Real Analysis #3 - The Completeness Property

  Рет қаралды 28,207

BriTheMathGuy

BriTheMathGuy

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 20
@BriTheMathGuy
@BriTheMathGuy 4 жыл бұрын
🎓Become a Math Master With My Intro To Proofs Course! (FREE ON KZbin) kzbin.info/www/bejne/aZTdmJl-irGNedU
@hazelndlovu3996
@hazelndlovu3996 4 жыл бұрын
Finally useful Real analysis videos. Suggestion -Do more examples at the end.
@LukeSequ
@LukeSequ 4 жыл бұрын
These are the best real analysis videos I can find!
@BriTheMathGuy
@BriTheMathGuy 4 жыл бұрын
Great to hear!
@sinjini3189
@sinjini3189 3 жыл бұрын
I was confused about why Q does not have the completeness property. And this video cleared my confusion. Thank you so much!
@cgfam5256
@cgfam5256 3 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much. your 4 min video is way better than +30 min of others!!!
@BriTheMathGuy
@BriTheMathGuy 3 жыл бұрын
Glad it helped!
@izzywhippet1855
@izzywhippet1855 3 жыл бұрын
You said that root 2 is an upper bound of the set defined on Q, but your earlier definition of bounds said that an upper bound on Set S has to be an element of S. But as you go on to say, root 2 is not in Q, so it is not in the set you defined either. Have I misunderstood the definiton of bounds?
@christopherallen3353
@christopherallen3353 Жыл бұрын
That's the point. The subset must contain root two, but root two is irrational and therefore not in the set. Thus the rational number not complete.
@sibusisopgambu9699
@sibusisopgambu9699 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks. Please keep making more videos ...
@BriTheMathGuy
@BriTheMathGuy 4 жыл бұрын
I'll do my best. Have a great day!
@supernova3767
@supernova3767 Жыл бұрын
Does the supremum have to be in the set we're working with? Do the bounds have to be in the sets we're working with?
@nonexistent6426
@nonexistent6426 6 ай бұрын
no for both questions. supremum is the least upper bound, and you can have infinitely many upper bounds for a set (for e.g., in the video sqrt(3) can also be an upper bound for the given set, but the *least* value is sqrt(2)) and the set is complete only if the supremum belongs to that set
@mariamary1116
@mariamary1116 3 жыл бұрын
What's the completeness property of set IR?
@jaygourley1818
@jaygourley1818 3 жыл бұрын
Is the word "has" equivocal in this lecture? It could also mean "is contained in."
@AnhNguyen-zd9bd
@AnhNguyen-zd9bd 4 жыл бұрын
So it means the set { x^2
@whodafookisdatguy7659
@whodafookisdatguy7659 3 жыл бұрын
I think the idea is for completeness supA must belong to Q, and no matter which element q1 in Q we take such that q1 = supA there will always be a q2 in Q such that q1
@mahmoudalbahar1641
@mahmoudalbahar1641 3 жыл бұрын
Many thanks for this good video.
@SpiritVector
@SpiritVector 4 жыл бұрын
sup.
@BriTheMathGuy
@BriTheMathGuy 4 жыл бұрын
Hey :)
Real Analysis #4 - Fields
6:38
BriTheMathGuy
Рет қаралды 11 М.
The Completeness axiom and a proof by contradiction
6:56
Jan-Fredrik Olsen
Рет қаралды 17 М.
Osman Kalyoncu Sonu Üzücü Saddest Videos Dream Engine 269 #shorts
00:26
Smart Sigma Kid #funny #sigma
00:14
CRAZY GREAPA
Рет қаралды 84 МЛН
啊?就这么水灵灵的穿上了?
00:18
一航1
Рет қаралды 96 МЛН
小丑家的感情危机!#小丑#天使#家庭
00:15
家庭搞笑日记
Рет қаралды 38 МЛН
The Archimedean Property of the Real Numbers
4:56
Mike, the Mathematician
Рет қаралды 1,5 М.
The Most Beautiful Proof
3:57
BriTheMathGuy
Рет қаралды 272 М.
Prove Infimums Exist with the Completeness Axiom | Real Analysis
9:25
Real Analysis | The Supremum and Completeness of ℝ
16:10
Michael Penn
Рет қаралды 156 М.
How Math Becomes Difficult
39:19
MAKiT
Рет қаралды 152 М.
Some silly number systems
8:17
Random Andgit
Рет қаралды 143 М.
Start Learning Reals 2 | Completeness Axiom
10:58
The Bright Side of Mathematics
Рет қаралды 16 М.
Completeness of Real Numbers
19:12
Mika Seppälä
Рет қаралды 46 М.
Completeness Axiom, Proving Rationals are not Complete [Real Analysis]
9:52
Osman Kalyoncu Sonu Üzücü Saddest Videos Dream Engine 269 #shorts
00:26