Scribd
Upload
55 views

Rudin's Ex. 6: M N P Q MQ+NP NQ

This document proves several properties of exponential functions with a base b that is greater than 1: 1) It proves that (bm)1/n = (bp)1/q if m/n = p/q. This allows defining br as (bm)1/n. 2) It proves that bs+t = bsbt for rational s and t. 3) It proves that br is the supremum of the set B(r) of all bt where t is rational and t ≤ r. This allows defining bx as the supremum of B(x) for any real x. 4) It proves that bx+y = bxby for all real x and y

Uploaded by

theskepticalone
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
55 views

Rudin's Ex. 6: M N P Q MQ+NP NQ

This document proves several properties of exponential functions with a base b that is greater than 1: 1) It proves that (bm)1/n = (bp)1/q if m/n = p/q. This allows defining br as (bm)1/n. 2) It proves that bs+t = bsbt for rational s and t. 3) It proves that br is the supremum of the set B(r) of all bt where t is rational and t ≤ r. This allows defining bx as the supremum of B(x) for any real x. 4) It proves that bx+y = bxby for all real x and y

Uploaded by

theskepticalone
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

1.4 Fix b > 1. Rudin’s Ex.

(a) If m, n, p, q are integers, n > 0, q > 0, and r = m/n = p/q, prove that
(bm )1/n = (bp )1/q .
Hence it makes sense to define br = (bm )1/n .
(b) Prove that bs+t = bs bt if s and t are rational.
(c) If x is real, define B(x) to be the set of all numbers bt , where t is rational and
t ≤ x. Prove that
br = sup B(r)
where r is rational. Hence it makes sense to define
bx = sup B(x)
for every real x.
(d) Prove that bx+y = bx by for all real x and y. Part (d) is very
difficult.
Proof (a) If we can show
 nq  nq
(bm )1/n = (bp )1/q ,

then by Theorem 1.21, we have (bm )1/n = (bp )1/q . Indeed,


 nq h n i q
(bm )1/n = (bm )1/n
= (bm )q = bmq
= bnp = (bp )n
h q i n  nq
= (bp )1/q = (bp )1/q .

(b) For s and t rational, choose integers m, n, p, q, with n > 0, q > 0, such that
p mq+np
s= mn and t = q . Since s + t = nq , we have
 m p nq  mq+np nq h inq
(bs+t )nq = b n +q = b nq = (bmq+np )1/nq = bmq+np
= (bm )q · (bp )n
h n iq h q in
= (bm )1/n · (bp )1/q
h inq
= (bm )1/n · (bp )1/q = (bs · bt )nq .

which implies bs+t = bs · bt , by Theorem 1.21.


(c) By the definition of B(x), if r is rational, then br ∈ B(r). If we can show that br is
an upper bound of B(r), then, by the fact that br ∈ B(r), we conclude br = sup B(r).
Indeed, since b > 1, for any rational t with t ≤ r, by (b), we have
br = bt · br−t ≥ bt · 1r−t = bt .

1
Here we use the fact 1r = 1 for any rational r. This fact is because 1n = 1 implies
11/n = 1 by Theorem 1.21, and 1m/n = (1m )1/n = 11/n = 1 for integers m, n, with
n > 0.
(d) Step 1: Put

B(x) = {br : r ≤ x, r rational}, Bo (x) = {br : r < x, r rational}.

By the definition, bx = sup B(x). Now we show that bx = sup Bo (x).


In fact, if x is irrational, it is obvious that Bo (x) = B(x), which implies bx =
sup Bo (x). If x is rational, since Bo (x) ⊂ B(x), we know that sup Bo (x) ≤ sup B(x) =
bx . On the other hand, for any positive integer n, bx−1/n = bx b−1/n by (b). Since
bx−1/n ∈ Bo (x), we have

sup Bo (x) ≥ sup{bx−1/n : n ∈ N} = bx sup{b−1/n : n ∈ N}.

Hence, if we can prove sup{b−1/n : n ∈ N} = 1, then we have sup Bo (x) ≥ bx , so that


sup Bo (x) = bx .
Indeed, since b1/n b−1/n = b0 = 1, we have b−1/n = (b1/n )−1 . By (b1/n )n = b > 1, we
have b1/n > 1, so b−1/n < 1. That is, 1 is an upper bound of {b−1/n : n ∈ N}. For
any 0 <  < 1, define δ > 0 by 1 −  = (1 + δ)−1 . Since (1 − )n = [(1 + δ)−1 ]n =
[(1 + δ)n ]−1 ≤ (1 + nδ)−1 < b for sufficiently large n by the Archimedean property,
we know that 1 −  < b−1/n . That means 1 −  cannot be an upper bound of
{b−1/n : n ∈ N}. Hence, sup{b−1/n : n ∈ N} = 1.
Step 2: We shall show bx+y = bx by .
First, by the definition of B(x), since

{(s, t) ∈ Q2 : s ≤ x, t ≤ y} ⊂ {(s, t) ∈ Q2 : s + y ≤ x + y},

we have
bx by = sup (bs · bt ) ≤ sup bs+t = bx+y .
s≤x,t≤y s+t≤x+y
s, t rational s, t rational

It remains to show that the reversed inequality holds. In fact, by Step 1, it is


sufficient to show that bx by is an upper bound of Bo (x + y). Let r < x + y be a
rational number, then there are rational numbers s and t, such that r < s + t, s < x,
t < y. Thus, A similar argument
br < bs+t = bs bt ≤ bx by , does not work for
B(x + y).
which means bx+y = sup Bo (x + y) ≤ bx by .
1.6 Under what conditions does equality hold in the Schwarz inequality? Rudin’s Ex. 15
|aj |2 , B = |bj |2 , C =
P P P
Proof Write A = aj b̄j . If b1 = · · · = bn = 0, then
B = 0 and the Schwarz inequality is trivial. Otherwise B > 0, from elementary

2
calculations, we give
X X
|Baj − Cbj |2 = (Baj − Cbj )(Bāj − C̄ b̄j )
X X X X
= B2 |aj |2 − B C̄ aj b̄j − BC āj bj + |C|2 |bj |2
= B 2 A − B|C|2
= B(AB − |C|)2 ,

Hence, if the Schwarz inequality holds, that is, AB = |C|2 , then there are two
complex numbers λ and µ, not both zero, such that

λaj = µbj , j = 1, 2, . . . .

In the case that b1 = · · · = bn = 0, we simply take λ = 0 and µ arbitrary.


On the other hand, suppose there are two complex numbers λ and µ, not both zero,
such that
λaj = µbj , j = 1, 2, . . . .
Without loss of generality, we assume λ 6= 0. Then, by writing aj = γbj , we have
2 2 2
n n n
X X 2
X
= |γ|2 |bj |2


a b̄
j j
=
γ|b |
j
j=1 j=1 j=1
  
Xn Xn
= |γ|2  |bj |2   |bj |2 
j=1 j=1
  
Xn Xn
=  |bj |2   |γbj |2 
j=1 j=1
  
Xn n
X
=  |aj |2   |bj |2  .
j=1 j=1

The Schwarz inequality holds.


Hence, we conclude that the Schwarz inequality holds if and only if there are two
complex numbers λ and µ, not both zero, such that

λaj = µbj , j = 1, 2, . . . .

You might also like