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.

The hint that I've been given is: for each n in the naturals, use the assumption that $n$ is not an upper bound for $f(I)$ to choose a sequence of $x_n$ (from $n=1$ to infinity) in $I$; then apply Bolzano-Weierstrass.

share|improve this question
    
Yes, exactly, do so. –  Hagen von Eitzen Dec 9 '12 at 16:32
    
@HagenvonEitzen I have no idea how to go about it though? I don't even understand the hint. –  Mathlete Dec 9 '12 at 16:34
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 0 down vote accepted

Suppose that $f$ is not bounded above that is \begin{equation}\forall M\in \mathbb{R} \exists x\in [a,b]:f(x)>M\end{equation} Taking $M=1,...,n,...$ we can construct inductively a sequence $(x_n)\in [a,b]$ such as that \begin{equation}\forall n\in \mathbb{N}\;f(x_n)>n\end{equation} The sequence $(x_n)$ is bounded and so by the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem it has a convergent subsequence $x_{k_n}\to c$ Since $\forall n\in \mathbb{N}\ a\le x_n \le b$ we have that $a\le c \le b$. By hypothesis, $f$ is sequentially continuous at $c$ and because $x_{k_n}\to c$ it follows \begin{equation}f(x_{k_n})\to f(c)\end{equation} which is a contradiction to the fact that \begin{equation}\forall n\in \mathbb{N}\;f(x_n)>n\end{equation} Thus, $f$ is bounded above.

EDIT: We have $\forall n\in \mathbb{N}\;f(x_n)>n$. This implies \begin{equation}\lim_{n\to \infty}f(x_n)=+\infty\end{equation} which is a contradiction to the fact that $f(x_{k_n})\to f(c)$

share|improve this answer
    
Are you assuming that the sequence x_n is bounded above? –  Mathlete Dec 9 '12 at 16:52
    
It is bounded above by say, $b$. –  Nameless Dec 9 '12 at 16:52
    
Oh of course. How is the the fact that f(x_k_n) tending to f(c) a contradiction to the following fact? –  Mathlete Dec 9 '12 at 16:53
    
Take the limit of the inequality as $n\to +\infty$ –  Nameless Dec 9 '12 at 16:54
    
What do you mean? –  Mathlete Dec 9 '12 at 16:56
show 1 more comment

Your Answer

 
discard

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.