T1S/MATH2241/2021-22/2nd
THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG
DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS
MATH2241 Introduction to Mathematical Analysis
Tutorial 1 – Solution
1. (a) Note that {x ∈ R : x1 > 2} = (0, 12 ).
Supremum = 12 ; Maximum does not exist.
Infimum = 0; Minimum does not exist.
(b) Note that
1 2 3 1 2 3
+ + ≤ + + = 6 for any k, m, n ∈ N.
k m n 1 1 1
Supremum = Maximum = 6.
Infimum = 0; Minimum does not exist.
(c) Supremum does not exist; Maximum does not exist.
Infimum = 0; Minimum does not exist.
2. For any nonempty bounded subset A of R, we have
inf A ≤ a ≤ sup A for any a ∈ A
since inf A and sup A are lower bound and upper bound of A respectively. It follows
that if inf A = sup A, then we have a = inf A = sup A for any a ∈ A, that is, the
set A is just a singleton set.
3. First of all, for any nonempty bounded subset A of R, we have
inf A ≤ a ≤ sup A for any a ∈ A.
It remains to show that if A ⊆ B, then sup A ≤ sup B and inf B ≤ inf A.
Since sup B is an upper bound for B, we have b ≤ sup B for any b ∈ B. Now since
A ⊆ B, so in particular we have a ≤ sup B for any a ∈ A. But sup A is the least
upper bound for A, we conclude that sup A ≤ sup B.
Similar argument suggests that inf B ≤ inf A.
1
4. First of all, it is not hard to see that A + B is also a nonempty bounded subset of
R, hence its supremum and infimum exist.
(a) We will prove the result by showing (i) sup (A + B) ≤ sup A + sup B and (ii)
sup (A + B) ≥ sup A + sup B.
For (i), since sup A is an upper bound for A, we have a ≤ sup A for any a ∈ A.
Similarly, b ≤ sup B for any b ∈ B. Hence a + b ≤ sup A + sup B for any
a ∈ A and b ∈ B. Thus sup A + sup B is an upper bound for the set A + B.
Hence by definition of a supremum, we have sup (A + B) ≤ sup A + sup B.
For (ii), we first write a = (a + b) − b for any a ∈ A and b ∈ B. Then
a = (a + b) − b ≤ sup (A + B) − b
since sup (A + B) is an upper bound for A + B. Thus for any b ∈ B, sup (A +
B) − b is an upper bound for A and hence by definition of sup A we have
sup A ≤ sup (A + B) − b for any b ∈ B.
Rearranging we get b ≤ sup (A+B)−sup A for any b ∈ B. Thus by definition
of sup B, we have
sup B ≤ sup (A + B) − sup A,
that is,
sup (A + B) ≥ sup A + sup B.
(b) Similar argument as in (a).
5. First of all, since A is a nonempty subset of R which is bounded above by α, we
know that sup A exists by the Completeness Axiom. Assume to the contrary that
α 6= sup A. Then we have sup A < α. By Archimedean Property, we know that
there exists n ∈ N such that n1 < α − sup A, which is equivalent to sup A < α − n1 .
Now by assumption, for this n ∈ N, there exists an ∈ A such that α − n1 ≤ an .
Combining the two inequalities gives sup A < an , which is a contradiction.
6. (a) One such example is given by B = {x ∈ Q : x2 < 2} (See also Chapter 1,
√
bottom of p.13). Every element in B is rational but sup B = 2.
(b) One such example is given by S = the set of all negative irrational numbers.
In this case, we claim that sup S exists and is equal to 0, which is rational.
Clearly, S is nonempty and bounded above by 0, hence its supremum exists.
To show that 0 is the smallest upper bound, assume to the contrary that there
is a smaller upper bound s < 0. Then by the density of irrational numbers
in R (Corollary 1.37), there must be an irrational number t with s < t < 0.
But this means s is no longer an upper bound of S. Contradiction.
2
7. Assume to the contrary that there exists a bijective function f : N −→ [0, 1]. We
will construct a nested sequence of closed and bounded intervals as follows.
• First consider f (1). Define I1 to be any nondegenerate1 closed and bounded
interval in [0, 1] which does NOT contain f (1).
• Next, define I2 to be any nondegenerate closed and bounded interval in I1
which does NOT contain f (2). Since I2 ⊆ I1 , so automatically it will NOT
contain f (1) as well.
• Repeating this process gives us a nested sequence of nondegenerate closed
and bounded intervals I1 ⊇ I2 ⊇ I3 ⊇ · · · ⊇ Ik ⊇ Ik+1 ⊇ · · · .
Now by the Nested Intervals Property, there exists x ∈ In for all n ∈ N. It is
not hard to see that x 6= f (n) for any n ∈ N for if x = f (n0 ) for some n0 ∈ N,
then x ∈/ In0 by the construction of In0 , contradiction. Hence we have found an
element x in [0, 1] such that x 6= f (n) for any n ∈ N, contradicting the assumption
that f : N −→ [0, 1] is bijective. We conclude that there is no bijective function
f : N −→ [0, 1], and hence [0, 1] is uncountable.
1
nondegenerate closed and bounded intervals are intervals of the form [a, b] with a < b. This excludes
singleton sets which can be regarded as degenerate closed and bounded intervals.
