643 lines
22 KiB
Plaintext
643 lines
22 KiB
Plaintext
|
import Bookshelf.Real.Set
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! # Exercises.Apostol.Chapter_I_3
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
A Set of Axioms for the Real-Number System
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
namespace Exercises.Apostol.Chapter_I_3
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
#check Archimedean
|
|||
|
#check Real.exists_isLUB
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! ## The least-upper-bound axiom (completeness axiom) -/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
A property holds for the negation of elements in set `S` **iff** it also holds
|
|||
|
for the elements of the negation of `S`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma set_neg_prop_iff_neg_set_prop (S : Set ℝ) (p : ℝ → Prop)
|
|||
|
: (∀ y, y ∈ S → p (-y)) ↔ (∀ y, y ∈ -S → p y) := by
|
|||
|
apply Iff.intro
|
|||
|
· intro h y hy
|
|||
|
rw [← neg_neg y, Set.neg_mem_neg] at hy
|
|||
|
have := h (-y) hy
|
|||
|
simp at this
|
|||
|
exact this
|
|||
|
· intro h y hy
|
|||
|
rw [← Set.neg_mem_neg] at hy
|
|||
|
exact h (-y) hy
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
The upper bounds of the negation of a set is the negation of the lower bounds of
|
|||
|
the set.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma upper_bounds_neg_eq_neg_lower_bounds (S : Set ℝ)
|
|||
|
: upperBounds (-S) = -lowerBounds S := by
|
|||
|
suffices (∀ x, x ∈ upperBounds (-S) ↔ x ∈ -(lowerBounds S)) from
|
|||
|
Set.ext this
|
|||
|
intro x
|
|||
|
apply Iff.intro
|
|||
|
· intro hx
|
|||
|
unfold lowerBounds
|
|||
|
show -x ∈ { x | ∀ ⦃a : ℝ⦄, a ∈ S → x ≤ a }
|
|||
|
show ∀ ⦃a : ℝ⦄, a ∈ S → (-x) ≤ a
|
|||
|
intro a ha; rw [neg_le]; revert ha a
|
|||
|
rw [set_neg_prop_iff_neg_set_prop S (fun a => a ≤ x)]
|
|||
|
exact hx
|
|||
|
· intro hx
|
|||
|
unfold upperBounds
|
|||
|
show ∀ ⦃a : ℝ⦄, a ∈ -S → a ≤ x
|
|||
|
rw [← set_neg_prop_iff_neg_set_prop S (fun a => a ≤ x)]
|
|||
|
intro y hy; rw [neg_le]; revert hy y
|
|||
|
exact hx
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
The negation of the upper bounds of a set is the lower bounds of the negation of
|
|||
|
the set.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma neg_upper_bounds_eq_lower_bounds_neg (S : Set ℝ)
|
|||
|
: -upperBounds S = lowerBounds (-S) := by
|
|||
|
suffices (∀ x, x ∈ -upperBounds S ↔ x ∈ lowerBounds (-S)) from
|
|||
|
Set.ext this
|
|||
|
intro x
|
|||
|
apply Iff.intro
|
|||
|
· intro hx
|
|||
|
unfold lowerBounds
|
|||
|
show ∀ ⦃a : ℝ⦄, a ∈ -S → x ≤ a
|
|||
|
rw [← set_neg_prop_iff_neg_set_prop S (fun a => x ≤ a)]
|
|||
|
intro y hy; rw [le_neg]; revert hy y
|
|||
|
exact hx
|
|||
|
· intro hx
|
|||
|
unfold upperBounds
|
|||
|
show -x ∈ { x | ∀ ⦃a : ℝ⦄, a ∈ S → a ≤ x }
|
|||
|
show ∀ ⦃a : ℝ⦄, a ∈ S → a ≤ (-x)
|
|||
|
intro a ha; rw [le_neg]; revert ha a
|
|||
|
rw [set_neg_prop_iff_neg_set_prop S (fun a => x ≤ a)]
|
|||
|
exact hx
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
An element `x` is the least element of the negation of a set **iff** `-x` is the
|
|||
|
greatest element of the set.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma is_least_neg_set_eq_is_greatest_set_neq (S : Set ℝ)
|
|||
|
: IsLeast (-S) x = IsGreatest S (-x) := by
|
|||
|
unfold IsLeast IsGreatest
|
|||
|
rw [← neg_upper_bounds_eq_lower_bounds_neg S]
|
|||
|
rfl
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
At least with respect to `ℝ`, `x` is the least upper bound of set `-S` **iff**
|
|||
|
`-x` is the greatest lower bound of `S`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem is_lub_neg_set_iff_is_glb_set_neg (S : Set ℝ)
|
|||
|
: IsLUB (-S) x = IsGLB S (-x) :=
|
|||
|
calc IsLUB (-S) x
|
|||
|
_ = IsLeast (upperBounds (-S)) x := rfl
|
|||
|
_ = IsLeast (-lowerBounds S) x := by rw [upper_bounds_neg_eq_neg_lower_bounds S]
|
|||
|
_ = IsGreatest (lowerBounds S) (-x) := by rw [is_least_neg_set_eq_is_greatest_set_neq]
|
|||
|
_ = IsGLB S (-x) := rfl
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.27
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Every nonempty set `S` that is bounded below has a greatest lower bound; that
|
|||
|
is, there is a real number `L` such that `L = inf S`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem exists_isGLB (S : Set ℝ) (hne : S.Nonempty) (hbdd : BddBelow S)
|
|||
|
: ∃ x, IsGLB S x := by
|
|||
|
-- First we show the negation of a nonempty set bounded below is a nonempty
|
|||
|
-- set bounded above. In that case, we can then apply the completeness axiom
|
|||
|
-- to argue the existence of a supremum.
|
|||
|
have hne' : (-S).Nonempty := Set.nonempty_neg.mpr hne
|
|||
|
have hbdd' : ∃ x, ∀ (y : ℝ), y ∈ -S → y ≤ x := by
|
|||
|
rw [bddBelow_def] at hbdd
|
|||
|
let ⟨lb, lbp⟩ := hbdd
|
|||
|
refine ⟨-lb, ?_⟩
|
|||
|
rw [← set_neg_prop_iff_neg_set_prop S (fun y => y ≤ -lb)]
|
|||
|
intro y hy
|
|||
|
exact neg_le_neg (lbp y hy)
|
|||
|
rw [←bddAbove_def] at hbdd'
|
|||
|
-- Once we have found a supremum for `-S`, we argue the negation of this value
|
|||
|
-- is the same as the infimum of `S`.
|
|||
|
let ⟨ub, ubp⟩ := Real.exists_isLUB (-S) hne' hbdd'
|
|||
|
exact ⟨-ub, (is_lub_neg_set_iff_is_glb_set_neg S).mp ubp⟩
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
Every real should be less than or equal to the absolute value of its ceiling.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma leq_nat_abs_ceil_self (x : ℝ) : x ≤ Int.natAbs ⌈x⌉ := by
|
|||
|
by_cases h : x ≥ 0
|
|||
|
· let k : ℤ := ⌈x⌉
|
|||
|
unfold Int.natAbs
|
|||
|
have k' : k = ⌈x⌉ := rfl
|
|||
|
rw [←k']
|
|||
|
have _ : k ≥ 0 := by -- Hint for match below
|
|||
|
rw [k', ge_iff_le]
|
|||
|
exact Int.ceil_nonneg (ge_iff_le.mp h)
|
|||
|
match k with
|
|||
|
| Int.ofNat m => calc x
|
|||
|
_ ≤ ⌈x⌉ := Int.le_ceil x
|
|||
|
_ = Int.ofNat m := by rw [←k']
|
|||
|
· have h' : ((Int.natAbs ⌈x⌉) : ℝ) ≥ 0 := by simp
|
|||
|
calc x
|
|||
|
_ ≤ 0 := le_of_lt (lt_of_not_le h)
|
|||
|
_ ≤ ↑(Int.natAbs ⌈x⌉) := GE.ge.le h'
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! ## The Archimedean property of the real-number system -/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.29
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
For every real `x` there exists a positive integer `n` such that `n > x`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem exists_pnat_geq_self (x : ℝ) : ∃ n : ℕ+, ↑n > x := by
|
|||
|
let x' : ℕ+ := ⟨Int.natAbs ⌈x⌉ + 1, by simp⟩
|
|||
|
have h : x < x' := calc x
|
|||
|
_ ≤ Int.natAbs ⌈x⌉ := leq_nat_abs_ceil_self x
|
|||
|
_ < ↑↑(Int.natAbs ⌈x⌉ + 1) := by simp
|
|||
|
_ = x' := rfl
|
|||
|
exact ⟨x', h⟩
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.30
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x > 0` and if `y` is an arbitrary real number, there exists a positive
|
|||
|
integer `n` such that `nx > y`.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This is known as the *Archimedean Property of the Reals*.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem exists_pnat_mul_self_geq_of_pos {x y : ℝ}
|
|||
|
: x > 0 → ∃ n : ℕ+, n * x > y := by
|
|||
|
intro hx
|
|||
|
let ⟨n, p⟩ := exists_pnat_geq_self (y / x)
|
|||
|
have p' := mul_lt_mul_of_pos_right p hx
|
|||
|
rw [div_mul, div_self (show x ≠ 0 from LT.lt.ne' hx), div_one] at p'
|
|||
|
exact ⟨n, p'⟩
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.31
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If three real numbers `a`, `x`, and `y` satisfy the inequalities
|
|||
|
`a ≤ x ≤ a + y / n` for every integer `n ≥ 1`, then `x = a`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem forall_pnat_leq_self_leq_frac_imp_eq {x y a : ℝ}
|
|||
|
: (∀ n : ℕ+, a ≤ x ∧ x ≤ a + (y / n)) → x = a := by
|
|||
|
intro h
|
|||
|
match @trichotomous ℝ LT.lt _ x a with
|
|||
|
| Or.inr (Or.inl r) => -- x = a
|
|||
|
exact r
|
|||
|
| Or.inl r => -- x < a
|
|||
|
have z : a < a := lt_of_le_of_lt (h 1).left r
|
|||
|
simp at z
|
|||
|
| Or.inr (Or.inr r) => -- x > a
|
|||
|
let ⟨c, hc⟩ := exists_pos_add_of_lt' r
|
|||
|
let ⟨n, hn⟩ := @exists_pnat_mul_self_geq_of_pos c y hc.left
|
|||
|
have hn := mul_lt_mul_of_pos_left hn $
|
|||
|
have hp : 0 < (↑↑n : ℝ) := by simp
|
|||
|
show 0 < ((↑↑n)⁻¹ : ℝ) from inv_pos.mpr hp
|
|||
|
rw [
|
|||
|
inv_mul_eq_div,
|
|||
|
← mul_assoc, mul_comm (n⁻¹ : ℝ),
|
|||
|
← one_div,
|
|||
|
mul_one_div
|
|||
|
] at hn
|
|||
|
simp at hn
|
|||
|
have := calc a + y / ↑↑n
|
|||
|
_ < a + c := add_lt_add_left hn a
|
|||
|
_ = x := hc.right
|
|||
|
_ ≤ a + y / ↑↑n := (h n).right
|
|||
|
simp at this
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
If three real numbers `a`, `x`, and `y` satisfy the inequalities
|
|||
|
`a - y / n ≤ x ≤ a` for every integer `n ≥ 1`, then `x = a`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem forall_pnat_frac_leq_self_leq_imp_eq {x y a : ℝ}
|
|||
|
: (∀ n : ℕ+, a - (y / n) ≤ x ∧ x ≤ a) → x = a := by
|
|||
|
intro h
|
|||
|
match @trichotomous ℝ LT.lt _ x a with
|
|||
|
| Or.inr (Or.inl r) => -- x = a
|
|||
|
exact r
|
|||
|
| Or.inl r => -- x < a
|
|||
|
let ⟨c, hc⟩ := exists_pos_add_of_lt' r
|
|||
|
let ⟨n, hn⟩ := @exists_pnat_mul_self_geq_of_pos c y hc.left
|
|||
|
have hn := mul_lt_mul_of_pos_left hn $
|
|||
|
have hp : 0 < (↑↑n : ℝ) := by simp
|
|||
|
show 0 < ((↑↑n)⁻¹ : ℝ) from inv_pos.mpr hp
|
|||
|
rw [
|
|||
|
inv_mul_eq_div,
|
|||
|
← mul_assoc, mul_comm (n⁻¹ : ℝ),
|
|||
|
← one_div,
|
|||
|
mul_one_div
|
|||
|
] at hn
|
|||
|
simp at hn
|
|||
|
have := calc a - y / ↑↑n
|
|||
|
_ > a - c := sub_lt_sub_left hn a
|
|||
|
_ = x := sub_eq_of_eq_add (Eq.symm hc.right)
|
|||
|
_ ≥ a - y / ↑↑n := (h n).left
|
|||
|
simp at this
|
|||
|
| Or.inr (Or.inr r) => -- x > a
|
|||
|
have z : x < x := lt_of_le_of_lt (h 1).right r
|
|||
|
simp at z
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! ## Fundamental properties of the supremum and infimum -/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
Every member of a set `S` is less than or equal to some value `ub` if and only
|
|||
|
if `ub` is an upper bound of `S`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma mem_upper_bounds_iff_forall_le {S : Set ℝ}
|
|||
|
: ub ∈ upperBounds S ↔ ∀ x ∈ S, x ≤ ub := by
|
|||
|
apply Iff.intro
|
|||
|
· intro h _ hx
|
|||
|
exact (h hx)
|
|||
|
· exact id
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
If a set `S` has a least upper bound, it follows every member of `S` is less
|
|||
|
than or equal to that value.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma forall_lub_imp_forall_le {S : Set ℝ}
|
|||
|
: IsLUB S ub → ∀ x ∈ S, x ≤ ub := by
|
|||
|
intro h
|
|||
|
rw [← mem_upper_bounds_iff_forall_le]
|
|||
|
exact h.left
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
Any member of the upper bounds of a set must be greater than or equal to the
|
|||
|
least member of that set.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma mem_imp_ge_lub {x : ℝ} (h : IsLUB S s) : x ∈ upperBounds S → x ≥ s := by
|
|||
|
intro hx
|
|||
|
exact h.right hx
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.32a
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Let `h` be a given positive number and let `S` be a set of real numbers. If `S`
|
|||
|
has a supremum, then for some `x` in `S` we have `x > sup S - h`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem sup_imp_exists_gt_sup_sub_delta {S : Set ℝ} {s h : ℝ} (hp : h > 0)
|
|||
|
: IsLUB S s → ∃ x ∈ S, x > s - h := by
|
|||
|
intro hb
|
|||
|
-- Suppose all members of our set was less than `s - h`. Then `s` couldn't be
|
|||
|
-- the *least* upper bound.
|
|||
|
by_contra nb
|
|||
|
suffices s - h ∈ upperBounds S by
|
|||
|
have h' : h < h := calc h
|
|||
|
_ ≤ 0 := (le_sub_self_iff s).mp (hb.right this)
|
|||
|
_ < h := hp
|
|||
|
simp at h'
|
|||
|
rw [not_exists] at nb
|
|||
|
have nb' : ∀ x ∈ S, x ≤ s - h := by
|
|||
|
intro x hx
|
|||
|
exact le_of_not_gt (not_and.mp (nb x) hx)
|
|||
|
rwa [← mem_upper_bounds_iff_forall_le] at nb'
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
Every member of a set `S` is greater than or equal to some value `lb` if and
|
|||
|
only if `lb` is a lower bound of `S`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma mem_lower_bounds_iff_forall_ge {S : Set ℝ}
|
|||
|
: lb ∈ lowerBounds S ↔ ∀ x ∈ S, x ≥ lb := by
|
|||
|
apply Iff.intro
|
|||
|
· intro h _ hx
|
|||
|
exact (h hx)
|
|||
|
· exact id
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
If a set `S` has a greatest lower bound, it follows every member of `S` is
|
|||
|
greater than or equal to that value.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma forall_glb_imp_forall_ge {S : Set ℝ}
|
|||
|
: IsGLB S lb → ∀ x ∈ S, x ≥ lb := by
|
|||
|
intro h
|
|||
|
rw [← mem_lower_bounds_iff_forall_ge]
|
|||
|
exact h.left
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/--
|
|||
|
Any member of the lower bounds of a set must be less than or equal to the
|
|||
|
greatest member of that set.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
lemma mem_imp_le_glb {x : ℝ} (h : IsGLB S s) : x ∈ lowerBounds S → x ≤ s := by
|
|||
|
intro hx
|
|||
|
exact h.right hx
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.32b
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Let `h` be a given positive number and let `S` be a set of real numbers. If `S`
|
|||
|
has an infimum, then for some `x` in `S` we have `x < inf S + h`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem inf_imp_exists_lt_inf_add_delta {S : Set ℝ} {s h : ℝ} (hp : h > 0)
|
|||
|
: IsGLB S s → ∃ x ∈ S, x < s + h := by
|
|||
|
intro hb
|
|||
|
-- Suppose all members of our set was greater than `s + h`. Then `s` couldn't
|
|||
|
-- be the *greatest* lower bound.
|
|||
|
by_contra nb
|
|||
|
suffices s + h ∈ lowerBounds S by
|
|||
|
have h' : h < h := calc h
|
|||
|
_ ≤ 0 := (add_le_iff_nonpos_right s).mp (hb.right this)
|
|||
|
_ < h := hp
|
|||
|
simp at h'
|
|||
|
rw [not_exists] at nb
|
|||
|
have nb' : ∀ x ∈ S, x ≥ s + h := by
|
|||
|
intro x hx
|
|||
|
exact le_of_not_gt (not_and.mp (nb x) hx)
|
|||
|
rwa [← mem_lower_bounds_iff_forall_ge] at nb'
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.33a (Additive Property)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Given nonempty subsets `A` and `B` of `ℝ`, let `C` denote the set
|
|||
|
`C = {a + b : a ∈ A, b ∈ B}`. If each of `A` and `B` has a supremum, then `C`
|
|||
|
has a supremum, and `sup C = sup A + sup B`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem sup_minkowski_sum_eq_sup_add_sup (A B : Set ℝ) (a b : ℝ)
|
|||
|
(hA : A.Nonempty) (hB : B.Nonempty)
|
|||
|
(ha : IsLUB A a) (hb : IsLUB B b)
|
|||
|
: IsLUB (Real.minkowski_sum A B) (a + b) := by
|
|||
|
let C := Real.minkowski_sum A B
|
|||
|
-- First we show `a + b` is an upper bound of `C`.
|
|||
|
have hub : a + b ∈ upperBounds C := by
|
|||
|
rw [mem_upper_bounds_iff_forall_le]
|
|||
|
intro x hx
|
|||
|
have ⟨a', ⟨ha', ⟨b', ⟨hb', hxab⟩⟩⟩⟩: ∃ a ∈ A, ∃ b ∈ B, x = a + b := hx
|
|||
|
have hs₁ : a' ≤ a := (forall_lub_imp_forall_le ha) a' ha'
|
|||
|
have hs₂ : b' ≤ b := (forall_lub_imp_forall_le hb) b' hb'
|
|||
|
exact calc x
|
|||
|
_ = a' + b' := hxab
|
|||
|
_ ≤ a + b := add_le_add hs₁ hs₂
|
|||
|
-- Now we show `a + b` is the *least* upper bound of `C`. We know a least
|
|||
|
-- upper bound `c` exists; show that `c = a + b`.
|
|||
|
have ⟨c, hc⟩ := Real.exists_isLUB C
|
|||
|
(Real.nonempty_minkowski_sum_iff_nonempty_add_nonempty.mpr ⟨hA, hB⟩)
|
|||
|
⟨a + b, hub⟩
|
|||
|
suffices (∀ n : ℕ+, c ≤ a + b ∧ a + b ≤ c + (1 / n)) by
|
|||
|
rwa [← forall_pnat_leq_self_leq_frac_imp_eq this] at hc
|
|||
|
intro n
|
|||
|
apply And.intro
|
|||
|
· exact hc.right hub
|
|||
|
· have hd : 1 / (2 * n) > (0 : ℝ) := by norm_num
|
|||
|
have ⟨a', ha'⟩ := sup_imp_exists_gt_sup_sub_delta hd ha
|
|||
|
have ⟨b', hb'⟩ := sup_imp_exists_gt_sup_sub_delta hd hb
|
|||
|
have hab' : a + b < a' + b' + 1 / n := by
|
|||
|
have ha'' := add_lt_add_right ha'.right (1 / (2 * ↑↑n))
|
|||
|
have hb'' := add_lt_add_right hb'.right (1 / (2 * ↑↑n))
|
|||
|
rw [sub_add_cancel] at ha'' hb''
|
|||
|
have hr := add_lt_add ha'' hb''
|
|||
|
ring_nf at hr
|
|||
|
ring_nf
|
|||
|
rwa [add_assoc, add_comm b' (↑↑n)⁻¹, ← add_assoc]
|
|||
|
have hc' : a' + b' ≤ c := by
|
|||
|
refine forall_lub_imp_forall_le hc (a' + b') ?_
|
|||
|
show ∃ a ∈ A, ∃ b ∈ B, a' + b' = a + b
|
|||
|
exact ⟨a', ⟨ha'.left, ⟨b', ⟨hb'.left, rfl⟩⟩⟩⟩
|
|||
|
calc a + b
|
|||
|
_ ≤ a' + b' + 1 / n := le_of_lt hab'
|
|||
|
_ ≤ c + 1 / n := add_le_add_right hc' (1 / n)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.33b (Additive Property)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Given nonempty subsets `A` and `B` of `ℝ`, let `C` denote the set
|
|||
|
`C = {a + b : a ∈ A, b ∈ B}`. If each of `A` and `B` has an infimum, then `C`
|
|||
|
has an infimum, and `inf C = inf A + inf B`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem inf_minkowski_sum_eq_inf_add_inf (A B : Set ℝ)
|
|||
|
(hA : A.Nonempty) (hB : B.Nonempty)
|
|||
|
(ha : IsGLB A a) (hb : IsGLB B b)
|
|||
|
: IsGLB (Real.minkowski_sum A B) (a + b) := by
|
|||
|
let C := Real.minkowski_sum A B
|
|||
|
-- First we show `a + b` is a lower bound of `C`.
|
|||
|
have hlb : a + b ∈ lowerBounds C := by
|
|||
|
rw [mem_lower_bounds_iff_forall_ge]
|
|||
|
intro x hx
|
|||
|
have ⟨a', ⟨ha', ⟨b', ⟨hb', hxab⟩⟩⟩⟩: ∃ a ∈ A, ∃ b ∈ B, x = a + b := hx
|
|||
|
have hs₁ : a' ≥ a := (forall_glb_imp_forall_ge ha) a' ha'
|
|||
|
have hs₂ : b' ≥ b := (forall_glb_imp_forall_ge hb) b' hb'
|
|||
|
exact calc x
|
|||
|
_ = a' + b' := hxab
|
|||
|
_ ≥ a + b := add_le_add hs₁ hs₂
|
|||
|
-- Now we show `a + b` is the *greatest* lower bound of `C`. We know a
|
|||
|
-- greatest lower bound `c` exists; show that `c = a + b`.
|
|||
|
have ⟨c, hc⟩ := exists_isGLB C
|
|||
|
(Real.nonempty_minkowski_sum_iff_nonempty_add_nonempty.mpr ⟨hA, hB⟩)
|
|||
|
⟨a + b, hlb⟩
|
|||
|
suffices (∀ n : ℕ+, c - (1 / n) ≤ a + b ∧ a + b ≤ c) by
|
|||
|
rwa [← forall_pnat_frac_leq_self_leq_imp_eq this] at hc
|
|||
|
intro n
|
|||
|
apply And.intro
|
|||
|
· have hd : 1 / (2 * n) > (0 : ℝ) := by norm_num
|
|||
|
have ⟨a', ha'⟩ := inf_imp_exists_lt_inf_add_delta hd ha
|
|||
|
have ⟨b', hb'⟩ := inf_imp_exists_lt_inf_add_delta hd hb
|
|||
|
have hab' : a' + b' - 1 / n < a + b := by
|
|||
|
have ha'' := sub_lt_sub_right ha'.right (1 / (2 * ↑↑n))
|
|||
|
have hb'' := sub_lt_sub_right hb'.right (1 / (2 * ↑↑n))
|
|||
|
rw [add_sub_cancel] at ha'' hb''
|
|||
|
have hr := add_lt_add ha'' hb''
|
|||
|
ring_nf at hr
|
|||
|
ring_nf
|
|||
|
rwa [← add_sub_assoc, add_sub_right_comm]
|
|||
|
have hc' : c ≤ a' + b' := by
|
|||
|
refine forall_glb_imp_forall_ge hc (a' + b') ?_
|
|||
|
show ∃ a ∈ A, ∃ b ∈ B, a' + b' = a + b
|
|||
|
exact ⟨a', ⟨ha'.left, ⟨b', ⟨hb'.left, rfl⟩⟩⟩⟩
|
|||
|
calc c - 1 / n
|
|||
|
_ ≤ a' + b' - 1 / n := sub_le_sub_right hc' (1 / n)
|
|||
|
_ ≤ a + b := le_of_lt hab'
|
|||
|
· exact hc.right hlb
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Theorem I.34
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Given two nonempty subsets `S` and `T` of `ℝ` such that `s ≤ t` for every `s` in
|
|||
|
`S` and every `t` in `T`. Then `S` has a supremum, and `T` has an infimum, and
|
|||
|
they satisfy the inequality `sup S ≤ inf T`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem forall_mem_le_forall_mem_imp_sup_le_inf (S T : Set ℝ)
|
|||
|
(hS : S.Nonempty) (hT : T.Nonempty)
|
|||
|
(p : ∀ s ∈ S, ∀ t ∈ T, s ≤ t)
|
|||
|
: ∃ (s : ℝ), IsLUB S s ∧ ∃ (t : ℝ), IsGLB T t ∧ s ≤ t := by
|
|||
|
-- Sshow a supremum of `S` and an infimum of `T` exists (since each set bounds
|
|||
|
-- above and below the other, respectively).
|
|||
|
let ⟨s, hs⟩ := hS
|
|||
|
let ⟨t, ht⟩ := hT
|
|||
|
have ps : t ∈ upperBounds S := by
|
|||
|
intro x hx
|
|||
|
exact p x hx t ht
|
|||
|
have pt : s ∈ lowerBounds T := by
|
|||
|
intro x hx
|
|||
|
exact p s hs x hx
|
|||
|
have ⟨S_lub, hS_lub⟩ := Real.exists_isLUB S hS ⟨t, ps⟩
|
|||
|
have ⟨T_glb, hT_glb⟩ := exists_isGLB T hT ⟨s, pt⟩
|
|||
|
refine ⟨S_lub, ⟨hS_lub, ⟨T_glb, ⟨hT_glb, ?_⟩⟩⟩⟩
|
|||
|
-- Assume `T_glb < S_lub`. Then `∃ c, T_glb + c < S_lub` which in turn implies
|
|||
|
-- existence of some `x ∈ S` such that `T_glb < S_lub - c / 2 < x < S_lub`.
|
|||
|
by_contra nr
|
|||
|
rw [not_le] at nr
|
|||
|
have ⟨c, hc⟩ := exists_pos_add_of_lt' nr
|
|||
|
have c_div_two_gt_zero : c / 2 > 0 := by
|
|||
|
have hr := div_lt_div_of_lt (show (0 : ℝ) < 2 by simp) hc.left
|
|||
|
rwa [zero_div] at hr
|
|||
|
have T_glb_lt_S_lub_sub_c_div_two : T_glb < S_lub - c / 2 := by
|
|||
|
have hr := congrFun (congrArg HSub.hSub hc.right) (c / 2)
|
|||
|
rw [add_sub_assoc, sub_half c] at hr
|
|||
|
calc T_glb
|
|||
|
_ < T_glb + c / 2 := (lt_add_iff_pos_right T_glb).mpr c_div_two_gt_zero
|
|||
|
_ = S_lub - c / 2 := hr
|
|||
|
-- Since `x ∈ S`, `p` implies `x ≤ t` for all `t ∈ T`. So `x ≤ T_glb`. But the
|
|||
|
-- above implies `T_glb < x`.
|
|||
|
have ⟨x, hx⟩ := sup_imp_exists_gt_sup_sub_delta c_div_two_gt_zero hS_lub
|
|||
|
have : x < x := calc x
|
|||
|
_ ≤ T_glb := mem_imp_le_glb hT_glb (p x hx.left)
|
|||
|
_ < S_lub - c / 2 := T_glb_lt_S_lub_sub_c_div_two
|
|||
|
_ < x := hx.right
|
|||
|
simp at this
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! ## Exercises -/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Exercise 1
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x` and `y` are arbitrary real numbers with `x < y`, prove that there is at
|
|||
|
least one real `z` satisfying `x < z < y`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem exercise_1 (x y : ℝ) (h : x < y) : ∃ z, x < z ∧ z < y := by
|
|||
|
have ⟨z, hz⟩ := exists_pos_add_of_lt' h
|
|||
|
refine ⟨x + z / 2, ⟨?_, ?_⟩⟩
|
|||
|
· have hz' : z / 2 > 0 := by
|
|||
|
have hr := div_lt_div_of_lt (show (0 : ℝ) < 2 by simp) hz.left
|
|||
|
rwa [zero_div] at hr
|
|||
|
exact (lt_add_iff_pos_right x).mpr hz'
|
|||
|
· have hz' : z / 2 < z := div_lt_self hz.left (show 1 < 2 by norm_num)
|
|||
|
calc x + z / 2
|
|||
|
_ < x + z := (add_lt_add_iff_left x).mpr hz'
|
|||
|
_ = y := hz.right
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Exercise 2
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x` is an arbitrary real number, prove that there are integers `m` and `n`
|
|||
|
such that `m < x < n`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem exercise_2 (x : ℝ) : ∃ m n : ℝ, m < x ∧ x < n := by
|
|||
|
refine ⟨x - 1, ⟨x + 1, ⟨?_, ?_⟩⟩⟩ <;> norm_num
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Exercise 3
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x > 0`, prove that there is a positive integer `n` such that `1 / n < x`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem exercise_3 (x : ℝ) (h : x > 0) : ∃ n : ℕ+, 1 / n < x := by
|
|||
|
have ⟨n, hn⟩ := @exists_pnat_mul_self_geq_of_pos x 1 h
|
|||
|
refine ⟨n, ?_⟩
|
|||
|
have hr := mul_lt_mul_of_pos_right hn (show 0 < 1 / ↑↑n by norm_num)
|
|||
|
conv at hr => arg 2; rw [mul_comm, ← mul_assoc]; simp
|
|||
|
rwa [one_mul] at hr
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Exercise 4
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x` is an arbitrary real number, prove that there is exactly one integer `n`
|
|||
|
which satisfies the inequalities `n ≤ x < n + 1`. This `n` is called the
|
|||
|
greatest integer in `x` and is denoted by `⌊x⌋`. For example, `⌊5⌋ = 5`,
|
|||
|
`⌊5 / 2⌋ = 2`, `⌊-8/3⌋ = -3`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem exercise_4 (x : ℝ) : ∃! n : ℤ, n ≤ x ∧ x < n + 1 := by
|
|||
|
let n := Int.floor x
|
|||
|
refine ⟨n, ⟨?_, ?_⟩⟩
|
|||
|
· exact ⟨Int.floor_le x, Int.lt_floor_add_one x⟩
|
|||
|
· intro y hy
|
|||
|
rw [← Int.floor_eq_iff] at hy
|
|||
|
exact Eq.symm hy
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-- #### Exercise 5
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x` is an arbitrary real number, prove that there is exactly one integer `n`
|
|||
|
which satisfies `x ≤ n < x + 1`.
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
theorem exercise_5 (x : ℝ) : ∃! n : ℤ, x ≤ n ∧ n < x + 1 := by
|
|||
|
let n := Int.ceil x
|
|||
|
refine ⟨n, ⟨?_, ?_⟩⟩
|
|||
|
· exact ⟨Int.le_ceil x, Int.ceil_lt_add_one x⟩
|
|||
|
· simp only
|
|||
|
intro y hy
|
|||
|
suffices y - 1 < x ∧ x ≤ y by
|
|||
|
rw [← Int.ceil_eq_iff] at this
|
|||
|
exact Eq.symm this
|
|||
|
apply And.intro
|
|||
|
· have := (sub_lt_sub_iff_right 1).mpr hy.right
|
|||
|
rwa [add_sub_cancel] at this
|
|||
|
· exact hy.left
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! #### Exercise 6
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x` and `y` are arbitrary real numbers, `x < y`, prove that there exists at
|
|||
|
least one rational number `r` satisfying `x < r < y`, and hence infinitely many.
|
|||
|
This property is often described by saying that the rational numbers are *dense*
|
|||
|
in the real-number system.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
###### TODO
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! #### Exercise 7
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x` is rational, `x ≠ 0`, and `y` irrational, prove that `x + y`, `x - y`,
|
|||
|
`xy`, `x / y`, and `y / x` are all irrational.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
###### TODO
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! #### Exercise 8
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Is the sum or product of two irrational numbers always irrational?
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
###### TODO
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! #### Exercise 9
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If `x` and `y` are arbitrary real numbers, `x < y`, prove that there exists at
|
|||
|
least one irrational number `z` satisfying `x < z < y`, and hence infinitely
|
|||
|
many.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
###### TODO
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! #### Exercise 10
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
An integer `n` is called *even* if `n = 2m` for some integer `m`, and *odd* if
|
|||
|
`n + 1` is even. Prove the following statements:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(a) An integer cannot be both even and odd.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(b) Every integer is either even or odd.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(c) The sum or product of two even integers is even. What can you say about the
|
|||
|
sum or product of two odd integers?
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(d) If `n²` is even, so is `n`. If `a² = 2b²`, where `a` and `b` are integers,
|
|||
|
then both `a` and `b` are even.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(e) Every rational number can be expressed in the form `a / b`, where `a` and
|
|||
|
`b` are integers, at least one of which is odd.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
###### TODO
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
def is_even (n : ℤ) := ∃ m : ℤ, n = 2 * m
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
def is_odd (n : ℤ) := is_even (n + 1)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! #### Exercise 11
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Prove that there is no rational number whose square is `2`.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
[Hint: Argue by contradiction. Assume `(a / b)² = 2`, where `a` and `b` are
|
|||
|
integers, at least one of which is odd. Use parts of Exercise 10 to deduce a
|
|||
|
contradiction.]
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
###### TODO
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
/-! #### Exercise 12
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The Archimedean property of the real-number system was deduced as a consequence
|
|||
|
of the least-upper-bound axiom. Prove that the set of rational numbers satisfies
|
|||
|
the Archimedean property but not the least-upper-bound property. This shows that
|
|||
|
the Archimedean property does not imply the least-upper-bound axiom.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
###### TODO
|
|||
|
-/
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
end Exercises.Apostol.Chapter_I_3
|