TheoremBase

Proof

Throughout write Ak={am:m≥k}A_{k}=\{a_{m}:m\ge k\}, βk=inf⁡Ak\beta_{k}=\inf A_{k} and γk=sup⁡Ak\gamma_{k}=\sup A_{k}, so that ℓ:=lim inf⁡nan=sup⁡{βk:k∈N}\ell:=\liminf_{n}a_{n}=\sup\{\beta_{k}:k\in\mathbb{N}\} and L:=lim sup⁡nan=inf⁡{γk:k∈N}L:=\limsup_{n}a_{n}=\inf\{\gamma_{k}:k\in\mathbb{N}\} by Limit Inferior of a Bounded Sequence of Real Numbers and Limit Superior of a Bounded Sequence of Real Numbers. Since ak∈Aka_{k}\in A_{k} we have βk≤ak≤γk\beta_{k}\le a_{k}\le\gamma_{k}. Order manipulations in R\mathbb{R} use Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field, and claim numbers for the order on N\mathbb{N} refer to Properties of the Order on the Natural Numbers.

Monotonicity of the tails. If k≤k′k\le k' then Ak′⊆AkA_{k'}\subseteq A_{k}, since m≥k′m\ge k' and k′≥kk'\ge k give m≥km\ge k by transitivity (claim 1). Hence βk\beta_{k} is a lower bound of Ak′A_{k'} and γk\gamma_{k} is an upper bound of Ak′A_{k'}, so βk≤βk′\beta_{k}\le\beta_{k'} and γk′≤γk\gamma_{k'}\le\gamma_{k} by the defining properties of the infimum and the supremum.

Claim 1. Let k,k′∈Nk,k'\in\mathbb{N}. By trichotomy (claim 3) one of k,k′k,k' is greater than or equal to the other; call it k′′k'', so k≤k′′k\le k'' and k′≤k′′k'\le k''. Then

βk≤βk′′≤ak′′≤γk′′≤γk′.\beta_{k}\le\beta_{k''}\le a_{k''}\le\gamma_{k''}\le\gamma_{k'} .

Thus γk′\gamma_{k'} is an upper bound of {βk:k∈N}\{\beta_{k}:k\in\mathbb{N}\}, so ℓ≤γk′\ell\le\gamma_{k'} for every k′k'; that is, ℓ\ell is a lower bound of {γk′:k′∈N}\{\gamma_{k'}:k'\in\mathbb{N}\}, whence ℓ≤L\ell\le L.

Claim 2. Assume an≤bna_{n}\le b_{n} for every nn, and write Bk={bm:m≥k}B_{k}=\{b_{m}:m\ge k\} with βk′=inf⁡Bk\beta'_{k}=\inf B_{k} and γk′=sup⁡Bk\gamma'_{k}=\sup B_{k}.

Fix kk. For every m≥km\ge k we have βk≤am≤bm\beta_{k}\le a_{m}\le b_{m}, so βk\beta_{k} is a lower bound of BkB_{k} and therefore βk≤βk′≤lim inf⁡nbn\beta_{k}\le\beta'_{k}\le\liminf_{n}b_{n}, the last inequality because βk′\beta'_{k} belongs to the set whose supremum is lim inf⁡nbn\liminf_{n}b_{n}. Hence lim inf⁡nbn\liminf_{n}b_{n} is an upper bound of {βk:k∈N}\{\beta_{k}:k\in\mathbb{N}\} and ℓ≤lim inf⁡nbn\ell\le\liminf_{n}b_{n}.

Similarly, for every m≥km\ge k we have am≤bm≤γk′a_{m}\le b_{m}\le\gamma'_{k}, so γk′\gamma'_{k} is an upper bound of AkA_{k} and L≤γk≤γk′L\le\gamma_{k}\le\gamma'_{k}, the first inequality because γk\gamma_{k} belongs to the set whose infimum is LL. Hence LL is a lower bound of {γk′:k∈N}\{\gamma'_{k}:k\in\mathbb{N}\} and L≤lim sup⁡nbnL\le\limsup_{n}b_{n}.

For the two special cases, note that for the constant sequence with value MM every tail set is {M}\{M\}, whose infimum and supremum are both MM, so its limit inferior and limit superior are both MM. If an≤Ma_{n}\le M for every nn, comparison with that constant sequence gives L≤ML\le M; if M≤anM\le a_{n} for every nn, comparison in the other direction gives M≤ℓM\le\ell.

Claim 3. Let ε>0\varepsilon>0 be real. By claim 3 of Approximation Property of the Supremum and the Infimum in R\mathbb{R}, applied to the set {βk:k∈N}\{\beta_{k}:k\in\mathbb{N}\}, whose supremum is ℓ\ell, there is kk with ℓ−ε<βk\ell-\varepsilon<\beta_{k}. For every m≥km\ge k we have βk≤am\beta_{k}\le a_{m}, hence ℓ−ε<am\ell-\varepsilon<a_{m}; take N=kN=k. Dually, by claim 4 of that lemma, applied to the set {γk:k∈N}\{\gamma_{k}:k\in\mathbb{N}\}, whose infimum is LL, there is k′k' with γk′<L+ε\gamma_{k'}<L+\varepsilon, and for every m≥k′m\ge k' we have am≤γk′<L+εa_{m}\le\gamma_{k'}<L+\varepsilon; take N′=k′N'=k'.

Claim 4. Let ε>0\varepsilon>0 be real.

Every tail contains an index with am<ℓ+εa_{m}<\ell+\varepsilon. Fix k∈Nk\in\mathbb{N}. Since βk\beta_{k} belongs to the set whose supremum is ℓ\ell, we have βk≤ℓ\beta_{k}\le\ell. By claim 4 of Approximation Property of the Supremum and the Infimum in R\mathbb{R}, applied to AkA_{k}, whose infimum is βk\beta_{k}, there is an element of AkA_{k}, say ama_{m} with m≥km\ge k, satisfying am<βk+ε≤ℓ+εa_{m}<\beta_{k}+\varepsilon\le\ell+\varepsilon.

Let P={n∈N:an<ℓ+ε}P=\{n\in\mathbb{N}:a_{n}<\ell+\varepsilon\}. Taking k=1k=1 above shows P≠∅P\ne\emptyset. Taking k=n+1k=n+1 shows that for every n∈Pn\in P there is n′∈Pn'\in P with n+1≤n′n+1\le n'; then n<n′n<n', because either n′=n+1n'=n+1 and n<n+1n<n+1 by claim 6, or n+1<n′n+1<n' and n<n+1<n′n<n+1<n' gives n<n′n<n' by transitivity (claim 1). So the relation on PP that links nn to n′n' when n′>nn'>n has the property that every element of PP is related to some element of PP, and Axiom of Dependent Choice, started at an element of PP, yields a sequence (nj)j∈N(n_{j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}} in PP with nj+1>njn_{j+1}>n_{j} for every jj. Thus n1<n2<…n_{1}<n_{2}<\dots and anj<ℓ+εa_{n_{j}}<\ell+\varepsilon for every jj.

Claim 5. Suppose first that (an)(a_{n}) has limit aa, and let ε>0\varepsilon>0 be real. There is NN with ∣am−a∣<ε|a_{m}-a|<\varepsilon for every m≥Nm\ge N, that is, by claim 9 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field, a−ε<am<a+εa-\varepsilon<a_{m}<a+\varepsilon for every m≥Nm\ge N. Then a−εa-\varepsilon is a lower bound of ANA_{N} and a+εa+\varepsilon is an upper bound of ANA_{N}, so

a−ε≤βN≤ℓ≤L≤γN≤a+ε,a-\varepsilon\le\beta_{N}\le\ell\le L\le\gamma_{N}\le a+\varepsilon,

using claim 1 in the middle. Since this holds for every real ε>0\varepsilon>0, we get a≤ℓa\le\ell and L≤aL\le a: if ℓ<a\ell<a, then ε=(a−ℓ)/2\varepsilon=(a-\ell)/2 is positive and a−ε=(a+ℓ)/2>ℓa-\varepsilon=(a+\ell)/2>\ell, contradicting a−ε≤ℓa-\varepsilon\le\ell; and if a<La<L, then ε=(L−a)/2\varepsilon=(L-a)/2 is positive and a+ε=(a+L)/2<La+\varepsilon=(a+L)/2<L, contradicting L≤a+εL\le a+\varepsilon. With ℓ≤L\ell\le L this gives a≤ℓ≤L≤aa\le\ell\le L\le a, so ℓ=L=a\ell=L=a.

Conversely suppose ℓ=L=a\ell=L=a and let ε>0\varepsilon>0 be real. By claim 3 there are NN and N′N' with a−ε<ama-\varepsilon<a_{m} for every m≥Nm\ge N and am<a+εa_{m}<a+\varepsilon for every m≥N′m\ge N'. Let N′′N'' be the greater of NN and N′N' (claim 3 of the order lemma). For m≥N′′m\ge N'' both inequalities hold, so ∣am−a∣<ε|a_{m}-a|<\varepsilon by claim 9 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field. Hence (an)(a_{n}) has limit aa in the sense of Limit of a Sequence of Real Numbers.

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…