B.Sc.

Engineering
Semester 1 - 2018 batch
MA 1013 Mathematics

Tutorial 04-Answers
Section A (Logic and Set Theory)
(1) ∼ [limx→a f (x) exists finitely iff {∃L( f or ∀ε > 0, ∃δ > 0( f or∀x ∈ R, 0 < |x−a| < δ =⇒
|f (x) − L| < ε))}]

[∼ (limx→a f (x) exists finitely)∧{∃L f or ∀ε > 0, ∃δ > 0 f or ∀x ∈ R, 0 < |x − a| <

δ =⇒ |f (x) − L| < ε}] ∨ [(limx→a f (x) exists finitely)∧ ∼ {∃L f or ∀ε > 0, ∃δ >
0 f or ∀x ∈ R, 0 < |x − a| < δ =⇒ |f (x) − L| < ε}]

[(limx→a f (x) does not exist finitely)∧{∃L f or ∀ε > 0, ∃δ > 0 f or ∀x ∈ R, 0 < |x − a| <
δ =⇒ |f (x) − L| < ε}] ∨ [(limx→a f (x) exists finitely)∧{∀L f or ∃ε > 0, ∃δ > 0 f or ∃x ∈
R, 0 < |x − a| < δ ∧ |f (x) − L| ≥ ε}]

(2) Let ”Animals” be the universe of discourse (U )

R(x) : x is a reptile.
F (x) : x has fur.
S(x) : x is a snake

∀x ∈ U, R(x) =⇒ ∼ F (x)
∀x ∈ U, S(x) =⇒ R(x)
—————————————–
∀x ∈ U, S(x) =⇒ ∼ F (x)

(1) ∀x ∈ U, S(x) =⇒ R(x) (Premise)

(2) For any a ∈ U, S(a) =⇒ R(a) (From (1), Universal specification)
(3) ∀x ∈ U, R(x) =⇒ ∼ F (x) (Premise)
(4) For any a ∈ U, R(a) =⇒ ∼ F (a) (From (3), Universal specification)
(5) For any a ∈ U, S(a) =⇒ ∼ F (a) (From (2) and (4),Hypothetical Syllogism)
(6) ∀x ∈ U, S(x) =⇒ ∼ F (x)(From (5), Universal generalization)
∴ Argument is valid.

(3) s: It’s not sunny this afternoon.

c: It’s colder than yesterday.
p: We will go swimming.
t: We will take a canoe trip.
h: We will be home by sunset.

1
 s∧c
p =⇒ ∼ s
∼ p =⇒ t
t =⇒ h
——————
h

(1) s ∧ c (Premise)
(2) s (From (1),Simplification)
(3) p =⇒ ∼ s (Premise)
(4) ∼ p (From (2) and (3),Modus tollens)
(5) ∼ p =⇒ t (Premise)
(6) t (From (4) and (5),Modus Ponens)
(7) t =⇒ h (Premise)
(8) h (From (6) and (7),Modus Ponens)

∴ Argument is valid.

(4) Let ”Things in the universe” be the universe of discourse (U )

A(x) : x is a philosopher.
B(x) : x is a god.
C(x) : x is certain.
N (x) : x is a number.
M (x) : x is material.
S(x) : x is a student.
H(x) : x is happy.
G(x) : x complained.

(a) ∃xA(x)
(b) ∀x ∼ B(x)
(c) ∀x ∼ C(x)
(d) ∃x N (x) =⇒ ∃x ∼ M (x) /∃xN (x) =⇒ ∼ (∀xM (x))
(e) ∀x S(x) =⇒ H(x)
(f) ∃x S(x) ∧ H(x)
(g) ∀x ∼ G(x)
(h) ∃x ∼ G(x) / ∼ (∀xG(x))
(i) [∀x M (x)] ∨ [∃x ∼ M (x)]

(5) Universal set of discourse :Abelian Group

E(x, y) : x = y
P (x, y, z) : x + y = z

2
 (a) ∀x ∀y [∃z : P (x, y, z)]
(b) ∀x ∀y ∀z ∀w [P (x, y, z) ∧ P (x, y, w) =⇒ E(z, w)]
(c) ∀x ∀y ∀z [P (x + y, z, (x + (y + z)))]
or
∀x ∀y ∀z [E([(x + y) + z], [x + (y + z)])]

Section B (Real Analysis)

(1) (a) Case I (y > 0):

y > 0 =⇒ |y| = y and y 2 = y.y > 0

=⇒ |y 2 | = y 2 = |y|2

Case II (y = 0):

y = 0 =⇒ y 2 = 0 and |y| = |0| = 0

=⇒ |y 2 | = |02 | = 0 = |0|2 = |y|2
Case III (y < 0):

y < 0 =⇒ |y| = −y and y 2 = y.y > 0 (By the convention)

|y 2 | = y 2 = (−y)(−y) = |y||y| = |y|2

∴ From all cases,

∀y ∈ R, |y 2 | = |y|2

(b) |a + b|2 + |a − b|2 = |(a + b)2 | + |(a − b)2 | (From above (1)(a) proof)
|a + b|2 + |a − b|2 = (a + b)2 + (a − b)2
|a + b|2 + |a − b|2 = 2a2 + 2b2
|a + b|2 + |a − b|2 = 2|a2 | + 2|b2 |
|a + b|2 + |a − b|2 = 2|a|2 + 2|b|2 (From above (1)(a) proof)

(c) s, t ≥ 0

s+t
Let (E)= 1+s+t

s s
(E)= 1+s+t + 1+s+t
→ (1)

We know that t ≥ 0,
1+s+t≥1+s

1 1
1+s+t
≤ 1+s

s s
1+s+t
≤ 1+s
(s ≥ 0) → (2)

We know that s ≥ 0,
1+t+s≥1+t

3
 1 1
1+t+s
≤ 1+t

t t
1+s+t
≤ 1+t
(t ≥ 0) → (3)

From (2) and (3),

s t s t
1+s+t
+ 1+s+t
≤ 1+s
+ 1+t

s+t s t
1+s+t
≤ 1+s
+ 1+t

2
(2) l 6= 0 |y − l| < min( |l|2 , k|l|
2
)

|l| k|l|2
=⇒ |y − l| < and |y − l| <
| {z 2} | {z 2 }
(1) (2)
|l| 1
Suppose y = 0; |y − l| = |0 − l| = |l| < 2
=⇒ 1 < 2
#Contradiction
∴ y 6= 0

Note that ||y| − |l|| ≤ |y − l| (From the alternative method of the triangle inequality)
|l| 3|l|
|y| − |l| ≤ ||y| − |l|| ≤ |y − l| < 2
gives |y| < 2

|l| |l|
|l| − |y| ≤ ||y| − |l|| ≤ |y − l| < 2
gives |y| > 2

(|l| = |l − y + y|) ≤ (|l − y| + |y| = |y − || + |y|) < ( |l|2 + |y|) (From (1))

=⇒ |l|2 < |y|

|y − l| < k|l| |l|2 < k|l||y| (From (2) and above)
|y−l|
=⇒ |ly|
< k(∵ y, l 6= 0)

| 1l − y1 | < k

(3) Let s, t ∈ R
|s + t| = |s| + |t| ⇐⇒ ||s + t|| = ||s| + |t||
⇐⇒ |s + t|2 = (|s| + |t|)2
⇐⇒ |(s + t)2 | = |s|2 + 2|s||t| + |t|2
⇐⇒ (s + t)2 = s2 + 2|st| + t2
⇐⇒ s2 + 2st + t2 = s2 + 2|st| + t2
⇐⇒ |st| = st
⇐⇒ st ≥ 0

(4) (a) A 6= ∅ , A ⊆ R and A is bounded.

A is bounded above =⇒ inf (A) and sup(A) exists. (Completeness Properties)

∀a ∈ A,
inf (A) ≤ a ≤ sup(A)

4
 since µ < 0, µinf (A) ≥ µA ≥ µsup(A)
µA is bounded above and below =⇒ µA is bounded.→(1)

Let λ be an arbitrary (random) lower bound of µA → (2)

=⇒ λ ≤ inf (µA) ≤ µA
=⇒ λ ≤ µA
=⇒ λ ≤ µA ∀a ∈ A
=⇒ µλ ≥ a ∀a ∈ A
=⇒ µλ ≥ sup(A) ≥ a ∀a ∈ A (∵ µλ is an upper bound of A)
=⇒ λ ≤ µsup(A) → (3)

From (1),(2) and (3),

inf (µA) = µsup(A)

(b) A 6= ∅, A ⊆ R and A is bounded.

A is bounded above and below =⇒ sup(A), inf (A) exists.

∴ For any a ∈ A,
inf (A) ≤ a ≤ sup(A)
Since p > 0, q ∈ R,
pinf (A) + q ≤ pa + q ≤ psup(A) + q ∀a ∈ A
pinf (A) + q ≤ b ≤ psup(A) + q ∀b ∈ B(∵ B = {pa + q|a ∈ A})
∴ B is bounded above and below
∴ B is bounded above and below

Also pinf (A) + q is a lower bound and psup(A) + q is an upper bound of B → (1)

Let λ be any arbitrary upper bound of B

=⇒ λ ≥ b ∀b ∈ B
=⇒ λ ≥ pa + q ∀a ∈ A
=⇒ λ−qp
≥ a ∀a ∈ A
λ−q
=⇒ p is an upper bound of A
=⇒ λ−qp
≥ sup(A) ≥ a(∵ sup(A) exists)
=⇒ λ − q ≥ psup(A)
=⇒ λ ≥ psup(A) + q → (2) From (1) and (2),
∴ sup(B) = psup(A) + q (By the definition of the supremum)

(5) (a) A, B ⊆ R, A, B 6= ∅
Since A and B are bounded , sup(A), sup(B), inf (A), inf (B) exist, and all 4 are
unique real values.
∀b ∈ B, inf (B) ≤ b ≤ sup(B)
∀a ∈ A, inf (A) ≤ a ≤ sup(A)

Since A ⊆ B,
a ∈ A =⇒ a ∈ B.
∴ ∀a ∈ A, since a ∈ B,
inf (B) ≤ a ≤ sup(B)
∴ ∀ ∈ A, inf (B) ≤ a ≤ sup(B)

5
 ∴ inf (B) is a lower bound of A and sup(B) is an upper bound of A.

Since inf (A) and sup(A) exist and they are unique.
inf (B) ≤ inf (A) and sup(A) ≤ sup(B)
(Definitions of supremum and infimum)

(b) S, T ⊆ R, S, T 6= ∅
S, T are bounded. =⇒ sup(S) and sup(B) exist (Completeness Property)

∀a ∈ S, a ≤ sup(S) and ∀b ∈ T, b ≤ sup(T )

S ∪ T = {x|x ∈ S or x ∈ T }

Let p be an arbitrary upper bound of S ∪ T

∴ p ∈ S or p ∈ T
=⇒ p ≤ sup(S) or p ≤ sup(T )
=⇒ p ≤ sup(S) ≤ M ax{sup(S), sup(T )} or p ≤ sup(T ) ≤ M ax{sup(S), sup(T )}
=⇒ p ≤ M ax{sup(S), sup(T )} or p ≤ p ≤ M ax{sup(S), sup(T )}
=⇒ p ≤ M ax{sup(S), sup(T )}

∴ ∀x ∈ (S ∪ T ), x ≤ M ax{sup(S), sup(T )}
∴ M ax{sup(S), sup(T )} is an upper bound of S ∪ T (∵ S ∪ T 6= ∅) → (1)
∴ sup(S ∪ T )exists (Completeness property)

Let λ is an arbitrary upper bound of S ∪ T =⇒ ∀x ∈ (S ∪ T ), x ≤ λ

Suppose λ < M ax{sup(S), sup(T )}
=⇒ λ < sup(S) or λ < sup(T )

Since S ⊂ S ∪ T and T ⊂ S ∪ T
For any a ∈ S, a ∈ S ∪ T and for any b ∈ T, b ∈ S ∪ T

Case I( λ < sup(S)) :

∴ a ≤ λ < sup(S) for any a ∈ S.(∵ λ is an upper bound.)

∴ ∀x ∈ S, x ≤ λ < sup(S)
∴ λ is an upper bound of S, which is less than sup(S) #Contradiction

Case II( λ < sup(T )) :

∴ a ≤ λ < sup(T ) for any b ∈ T.(∵ λ is an upper bound.)

∴ ∀x ∈ T, x ≤ λ < sup(T )
∴ λ is an upper bound of T , which is less than sup(T ) #Contradiction
Either case raises a contradiction,
∴ For an arbitrary upper bound λ of S∪T ,it’s not the case that λ < M ax{sup(S), sup(B)}
∴ For an arbitrary upper bound λ of S ∪ T, M ax{sup(S), sup(T )} ≤ λ → (2)

From (1) and (2),

sup(S ∪ T ) = M ax{sup(S), sup(T )}

6
*****This PDF made with LaTex*****
#teamLaTex #B18