How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced — the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted — a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated — a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum
Statement
For every and all , the set has a maximum and a minimum (Maximum and minimum of a set).
What is proved below is exactly the displayed statement, by induction on .
The usual reading, that every nonempty finite subset of has a
maximum and a minimum, follows once one identifies the nonempty finite subsets
of with the sets listable as . That
identification is recorded as a stipulation in the Given below, because this page
has no definition of finiteness to prove it against. It is discharged, not
merely assumed: The nonempty finite subsets of are exactly the listable ones ↗ proves that the two
descriptions of a nonempty finite subset of agree. That lemma is
recorded in justified_by rather than in deps, since it is about the sets this
lemma quantifies over and therefore depends on this one. This is what licenses
the notation
and for finite sets of
real numbers from this page onwards.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Real numbers ; for write , so that . A subset of is nonempty and finite exactly when it equals for some and some choice of .
denotes the statement: for all , the set has a maximum and a minimum.
Maximum and minimum: means and for all ; means and for all ; each is unique when it exists (Maximum and minimum of a set).
Induction principle: if holds and implies for every , then holds for every , where denotes the successor (The principle of mathematical induction, Addition of natural numbers).
The order on is reflexive, total and transitive: ; for all exactly one of , , holds, so at least one of and holds; and with gives (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Ordered field).
Proof
Base case: , and with by reflexivity, so is both a maximum and a minimum of ; hence holds.
Inductive hypothesis: fix and assume , that is, for all reals the set has a maximum and a minimum.
Let be arbitrary; by the inductive hypothesis the set has a maximum and a minimum , and .
By totality at least one of and holds. If , then , every element of is because , and as well, so is a maximum of . If , then , every satisfies hence by transitivity, and , so is a maximum of . Either way has a maximum.
Dually, at least one of and holds. If , then and every element of is , so is a minimum of . If , then and every satisfies hence by transitivity, so is a minimum of . Either way has a minimum.
Since were arbitrary, has a maximum and a minimum for every such list, that is, implies .
The base case and the inductive step give for every by the induction principle; since a nonempty finite subset of is exactly a set of the form , every nonempty finite subset of has both a maximum and a minimum.
Remarks
- Where the stipulation is discharged. Finiteness itself is defined later, in Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable ↗, as equinumerosity with a von Neumann natural; with that definition in hand The nonempty finite subsets of are exactly the listable ones ↗ proves that a subset of is nonempty and finite exactly when it is listable as , which is the Given below. So nothing on this page rests on an assumption that is never paid for; it is paid for later, and the payment is recorded in
justified_by. - Only the total order is used, never completeness. The base case needs reflexivity, the inductive step needs totality and transitivity, and the induction itself runs over . The same induction works in any totally ordered field; what is recorded here is its specialisation to .
- Nonemptiness is essential: is finite and has no maximum (Maximum and minimum of a set). Finiteness is essential too: is bounded and has no maximum (FALSE: the supremum of a set belongs to the set).
- Combined with claim 1 of The supremum is attained exactly when a maximum exists, this says every nonempty finite subset of has a supremum, and that the supremum is attained, because it equals the maximum. The infimum half is not part of The supremum is attained exactly when a maximum exists, which speaks only of maxima and suprema; it follows from the minimum proved here together with the reflection identity (Reflection through zero exchanges upper and lower bounds, Every nonempty set bounded below has an infimum).
Depends on
Used by
- A connected graph with pairwise distinct edge weights has a unique minimum spanning tree Corollary
- A continuous real function on a compact subset of ℝ is bounded Corollary
- [0,1) is neither open nor closed in ℝ Counterexample
- A function differentiable on [0,1] whose derivative is unbounded, hence not Riemann integrable Counterexample
- ℕ with the discrete metric is bounded and is not totally bounded Counterexample
- On (0,∞) the metrics |x-y| and |1/x - 1/y| have the same topology and are not uniformly equivalent Counterexample
- On (0,∞) the metrics |x-y| and |1/x - 1/y| share their topology and not their Cauchy sequences Counterexample
- On ℝ the metrics |x-y| and min(|x-y|,1) are uniformly but not Lipschitz equivalent Counterexample
- Refuted: a pointwise bounded family of continuous functions is equicontinuous. The spikes are bounded by 1 everywhere and are not equicontinuous at 0 Counterexample
- Refuted: C(X,Y) is closed in the topology of pointwise convergence. The ramps on [0,1] converge pointwise to a discontinuous limit Counterexample
- Refuted: convergence uniformly on every compact subset of ℝ implies uniform convergence. The maps x ↦ x/(n+1) separate the two Counterexample
- The cover {(1/k, 1)} of (0,1) has no finite subcover, so (0,1) is not compact Counterexample
- The identity on (0,1) is bounded with no greatest value, and on [0,∞) it is continuous and unbounded Counterexample
- The open interval (0,1) is totally bounded and not compact, the cover by the intervals (1/(k+2), 1) having no finite subcover Counterexample
- x ↦ 1/x is continuous on (0,1) and sends the Cauchy sequence (1/(k+2))_k ≥ 0 to an unbounded one Counterexample
- ℤ and {n + 1/n : n ≥ 2} are disjoint closed subsets of ℝ at distance 0, so the set-to-set distance is not a metric Counterexample
- ℤ is closed and not compact, and (0,1) is bounded and not compact: neither hypothesis of Heine-Borel can be dropped Counterexample
- Grid partitions of a rectangle in ℝᵐ, their cells, refinements and mesh Definition
- Metric space: d(x,y) = 0 iff x = y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric Definition
- Open subset of ℝ (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen Definition
- Partition of [a,b] as a finite strictly increasing list a = t₀ < t₁ < … < tₙ = b, its subintervals and their lengths, its mesh, refinement, and the common refinement of two partitions Definition
- Real edge-weighted graphs, total tree weight and minimum spanning trees Definition
- The p-norms ‖ x‖ₚ for rational p ≥ 1, and ‖ x‖_∞ Definition
- The topology of compact convergence on C(X,Y) for metric X and Y: uniform convergence on each compact subset of X Definition
- {1/k : k ≥ 1} ∪ {0} is compact while {1/k : k ≥ 1} is not closed Example
- Arens space S₂ is sequential but not Fréchet–Urysohn Example
- C([0,1], ℝ) is complete, and on it the uniform metric and the supremum metric induce the same topology Example
- Dini's theorem applied to a nondecreasing sequence of piecewise linear approximations on [0,1], and what fails when the limit is not continuous Example
- Every nondegenerate closed interval is perfect, giving a second proof that it is uncountable Example
- For every F_σ subset E of [0,1] of measure zero there is a bounded Riemann integrable function on [0,1] whose set of discontinuities is exactly E Example
- min(|x-y|, 1) on ℝ has the usual topology and diameter at most 1 Example
- On C(ℝ, ℝ) the compact-open topology has the sets {g : sup_[-m,m] |f-g| < ε} as a neighbourhood base, and ℝ is locally compact so evaluation is continuous Example
- sup(0,1) = 1 and inf(0,1) = 0, with neither attained Example
- sup{q ∈ ℚ : q > 0, q² < 2} = √2 in ℝ, and no supremum in ℚ Example
- The 2-adic absolute value gives an ultrametric on ℚ, in which every triangle is isosceles and every point of a ball is a centre Example
- The bounded real-valued functions on a set, with the supremum metric, form a complete metric space Example
- The Cantor set is homeomorphic to {0,1}^ℕ with the product of discrete topologies, the ternary digits being the coordinates Example
- The comparison constants between ‖·‖₁, ‖·‖₂ and ‖·‖_∞ on ℝ², and vectors attaining each Example
- The Dirichlet function is the pointwise limit of a sequence of Baire class one functions and is itself not Baire class one, so the Baire hierarchy on [0,1] is already strict at the first level Example
- The distance ψ(x) = d(x, ℤ) from a real number to the integers is 1-Lipschitz, hence uniformly continuous, takes values in [0,1/2], and vanishes exactly on ℤ Example
…and 77 more results.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 19 results over 9 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Maximum and minimum (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Mathematical induction (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Finite set (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- John K. Hunter, An Introduction to Real Analysis (standard reference, not scraped)