Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $I:=[a,b]$ and let $f:I\to\Bbb R$ be a (not necessarily continuous) function with the property that for every $x \in I$, the function $f$ is bounded on a neighborhood $V_{\delta_x}$ of $x$. Prove that $f$ is bounded on $I.$

I am not entirely sure where to start here. Can I say that the $\lim x_n = x$ and so there exists $N_1$ in the natural numbers such that $x_n$ is in the neighborhood for any $n>N_1$ and then continue?

Please help!

share|improve this question
Hint: $I$ is a compact set. What can you say about the collection $\{V_{\delta_x}\}_{x\in I}$ in relation to $I$? –  J. Loreaux Oct 23 '12 at 18:45
We have not yet used compact sets in class. –  Jackson Hart Oct 23 '12 at 18:49
Have you yet covered the fact that every bounded sequence of reals has a convergent subsequence? –  Brian M. Scott Oct 23 '12 at 18:53
Yes, the B-W theorem. Could I say that Suppose that f is unbounded. Then there exists xn∈[a,b] with (for example) limn→∞f(xn)=∞. Because the sequence xn is bounded, it has a convergent subsequence, denote it also xn→x0∈[a,b]. Then use the fact that f is bounded near x0 to derive a contradiction. –  Jackson Hart Oct 23 '12 at 18:56
Precisely so, Jackson. –  Cameron Buie Oct 23 '12 at 18:59

2 Answers 2

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Suppose that $f$ is not bounded on $I$. Then for each $n\in\Bbb N$ there is an $x_n\in I$ such that $|f(x_n)|\ge n$. The sequence $\langle x_n:n\in\Bbb N\rangle$ is bounded, since it lies in $I$, so it has a convergent subsequence $\langle x_{n_k}:k\in\Bbb N\rangle$. Let $x$ be the limit of this subsequence. There is an $m\in\Bbb N$ such that $x_{n_k}\in V_{\delta_x}$ for every $k\ge m$, contradicting the boundedness of $f$ on $V_{\delta_x}$.

Added: Recall that the points $x_n$ were chosen so that $|f(x_n)|\ge n$ for each $n\in\Bbb N$. In particular, $|f(x_{n_k})|\ge n_k$ for all $k\in\Bbb N$. Now let $M$ be any positive real number. There is a $k_0\in\Bbb N$ such that $n_{k_0}\ge M$. (Recall that $\langle x_{n_k}:k\in\Bbb N\rangle$ is a subsequence of $\langle x_n:n\in\Bbb N\rangle$, so $\langle n_k:k\in\Bbb N\rangle$ must be strictly increasing.) Now choose any $k\ge\max\{m,k_0\}$; then $n_k\ge n_{k_0}\ge M$, and $x_{n_k}\in V_{\delta_x}$ (because $k\ge m$), so $x_{n_k}$ is a point of $V_{\delta_x}$, and $|f(x_{n_k})|\ge M$. $M$ was arbitrary, so there are points of $V_{\delta_x}$ at which $f$ assumes values with arbitrarily large magnitudes $-$ which is exactly what it means for $f$ to be unbounded on $V_{\delta_x}$.

share|improve this answer
It should be noted that $x\in I$ since $I$ is closed. –  J. Loreaux Oct 23 '12 at 19:00
I understand everything here except the part that says |f(xn)|≥n. –  Jackson Hart Oct 23 '12 at 19:04
Is it like that simply because it isn't bounded? –  Jackson Hart Oct 23 '12 at 19:06
@Jackson: Yes: if it’s not bounded, it assumes values with arbitrarily large magnitudes. In particular, for any $n\in\Bbb N$ there must be some point at which $f(n)\ge n$ or $f(n)\le -n$, i.e., $|f(n)|\ge n$. –  Brian M. Scott Oct 23 '12 at 19:09
Ok, I get that now. I am still slight confused for some reason. Could you help explain to me how this contradicts the boundedness of f on V? –  Jackson Hart Oct 23 '12 at 19:12

If you are familiar with compactness, for every $x$ let $V_x$ be an appropriate neighbourhood of $x$, and $B_x$ an associated bound. Then the $V_x$ form an open cover of our interval $[a,b]$. There is therefore a finite subcover $\{V_{x_1},\dots, V_{x_n}\}$. Let $B=\max B_{x_i}$.

share|improve this answer
We have not learned yet about compactness and so I am pretty sure that our teacher will not let us use that. –  Jackson Hart Oct 23 '12 at 18:49

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.