Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-27
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.

Rudin 4.20, the sharp converse: on a noncompact ERE \subseteq \mathbb{R} there is an unbounded continuous function and a bounded continuous function with no greatest value, and if EE is bounded there is a continuous function on EE that is not uniformly continuous

Statement

Let ERE \subseteq \mathbb{R} be nonempty and not compact (Open cover, subcover, compact subset of R\mathbb{R} (every open cover has a finite subcover), and sequentially compact subset). Then:

  1. there is a function f:ERf : E \to \mathbb{R}, continuous on EE (Continuity of f:ARf : A \to \mathbb{R} at a point of AA and on AA: the ε\varepsilon-δ\delta condition, its agreement with limxcf(x)=f(c)\lim_{x \to c} f(x) = f(c) at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point), that is unbounded on EE;
  2. there is a function g:ERg : E \to \mathbb{R}, continuous and bounded on EE, such that supg[E]\sup g[E] exists and is not attained; in particular gg has no greatest value on EE (Maximum and minimum of a set);
  3. if in addition EE is bounded (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set), there is a function h:ERh : E \to \mathbb{R}, continuous on EE, that is not uniformly continuous on EE (Uniform continuity of f:ARf : A \to \mathbb{R}: one δ\delta serving every pair of points of AA).

Together with A continuous real function on a compact subset of R\mathbb{R} is bounded, Extreme value theorem: a continuous real function on a nonempty compact subset of R\mathbb{R} attains a greatest and a least value and Heine-Cantor in R\mathbb{R}: a continuous real function on a compact subset of R\mathbb{R} is uniformly continuous, proved R\mathbb{R}-natively from sequential compactness this says that compactness is exactly the hypothesis those three theorems need: on a compact set every continuous function is bounded, attains its extrema and is uniformly continuous, and on a set that is not compact each of those three conclusions fails for some continuous function.

Claim 3 carries the boundedness hypothesis because it must. On an unbounded closed set every uniformly continuous function is still uniformly continuous, and a noncompact set may well carry only uniformly continuous functions of interest; what claim 3 asserts is the sharp statement for the bounded case, which is the case Heine-Cantor leaves open. The unbounded case is covered by claims 1 and 2, which hold with no extra hypothesis.

Every witness is exhibited, not merely asserted to exist. Four functions do the work: xx and 1/(1+x2)-1/(1+x^{2}) when EE is unbounded, and 1/(xx0)1/(x-x_0) and xx0-|x - x_0| when EE is bounded, where x0x_0 is then a point of EE\overline{E} \setminus E.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A nonempty set ERE \subseteq \mathbb{R} that is not compact.

[L2]

Boundedness: SS is bounded when there are reals ,u\ell, u with su\ell \le s \le u for every sSs \in S; equivalently when there is a real M0M \ge 0 with sM|s| \le M for every sSs \in S. So if SS is unbounded then for every real M>0M > 0 some sSs \in S has s>M|s| > M (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set, Basic properties of the absolute value, Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum, Maximum and minimum of a set).

[L4]

Algebra of continuous functions: constants, the identity and polynomial functions are continuous on any subset of R\mathbb{R}; sums, scalar multiples, products and absolute values of continuous functions are continuous; and if qq is continuous on SS and q(x)0q(x) \ne 0 for every xSx \in S, then p/qp/q is continuous on SS (Sums, scalar multiples, products, absolute values, maxima, minima and quotients with nonvanishing denominator of continuous functions are continuous, as are constants, the identity and every polynomial function, Continuity of f:ARf : A \to \mathbb{R} at a point of AA and on AA: the ε\varepsilon-δ\delta condition, its agreement with limxcf(x)=f(c)\lim_{x \to c} f(x) = f(c) at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, Integer powers ama^m).

[L5]

Suprema: a nonempty subset of R\mathbb{R} bounded above has a least upper bound (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)), and for u=supSu = \sup S every real ε>0\varepsilon > 0 admits sSs \in S with uε<su - \varepsilon < s (Epsilon characterisation of the supremum).

[L6]

Archimedean property in reciprocal form, reciprocals, and squares: for every real η>0\eta > 0 there is a natural n1n \ge 1 with 1/n<η1/n < \eta; 0<s<t0 < s < t implies 0<1/t<1/s0 < 1/t < 1/s; 0a<b0 \le a < b implies a2<b2a^{2} < b^{2}; and t1t \ge 1 implies t2tt^{2} \ge t (For every ε>0\varepsilon > 0 in a complete ordered field there is a natural n1n \ge 1 with 1/n<ε1/n < \varepsilon, Every complete ordered field is Archimedean, Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order, Monotonicity of xxnx \mapsto x^n and of nann \mapsto a^n, Integer powers ama^m).

[L8]

Ordered-field arithmetic in R\mathbb{R}: totality and trichotomy; u>0|u| > 0 exactly when u0u \ne 0; 1+t21>01 + t^{2} \ge 1 > 0 for every real tt; and the minimum of a two-element set of reals (Ordered field, Basic properties of the absolute value, Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum, Maximum and minimum of a set, Intervals of R\mathbb{R}: the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1

By [L1] the set EE is not closed or not bounded, and these two possibilities are exhaustive: if EE is bounded then it is not closed. The two cases below are treated separately, and claim 3 arises only in the second.

L1
1.2

First case: EE is unbounded. Claim 1. Put f(x):=xf(x) := x, continuous on EE by [L4]. Given a real M>0M > 0, [L2] supplies xEx \in E with x>M|x| > M, that is f(x)>M|f(x)| > M; so ff is unbounded on EE.

L2L4construct
1.3

First case, claim 2. Put g(x):=1/(1+x2)g(x) := -1/(1+x^{2}). The denominator is a polynomial function, continuous by [L4], and satisfies 1+x21>01 + x^{2} \ge 1 > 0 by [L8], so gg is continuous on EE by [L4]; moreover 0<1/(1+x2)10 < 1/(1+x^{2}) \le 1, so 1g(x)<0-1 \le g(x) < 0 for every xEx \in E and gg is bounded. Hence g[E]g[E] is nonempty and bounded above by 00, so u:=supg[E]u := \sup g[E] exists by [L5] and u0u \le 0.

L4L5L8construct
2.1

First case: the supremum is 00 and is not attained. Let a real ε>0\varepsilon > 0 be given and put M:=max{1,1/ε}1M := \max\{1, 1/\varepsilon\} \ge 1. By [L2] there is xEx \in E with x>M|x| > M, so x2>M2M1/εx^{2} > M^{2} \ge M \ge 1/\varepsilon by [L6] and [L8], hence 1+x2>1/ε>01 + x^{2} > 1/\varepsilon > 0 and 1/(1+x2)<ε1/(1+x^{2}) < \varepsilon by [L6], that is g(x)>εg(x) > -\varepsilon. So no real below 00 is an upper bound of g[E]g[E], and 00 is one; therefore u=0u = 0. Since g(x)<0g(x) < 0 for every xEx \in E by step 1.3, the value 00 is not attained, and for each xEx \in E the number ε:=g(x)>0\varepsilon := -g(x) > 0 produces by [L5] some xEx' \in E with g(x)>ε=g(x)g(x') > -\varepsilon = g(x), so gg has no greatest value.

step 1.3L2L5L6L8
2.2

Second case: EE is bounded, hence not closed. By [L3] we have EEE \subseteq \overline{E} and EEE \ne \overline{E}, so there is x0EEx_0 \in \overline{E} \setminus E. Every neighbourhood of x0x_0 meets EE by [L3]; and xx00x - x_0 \ne 0 for every xEx \in E, since x0Ex_0 \notin E, so xx0>0|x - x_0| > 0 there by [L8].

step 1.1L3L8choose
3.1

Second case, claim 1. Put f(x):=1/(xx0)f(x) := 1/(x - x_0) for xEx \in E. The denominator is a polynomial function, continuous by [L4], and does not vanish on EE by step 2.2, so ff is continuous on EE by [L4]. Given a real M>0M > 0, step 2.2 supplies xEx \in E with xx0<1/M|x - x_0| < 1/M, and xx0>0|x - x_0| > 0, so f(x)=1/xx0>M|f(x)| = 1/|x - x_0| > M by [L6]. Hence ff is unbounded on EE.

step 2.2L4L6construct
3.2

Second case, claim 2. Put g(x):=xx0g(x) := -|x - x_0| for xEx \in E, continuous on EE by [L4]. Since EE is bounded, [L2] gives a real M0M \ge 0 with xM|x| \le M on EE, so xx0M+x0|x - x_0| \le M + |x_0| and (M+x0)g(x)<0-(M + |x_0|) \le g(x) < 0 for every xEx \in E: gg is bounded, and g[E]g[E] is nonempty and bounded above by 00. For a real ε>0\varepsilon > 0, step 2.2 supplies xEx \in E with xx0<ε|x - x_0| < \varepsilon, that is g(x)>εg(x) > -\varepsilon; so supg[E]=0\sup g[E] = 0 by [L5], and it is not attained because g(x)<0g(x) < 0 everywhere on EE. As in step 2.1, gg therefore has no greatest value on EE.

step 2.1step 2.2L2L4L5L8construct
4.1

Second case, claim 3. Put h:=fh := f of step 3.1, continuous on EE. Suppose hh were uniformly continuous on EE. By [L7] there would be a continuous H:ERH : \overline{E} \to \mathbb{R} with H(x)=h(x)H(x) = h(x) for xEx \in E, and x0Ex_0 \in \overline{E}. Continuity of HH at x0x_0 with ε:=1\varepsilon := 1 gives a real δ>0\delta > 0 such that every zEz \in \overline{E} with zx0<δ|z - x_0| < \delta satisfies H(z)H(x0)<1|H(z) - H(x_0)| < 1, hence H(z)<H(x0)+1=:B|H(z)| < |H(x_0)| + 1 =: B, a real with B>0B > 0. Put r:=min{δ,1/B}>0r := \min\{\delta, 1/B\} > 0; by step 2.2 there is xEx \in E with xx0<r|x - x_0| < r, and then 0<xx0<1/B0 < |x - x_0| < 1/B gives h(x)=1/xx0>B|h(x)| = 1/|x - x_0| > B by [L6], while xEx \in \overline{E} with xx0<δ|x - x_0| < \delta gives h(x)=H(x)<B|h(x)| = |H(x)| < B. That is impossible, so hh is not uniformly continuous on EE.

step 2.2step 3.1L6L7L8
5.1

The two cases of step 1.1 are exhaustive, and in each of them claims 1 and 2 have been established by exhibiting the functions named, while claim 3, whose hypothesis places EE in the second case, is step 4.1.

step 1.2step 1.3step 2.1step 3.1step 3.2step 4.1discharge-construct: the four witnesses x and -1/(1+x^2) and 1/(x-x_0) and -|x-x_0|

Remarks

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 155 results over 25 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