :$p \notin p^*$ Thus: :$p \in \alpha \implies p^* < \alpha$ {{qed|lemma}} Let $p^* < \alpha$. Then there exists a [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] $q$ ...
Condition for Rational Cut to be Less than Given Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Condition_for_Rational_Cut_to_be_Less_than_Given_Cut
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Condition_for_Rational_Cut_to_be_Less_than_Given_Cut
[ "Cuts" ]
[ "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts/Strict" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Rational Number" ]
proofwiki-16761
Continuous Mapping to Product Space/General Result
Let $X$ be a topological space. Let $\family {Y_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of topological spaces for some indexing set $I$. Let $\ds Y = \prod_{i \mathop \in I} Y_i$ be the product space of $\family {Y_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$. For each $i \in I$, let $\pr_i: X \to X_i$ denote the $i$th projection on $X$:...
Suppose $f$ is continuous. From Projection from Product Topology is Continuous $\pr_i$ is continuous for each $i \in I$. By Composite of Continuous Mappings is Continuous it follows that $\pr_i \circ f$ is continuous for each $i \in I$. Conversely, suppose that each $\pr_i \circ f$ is continuous. Let $U = \pr_{i_1}^{-...
Let $X$ be a [[Definition:Topological Space|topological space]]. Let $\family {Y_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]] for some [[Definition:Indexing Set|indexing set]] $I$. Let $\ds Y = \prod_{i \mathop \in I} Y_i$ be the [[Def...
Suppose $f$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|continuous]]. From [[Projection from Product Topology is Continuous]] $\pr_i$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|continuous]] for each $i \in I$. By [[Composite of Continuous Mappings is Continuous]] it follows that $\pr_i \circ f$ is [[Definition:C...
Continuous Mapping to Product Space/General Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Continuous_Mapping_to_Product_Space/General_Result
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Continuous_Mapping_to_Product_Space/General_Result
[ "Product Topology", "Continuous Mappings" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Product Space (Topology)", "Definition:Projection (Mapping Theory)/Family of Sets", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:C...
[ "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Projection from Product Topology is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Composite of Continuous Mappings is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Open Set/Topolog...
proofwiki-16762
Set of Cuts forms Ordered Field
Let $\CC$ denote the set of cuts. Let $\struct {\CC, +, \times, \le}$ denote the ordered structure formed from $\CC$ and: :the operation $+$ of addition of cuts :the operation $\times$ of multiplication of cuts :the ordering $\le$ of cuts. Then $\struct {\CC, +, \times, \le}$ is an ordered field.
First we show that $\struct {\CC, +, \times}$ is a field by demonstrating that it fulfils the field axioms: {{:Axiom:Field Axioms}} It has been established from Set of Cuts under Addition forms Abelian Group that $\struct {\CC, +}$ forms an abelian group. Thus $\text A 0$ through to $\text A 4$ are fulfilled. It remai...
Let $\CC$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Cut (Analysis)|cuts]]. Let $\struct {\CC, +, \times, \le}$ denote the [[Definition:Ordered Structure|ordered structure]] formed from $\CC$ and: :the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|operation $+$ of addition of cuts]] :the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|operation...
First we show that $\struct {\CC, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] by demonstrating that it fulfils the [[Axiom:Field Axioms|field axioms]]: {{:Axiom:Field Axioms}} It has been established from [[Set of Cuts under Addition forms Abelian Group]] that $\struct {\CC, +}$ forms an [[Definiti...
Set of Cuts forms Ordered Field
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Cuts_forms_Ordered_Field
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Cuts_forms_Ordered_Field
[ "Cuts", "Totally Ordered Fields" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Definition:Ordered Structure", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Ordered Field" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Axiom:Field Axioms", "Set of Cuts under Addition forms Abelian Group", "Definition:Abelian Group", "Axiom:Field Axioms", "Axiom:Field Axioms", "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)" ]
proofwiki-16763
Set of Rational Cuts forms Ordered Field
Let $\RR$ denote the set of rational cuts. Let $\struct {\RR, +, \times, \le}$ denote the ordered structure formed from $\RR$ and: :the operation $+$ of addition of cuts :the operation $\times$ of multiplication of cuts :the ordering $\le$ of cuts. Then $\struct {\RR, + \times, \le}$ is an ordered field.
We demonstrate that $\struct {\RR, +, \times}$ is a field by showing it is a subfield of the structure $\struct {\CC, +, \times}$, where $\CC$ denotes the set of all cuts. We do this by establishing that all $4$ criteria of the Subfield Test are satisfied. We note that $0^* \in \RR$, where $0^*$ is the rational cut ass...
Let $\RR$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cuts]]. Let $\struct {\RR, +, \times, \le}$ denote the [[Definition:Ordered Structure|ordered structure]] formed from $\RR$ and: :the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|operation $+$ of addition of cuts]] :the [[Definition:Addition of Cuts|op...
We demonstrate that $\struct {\RR, +, \times}$ is a [[Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)|field]] by showing it is a [[Definition:Subfield|subfield]] of the [[Definition:Algebraic Structure with Two Operations|structure]] $\struct {\CC, +, \times}$, where $\CC$ denotes the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Cut...
Set of Rational Cuts forms Ordered Field
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rational_Cuts_forms_Ordered_Field
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rational_Cuts_forms_Ordered_Field
[ "Cuts", "Totally Ordered Fields" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Ordered Structure", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Addition of Cuts", "Definition:Ordering of Cuts", "Definition:Ordered Field" ]
[ "Definition:Field (Abstract Algebra)", "Definition:Subfield", "Definition:Algebraic Structure/Two Operations", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)", "Subfield Test", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Zero (Number)" ]
proofwiki-16764
Box Topology contains Product Topology
Let $\family {\struct {X_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of topological spaces where $I$ is an arbitrary index set. Let $X$ be the cartesian product of $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$: :$\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ Let $\tau$ be the product topology on $X$. Let $\tau'$ be the box topolo...
From Natural Basis of Product Topology and Basis for Box Topology, it follows immediately that the natural basis $\BB$ for the product topology is contained in the basis $\BB'$ for the box topology. From Corollary of Basis Condition for Coarser Topology, it follows that $\tau \subseteq \tau'$. {{qed}} Category:Product ...
Let $\family {\struct {X_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]] where $I$ is an arbitrary [[Definition:Indexing Set|index set]]. Let $X$ be the [[Definition:Cartesian Product of Family|cartesian product]] of $\family {X_...
From [[Natural Basis of Product Topology]] and [[Basis for Box Topology]], it follows immediately that the [[Definition:Natural Basis of Product Topology|natural basis]] $\BB$ for the [[Definition:Product Topology|product topology]] is contained in the [[Definition:Synthetic Basis|basis]] $\BB'$ for the [[Definition:Bo...
Box Topology contains Product Topology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Box_Topology_contains_Product_Topology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Box_Topology_contains_Product_Topology
[ "Product Topology", "Box Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Cartesian Product/Family of Sets", "Definition:Product Topology", "Definition:Box Topology" ]
[ "Natural Basis of Product Topology", "Basis for Box Topology", "Definition:Product Topology/Natural Basis", "Definition:Product Topology", "Definition:Basis (Topology)/Synthetic Basis", "Definition:Box Topology", "Basis Condition for Coarser Topology/Corollary 2", "Category:Product Topology", "Categ...
proofwiki-16765
Ordered Field of Rational Cuts is Isomorphic to Rational Numbers
Let $\struct {\RR, +, \times, \le}$ denote the ordered field of rational cuts. Let $\struct {\Q, +, \times, \le}$ denote the field of rational numbers. Then $\struct {\RR, +, \times, \le}$ and $\struct {\Q, +, \times, \le}$ are isomorphic.
{{ProofWanted|Straightforward but tedious}}
Let $\struct {\RR, +, \times, \le}$ denote the [[Definition:Ordered Field|ordered field]] of [[Definition:Rational Cut|rational cuts]]. Let $\struct {\Q, +, \times, \le}$ denote the [[Definition:Field of Rational Numbers|field of rational numbers]]. Then $\struct {\RR, +, \times, \le}$ and $\struct {\Q, +, \times, \...
{{ProofWanted|Straightforward but tedious}}
Ordered Field of Rational Cuts is Isomorphic to Rational Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordered_Field_of_Rational_Cuts_is_Isomorphic_to_Rational_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Ordered_Field_of_Rational_Cuts_is_Isomorphic_to_Rational_Numbers
[ "Cuts", "Rational Numbers" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Field", "Definition:Cut (Analysis)/Rational", "Definition:Field of Rational Numbers", "Definition:Ordered Field Isomorphism" ]
[]
proofwiki-16766
Supremum of Subset of Real Numbers May or May Not be in Subset
Let $S \subset \R$ be a proper subset of the set $\R$ of real numbers. Let $S$ admit a supremum $M$. Then $M$ may or may not be an element of $S$.
Consider the subset $S$ of the real numbers $\R$ defined as: :$S = \set {\dfrac 1 n: n \in \Z_{>0} }$ It is seen that: :$S = \set {1, \dfrac 1 2, \dfrac 1 3, \ldots}$ and hence $\sup S = 1$. Thus $\sup S \in S$. Consider the subset $T$ of the real numbers $\R$ defined as: :$T = \set {-\dfrac 1 n: n \in \Z_{>0} }$ It is...
Let $S \subset \R$ be a [[Definition:Proper Subset|proper subset]] of the [[Definition:Real Number|set $\R$ of real numbers]]. Let $S$ admit a [[Definition:Supremum of Subset of Real Numbers|supremum]] $M$. Then $M$ may or may not be an [[Definition:Element|element]] of $S$.
Consider the [[Definition:Subset|subset]] $S$ of the [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]] $\R$ defined as: :$S = \set {\dfrac 1 n: n \in \Z_{>0} }$ It is seen that: :$S = \set {1, \dfrac 1 2, \dfrac 1 3, \ldots}$ and hence $\sup S = 1$. Thus $\sup S \in S$. Consider the [[Definition:Subset|subset]] $T$ of the [...
Supremum of Subset of Real Numbers May or May Not be in Subset
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Supremum_of_Subset_of_Real_Numbers_May_or_May_Not_be_in_Subset
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Supremum_of_Subset_of_Real_Numbers_May_or_May_Not_be_in_Subset
[ "Suprema" ]
[ "Definition:Proper Subset", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Supremum of Set/Real Numbers", "Definition:Element" ]
[ "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Real Number" ]
proofwiki-16767
Infimum of Subset of Real Numbers May or May Not be in Subset
Let $S \subset \R$ be a proper subset of the set $\R$ of real numbers. Let $S$ admit an infimum $m$. Then $m$ may or may not be an element of $S$.
Consider the subset $S$ of the real numbers $\R$ defined as: :$S = \set {\dfrac 1 n: n \in \Z_{>0} }$ It is seen that: :$S = \set {1, \dfrac 1 2, \dfrac 1 3, \ldots}$ and hence $\inf S = 0$. Thus $\inf S \notin S$. Consider the subset $T$ of the real numbers $\R$ defined as: :$T = \set {-\dfrac 1 n: n \in \Z_{>0} }$ It...
Let $S \subset \R$ be a [[Definition:Proper Subset|proper subset]] of the [[Definition:Real Number|set $\R$ of real numbers]]. Let $S$ admit an [[Definition:Infimum of Subset of Real Numbers|infimum]] $m$. Then $m$ may or may not be an [[Definition:Element|element]] of $S$.
Consider the [[Definition:Subset|subset]] $S$ of the [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]] $\R$ defined as: :$S = \set {\dfrac 1 n: n \in \Z_{>0} }$ It is seen that: :$S = \set {1, \dfrac 1 2, \dfrac 1 3, \ldots}$ and hence $\inf S = 0$. Thus $\inf S \notin S$. Consider the [[Definition:Subset|subset]] $T$ of th...
Infimum of Subset of Real Numbers May or May Not be in Subset
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infimum_of_Subset_of_Real_Numbers_May_or_May_Not_be_in_Subset
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Infimum_of_Subset_of_Real_Numbers_May_or_May_Not_be_in_Subset
[ "Suprema" ]
[ "Definition:Proper Subset", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Infimum of Set/Real Numbers", "Definition:Element" ]
[ "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Real Number" ]
proofwiki-16768
Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent
Let $x \in \R$ be a real number such that $x > 0$. Let $n \in \Z$ be an integer such that $n > 0$. Then there is at most one $y \in \R: y \ge 0$ such that $y^n = x$.
We have that: :$0 < y_1 < y_2 \implies y_1^n < y_2^n$ so there exists at most one $y \in \R: y \ge 0$ such that $y^n = x$. {{Qed}}
Let $x \in \R$ be a [[Definition:Real Number|real number]] such that $x > 0$. Let $n \in \Z$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 0$. Then there is at most one $y \in \R: y \ge 0$ such that $y^n = x$.
We have that: :$0 < y_1 < y_2 \implies y_1^n < y_2^n$ so there exists at most one $y \in \R: y \ge 0$ such that $y^n = x$. {{Qed}}
Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Uniqueness_of_Positive_Root_of_Positive_Real_Number/Positive_Exponent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Uniqueness_of_Positive_Root_of_Positive_Real_Number/Positive_Exponent/Proof_2
[ "Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Integer" ]
[]
proofwiki-16769
Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent
Let $x \in \R$ be a real number such that $x > 0$. Let $n \in \Z$ be an integer such that $n > 0$. Then there is at most one $y \in \R: y \ge 0$ such that $y^n = x$.
To prove uniqueness, we must show that: :$y_1^n = x = y_2^n$ implies $y_1 = y_2$ {{AimForCont}} that $y_1 \ne y_2$. Then $y_1 < y_2$ or $y_2 < y_1$. {{WLOG}}, assume that $y_1 < y_2$. We will show by induction that $y_1^n < y_2^n$, contradicting the assumption that $y_1^n = x = y_2^n$. === Basis for the Induction === B...
Let $x \in \R$ be a [[Definition:Real Number|real number]] such that $x > 0$. Let $n \in \Z$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 0$. Then there is at most one $y \in \R: y \ge 0$ such that $y^n = x$.
To prove [[Definition:Unique|uniqueness]], we must show that: :$y_1^n = x = y_2^n$ implies $y_1 = y_2$ {{AimForCont}} that $y_1 \ne y_2$. Then $y_1 < y_2$ or $y_2 < y_1$. {{WLOG}}, assume that $y_1 < y_2$. We will show by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]] that $y_1^n < y_2^n$, contradicting the assu...
Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent/Proof 3
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Uniqueness_of_Positive_Root_of_Positive_Real_Number/Positive_Exponent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Uniqueness_of_Positive_Root_of_Positive_Real_Number/Positive_Exponent/Proof_3
[ "Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Integer" ]
[ "Definition:Unique", "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Basis for the Induction", "Definition:Induction Hypothesis", "Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent/Proof 3", "Definition:Positive", "Axiom:Real Number/Axioms", "Principle of Mathematical Induction"...
proofwiki-16770
Existence and Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent
Let $x \in \R$ be a real number such that $x \ge 0$. Let $n \in \Z$ be an integer such that $n > 0$. Then there always exists a unique $y \in \R: \paren {y \ge 0} \land \paren {y^n = x}$.
=== Proof of Existence === {{:Existence of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent}}
Let $x \in \R$ be a [[Definition:Real Number|real number]] such that $x \ge 0$. Let $n \in \Z$ be an [[Definition:Integer|integer]] such that $n > 0$. Then there always exists a [[Definition:Unique|unique]] $y \in \R: \paren {y \ge 0} \land \paren {y^n = x}$.
=== [[Existence of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent|Proof of Existence]] === {{:Existence of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent}}
Existence and Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Existence_and_Uniqueness_of_Positive_Root_of_Positive_Real_Number/Positive_Exponent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Existence_and_Uniqueness_of_Positive_Root_of_Positive_Real_Number/Positive_Exponent
[ "Existence and Uniqueness of Positive Root of Positive Real Number" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Integer", "Definition:Unique" ]
[ "Existence of Positive Root of Positive Real Number/Positive Exponent" ]
proofwiki-16771
Basis Condition for Coarser Topology
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ be two bases on $S$. Let $\tau_1$ and $\tau_2$ be the topologies generated by $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ respectively. If $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ satisfy: :$\forall U \in \BB_1 : \exists \AA \subseteq \BB_2: U = \bigcup \AA$ then $\tau_1$ is coarser than $\tau_2$.
Let $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ satisfy: :$\forall U \in \BB_1 : \exists \AA \subseteq \BB_2: U = \bigcup \AA$ Let $U \in \BB_1$. Then there exists $\AA_2 \subseteq \BB_2$ such that $U = \bigcup \AA_2$. By definition of the topology generated by $\BB_2$, it follows that $U \in \tau_2$. Since $U$ was arbitrary, it follows that ...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ be two [[Definition:Synthetic Basis|bases]] on $S$. Let $\tau_1$ and $\tau_2$ be the [[Definition:Topology|topologies]] [[Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Basis|generated]] by $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ respectively. If $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ satisfy: :$\...
Let $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ satisfy: :$\forall U \in \BB_1 : \exists \AA \subseteq \BB_2: U = \bigcup \AA$ Let $U \in \BB_1$. Then there exists $\AA_2 \subseteq \BB_2$ such that $U = \bigcup \AA_2$. By definition of the [[Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Basis|topology generated]] by $\BB_2$, it follows that ...
Basis Condition for Coarser Topology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Basis_Condition_for_Coarser_Topology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Basis_Condition_for_Coarser_Topology
[ "Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Basis (Topology)/Synthetic Basis", "Definition:Topology", "Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Basis", "Definition:Coarser Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Basis", "Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Basis", "Definition:Topology", "Category:Topology" ]
proofwiki-16772
Basis Condition for Coarser Topology/Corollary 1
If $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ satisfy: :$\forall U \in \BB_1: \forall x \in U: \exists V \in \BB_2: x \in V \subseteq U$ then $\tau_1$ is coarser than $\tau_2$.
Let $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ satisfy: :$\forall U \in \BB_1: \forall x \in U: \exists V \in \BB_2: x \in V \subseteq U$ Let $U \in \BB_1$. Let $\AA = \set {V \in \BB_2 : V \subseteq U}$ From Union of Family of Sets is Smallest Superset: :$\bigcup \AA \subseteq V$ Let $x \in U$. Then: :$\exists V_x \in \BB_2 : x \in V_x \sub...
If $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ satisfy: :$\forall U \in \BB_1: \forall x \in U: \exists V \in \BB_2: x \in V \subseteq U$ then $\tau_1$ is [[Definition:Coarser Topology|coarser]] than $\tau_2$.
Let $\BB_1$ and $\BB_2$ satisfy: :$\forall U \in \BB_1: \forall x \in U: \exists V \in \BB_2: x \in V \subseteq U$ Let $U \in \BB_1$. Let $\AA = \set {V \in \BB_2 : V \subseteq U}$ From [[Union is Smallest Superset/Family of Sets|Union of Family of Sets is Smallest Superset]]: :$\bigcup \AA \subseteq V$ Let $x \i...
Basis Condition for Coarser Topology/Corollary 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Basis_Condition_for_Coarser_Topology/Corollary_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Basis_Condition_for_Coarser_Topology/Corollary_1
[ "Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Coarser Topology" ]
[ "Union is Smallest Superset/Family of Sets", "Definition:Set Equality", "Basis Condition for Coarser Topology", "Definition:Coarser Topology", "Category:Topology" ]
proofwiki-16773
Basis Condition for Coarser Topology/Corollary 2
If $\BB_1 \subseteq \BB_2$ then $\tau_1$ is coarser than $\tau_2$.
Let $\BB_1 \subseteq \BB_2$. Let $U \in \BB_1$. Let $\AA = \set U$. Then: :$\AA \subseteq \BB_2$ and :$U = \bigcup \AA$ So: :$\forall U \in \BB_1 : \exists \AA \subseteq \BB_2: U = \bigcup \AA$ From Basis Condition for Coarser Topology: :$\tau_1$ is coarser than $\tau_2$ {{qed}} Category:Topology gmwsn3hqv1yry5z79x0w8t...
If $\BB_1 \subseteq \BB_2$ then $\tau_1$ is [[Definition:Coarser Topology|coarser]] than $\tau_2$.
Let $\BB_1 \subseteq \BB_2$. Let $U \in \BB_1$. Let $\AA = \set U$. Then: :$\AA \subseteq \BB_2$ and :$U = \bigcup \AA$ So: :$\forall U \in \BB_1 : \exists \AA \subseteq \BB_2: U = \bigcup \AA$ From [[Basis Condition for Coarser Topology]]: :$\tau_1$ is [[Definition:Coarser Topology|coarser]] than $\tau_2$ {{qed}}...
Basis Condition for Coarser Topology/Corollary 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Basis_Condition_for_Coarser_Topology/Corollary_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Basis_Condition_for_Coarser_Topology/Corollary_2
[ "Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Coarser Topology" ]
[ "Basis Condition for Coarser Topology", "Definition:Coarser Topology", "Category:Topology" ]
proofwiki-16774
Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coarser Codomain Topologies is Continuous
Let $\struct {X, \tau_1}$ and $\struct {Y, \tau_2}$ be topological spaces. Let $f: \struct {X, \tau_1} \to \struct {Y, \tau_2}$ be a continuous mapping. Let $\tau'_1$ be a finer topology on $X$ than $\tau_1$, that is, $\tau_1 \subseteq \tau'_1$. Let $\tau'_2$ be a coarser topology on $Y$ than $\tau_2$, that is, $\tau'_...
Let $U \in \tau'_2$. Since $\tau'_2$ is a coarser topology than $\tau_2$: :$U \in \tau_2$ By definition of continuity: :$\map {f^{-1}} U \in \tau_1$ Since $\tau'_1$ is a finer topology than $\tau_1$: :$\map {f^{-1}} U \in \tau'_1$ Since $U$ was arbitrary, by definition of continuity: :$f: \struct {X, \tau'_1} \to \stru...
Let $\struct {X, \tau_1}$ and $\struct {Y, \tau_2}$ be [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]]. Let $f: \struct {X, \tau_1} \to \struct {Y, \tau_2}$ be a [[Definition:Continuous Mapping|continuous mapping]]. Let $\tau'_1$ be a [[Definition:Finer Topology|finer topology]] on $X$ than $\tau_1$, that is, $\...
Let $U \in \tau'_2$. Since $\tau'_2$ is a [[Definition:Coarser Topology|coarser topology]] than $\tau_2$: :$U \in \tau_2$ By definition of [[Definition:Continuous Mapping|continuity]]: :$\map {f^{-1}} U \in \tau_1$ Since $\tau'_1$ is a [[Definition:Finer Topology|finer topology]] than $\tau_1$: :$\map {f^{-1}} U \i...
Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coarser Codomain Topologies is Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Continuous_Mapping_on_Finer_Domain_and_Coarser_Codomain_Topologies_is_Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Continuous_Mapping_on_Finer_Domain_and_Coarser_Codomain_Topologies_is_Continuous
[ "Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Continuous Mapping", "Definition:Finer Topology", "Definition:Coarser Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Coarser Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping", "Definition:Finer Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping", "Definition:Continuous Mapping", "Category:Topology" ]
proofwiki-16775
Projection from Box Topology is Continuous
Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an $I$-indexed family of topological spaces. Let $X$ be the cartesian product of $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$, that is: :$\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \in I} X_i$ Let $\tau$ be the box topology on $X$. For each $i \in I$, let $\pr_i: X \to X_i$ denote the $i$t...
Let $\tau'$ be the product topology on $X$. From Projection from Product Topology is Continuous: :$\forall i \in I : \pr_i : \struct{X, \tau'} \to \struct{X_i, \tau_i}$ is continuous From Box Topology contains Product Topology, $\tau$ is a finer topology than $\tau'$ on $X$. From Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and ...
Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|$I$-indexed family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]]. Let $X$ be the [[Definition:Cartesian Product of Family|cartesian product]] of $\family {X_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$, that is: :$\ds X := \prod_{i \mathop \i...
Let $\tau'$ be the [[Definition:Product Topology|product topology]] on $X$. From [[Projection from Product Topology is Continuous]]: :$\forall i \in I : \pr_i : \struct{X, \tau'} \to \struct{X_i, \tau_i}$ is [[Definition:Everywhere Continuous Mapping (Topology)|continuous]] From [[Box Topology contains Product Topolo...
Projection from Box Topology is Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Projection_from_Box_Topology_is_Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Projection_from_Box_Topology_is_Continuous
[ "Box Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Cartesian Product/Family of Sets", "Definition:Box Topology", "Definition:Projection (Mapping Theory)/Family of Sets", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)/Everywhere" ]
[ "Definition:Product Topology", "Projection from Product Topology is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)/Everywhere", "Box Topology contains Product Topology", "Definition:Finer Topology", "Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coarser Codomain Topologies is Continuous", "Definition:C...
proofwiki-16776
Domain Topology Contains Initial Topology iff Mappings are Continuous
Let $\struct{Y, \tau}$ be a topological space. Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be a family of topological spaces. Let $\family {f_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be a family of mappings $f_i : Y \to X_i$. Let $\tau'$ be the initial topology on $Y$ with respect to $\family {f_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$. Then: :$...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\tau' \subseteq \tau$. From Equivalence of Definitions of Initial Topology: :for each $i \in I$, $f_i: \struct{Y, \tau'} \to \struct{X_i, \tau_i}$ is $\tuple{\tau', \tau_i}$-continuous From Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coarser Codomain Topologies is Continuous: :for each $i \i...
Let $\struct{Y, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Topological Space|topological space]]. Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be a [[Definition:Indexed Family|family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]]. Let $\family {f_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be a [[Definition:Indexed Family|family]] of [[...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\tau' \subseteq \tau$. From [[Equivalence of Definitions of Initial Topology]]: :for each $i \in I$, $f_i: \struct{Y, \tau'} \to \struct{X_i, \tau_i}$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|$\tuple{\tau', \tau_i}$-continuous]] From [[Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coar...
Domain Topology Contains Initial Topology iff Mappings are Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Domain_Topology_Contains_Initial_Topology_iff_Mappings_are_Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Domain_Topology_Contains_Initial_Topology_iff_Mappings_are_Continuous
[ "Initial Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Initial Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)" ]
[ "Equivalence of Definitions of Initial Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coarser Codomain Topologies is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Equivalence of Definitions of Initial T...
proofwiki-16777
Final Topology Contains Codomain Topology iff Mappings are Continuous
Let $\struct{Y, \tau}$ be a topological space. Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be a family of topological spaces. Let $\family {f_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be a family of mappings $f_i : X_i \to Y$. Let $\tau'$ be the final topology on $Y$ with respect to $\family {f_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$. Then: :$\t...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\tau \subseteq \tau'$. From Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology: :for each $i \in I$, $f_i: \struct{X_i, \tau_i} \to \struct{Y, \tau'}$ is $\tuple{\tau_i, \tau'}$-continuous From Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coarser Codomain Topologies is Continuous: :for each $i \in ...
Let $\struct{Y, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Topological Space|topological space]]. Let $\family {\struct{X_i, \tau_i}}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be a [[Definition:Indexed Family|family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]]. Let $\family {f_i}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be a [[Definition:Indexed Family|family]] of [[...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\tau \subseteq \tau'$. From [[Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology]]: :for each $i \in I$, $f_i: \struct{X_i, \tau_i} \to \struct{Y, \tau'}$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|$\tuple{\tau_i, \tau'}$-continuous]] From [[Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coarse...
Final Topology Contains Codomain Topology iff Mappings are Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Final_Topology_Contains_Codomain_Topology_iff_Mappings_are_Continuous
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Final_Topology_Contains_Codomain_Topology_iff_Mappings_are_Continuous
[ "Final Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Final Topology", "Definition:Continuous" ]
[ "Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Continuous Mapping on Finer Domain and Coarser Codomain Topologies is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topol...
proofwiki-16778
Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology
Let $X$ be a set. Let $I$ be an indexing set. Let $\family {\struct {Y_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of topological spaces indexed by $I$. Let $\family {f_i: Y_i \to X}_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an indexed family of mappings indexed by $I$. {{TFAE|def = Final Topology}}
=== Definition 1 Implies Definition 2 === {{:Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology/Definition 1 Implies Definition 2}}{{qed|lemma}}
Let $X$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $I$ be an [[Definition:Indexing Set|indexing set]]. Let $\family {\struct {Y_i, \tau_i} }_{i \mathop \in I}$ be an [[Definition:Indexed Family|indexed family]] of [[Definition:Topological Space|topological spaces]] [[Definition:Indexing Set|indexed]] by $I$. Let $\family {f_...
=== [[Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology/Definition 1 Implies Definition 2|Definition 1 Implies Definition 2]] === {{:Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology/Definition 1 Implies Definition 2}}{{qed|lemma}}
Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Final_Topology
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Final_Topology
[ "Final Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Indexing Set", "Definition:Indexing Set/Family", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Indexing Set" ]
[ "Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology/Definition 1 Implies Definition 2" ]
proofwiki-16779
Condition for Trivial Relation to be Mapping
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\RR = S \times T$ be the trivial relation in $S$ to $T$. Then $\RR$ is a mapping {{iff}} either: :$(2): \card S = 0$ or: :$(1): \card T = 1$ where $\card {\, \cdot \,}$ denotes cardinality.
By definition, the trivial relation in $S$ to $T$ is the set: :$\RR = \set {\tuple {s, t}: s \in S, t \in T}$ Proof by Cases: :$(1)$: Let $\card S = 0$. That is, $S = \O$. By definition of the trivial relation, in this case $\RR = \O$. This is the empty mapping. From Empty Mapping is Mapping, this is a mapping. :$(2)$:...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\RR = S \times T$ be the [[Definition:Trivial Relation|trivial relation]] in $S$ to $T$. Then $\RR$ is a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] {{iff}} either: :$(2): \card S = 0$ or: :$(1): \card T = 1$ where $\card {\, \cdot \,}$ denotes [[Definition:Cardinality|cardinalit...
By definition, the [[Definition:Trivial Relation|trivial relation]] in $S$ to $T$ is the [[Definition:Set|set]]: :$\RR = \set {\tuple {s, t}: s \in S, t \in T}$ [[Proof by Cases]]: :$(1)$: Let $\card S = 0$. That is, $S = \O$. By definition of the [[Definition:Trivial Relation|trivial relation]], in this case $\R...
Condition for Trivial Relation to be Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Condition_for_Trivial_Relation_to_be_Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Condition_for_Trivial_Relation_to_be_Mapping
[ "Trivial Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Trivial Relation", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Cardinality" ]
[ "Definition:Trivial Relation", "Definition:Set", "Proof by Cases", "Definition:Trivial Relation", "Definition:Empty Mapping", "Empty Mapping is Mapping", "Definition:Mapping", "Relation to Empty Set is Mapping iff Domain is Empty", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Trivial Relation", "Definition...
proofwiki-16780
Relation to Empty Set is Mapping iff Domain is Empty
Let $S$ be a set Let $S \times \O$ denote the cartesian product of $S$ with the empty set $\O$. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times \O$ be a relation in $S$ to $\O$. Then $\RR$ is a mapping {{iff}} $S = \O$.
Let $S \ne \O$. Then $\exists s \in S$. But there exists no $t \in \O$. Hence there is no $\tuple {s, t} \in \RR$. So $\RR$ is not a mapping by definition. Let $S = \O$. Then $\RR$ is the empty mapping by definition. From Empty Mapping is Mapping, it is demonstrated that $\RR$ is indeed a mapping. Hence the result. {{q...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]] Let $S \times \O$ denote the [[Definition:Cartesian Product|cartesian product]] of $S$ with the [[Definition:Empty Set|empty set]] $\O$. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times \O$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] in $S$ to $\O$. Then $\RR$ is a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] {{iff}} $S...
Let $S \ne \O$. Then $\exists s \in S$. But there exists no $t \in \O$. Hence there is no $\tuple {s, t} \in \RR$. So $\RR$ is not a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] by definition. Let $S = \O$. Then $\RR$ is the [[Definition:Empty Mapping|empty mapping]] by definition. From [[Empty Mapping is Mapping]], it is de...
Relation to Empty Set is Mapping iff Domain is Empty
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_to_Empty_Set_is_Mapping_iff_Domain_is_Empty
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_to_Empty_Set_is_Mapping_iff_Domain_is_Empty
[ "Empty Mapping", "Relation Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Cartesian Product", "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Empty Mapping", "Empty Mapping is Mapping", "Definition:Mapping", "Category:Empty Mapping", "Category:Relation Theory" ]
proofwiki-16781
Equivalence of Definitions of Initial Topology/Definition 1 Implies Definition 2
Let: :$\SS = \set{\map {f_i^{-1}} U: i \in I, U \in \tau_i} \subseteq \powerset X$ where $\map {f_i^{-1}} U$ denotes the preimage of $U$ under $f_i$. Let $\tau$ be the topology on $X$ generated by the subbase $\SS$.
==== Mappings are Continuous ==== Let $i \in I$. Let $U \in \tau_i$. Then $\map {f_i^{-1} } U$ is an element of the subbase $\SS$ of $X$, and is therefore trivially in $\tau$. {{qed|lemma}} ==== $\tau$ is the Coarsest such Topology ==== Let $\struct {X, \vartheta}$ be a topological space. Let the mappings $\family {f_i...
Let: :$\SS = \set{\map {f_i^{-1}} U: i \in I, U \in \tau_i} \subseteq \powerset X$ where $\map {f_i^{-1}} U$ denotes the [[Definition:Preimage of Subset under Mapping|preimage]] of $U$ under $f_i$. Let $\tau$ be the [[Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Sub-Basis|topology on $X$ generated]] by the [[Definition:...
==== Mappings are Continuous ==== Let $i \in I$. Let $U \in \tau_i$. Then $\map {f_i^{-1} } U$ is an [[Definition:Element|element]] of the [[Definition:Subbase|subbase]] $\SS$ of $X$, and is therefore trivially in $\tau$. {{qed|lemma}} ==== $\tau$ is the Coarsest such Topology ==== Let $\struct {X, \vartheta}$ be...
Equivalence of Definitions of Initial Topology/Definition 1 Implies Definition 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Initial_Topology/Definition_1_Implies_Definition_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Initial_Topology/Definition_1_Implies_Definition_2
[ "Initial Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Preimage/Mapping/Subset", "Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Sub-Basis", "Definition:Sub-Basis" ]
[ "Definition:Element", "Definition:Sub-Basis", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Equivalence of Definitions of Topology Generated by Synthetic Sub-Basis", "Definition:Coarser Topology" ]
proofwiki-16782
Equivalence of Definitions of Initial Topology/Definition 2 Implies Definition 1
Let $\tau$ be the coarsest topology on $X$ such that each $f_i: X \to Y_i$ is $\tuple{\tau, \tau_i}$-continuous. Let: :$\SS = \set {\map {f_i^{-1} } U: i \in I, U \in \tau_i} \subseteq \map \PP X$ where $\map {f_i^{-1} } U$ denotes the preimage of $U$ under $f_i$.
Let $\map \tau \SS$ be the topology on $X$ generated by the subbase $\SS$. ==== $\tau$ contains Topology Generated by $\SS$ ==== Let $i \in I$ and $U \in \tau_i$. By definition of $\tuple{\tau, \tau_i}$-continuity: :$\map {f_i^{-1} } U \in \tau$ Since $i \in I$ and $U \in \tau_i$ were arbitrary, then $\SS \subseteq \t...
Let $\tau$ be the [[Definition:Coarser Topology|coarsest topology]] on $X$ such that each $f_i: X \to Y_i$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|$\tuple{\tau, \tau_i}$-continuous]]. Let: :$\SS = \set {\map {f_i^{-1} } U: i \in I, U \in \tau_i} \subseteq \map \PP X$ where $\map {f_i^{-1} } U$ denotes the [[Defi...
Let $\map \tau \SS$ be the [[Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Sub-Basis|topology on $X$ generated ]] by the [[Definition:Subbase|subbase]] $\SS$. ==== $\tau$ contains Topology Generated by $\SS$ ==== Let $i \in I$ and $U \in \tau_i$. By definition of [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|$\tuple{\tau...
Equivalence of Definitions of Initial Topology/Definition 2 Implies Definition 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Initial_Topology/Definition_2_Implies_Definition_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Initial_Topology/Definition_2_Implies_Definition_1
[ "Initial Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Coarser Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Preimage/Mapping/Subset" ]
[ "Definition:Topology Generated by Synthetic Sub-Basis", "Definition:Sub-Basis", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Equivalence of Definitions of Topology Generated by Synthetic Sub-Basis", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Sub-Basis", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:C...
proofwiki-16783
Even Natural Numbers are Infinite
The set of even natural numbers is infinite.
Let $E$ denote the set of even natural numbers. {{AimForCont}} $E$ is finite. Then there exists $n \in \N$ such that $E$ has $n$ elements. Let $m$ be the greatest element of $E$. But then $m + 2$ is an even natural number. But $m + 2 > m$, and $m$ is the greatest element of $E$. Therefore $m + 2$ is an even natural num...
The [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Even Integer|even]] [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]] is [[Definition:Infinite Set|infinite]].
Let $E$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Even Integer|even]] [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. {{AimForCont}} $E$ is [[Definition:Finite Set|finite]]. Then there exists $n \in \N$ such that $E$ has $n$ [[Definition:Element|elements]]. Let $m$ be the [[Definition:Greatest Element|greate...
Even Natural Numbers are Infinite
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Even_Natural_Numbers_are_Infinite
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Even_Natural_Numbers_are_Infinite
[ "Even Integers", "Infinite Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Even Integer", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Infinite Set" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Even Integer", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Greatest Element", "Definition:Even Integer", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Greatest Element", "Definition:Even Integer", "Definition:Natural Numbers"...
proofwiki-16784
Set of Points on Line Segment is Infinite
The set of points on a line segment is infinite.
Let $S$ denote the set of points on a line segment. {{AimForCont}} $S$ is finite. Then there exists $n \in \N$ such that $S$ has $n$ elements. Let $s_1$ and $s_2$ be two arbitrary adjacent points in $S$. That is, such that there are no points in $S$ between $s_1$ and $s_2$. But there exists (at least) one point on the ...
The [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Point|points]] on a [[Definition:Line Segment|line segment]] is [[Definition:Infinite Set|infinite]].
Let $S$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Point|points]] on a [[Definition:Line Segment|line segment]]. {{AimForCont}} $S$ is [[Definition:Finite Set|finite]]. Then there exists $n \in \N$ such that $S$ has $n$ [[Definition:Element|elements]]. Let $s_1$ and $s_2$ be two arbitrary adjacent [[Definitio...
Set of Points on Line Segment is Infinite
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Points_on_Line_Segment_is_Infinite
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Points_on_Line_Segment_is_Infinite
[ "Lines", "Infinite Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Line/Segment", "Definition:Infinite Set" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Line/Segment", "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Line/Segment", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Contradiction", "Proof by Contradiction", "Definition:Finit...
proofwiki-16785
Set of Doubletons of Natural Numbers is Countable
Let $S$ be the set defined as: :$S = \set {\set {n_1, n_2}: n_1, n_2 \in \N, n_1 \ne n_2}$ where $\N$ denotes the set of natural numbers. Then $S$ is countably infinite.
We can write the elements of $S \times T$ in the form of an infinite table: :$\begin{array} {*{4}c} \tuple {1, 0} & & & \\ \tuple {2, 0} & \tuple {2, 1} & & \\ \tuple {3, 0} & \tuple {3, 1} & \tuple {3, 2} & \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots \\ \end{array}$ This table clearly contains all the elements of $...
Let $S$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] defined as: :$S = \set {\set {n_1, n_2}: n_1, n_2 \in \N, n_1 \ne n_2}$ where $\N$ denotes the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Natural Number|natural numbers]]. Then $S$ is [[Definition:Countably Infinite Set|countably infinite]].
We can write the [[Definition:Element|elements]] of $S \times T$ in the form of an [[Definition:Infinite Set|infinite]] table: :$\begin{array} {*{4}c} \tuple {1, 0} & & & \\ \tuple {2, 0} & \tuple {2, 1} & & \\ \tuple {3, 0} & \tuple {3, 1} & \tuple {3, 2} & \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots \\ \end{array...
Set of Doubletons of Natural Numbers is Countable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Doubletons_of_Natural_Numbers_is_Countable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Doubletons_of_Natural_Numbers_is_Countable
[ "Cartesian Product of Countable Sets is Countable" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Countably Infinite/Set" ]
[ "Definition:Element", "Definition:Infinite Set", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Triangular Number", "Definition:Injection", "Definition:Bijection" ]
proofwiki-16786
Finite Sets are Comparable
Let $S$ and $T$ be finite sets. Then $S$ and $T$ are comparable by size.
By definition of finite set, there exist $m, n \in \N$ such that: :$S \sim \N_{<n}$ :$T \sim \N_{<m}$ That is, there are bijections $f, g$: :$f: S \to \N_{<n}$ :$g: T \to \N_{<m}$ {{WLOG}}, suppose that $m \le n$. Then $\N_{<m} \subseteq \N_{<n}$, and so we can define: :$h: T \to S, \map h t = \map {f^{-1}} { \map g t ...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Finite Set|finite sets]]. Then $S$ and $T$ are [[Definition:Comparable Sets by Size|comparable by size]].
By definition of [[Definition:Finite Set|finite set]], there exist $m, n \in \N$ such that: :$S \sim \N_{<n}$ :$T \sim \N_{<m}$ That is, there are [[Definition:Bijection|bijections]] $f, g$: :$f: S \to \N_{<n}$ :$g: T \to \N_{<m}$ {{WLOG}}, suppose that $m \le n$. Then $\N_{<m} \subseteq \N_{<n}$, and so we can de...
Finite Sets are Comparable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finite_Sets_are_Comparable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finite_Sets_are_Comparable
[ "Comparable Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Comparable Sets/Cardinality" ]
[ "Definition:Finite Set", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Inverse Mapping", "Inverse of Bijection is Bijection", "Composite of Injections is Injection", "Definition:Injection", "Injection to Image is Bijection", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Comparable Sets/Cardinality" ]
proofwiki-16787
Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology/Definition 1 Implies Definition 2
Let: :$\tau = \set{U \subseteq X: \forall i \in I: \map {f_i^{-1}} U \in \tau_i} \subseteq \powerset X$
From Final Topology is Topology, $\tau$ is a topology. ==== Mappings are continuous ==== Let $U \in \tau$. Let $i \in I$. Then $\map {f_i^{-1}} {U} \in \tau_i$ by definition of $\tau$. It follows that for each $i \in I$, $f_i: Y_i \to X$ is $\tuple {\tau_i, \tau}$-continuous. {{qed|lemma}} ==== $\tau$ is the finest suc...
Let: :$\tau = \set{U \subseteq X: \forall i \in I: \map {f_i^{-1}} U \in \tau_i} \subseteq \powerset X$
From [[Final Topology is Topology]], $\tau$ is a [[Definition:Topology|topology]]. ==== Mappings are continuous ==== Let $U \in \tau$. Let $i \in I$. Then $\map {f_i^{-1}} {U} \in \tau_i$ by definition of $\tau$. It follows that for each $i \in I$, $f_i: Y_i \to X$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|$\...
Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology/Definition 1 Implies Definition 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Final_Topology/Definition_1_Implies_Definition_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Final_Topology/Definition_1_Implies_Definition_2
[ "Final Topology" ]
[]
[ "Final Topology is Topology", "Definition:Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Finer Topology" ]
proofwiki-16788
Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology/Definition 2 Implies Definition 1
Let $\tau$ be the finest topology on $X$ such that each $f_i: Y_i \to X$ is $\tuple{\tau_i, \tau}$-continuous.
Let $\tau' = \set{U \subseteq X: \forall i \in I: \map {f_i^{-1} } U \in \tau_i}$. ==== $\tau'$ contains $\tau$ ==== Let $U \in \tau$. By definition of $\tuple {\tau_i, \tau}$-continuity for each $i \in I$: :$\forall i \in I : \map {f_i^{-1} } U \in \tau_i$ So: :$U \in \tau'$ Since $U$ was arbitrary: :$\tau \subseteq...
Let $\tau$ be the [[Definition:Finer Topology|finest topology]] on $X$ such that each $f_i: Y_i \to X$ is [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)|$\tuple{\tau_i, \tau}$-continuous]].
Let $\tau' = \set{U \subseteq X: \forall i \in I: \map {f_i^{-1} } U \in \tau_i}$. ==== $\tau'$ contains $\tau$ ==== Let $U \in \tau$. By definition of [[Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)| $\tuple {\tau_i, \tau}$-continuity]] for each $i \in I$: :$\forall i \in I : \map {f_i^{-1} } U \in \tau_i$ So: :$U \i...
Equivalence of Definitions of Final Topology/Definition 2 Implies Definition 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Final_Topology/Definition_2_Implies_Definition_1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Final_Topology/Definition_2_Implies_Definition_1
[ "Final Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Finer Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)" ]
[ "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Final Topology is Topology", "Definition:Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Finer Topology", "Definition:Continuous Mapping (Topology)", "Definition:Set Equ...
proofwiki-16789
Strictly Positive Integers have same Cardinality as Natural Numbers
Let $\Z_{>0} := \set {1, 2, 3, \ldots}$ denote the set of strictly positive integers. Let $\N := \set {0, 1, 2, \ldots}$ denote the set of natural numbers. Then $\Z_{>0}$ has the same cardinality as $\N$.
Consider the mapping $f: \N \to \Z_{>0}$ defined as: :$\forall x \in \N: \map f x = x + 1$ Then $f$ is trivially seen to be a bijection. The result follows by definition of cardinality.
Let $\Z_{>0} := \set {1, 2, 3, \ldots}$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Strictly Positive Integer|strictly positive integers]]. Let $\N := \set {0, 1, 2, \ldots}$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Natural Numbers|natural numbers]]. Then $\Z_{>0}$ has the same [[Definition:Cardinalit...
Consider the [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] $f: \N \to \Z_{>0}$ defined as: :$\forall x \in \N: \map f x = x + 1$ Then $f$ is trivially seen to be a [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]]. The result follows by definition of [[Definition:Cardinality|cardinality]].
Strictly Positive Integers have same Cardinality as Natural Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Strictly_Positive_Integers_have_same_Cardinality_as_Natural_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Strictly_Positive_Integers_have_same_Cardinality_as_Natural_Numbers
[ "Cardinality", "Natural Numbers", "Integers" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Integer", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Cardinality" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Cardinality" ]
proofwiki-16790
Power Set of Natural Numbers has Cardinality of Continuum
Let $\N$ denote the set of natural numbers. Let $\powerset \N$ denote the power set of $\N$. Let $\card {\powerset \N}$ denote the cardinality of $\powerset \N$. Let $\mathfrak c = \card \R$ denote the cardinality of the continuum. Then: :$\mathfrak c = \card {\powerset \N}$
=== Outline === $\powerset \N$ is demonstrated to have the same cardinality as the set of real numbers. This is done by identifying a real number with its basis expansion in binary notation. Such a basis expansion is a sequence of $0$s and $1$s. Each $1$ of a real number $x$ expressed in such a way can be identified wi...
Let $\N$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Natural Number|natural numbers]]. Let $\powerset \N$ denote the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $\N$. Let $\card {\powerset \N}$ denote the [[Definition:Cardinality|cardinality]] of $\powerset \N$. Let $\mathfrak c = \card \R$ denote the [[Definition:C...
=== Outline === $\powerset \N$ is demonstrated to have the same [[Definition:Cardinality|cardinality]] as the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Real Number|real numbers]]. This is done by identifying a [[Definition:Real Number|real number]] with its [[Definition:Basis Expansion/Positive Real Numbers|basis expans...
Power Set of Natural Numbers has Cardinality of Continuum/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Set_of_Natural_Numbers_has_Cardinality_of_Continuum
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Set_of_Natural_Numbers_has_Cardinality_of_Continuum/Proof_1
[ "Power Set of Natural Numbers has Cardinality of Continuum", "Cardinality of Continuum", "Power Set", "Natural Numbers", "Infinite Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Cardinality", "Definition:Cardinality of Continuum", "Definition:Continuum" ]
[ "Definition:Cardinality", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Basis Expansion/Positive Real Numbers", "Definition:Binary Notation", "Definition:Basis Expansion/Positive Real Numbers", "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Integer...
proofwiki-16791
Power Set of Natural Numbers has Cardinality of Continuum
Let $\N$ denote the set of natural numbers. Let $\powerset \N$ denote the power set of $\N$. Let $\card {\powerset \N}$ denote the cardinality of $\powerset \N$. Let $\mathfrak c = \card \R$ denote the cardinality of the continuum. Then: :$\mathfrak c = \card {\powerset \N}$
By Reals are Isomorphic to Dedekind Cuts there exists bijection: :$f: \R \to \mathscr D$ where: :$\mathscr D$ denotes the set of all Dedekind cuts of $\struct {\Q, \le}$. Dedekind's cuts are subsets of $\Q$. Therefore by definition of power set: :$\mathscr D \subseteq \powerset \Q$ By Subset implies Cardinal Inequality...
Let $\N$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Natural Number|natural numbers]]. Let $\powerset \N$ denote the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] of $\N$. Let $\card {\powerset \N}$ denote the [[Definition:Cardinality|cardinality]] of $\powerset \N$. Let $\mathfrak c = \card \R$ denote the [[Definition:C...
By [[Reals are Isomorphic to Dedekind Cuts]] there exists [[Definition:Bijection|bijection]]: :$f: \R \to \mathscr D$ where: :$\mathscr D$ denotes the [[Definition:Set of Sets|set]] of all [[Definition:Dedekind Cut|Dedekind cuts]] of $\struct {\Q, \le}$. Dedekind's cuts are [[Definition:Subset|subsets]] of $\Q$. Ther...
Power Set of Natural Numbers has Cardinality of Continuum/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Set_of_Natural_Numbers_has_Cardinality_of_Continuum
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Set_of_Natural_Numbers_has_Cardinality_of_Continuum/Proof_2
[ "Power Set of Natural Numbers has Cardinality of Continuum", "Cardinality of Continuum", "Power Set", "Natural Numbers", "Infinite Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Cardinality", "Definition:Cardinality of Continuum", "Definition:Continuum" ]
[ "Reals are Isomorphic to Dedekind Cuts", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Set of Sets", "Definition:Dedekind Cut", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Power Set", "Subset implies Cardinal Inequality", "Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite", "Definition:Countably Infinite/Set", "Definition:Count...
proofwiki-16792
Empty Set can be Derived from Axiom of Abstraction
The '''empty set''' can be formed by application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}. Hence the '''empty set''' can be derived as a valid object in Frege set theory.
Let $P$ be the property defined as: :$\forall x: \map P x := \neg \paren {x = x}$ Hence, using the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, we form the set: :$\O := \set {x: \neg \paren {x = x} }$ where the property ${\map P x}$ is: :$\neg \paren {x = x}$ Since we have that: :$\forall x: x = x$ it is seen that $\O$ as defined here ...
The '''[[Definition:Empty Set|empty set]]''' can be formed by application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}. Hence the '''[[Definition:Empty Set|empty set]]''' can be derived as a valid [[Definition:Object|object]] in [[Definition:Frege Set Theory|Frege set theory]].
Let $P$ be the [[Definition:Property|property]] defined as: :$\forall x: \map P x := \neg \paren {x = x}$ Hence, using the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, we form the set: :$\O := \set {x: \neg \paren {x = x} }$ where the [[Definition:Property|property]] ${\map P x}$ is: :$\neg \paren {x = x}$ Since we have that: :$\f...
Empty Set can be Derived from Axiom of Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Empty_Set_can_be_Derived_from_Axiom_of_Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Empty_Set_can_be_Derived_from_Axiom_of_Abstraction
[ "Empty Set", "Axiom of Abstraction" ]
[ "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Object", "Definition:Frege Set Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Property", "Definition:Property", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Frege Set Theory", "Definition:Property", "Definition:Unique", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Object", "Definition:Property", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Empty Set", "Definition:Object", "Definition:Frege Se...
proofwiki-16793
Doubleton of Sets can be Derived using Axiom of Abstraction
Let $a$ and $b$ be sets. By application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, the set $\set {a, b}$ can be formed. Hence the '''doubleton''' $\set {a, b}$ can be derived as a valid object in Frege set theory.
Let $P$ be the property defined as: :$\forall x: \map P x := \paren {x = a \lor x = b}$ where $\lor$ is the disjunction operator. Hence, using the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, we form the set: :$\set {a, b} := \set {x: x = a \lor x = b}$ {{qed}}
Let $a$ and $b$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. By application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, the [[Definition:Set|set]] $\set {a, b}$ can be formed. Hence the '''[[Definition:Doubleton|doubleton]]''' $\set {a, b}$ can be derived as a valid [[Definition:Object|object]] in [[Definition:Frege Set Theory|Frege set theo...
Let $P$ be the [[Definition:Property|property]] defined as: :$\forall x: \map P x := \paren {x = a \lor x = b}$ where $\lor$ is the [[Definition:Disjunction|disjunction operator]]. Hence, using the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, we form the [[Definition:Set|set]]: :$\set {a, b} := \set {x: x = a \lor x = b}$ {{qed}}
Doubleton of Sets can be Derived using Axiom of Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Doubleton_of_Sets_can_be_Derived_using_Axiom_of_Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Doubleton_of_Sets_can_be_Derived_using_Axiom_of_Abstraction
[ "Doubletons", "Axiom of Abstraction" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Doubleton", "Definition:Object", "Definition:Frege Set Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Property", "Definition:Disjunction", "Definition:Set" ]
proofwiki-16794
Power Set can be Derived using Axiom of Abstraction
Let $a$ be a set. By application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, the power set $\powerset a$ can be formed. Hence the '''power set''' $\powerset a$ can be derived as a valid object in Frege set theory.
Let $P$ be the property defined as: :$\forall x: \map P x := \paren {x \subseteq a}$ where $\lor$ is the disjunction operator. Hence, using the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, we form the set: :$\powerset a := \set {x: x \subseteq a}$ {{qed}}
Let $a$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. By application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] $\powerset a$ can be formed. Hence the '''[[Definition:Power Set|power set]]''' $\powerset a$ can be derived as a valid [[Definition:Object|object]] in [[Definition:Frege Set Theory|Frege set...
Let $P$ be the [[Definition:Property|property]] defined as: :$\forall x: \map P x := \paren {x \subseteq a}$ where $\lor$ is the [[Definition:Disjunction|disjunction operator]]. Hence, using the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, we form the [[Definition:Set|set]]: :$\powerset a := \set {x: x \subseteq a}$ {{qed}}
Power Set can be Derived using Axiom of Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Set_can_be_Derived_using_Axiom_of_Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Set_can_be_Derived_using_Axiom_of_Abstraction
[ "Power Set", "Axiom of Abstraction" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Power Set", "Definition:Object", "Definition:Frege Set Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Property", "Definition:Disjunction", "Definition:Set" ]
proofwiki-16795
Set Union can be Derived using Axiom of Abstraction
Let $a$ be a set of sets. By application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, the union $\bigcup a$ can be formed. Hence the '''union''' $\bigcup a$ can be derived as a valid object in Frege set theory.
Let $P$ be the property defined as: :$\forall x: \map P x := \paren {\exists y: y \in a \land x \in y}$ where $\land$ is the conjunction operator. That is, $\map P x$ {{iff}}: :$x$ is an element of some set $y$, where $y$ is one of the sets that comprise the elements of $a$. Hence, using the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}},...
Let $a$ be a [[Definition:Set of Sets|set of sets]]. By application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, the [[Definition:Set Union|union]] $\bigcup a$ can be formed. Hence the '''[[Definition:Set Union|union]]''' $\bigcup a$ can be derived as a valid [[Definition:Object|object]] in [[Definition:Frege Set Theory|Frege...
Let $P$ be the [[Definition:Property|property]] defined as: :$\forall x: \map P x := \paren {\exists y: y \in a \land x \in y}$ where $\land$ is the [[Definition:Conjunction|conjunction operator]]. That is, $\map P x$ {{iff}}: :$x$ is an [[Definition:Element|element]] of some [[Definition:Set|set]] $y$, where $y$ i...
Set Union can be Derived using Axiom of Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Union_can_be_Derived_using_Axiom_of_Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_Union_can_be_Derived_using_Axiom_of_Abstraction
[ "Set Union", "Axiom of Abstraction" ]
[ "Definition:Set of Sets", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Object", "Definition:Frege Set Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Property", "Definition:Conjunction", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Set" ]
proofwiki-16796
Set of Natural Numbers can be Derived using Axiom of Abstraction
Let $\N$ denote the set of natural numbers. By application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, $\N$ can be derived as a valid object in Frege set theory.
{{ProofWanted|Use the same construction as in ZF}}
Let $\N$ denote the [[Definition:Natural Numbers|set of natural numbers]]. By application of the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}}, $\N$ can be derived as a valid [[Definition:Object|object]] in [[Definition:Frege Set Theory|Frege set theory]].
{{ProofWanted|Use the same construction as in [[Definition:Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory|ZF]]}}
Set of Natural Numbers can be Derived using Axiom of Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Natural_Numbers_can_be_Derived_using_Axiom_of_Abstraction
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Natural_Numbers_can_be_Derived_using_Axiom_of_Abstraction
[ "Natural Numbers", "Axiom of Abstraction" ]
[ "Definition:Natural Numbers", "Definition:Object", "Definition:Frege Set Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory" ]
proofwiki-16797
Frege Set Theory is Logically Inconsistent
The system of axiomatic set theory that is Frege set theory is inconsistent.
From Russell's Paradox, the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}} leads to a contradiction. Let $q$ be such a contradiction: :$q = p \land \neg p$ for some statement $p$. From the Rule of Explosion it then follows that every logical formula is a provable consequence of $q$. Hence the result, by definition of inconsistent. {{qed}}
The [[Definition:Axiomatic Set Theory|system of axiomatic set theory]] that is [[Definition:Frege Set Theory|Frege set theory]] is [[Definition:Inconsistent (Logic)|inconsistent]].
From [[Russell's Paradox]], the {{axiom-link|Abstraction}} leads to a [[Definition:Contradiction|contradiction]]. Let $q$ be such a [[Definition:Contradiction|contradiction]]: :$q = p \land \neg p$ for some [[Definition:Statement|statement]] $p$. From the [[Rule of Explosion]] it then follows that every [[Definition:...
Frege Set Theory is Logically Inconsistent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Frege_Set_Theory_is_Logically_Inconsistent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Frege_Set_Theory_is_Logically_Inconsistent
[ "Frege Set Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Axiomatic Set Theory", "Definition:Frege Set Theory", "Definition:Inconsistent (Logic)" ]
[ "Russell's Paradox", "Definition:Contradiction", "Definition:Contradiction", "Definition:Statement", "Rule of Explosion", "Definition:Logical Formula", "Definition:Provable Consequence", "Definition:Inconsistent (Logic)" ]
proofwiki-16798
Exists Subset which is not Element
Let $S$ be a set. Then there exists at least one subset of $S$ which is not an element of $S$.
Let $S$ be a set. Let $T$ be the set of all elements of $S$ which do not contain $S$ as elements. Then by {{Corollary|Russell's Paradox}}, $T$ itself cannot be an element of $S$. This $T$ is the required subset.
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Then there exists at least one [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $S$ which is not an [[Definition:Element|element]] of $S$.
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $T$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Element|elements]] of $S$ which do not contain $S$ as [[Definition:Element|elements]]. Then by {{Corollary|Russell's Paradox}}, $T$ itself cannot be an [[Definition:Element|element]] of $S$. This $T$ is the required [[Defi...
Exists Subset which is not Element/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exists_Subset_which_is_not_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exists_Subset_which_is_not_Element/Proof_1
[ "Subsets", "Exists Subset which is not Element" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Element" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Subset" ]
proofwiki-16799
Exists Subset which is not Element
Let $S$ be a set. Then there exists at least one subset of $S$ which is not an element of $S$.
Consider the power set $\powerset S$ of $S$. From Cantor's Theorem, there is no surjection $f: S \to \powerset S$. That is, there are more subsets of $S$ than there are elements of $S$. So there must be at least one subset of $S$ which is not an element of $S$. {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Then there exists at least one [[Definition:Subset|subset]] of $S$ which is not an [[Definition:Element|element]] of $S$.
Consider the [[Definition:Power Set|power set]] $\powerset S$ of $S$. From [[Cantor's Theorem]], there is no [[Definition:Surjection|surjection]] $f: S \to \powerset S$. That is, there are more [[Definition:Subset|subsets]] of $S$ than there are [[Definition:Element|elements]] of $S$. So there must be at least one [...
Exists Subset which is not Element/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exists_Subset_which_is_not_Element
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exists_Subset_which_is_not_Element/Proof_2
[ "Subsets", "Exists Subset which is not Element" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Element" ]
[ "Definition:Power Set", "Cantor's Theorem", "Definition:Surjection", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Element" ]