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.
Monotone Functions, Discontinuities, and Continuity Sets
1 · Prerequisites
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Continuity, IVT, EVT, and Uniform Continuity
- Countability and Uncountability
- Divisibility, Greatest Common Divisors and Bézout's Identity
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Limits of Real Functions
- limsup, liminf, and Subsequential Limits
- Linear Independence, Bases and Dimension
- Metric Spaces
- Monotone Sequences, Bolzano-Weierstrass, and Cauchy Completeness
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Sequences and Limits
- Series: Convergence and the Nonnegative Tests
- Suprema and Infima
- The Cantor Set, Baire Category, and Measure Zero in ℝ
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topology of ℝ
- Vector Spaces, Linear Subspaces, Span and Direct Sums
2 · Summary
Objective. A function of a real variable can fail to be continuous in only so many ways, and this page measures the failure. It asks three questions and answers each of them completely. Which sets are the discontinuity sets of a monotone function? Which sets are the continuity sets of an arbitrary function? And which functions satisfying Cauchy's equation are the obvious ones? The answers are: exactly the at most countable sets; exactly the sets; and exactly those with any one of six very weak regularity properties.
Monotone functions. Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences fixes the vocabulary — nondecreasing, increasing, nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone, strictly monotone — in the same convention Nondecreasing, increasing, nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone, and eventually monotone sequences uses for sequences, and records the dictionary between the two. The first theorem, One-sided limits of a monotone function always exist: for nondecreasing on an interval and , whenever has points below , whenever it has points above , and these satisfy , is the one everything else on this half of the page rests on: a monotone function on an interval has every well-posed one-sided limit. For a nondecreasing function the left limit is a supremum and the right limit an infimum; for a nonincreasing function the roles reverse. Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind then sorts discontinuities into removable, jump and essential, equivalently Rudin's first and second kind, and A monotone function on an interval has no discontinuity of the second kind: at every point both relevant one-sided limits exist, and an interior point is a discontinuity exactly when shows that a monotone function has none of the second kind: at an interior point it is discontinuous exactly when the two one-sided limits differ, and then it jumps.
Froda's theorem and its converse. Froda's theorem: the set of discontinuities of a monotone function on an interval is at most countable, the injection into being built from one fixed enumeration of the rationals by least index, so no choice principle is used counts those jumps: the discontinuity set of a monotone function on an interval is at most countable, because the open intervals it opens between its one-sided limits are pairwise disjoint and each swallows a rational. The proof uses one fixed enumeration of and least indices, so it spends no choice principle. Converse to Froda: for every at most countable there is a bounded nondecreasing whose set of discontinuities is exactly , every one of them a jump is the exact converse: for every at most countable there is a bounded nondecreasing function on discontinuous exactly on , with every discontinuity a jump. Together the two settle the first question with no gap.
Continuous injections and inverses. A continuous injective function on an interval is strictly monotone proves that a continuous injection on an interval cannot fold: the middle of any three points carries the middle value, and strict monotonicity follows. Continuous inverse theorem: a continuous injective on an interval is a bijection onto the order-convex set , and the inverse is continuous and strictly monotone in the same sense as then delivers the continuous inverse theorem — the inverse of a continuous injection on an interval is continuous and monotone in the same sense — with no epsilon-delta argument, by reading it off A function on an interval satisfying whenever , whose image is order-convex, is continuous. The same lemma gives The Cantor function is continuous on , which supplies the continuity that The Cantor function is well defined, satisfies whenever , is surjective onto , and is constant on every interval removed from the Cantor set deliberately left unclaimed, and The Cantor function is continuous and nondecreasing, climbs from to , and is constant on every interval removed in the construction of the Cantor set, so all of its increase happens on a set of measure zero records what that continuity sits alongside: the function climbs from to while being locally constant off a set of measure zero.
Oscillation, and the continuity set. The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals introduces , valued in the extended reals so that no boundedness hypothesis is needed, and is continuous at if and only if converts continuity at a point into the vanishing of a single number there. That is what makes the continuity set accessible: For every real the set is the intersection with of a closed subset of ; in particular it is closed in when shows each set is relatively closed, and For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright assembles them, first into the pointwise exhaustion of the discontinuity set by the superlevel sets at the thresholds , and then into the statement that the discontinuity set is and the continuity set . Both halves are cited downstream, and the exhaustion is stated as a claim in its own right for that reason. Every subset of is the set of continuity points of some , so the sets are exactly the continuity sets proves the converse, so the continuity sets are exactly the sets, and No function is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational, because is not spends that on the sharpest consequence: no function is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational, because is not ( is , meager and not , while the irrationals are , residual and not ).
Dirichlet and Thomae. The Dirichlet function , and Thomae's function with at a rational in lowest terms with and at every irrational defines the indicator of the rationals and Thomae's function, the latter through the least denominator, which is a least element of a set of naturals and therefore canonical. The Dirichlet function is continuous at no point of , and Thomae's function is continuous at every irrational and at no rational, so its set of continuity points is exactly the set of irrationals and its oscillation at equals proves that the first is continuous nowhere, that the second is continuous exactly at the irrationals, and that its oscillation at a point equals its value there. Thomae's function is the witness that the arrangement forbidden by No function is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational, because is not is possible the other way round. Both functions are defined here rather than on the companion page because later pages need them, and an examples page is a leaf of this library; the Dirichlet clause deliberately restates, across that boundary, what The indicator of is continuous at no point of already proves.
The intermediate value property. The intermediate value property (Darboux property) of a function on an interval: the image of every subinterval is order-convex names the Darboux property and proves the equivalence of its two usual forms. Every continuous function on an interval has it; the converse is false, and FALSE: a function with the intermediate value property on an interval is continuous refutes it with a witness built by hand from the distance to the nearest integer.
Semicontinuity. Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on splits continuity into its two halves, is upper semicontinuous on if and only if is relatively open in for every real , lower semicontinuous if and only if is, and continuous if and only if it is both identifies each half by its level sets, and Semicontinuous extreme value theorem: an upper semicontinuous function on a nonempty compact is bounded above and attains a maximum, and a lower semicontinuous one is bounded below and attains a minimum proves the semicontinuous extreme value theorem: an upper semicontinuous function on a nonempty compact set attains a maximum. The theorem is genuinely one-sided, and the companion page says why.
Baire class one. Baire category inside a closed bounded interval: if with is covered by a sequence of closed sets, then one of them contains a nondegenerate closed subinterval of ; no choice principle is used localises Baire category in , by nested intervals with canonically chosen rational endpoints: a countable intersection of dense open sets is dense, so is not a countable union of nowhere dense sets to a closed bounded interval, which is the form the next theorem needs. Pointwise convergence of a sequence of real functions, and the Baire class one functions as the pointwise limits of sequences of continuous functions defines pointwise convergence and the pointwise limits of continuous functions, and Baire's theorem: a Baire class one function on a closed bounded interval is continuous at the points of a dense subset of that is the trace of a set, so its set of discontinuities is meager proves Baire's theorem: such a function on has a meager discontinuity set and is continuous on a dense subset. The argument is the refinement claim — on every subinterval there is a smaller one where the oscillation is small — repeated through category.
Cauchy's functional equation. Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions states the equation, An additive satisfies , and for every rational and every real ; in particular at every rational proves that an additive function is -homogeneous and hence determined on by its value at , and If an additive is bounded above on some nondegenerate interval, then for every real is the engine: one upper bound on one nondegenerate interval already forces everywhere. Six regularity conditions each force an additive to be : continuity at a single point, monotonicity on a nondegenerate interval, boundedness above on one, boundedness below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in collects six conditions that each imply linearity — continuity at a single point, monotonicity on an interval, boundedness above or below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in — five of them by reduction to that lemma. Two further classical clauses, boundedness on a set of positive measure and Lebesgue measurability, are absent: both need a measure, which is not available at this point in the reading order, and each is an independent sufficient condition, so nothing else changes when they are restored.
And what happens without any of them. Assuming the Axiom of Choice, has a Hamel basis over : there is such that every real is a finite -linear combination of elements of in exactly one way, and each basis vector carries a well-defined -linear coefficient map produces, from the Axiom of Choice through Every vector space has a basis and Zorn's lemma, a basis of over together with the coefficient map of a single basis vector; that map is additive and takes only rational values, which refutes FALSE: every additive is of the form for a single real outright. The hypothesis of choice is carried explicitly in the statement of every item that uses it. The lemma is stated here rather than quoted from as a vector space over has a basis, and every such basis is infinite; the existence proof exhibits none because that item lives on an examples page, which is a leaf; the two statements are not the same, and the lemma says exactly how they differ.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences
Definition
Throughout, is the complete ordered field (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Ordered field) with its order (Order on the reals). Let and let . Then is:
- nondecreasing when for all with ;
- increasing, or strictly increasing, when for all with ;
- nonincreasing when for all with ;
- decreasing, or strictly decreasing, when for all with ;
- monotone when it is nondecreasing or nonincreasing;
- strictly monotone when it is increasing or decreasing.
The naming follows the convention of Nondecreasing, increasing, nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone, and eventually monotone sequences, which is the convention of this library throughout: increasing is the strict notion and nondecreasing the weak one.
An increasing function is nondecreasing, and a decreasing function is nonincreasing. For either , and then , hence ; or , and then . The same argument with the inequalities reversed gives the second claim. So strictly monotone implies monotone.
A strictly monotone function is injective (Injection, surjection, bijection). Let be increasing and let with . By trichotomy either , and then , or , and then ; in both cases . The decreasing case is the same argument. The converse fails, and the failure is not exotic: a continuous injection on an interval is strictly monotone (A continuous injective function on an interval is strictly monotone), but on a domain that is not an interval it need not be.
Negation exchanges the two directions. For , that is , the four conditions above are exchanged in pairs: is nondecreasing exactly when is nonincreasing, and is increasing exactly when is decreasing, because holds exactly when (Ordered field). Several proofs below use this to reduce a nonincreasing case to a nondecreasing one.
Monotone on a set, not at a point. All six conditions are conditions on the whole of ; unlike continuity (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point) there is no pointwise version, and none is used in this library. The domain is an arbitrary subset of ; where a result needs to be an interval (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length) it says so, and the hypothesis is never decoration.
The dictionary to monotone sequences
A sequence of reals is a function (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences), and Nondecreasing, increasing, nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone, and eventually monotone sequences calls it nondecreasing when for all , increasing when for all , and so on. Those are the same four conditions as above, read with the ordered set in place of the ordered subset and with the comparison of indices in place of the comparison of arguments. So nothing new is introduced here for sequences, and the two vocabularies may be used interchangeably: the words nondecreasing, increasing, nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone mean the corresponding condition on the domain at hand.
One consequence is used repeatedly, and it has to be stated carefully because composition does not simply preserve the four words. Let be a nondecreasing sequence with for every , so that gives . Then:
- if is nondecreasing, is nondecreasing, since ;
- if is nonincreasing, is nonincreasing, since .
So along a nondecreasing sequence the composite inherits the direction of ; and with increasing and increasing, is increasing, while with increasing and decreasing, is decreasing.
Along a nonincreasing sequence the direction is reversed, not inherited. If is nonincreasing and is nonincreasing, then gives and hence : the composite is nondecreasing. The witness is on with , where both and are decreasing and is increasing. Two order-reversing maps compose to an order-preserving one, exactly as for the four words applied to functions.
One-sided limits of a monotone function always exist: for nondecreasing on an interval and , whenever has points below , whenever it has points above , and these satisfy
Statement
Let be order-convex (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length), let be nondecreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences) and let . Write
(The left and right limits of at , as limits of the restrictions of to and ).
- Left. If then is a limit point of (Limit point, isolated point, adherent point, derived set, and dense subset of ), the set is nonempty and bounded above by , and
- Right. If then is a limit point of , the set is nonempty and bounded below by , and
- Together. If both and are nonempty then
In particular a nondecreasing function on an interval has, at every point of that interval, every one-sided limit that is well posed at all: no hypothesis of continuity, of boundedness, or of any other kind is needed.
The nonincreasing case is not a separate theorem. If is nonincreasing then is nondecreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences), and a real is the left limit of at exactly when is the left limit of at , since ; so claims 1 to 3 hold for with the suprema and infima exchanged and the inequalities reversed.
Order-convexity of is what makes the limits well posed. Without it the symbol need not be defined even though is nonempty: for and the set is nonempty but is not a limit point of it, and The left and right limits of at , as limits of the restrictions of to and leaves the symbol undefined there for exactly that reason.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An order-convex , a nondecreasing , and .
is order-convex: and imply (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
Every nonempty subset of that is bounded above has a least upper bound, and every nonempty subset bounded below has a greatest lower bound (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set, Greatest lower bound (infimum), Every nonempty set bounded below has an infimum).
For nonempty and bounded above with upper bound : if and only if for every real there is with (Epsilon characterisation of the supremum). Dually, for nonempty and bounded below with lower bound : if and only if for every real there is with (Epsilon characterisation of the infimum).
means: is a limit point of , and for every real there is a real with for every with ; dually on the right (The left and right limits of at , as limits of the restrictions of to and , The - limit of at a limit point of , The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ).
is a limit point of a set when every punctured neighbourhood of meets (Limit point, isolated point, adherent point, derived set, and dense subset of , The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ); a one-sided limit, being the limit of a restriction, is unique when it exists (At a limit point of the domain a function has at most one limit).
Proof
Suppose and fix with ; then , since any with lies in .
Claim 2 is the same argument on the other side, and is written out here rather than deduced. Suppose and fix with ; then , and for real the point lies in within of , so is a limit point of .
Every real gives a point of within of and different from : put , so that and , and by step 1.1. Hence is a limit point of and the symbol on the left of claim 1 is well posed.
The set is nonempty, since , and is an upper bound of it, since gives . So exists and , the latter because is an upper bound and is the least one.
The set is nonempty and bounded below by , so exists and .
Let be real. By the epsilon characterisation of the supremum there is with and .
Given real , the epsilon characterisation of the infimum gives with and ; put . For with we have , so and hence .
Put and let satisfy . Then , so by monotonicity and because and is an upper bound of ; hence and therefore .
Claim 2 is proved: .
Claim 1 is proved: was arbitrary in step 3.1, so , and this value is the only one the symbol can denote.
Claim 3 follows by combining the two inequalities of claims 1 and 2, both of which are then available.
Remarks
-
Where completeness is spent. Exactly once on each side, in the existence of and of ; the rest of the proof is the definition of a one-sided limit and the monotonicity hypothesis. Over an ordered field that is not complete the statement fails, because the supremum need not exist.
-
The two one-sided limits need not agree, and that is the point. When both are defined they satisfy , and a strict inequality between the outer two is exactly a jump discontinuity; A monotone function on an interval has no discontinuity of the second kind: at every point both relevant one-sided limits exist, and an interior point is a discontinuity exactly when turns that observation into the classification of the discontinuities of a monotone function, and Froda's theorem: the set of discontinuities of a monotone function on an interval is at most countable, the injection into being built from one fixed enumeration of the rationals by least index, so no choice principle is used counts them.
Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind
Definition
Let , let and let . Then is discontinuous at , and is a discontinuity of , when is not continuous at (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point). As in The left and right limits of at , as limits of the restrictions of to and write
(Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length), and recall that is defined only when is a limit point of , and only when is a limit point of (Limit point, isolated point, adherent point, derived set, and dense subset of ).
At an isolated point there is nothing to classify. If is an isolated point of (Limit point, isolated point, adherent point, derived set, and dense subset of ), so that for some real , then is continuous at : the - condition of Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point is satisfied by , since the only with is itself and . So every discontinuity is a limit point of , and the classification below covers every case that occurs.
Two-sided points
Suppose is a limit point of both and , so that both one-sided limits are well posed. Say that is a discontinuity
- of the first kind when both one-sided limits exist;
- of the second kind, also called essential, when at least one of the two one-sided limits fails to exist.
A discontinuity of the first kind is further
- removable when ; the common value is then different from , for otherwise If is a limit point of the domain from both sides, the limit exists iff both one-sided limits exist and agree would give and would be continuous at (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point);
- a jump when ; the difference is then called the jump of at .
The three cases removable, jump, essential are mutually exclusive and exhaust the two-sided discontinuities of : either both one-sided limits exist, and then they are equal or not, or one of them does not exist.
Removable is a name for what can be repaired. If is a removable discontinuity with common one-sided value , then the function agreeing with off and taking the value at is continuous at , again by If is a limit point of the domain from both sides, the limit exists iff both one-sided limits exist and agree and Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point: changing the single value removes the discontinuity. No such repair is available at a jump or at an essential discontinuity, since there the two-sided limit does not exist at all and no choice of value at can create it.
One-sided points
If is a limit point of exactly one of and , only that side is defined and only that side is used: is a discontinuity of the first kind when the one-sided limit on the side in question exists, and of the second kind otherwise. When it exists it is different from , since on such a point the one-sided condition and the continuity condition are the same condition; and there is no jump case, there being nothing to compare the value with. The endpoints of an interval are the typical instance.
On the two vocabularies. First kind and second kind are Rudin's terms and are recorded because the literature uses them; removable, jump and essential are the names used in the rest of this library. They name the same three cases and no third classification is introduced.
A monotone function on an interval has no discontinuity of the second kind: at every point both relevant one-sided limits exist, and an interior point is a discontinuity exactly when
Statement
Let be order-convex (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length) and let be nondecreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences). Write and for .
- At every , each of the two one-sided limits that is well posed exists (The left and right limits of at , as limits of the restrictions of to and ). Consequently has no discontinuity of the second kind (Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind): every discontinuity of is of the first kind.
- Call an interior point of when both and are nonempty. At such a point and is continuous at (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point) if and only if .
- Hence an interior point is a discontinuity of exactly when and every such discontinuity is a jump, of jump .
The same three claims hold for a nonincreasing , with the two one-sided limits exchanged and all inequalities reversed, by applying the above to , which is nondecreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences) and has exactly the same points of continuity, since .
A point of that is not interior is an endpoint, and there are at most two. says that is a least element of and that it is a greatest one, and a set has at most one of each. Those two points are excluded from claims 2 and 3 only because a comparison of two one-sided limits is not available there; claim 1 covers them.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An order-convex , a nondecreasing , and .
If then is a limit point of and ; if then is a limit point of and (One-sided limits of a monotone function always exist: for nondecreasing on an interval and , whenever has points below , whenever it has points above , and these satisfy ).
If is a limit point of both and , then holds if and only if both one-sided limits at exist and equal ; in particular the two-sided limit exists exactly when the two one-sided limits exist and agree (If is a limit point of the domain from both sides, the limit exists iff both one-sided limits exist and agree).
At a limit point of , is continuous at if and only if exists and equals ; at an isolated point of every function is continuous (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, Limit point, isolated point, adherent point, derived set, and dense subset of , Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind).
A discontinuity at a two-sided point is of the second kind when at least one one-sided limit fails to exist, of the first kind otherwise, and is a jump when the two one-sided limits exist and differ; at a one-sided point it is of the first kind when the one available one-sided limit exists (Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind).
Proof
Let . If then exists, and if then exists; if one of the two sets is empty the corresponding symbol is not defined and there is nothing to prove for it.
Claim 1 follows: at every point of every well-posed one-sided limit of exists, so no discontinuity of can be of the second kind, and every discontinuity is therefore of the first kind.
Now let be an interior point of , and write and , both of which exist by step 1.1. Then , which is the displayed inequality of claim 2.
Suppose . Then forces , so both one-sided limits equal ; hence exists and equals , and is continuous at .
Suppose conversely that is continuous at . Since is a limit point of and hence of , continuity gives , and then both one-sided limits exist and equal ; in particular .
Claim 2 is proved by steps 3.1 and 3.2 together with step 2.2.
Claim 3: at an interior point , is discontinuous exactly when , and since the only way for them to differ is . Both one-sided limits exist and differ, so the discontinuity is a jump, of jump .
Remarks
-
Nothing here counts the discontinuities. Claim 3 says only what a discontinuity of a monotone function looks like at an interior point. That the set of them is at most countable is a further theorem, Froda's theorem: the set of discontinuities of a monotone function on an interval is at most countable, the injection into being built from one fixed enumeration of the rationals by least index, so no choice principle is used, and its proof is exactly the observation that the open intervals attached to distinct discontinuities are disjoint.
-
Why no interior discontinuity of a monotone function is removable. Claim 2 rules them out at interior points: there already forces continuity, because the inequality pins between the two one-sided values. That inequality is special to monotone functions, and it is what makes jump the only kind of interior discontinuity available. At a point of that is not interior the inequality is one-sided too and the argument does not apply, so a monotone function may fail to be continuous at an endpoint of while having its one one-sided limit; that failure is a discontinuity of the first kind and it is not a jump, there being only one side to compare.
Froda's theorem: the set of discontinuities of a monotone function on an interval is at most countable, the injection into being built from one fixed enumeration of the rationals by least index, so no choice principle is used
Statement
Let be order-convex (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length) and let be monotone (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences). Then the set
(Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind) is at most countable (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).
More precisely, the proof exhibits an injection (Injection, surjection, bijection) built from one fixed enumeration of the rationals: at a discontinuity interior to the value is read off the least index of a rational lying in the gap , which is a nonempty open interval by A monotone function on an interval has no discontinuity of the second kind: at every point both relevant one-sided limits exist, and an interior point is a discontinuity exactly when . The map is therefore determined by and by the fixed enumeration, and no choice principle is used: least indices are canonical by The well-ordering principle, and nothing anywhere in the proof is selected without being determined.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An order-convex and a monotone ; and denotes the canonical copy of the rationals inside .
is order-convex: and imply (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
A nondecreasing on an order-convex has, at every , each well-posed one-sided limit; and if both and are nonempty then and (One-sided limits of a monotone function always exist: for nondecreasing on an interval and , whenever has points below , whenever it has points above , and these satisfy ).
For a nondecreasing on an order-convex and a point with both and nonempty, is discontinuous at if and only if (A monotone function on an interval has no discontinuity of the second kind: at every point both relevant one-sided limits exist, and an interior point is a discontinuity exactly when ).
( is countably infinite) and the map embeds in injectively (The rationals embed densely in the reals), so composing a bijection with that embedding gives a bijection onto the canonical copy of the rationals inside ; and strictly between any two distinct reals there lies a point of (The rationals embed densely in the reals, Equinumerous sets, and , Injection, surjection, bijection).
Every nonempty subset of has a least element (The well-ordering principle).
Every subset of is at most countable, and a set in bijection with an at most countable set is at most countable (Every subset of an at most countable set is at most countable, Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable, Equinumerous sets, and , Injection, surjection, bijection).
is discontinuous at exactly when it is not continuous there, and , so and have exactly the same points of discontinuity (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences).
Proof
It is enough to treat a nondecreasing : if is nonincreasing then is nondecreasing and has the same discontinuity set, so the conclusion for is the conclusion for . Assume from here on that is nondecreasing.
Fix once and for all a bijection ; everything below is defined in terms of , and this one function.
Call interior when both and are nonempty, and write for the set of interior points of at which is discontinuous. A point of that is not interior has , and is then a least element of , or , and is then a greatest element of ; a subset of has at most one least and at most one greatest element, so has at most two elements.
For put and , both of which exist, and note .
Let with . Take for the least with , which exists because a point of lies strictly between and ; then , since and is order-convex.
For the set is nonempty, since a point of lies strictly between the two distinct reals and and is onto ; so is a well-defined natural number, determined by , and alone.
With as in step 2.2: because is one of the points in that set, and for the same reason on the other side. Hence .
The two open intervals and are therefore disjoint, so no point of lies in both, so and hence . Since was an arbitrary pair of distinct elements of , the map is injective.
Define by for ; if is a least element of ; and if is a greatest element of and not a least one. Then is injective: it is injective on by step 4.1, it separates the at most two points of from each other, and its values on are odd while its values off are even.
Consequently is a bijection from onto the subset , which is at most countable; countability transfers along that bijection, so is at most countable.
Remarks
-
The bound is attained. Froda's theorem gives no better bound than at most countable, and none is available: for every at most countable there is a bounded nondecreasing function on whose discontinuity set is exactly (Converse to Froda: for every at most countable there is a bounded nondecreasing whose set of discontinuities is exactly , every one of them a jump). Taking gives a nondecreasing function discontinuous at every rational and continuous at every irrational.
-
What the choice-freedom rests on. Two canonical selections, and nothing else: one fixed bijection , produced by is countably infinite, whose own proof spends no choice principle; and the least element of a nonempty set of naturals (The well-ordering principle). Replacing "least index" by "some index" would turn step 3.1 into an application of a choice principle over the possibly uncountable index set .
-
Monotonicity is doing all the work, not continuity of anything. The only property of used after step 1.1 is the inequality of step 3.2, which says that the gaps opened by distinct discontinuities are laid out in the same order as the discontinuities themselves and therefore do not overlap. A function that is not monotone can be discontinuous everywhere (The Dirichlet function is continuous at no point of , and Thomae's function is continuous at every irrational and at no rational, so its set of continuity points is exactly the set of irrationals and its oscillation at equals ).
Converse to Froda: for every at most countable there is a bounded nondecreasing whose set of discontinuities is exactly , every one of them a jump
Statement
Let be at most countable (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable). Then there is a function such that
- is nondecreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences) and for every real , so is bounded (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set);
- is continuous at every and discontinuous at every (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point), so the discontinuity set of is exactly ;
- every discontinuity of is a jump (Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind), with at every .
Together with Froda's theorem: the set of discontinuities of a monotone function on an interval is at most countable, the injection into being built from one fixed enumeration of the rationals by least index, so no choice principle is used this settles the question completely: the sets that occur as discontinuity sets of monotone functions on are exactly the at most countable ones.
The construction. For take . Otherwise fix a surjection (A nonempty set is at most countable iff it is a surjective image of ) and set
(Series, partial sums, convergence and the sum, divergence, and the tail series, Integer powers ): the mass is placed at the point and is collected by strictly to the right of it. Repetitions in the enumeration are harmless; they only make the jump at a point larger.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An at most countable .
A nonempty at most countable set is the image of a surjection (A nonempty set is at most countable iff it is a surjective image of , Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).
A series of nonnegative terms converges if and only if its partial sums are bounded above, and its sum is then the supremum of its partial sums; in particular every partial sum is at most the sum (A series of nonnegative terms converges iff its partial sums are bounded, and then the sum is their supremum, Series, partial sums, convergence and the sum, divergence, and the tail series, Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set).
Finite sums: is monotone in the terms, splits as for , scales, and telescopes as (Laws of finite sums and finite products, Finite sums and finite products, by recursion).
converges to for , the first term being (For , , and for the series diverges, Integer powers ); a series converges if and only if each of its tails does, and (A series converges iff each of its tail series converges, and the sum splits as plus the -th tail); a convergent sequence of reals comes within every positive of its limit from some index on (Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals).
A nonempty finite set of reals, presented as , has a maximum and a minimum (Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum, Maximum and minimum of a set); and strictly between any two distinct reals there lies a real (The rationals embed densely in the reals).
A nondecreasing function on an order-convex set has both one-sided limits at every interior point, and is discontinuous there exactly when they differ, in which case the discontinuity is a jump (One-sided limits of a monotone function always exist: for nondecreasing on an interval and , whenever has points below , whenever it has points above , and these satisfy , A monotone function on an interval has no discontinuity of the second kind: at every point both relevant one-sided limits exist, and an interior point is a discontinuity exactly when , Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind, Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
Proof
If , the constant function is nondecreasing, takes values in , is continuous at every real, and has empty discontinuity set; all three claims hold vacuously for claim 3. Assume from here on that and fix a surjection .
For every , : each term is , so the sum telescopes to .
Define when and otherwise, and note for every and every real .
For every real there is with : the partial sums converge to , and by the same telescoping as in step 1.2, so for all large , whence for those . Consequently the partial sums of have supremum , so that series converges with sum .
For every real the series converges and : its terms are nonnegative and its partial sums satisfy , so they are bounded above by and the sum, being their supremum, lies in .
Left continuity holds at every real : given real take with ; let ; if put , and otherwise put to be a real with , which exists because the maximum of the nonempty finite set is a real strictly below .
Right continuity holds at every : given real take with ; since and has image , no has , so every has or . Let ; if put , and otherwise put to be a real with .
is nondecreasing: if then implies , so for every , hence for every , and taking suprema gives .
For all reals and every with for every , one has : for the splitting holds, the last sum being at most ; so every partial sum of is at most , and so is their supremum .
Let and fix with . For every and every the finite sum exceeds by at least , because the list has nonnegative entries, so the finite sum of its first entries is at least its entry at the index , which is . Hence for every , the case holding because the partial sums of a nonnegative series are nondecreasing; so is an upper bound of those partial sums and therefore at least their supremum .
With as in step 3.2 and any with : for with we have , so ; and for with we have . So for every , and step 4.2 applied to the pair gives .
With as in step 3.3 and any with : for with we get , and for with we have , so . So for every , and step 4.2 applied to the pair gives .
So is discontinuous at : for and any real the point satisfies and , so no witnesses the continuity condition at .
Hence is continuous at every : fix a real , take as in step 3.2 and as in step 3.3 for that same , and put ; then every real with satisfies and therefore , by step 5.1 when and by step 5.2 when .
Every point of is an interior point of the order-convex set , so both one-sided limits of exist there; step 5.1 gives and step 4.3 gives . The two one-sided limits therefore differ, and the discontinuity at is a jump.
Claims 1, 2 and 3 hold for the function constructed in steps 1.1 and 2.1: claim 1 by steps 3.1 and 4.1, claim 2 by steps 6.1 and 5.3, and claim 3 by step 6.2.
Remarks
-
Why the mass is collected strictly to the right. The definition uses rather than , and that is what makes left continuous everywhere, as steps 3.2 and 5.1 show without any hypothesis on . The value at a point of is therefore the left limit, and the whole jump sits on the right. Using would produce a right continuous function with the same discontinuity set; nothing else would change.
-
Repetitions in the enumeration are harmless. If takes the value at several indices, the jump at is the total mass rather than a single term. Step 4.3 uses only one index and so needs no such sum; it establishes a lower bound for the jump, which is all that discontinuity requires.
-
Boundedness is free, and it is worth recording. The total mass available is , so maps into however large is. A bounded nondecreasing function on can therefore have a dense set of discontinuities; the companion page takes and gets exactly that.
A continuous injective function on an interval is strictly monotone
Statement
Let be order-convex (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length) and let be continuous on (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point) and injective (Injection, surjection, bijection). Then is strictly monotone (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences): either whenever in , or whenever in .
Both hypotheses are needed and neither can be weakened to the other. Continuity alone does not give injectivity, and injectivity alone does not give monotonicity: the companion page exhibits a continuous injection on , a set that is not order-convex, that is not monotone. So it is order-convexity of the domain, and not merely continuity, that forces the conclusion.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An order-convex and a continuous injective .
is order-convex: and imply (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
is injective: implies (Injection, surjection, bijection).
is continuous at every point of ; the restriction of to a subset is continuous at every point of , since the - condition of Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point quantifies over fewer points when the domain shrinks.
Intermediate value theorem: if , is continuous and lies between and in either order, then for some (Intermediate value theorem, by bisection with a canonical left-half rule: a continuous function on takes every value between and ).
Strictly between any two distinct reals there lies a real (The rationals embed densely in the reals).
is increasing when for all in , decreasing when for all in , and strictly monotone when it is one or the other (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences).
Proof
Suppose, for contradiction, that is not strictly monotone: is not increasing and is not decreasing.
Three-point claim. For all in , either or . Suppose not. By injectivity the three values are pairwise distinct, so the failure means that is not between and ; hence either and , or and .
Being decreasing means for all in , so its failure gives with and not , that is ; injectivity together with gives , so .
In the first case of step 1.2 pick a real with ; in the second pick with . Such a exists because the two bounds are distinct reals.
With as in step 2.2, and by order-convexity, and restricted to each is continuous; lies strictly between and , and strictly between and . So there are and with .
Since and we have , so and in particular ; but contradicts injectivity. The three-point claim of step 1.2 is therefore established.
Let with . Applying the three-point claim to gives or ; the second is impossible because . So .
Let with . If , the three-point claim applied to gives , the alternative being impossible as in step 5.1; if then by step 2.1; and if , the claim applied to gives . In every case .
Let with ; we show . If then and step 5.1 gives . If then the three-point claim applied to gives or , and the second contradicts from step 5.1; so .
Let with ; we show . If then and step 6.1 gives . If then the three-point claim applied to gives or , and the second contradicts from step 6.1; so .
The only remaining case is , where steps 5.1 and 6.1 give directly.
Steps 7.1, 6.2 and 7.2 cover every pair in : either , which is step 7.1, or , and then , which is step 6.2, or , which is step 7.2. So whenever in , that is, is increasing. This contradicts step 1.1, which assumed that is not increasing; the assumption of step 1.1 is therefore false and is strictly monotone.
Remarks
-
The three-point claim is the whole content. Steps 1.2, 2.2, 3.1 and 4.1 say that a continuous injection on an interval cannot fold: the middle of three points always has the middle value. Everything after that is bookkeeping, comparing an arbitrary pair with one fixed pair on which the direction is known.
-
Where the intermediate value theorem enters. Once only, in step 3.1, and it is what makes order-convexity of indispensable: the segments and must lie inside the domain for the theorem to apply. That is exactly the hypothesis the companion page's counterexample removes.
Continuous inverse theorem: a continuous injective on an interval is a bijection onto the order-convex set , and the inverse is continuous and strictly monotone in the same sense as
Statement
Let be order-convex (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length) and let be continuous on (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point) and injective (Injection, surjection, bijection). Then:
- is strictly monotone (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences);
- is order-convex;
- the map is a bijection, so there is exactly one with for every and for every ;
- is strictly monotone in the same sense as : increasing if is increasing, decreasing if is decreasing;
- is continuous on .
"Interval" means "order-convex" here, as throughout this library (A subset of is connected if and only if it is order-convex, that is, an interval is what licenses the word and Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length records that the classification of order-convex sets into the nine written forms is not proved here). No compactness and no boundedness is assumed: may be open, half-open, unbounded, or a single point.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An order-convex and a continuous injective .
A continuous injective function on an order-convex subset of is strictly monotone (A continuous injective function on an interval is strictly monotone).
The image of an order-convex subset of the domain under a continuous function is order-convex (The image of an interval under a continuous real function is order-convex, hence an interval, and the image of a closed bounded interval is a closed bounded interval, claim 1).
If is order-convex, satisfies whenever and , and is order-convex, then is continuous on (A function on an interval satisfying whenever , whose image is order-convex, is continuous).
Sums, scalar multiples and composites of continuous functions are continuous; in particular is continuous on every subset of , being the scalar multiple of the identity (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, A composite of continuous functions is continuous, with no side hypothesis of the kind the composition of limits needs).
is injective, so is a bijection and has a unique two-sided inverse (Injection, surjection, bijection).
increasing means whenever in ; is decreasing exactly when is increasing, and is order-convex exactly when is (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences, Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
Proof
Claim 1 is immediate: is continuous and injective on the order-convex set , hence strictly monotone.
Claim 2 is immediate: is order-convex and is continuous on , so is order-convex.
Claim 3 is immediate: is injective and is onto its image by definition of the image, so it is a bijection and has a unique two-sided inverse .
Suppose is increasing, and let with . Write and with and in . If then , since gives equality and gives ; that is , contradicting . Hence , that is , and is increasing.
Suppose instead that is decreasing, and put , that is . Then is continuous on , it is injective because is, and it is increasing.
Still with increasing: satisfies whenever in , by step 2.1 when and trivially when ; the domain is order-convex by step 1.2; and the image is , which is order-convex, because is onto . So the monotone-with-interval-image criterion applies and is continuous on .
By steps 2.1 and 3.1 applied to , the inverse of is increasing and continuous, and is order-convex.
For one has and , since and is the inverse of . So is the composite of the continuous map from into with the continuous , hence continuous on .
In that case is decreasing: for in one has in , so because is increasing, that is .
Claims 4 and 5 are now proved in both cases: for increasing by steps 2.1 and 3.1, and for decreasing by steps 5.1 and 6.1; and by step 1.1 there is no other case.
Remarks
-
No epsilon-delta argument appears anywhere. Continuity of the inverse is obtained entirely from A function on an interval satisfying whenever , whose image is order-convex, is continuous, whose hypotheses are exactly the two facts the theorem has already established: the inverse is monotone, and its image is the order-convex set . The decreasing case is reduced to the increasing one by composing with rather than repeating the argument.
-
What the theorem is used for. It is the tool that turns a strictly monotone continuous bijection into a continuous one in the other direction, and the standard elementary functions are built with it: the companion page derives the continuity of this way.
The Cantor function is continuous on
Statement
The Cantor function (The Cantor function on , defined on the Cantor set through ternary digits and extended constantly across each removed interval) is continuous on (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point). It is moreover nondecreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences), with and .
No intermediate value theorem is used. The Cantor function is surjective onto by construction (The Cantor function is well defined, satisfies whenever , is surjective onto , and is constant on every interval removed from the Cantor set, claim 3), so its image is order-convex without any appeal to continuity, and continuity is then read off the monotone-with-interval-image criterion (A function on an interval satisfying whenever , whose image is order-convex, is continuous). The implication runs in the direction opposite to the usual one: here surjectivity is known first and continuity is deduced.
Facts & Assumptions
is surjective onto , and , (The Cantor function is well defined, satisfies whenever , is surjective onto , and is constant on every interval removed from the Cantor set, claim 3).
If is order-convex, satisfies whenever and , and is order-convex, then is continuous on (A function on an interval satisfying whenever , whose image is order-convex, is continuous).
Every interval of the nine written forms, and in particular , is order-convex (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
A function with whenever in is nondecreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences).
Proof
The domain is order-convex.
satisfies whenever and .
The image is exactly , since is surjective onto , and is order-convex.
The three hypotheses of the monotone-with-interval-image criterion hold for on , so is continuous on .
is nondecreasing, which is what the inequality of step 1.2 says, and and .
Remarks
-
The Cantor function is well defined, satisfies whenever , is surjective onto , and is constant on every interval removed from the Cantor set deliberately claims nothing about continuity, and says so, for want of a definition of continuity at that point in the reading order. The present corollary supplies it, using nothing about beyond claims 2 and 3 of that theorem.
-
The Cantor function is not strictly monotone. It is constant on every interval removed in the construction of the Cantor set (The Cantor function is well defined, satisfies whenever , is surjective onto , and is constant on every interval removed from the Cantor set, claim 4), so it is nondecreasing but not increasing, and in particular it is not injective. The continuous inverse theorem (Continuous inverse theorem: a continuous injective on an interval is a bijection onto the order-convex set , and the inverse is continuous and strictly monotone in the same sense as ) therefore does not apply to it, and nothing here suggests otherwise.
The Cantor function is continuous and nondecreasing, climbs from to , and is constant on every interval removed in the construction of the Cantor set, so all of its increase happens on a set of measure zero
Remark
Collect what is now known about the Cantor function (The Cantor function on , defined on the Cantor set through ternary digits and extended constantly across each removed interval) and the Cantor set (The Cantor middle-thirds set as the intersection of the sets obtained by removing open middle thirds).
- is continuous on (The Cantor function is continuous on ).
- is nondecreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences), and , : it climbs the whole way from to (The Cantor function is well defined, satisfies whenever , is surjective onto , and is constant on every interval removed from the Cantor set, claims 2 and 3).
- is constant on every interval removed in the construction of : if lie in and , then is constant on ; and every point of lies in the open interval of such a pair (The Cantor function is well defined, satisfies whenever , is surjective onto , and is constant on every interval removed from the Cantor set, claim 4).
- has content zero, and therefore measure zero (The Cantor set is compact, perfect, uncountable, nowhere dense and of measure zero, and it contains no interval of positive length, so its only nonempty connected subsets are single points, claim 2, Measure zero (a countable cover by intervals of total length below every ) and content zero (a finite such cover)).
All of the increase happens on , in the following exact sense. Let in with . Then . Indeed, suppose and pick any with . Then , so lies in the open interval of a pair of points of with , and is constant on . Now , and , so and therefore ; symmetrically and give . Hence and , contrary to assumption. So a nondegenerate interval on which actually rises must meet , a set of measure zero, while on the complement of the function is locally constant.
What is not claimed here. Nothing above says that is differentiable anywhere, that its derivative vanishes anywhere, or that is singular: no notion of derivative is available at this point in the reading order, and no notion of Lebesgue measure is developed in the library as it stands. Measure zero here is exactly Measure zero (a countable cover by intervals of total length below every ) and content zero (a finite such cover), a condition on covers by intervals, and every statement above is a statement about , about , and about that covering condition, and about nothing else.
Why this is worth recording at all. A continuous nondecreasing function that climbs from to might be expected to do its climbing on a set that is large in some sense; does all of it on a set that is null and, being nowhere dense (The Cantor set is compact, perfect, uncountable, nowhere dense and of measure zero, and it contains no interval of positive length, so its only nonempty connected subsets are single points, claim 5), small in category as well. The companion page pushes the same observation one step further: maps the null set onto the whole of .
The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals
Definition
Let and let . All suprema and infima below are taken in the extended real line (The extended real line , its order, and the arithmetic that is left undefined), where every subset has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound (Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in ); no boundedness hypothesis on is therefore needed anywhere, and none is imposed.
Oscillation on a set. For put
Oscillation at a point. For put
where is the -neighbourhood of (The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ).
The two uses of the symbol are distinguished by their argument: a subset of in the first, a point of in the second. Where confusion is possible the first is written with named as a set.
Both values are well posed; point oscillation and nonempty-set oscillation are nonnegative
The set in the first display is nonempty whenever is, since gives the value ; so for nonempty , and for (Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in ). Only nonempty occurs below.
The set in the second display is nonempty, since some real exists, and each of its members is : for the set contains itself, because , so it is nonempty and (Basic properties of the absolute value). Hence is a lower bound of that set and
the second inequality because is a lower bound of the set of which is a member. In particular is never .
Monotonicity, and the case of a bounded
is monotone under inclusion. If then every value with is also a value with , so the first set of values is contained in the second and : a supremum of a subset is at most the supremum of the set. Consequently is nondecreasing in , since gives (The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ).
When is bounded, nonempty-set and point oscillations are real. Suppose there is a real with for every (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set). Then for ,
(The triangle inequality, Basic properties of the absolute value), so for every . If is nonempty, is a real number in , and every point oscillation is also a real number in : the supremum of a nonempty subset of that is bounded above in is the real supremum (Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in , Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Greatest lower bound (infimum)). The convention remains the single empty-set exception. Apart from that exception, an infinite extended value can occur only when is unbounded.
The notation. The letter is throughout this library, never "", and the function is always in the subscript.
is continuous at if and only if
Statement
Let , let and let . Then
(Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals).
Since always (The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals), the equivalent form of the right-hand side is: for every real there is a real with .
This is the tool that converts a pointwise condition into a set condition. Continuity at is a statement about near with a quantifier over ; is the vanishing of a single extended real attached to the point. The change of form is what makes the discontinuity set accessible: the sets are closed (For every real the set is the intersection with of a closed subset of ; in particular it is closed in when ) and their union over is the discontinuity set (For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright).
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , a function , and a point .
is continuous at exactly when for every real there is a real with for every with ; equivalently for every (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ).
In every subset has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound; a supremum is at most an extended real exactly when bounds every member of the set, and an infimum is at least an extended real exactly when bounds every member from below (Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in ).
and for reals (Basic properties of the absolute value).
Proof
Suppose is continuous at and let be real. Take with for every .
Conversely, suppose and let be real. Not every member of can be , for then would be a lower bound of that set and the infimum would satisfy . So there is a real with .
For with as in step 1.1, ; so is an upper bound of the set whose supremum is , and therefore .
With as in step 1.2 and any : both and lie in , so is one of the values whose supremum is and therefore .
Hence for every real . If were not it would satisfy , hence be a positive real, and taking would give , which is false for a positive real. So .
Since was arbitrary in step 1.2, the continuity condition holds at , and is continuous at . Together with step 3.1 this proves the equivalence.
Remarks
-
Where the extended reals are used, and where they are not. The definition of needs them, because may be unbounded near and the supremum may then be ; the proof needs only the order relations, and the two directions never compare an infinite value with a real except through the inequality , which already forces to be real.
-
The oscillation measures how badly continuity fails, not merely whether it does. The theorem uses only whether vanishes, but the number itself carries more: the oscillation of Thomae's function at a point is proved below to be exactly (The Dirichlet function is continuous at no point of , and Thomae's function is continuous at every irrational and at no rational, so its set of continuity points is exactly the set of irrationals and its oscillation at equals ), so it is at a rational with least denominator and at every irrational.
For every real the set is the intersection with of a closed subset of ; in particular it is closed in when
Statement
Let , let and let with . Put
(The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals). Then there is a closed (Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen) with
In particular, if then is itself a closed subset of .
The set is produced explicitly and does not depend on any choice: it is the complement of
which the proof shows to be open. Note that ranges over all of here and not only over ; the expression is the oscillation of on a subset of and makes sense for every real , taking the value when (The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals, Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in ).
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , a function , and a real .
In every subset has a greatest lower bound; an infimum is an extended real exactly when bounds the set from below, and the infimum is every member of the set (Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in ).
; if then , since gives (The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ).
is open when every point of has a neighbourhood contained in , and is closed exactly when is open (Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen).
Proof
Define for some real and .
is open. Let with witness , and let . Then , hence , hence , so with witness . Thus .
Let with . Then for every real , so is a lower bound of the set whose infimum is , and therefore , that is .
Let , so and . For every real the value is at least the infimum , hence at least ; so no witnesses membership of in , that is .
is closed, being the complement of the open set .
Steps 2.2 and 2.3 together say that for one has if and only if ; hence with closed.
If then is closed in .
Remarks
-
Why the strict inequality is on the open side. The set is defined by a strict inequality and an existential quantifier over , which is what makes it open; its complement is then closed, and the superlevel set is what remains of it inside . Defining with a strict inequality instead, as , would not give a closed set in general, and the exhaustion of For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright is arranged so that only the non-strict form is ever needed.
-
The relative form is the honest one. For general the set is a subset of and there is no reason for it to be closed in : taking and the restriction of a function with oscillation everywhere gives , which is not closed. What is always true is the displayed identity , and that is what the theorems downstream use.
For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright
Statement
Let and let . Write
(Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, Discontinuity of at a point of its domain, and its classification: removable discontinuity, jump discontinuity and essential discontinuity, equivalently Rudin's discontinuities of the first and of the second kind). Then:
- Pointwise exhaustion. (The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals), and is the union of the increasing sequence of superlevel sets (The canonical natural of a field), whose thresholds are .
- Descriptive form. There is an set and a set ( and subsets of ) with and may be taken to be with each a closed subset of cutting down on to the -th set of claim 1 (For every real the set is the intersection with of a closed subset of ; in particular it is closed in when ).
In particular, when the discontinuity set is an subset of and the continuity set is a subset, and claim 1 reads .
Claim 1 is stated separately because it is what is cited downstream. The exhaustion of by the superlevel sets is used directly wherever a property has to be established one threshold at a time — Baire's theorem: a Baire class one function on a closed bounded interval is continuous at the points of a dense subset of that is the trace of a set, so its set of discontinuities is meager shows each superlevel set nowhere dense and concludes that is meager — and that use needs the identity itself, not only the descriptive conclusion of claim 2.
The statement is relative on purpose. For a general domain the sets and are subsets of , and neither is or in in general; what the proof produces are two subsets of that cut down to them. The absolute form is stated only for , which is the case Every subset of is the set of continuity points of some , so the sets are exactly the continuity sets and No function is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational, because is not use.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: and a function .
is continuous at if and only if ; and for every ( is continuous at if and only if , The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals, The extended real line , its order, and the arithmetic that is left undefined).
For every real there is a closed with (For every real the set is the intersection with of a closed subset of ; in particular it is closed in when ).
For every real there is a natural with , where is the canonical natural of in ; and is strictly increasing and positive on the naturals (For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with , The canonical natural of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
A subset of is when it is the union of a sequence of closed sets and when it is the intersection of a sequence of open sets; is if and only if is ( and subsets of , Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen).
Proof
For each put , a positive real since , and let be closed with .
: a point is a discontinuity exactly when , and always, so exactly when .
. Let , so . If then . Otherwise , so is a positive real, and there is a natural with ; writing with gives , hence .
Conversely : if then , so .
Put , an subset of since each is closed and the family is indexed by . Then .
Claim 1 is proved: by step 1.2, and by steps 2.1 and 2.2, since is by step 1.1 exactly the set with . The union is increasing, since gives and hence .
Put , a subset of . Then .
Claim 2 is proved by steps 3.1 and 4.1; and for the two identities read and , so is and is outright.
Remarks
-
The exhaustion is indexed from and the thresholds are . contains , so the sequence of thresholds is and never , which is not defined. Writing the union as names the same family; the form above is used because a sequence in this library is a function on .
-
The converse holds and is proved separately. Every subset of is the continuity set of some function (Every subset of is the set of continuity points of some , so the sets are exactly the continuity sets), so the two classes coincide exactly. What the present theorem contributes is the direction that constrains: no function can have a continuity set that fails to be , and No function is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational, because is not spends that on .
The Dirichlet function , and Thomae's function with at a rational in lowest terms with and at every irrational
Definition
Throughout, denotes the chain of canonical embeddings (The naturals embed in the integers, The integers embed in the rationals, The rationals embed densely in the reals), and each set is identified with its image in , as elsewhere in this library; for a natural the real is the canonical natural (The canonical natural of a field), and for (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing). A real is rational when it lies in and irrational otherwise; both sets are dense in (Both and are dense in , and every nonempty open subset of is uncountable).
The Dirichlet function
This is the indicator of the rationals. It is a function because every real either lies in or does not, and the two clauses are exclusive.
The least denominator of a rational
Let and put
is nonempty. Every rational is with and a positive integer (The integers embed in the rationals), and a positive integer is for a unique natural (The naturals embed in the integers); then , so .
By the well-ordering principle (The well-ordering principle) the nonempty subset has a least element. Write
the least denominator of , and , so that
Nothing is selected here: is the least element of a set determined by , so it is a function of alone.
The least denominator is the denominator in lowest terms. The integers and are coprime (Coprime integers: ). Indeed put , which satisfies because makes the pair different from ( is symmetric and unchanged by signs: ; moreover , , , and unless , Common divisor, and the greatest common divisor , with the convention ). Then divides , so is a natural number , and because carries products of naturals to products (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing); hence
so and therefore , which forces . Conversely, a lowest-terms denominator is the least one, so the description is unambiguous. Suppose with a natural, and . Then , so ; and from we get in , so , and gives (If and then ; and if , and then , claim 1), hence . So : writing "in lowest terms with " and taking describe the same integer, and If is nonzero then and are coprime is what produces such a representation from an arbitrary one.
Thomae's function
It is also called the popcorn function or the ruler function. The value is well defined because is, and is invertible.
Boundary values, stated rather than left to the reader.
- . Indeed , so and ; the representation is .
- for every integer , by the same computation with .
- for every rational , since ; and exactly at the irrationals.
On the range. The values of are and the reciprocals of the canonical naturals ; every such value is attained, being the value at the rational itself, whose least denominator is because with would give a positive integer smaller than .
The Dirichlet function is continuous at no point of , and Thomae's function is continuous at every irrational and at no rational, so its set of continuity points is exactly the set of irrationals and its oscillation at equals
Statement
Let and be the Dirichlet and Thomae functions (The Dirichlet function , and Thomae's function with at a rational in lowest terms with and at every irrational ), and write for the least denominator of a rational , so that there and at every irrational . Then:
- is continuous at no point of (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point);
- for every real (The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals);
- is continuous at every irrational and discontinuous at every rational, so its set of continuity points is exactly .
Claim 1 restates, on this page, what The indicator of is continuous at no point of already proves. That item is homed on the examples page of Continuity, the intermediate and extreme value theorems, and uniform continuity, and an examples page is a leaf of this library: nothing outside it may depend on an item that lives there. The claim is needed here, and on later pages, as a citable statement, so it is proved again rather than quoted. The two statements are the same statement, and neither is stronger than the other; the proof below is the same argument, and no originality is claimed for it. This is the pattern The distance from a real number to the integers is -Lipschitz, hence uniformly continuous, takes values in , and vanishes exactly on follows.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Dirichlet function and Thomae's function , and a real ; are the canonical copies and .
for and otherwise; for and otherwise, where (The Dirichlet function , and Thomae's function with at a rational in lowest terms with and at every irrational ).
Both and are dense in , so every contains a rational and an irrational (Both and are dense in , and every nonempty open subset of is uncountable, The closure equals the set together with its limit points, equals the set of points every neighbourhood of which meets it, and is the smallest closed superset; a set is closed iff it contains its limit points, The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of , The rationals embed densely in the reals).
For every real there is exactly one integer with , written (Integer part: for every real there is exactly one integer with ); consequently no integer lies strictly between two consecutive integers.
For every real there is a natural with ; and is positive and strictly increasing on the naturals , so gives and (For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with , The canonical natural of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
A nonempty finite set of reals presented as has a minimum (Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum, Maximum and minimum of a set).
and for defined on all of , both computed in , where every set has a supremum and an infimum; is continuous at if and only if (The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals, The extended real line , its order, and the arithmetic that is left undefined, Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in , is continuous at if and only if ).
, , and if and then (Basic properties of the absolute value).
Proof
Claim 1. Let be real and let be real. The neighbourhood contains a rational and an irrational , and ; since is or , one of and equals . So the continuity condition at fails for , no witnessing it, and is continuous at no point.
A separation estimate. For a real and a natural put and define if , and otherwise. In both cases .
A lower bound. For every real the neighbourhood contains an irrational , and , so ; taking the infimum over gives .
With as in step 1.2: for every integer with one has . If then , so ; otherwise , and gives while gives . Dividing by gives the claim.
For a real and a natural put , the minimum of a nonempty finite set of positive reals, so .
If is rational with then and hence . Indeed with and ; if then , so step 2.1 gives , contrary to the hypothesis. So , and because is strictly increasing.
An upper bound for near . Let be real, take with and put . Every satisfies where : for this is ; for rational it is by step 3.1; and for irrational it is .
Hence with and as in step 4.1, since for all , so is an upper bound of the set whose supremum is; and therefore .
Claim 2 now follows in the two cases of the value , which are exactly the two cases of the position of . If is rational then , and applying step 5.1 with the admissible choice gives ; with step 1.3 this gives .
If is irrational then , and step 5.1 gives for every real ; since also , an extended real that is for every positive real and must be , so .
Every real is rational or irrational and not both, so steps 6.1 and 6.2 establish claim 2 for every real .
Claim 3 follows from claim 2: is continuous at exactly when , that is exactly when , that is exactly when is irrational. So the continuity set of is and its discontinuity set is .
Remarks
-
What claim 2 adds beyond claim 3. Continuity at a point is the vanishing of the oscillation there, so claim 3 is the special case of claim 2 recording where the value is . The value itself is used on the companion page, where the oscillation of is computed at particular points, and it shows that the failure of continuity at a rational is exactly as large as the value of there: small denominators are the bad points.
-
The continuity set of is , as it must be. The irrationals form a set ( is , meager and not , while the irrationals are , residual and not ), in agreement with For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright. The reverse arrangement is impossible: no function is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational, because is not (No function is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational, because is not ).
-
No choice principle is spent. The separation estimate of step 1.2 is written down from , the minimum of step 2.1 is the minimum of an explicitly listed finite set, and the least denominator is a least element. Density supplies points, and it is used only in the form "every neighbourhood meets the set", never to build a sequence.
Every subset of is the set of continuity points of some , so the sets are exactly the continuity sets
Statement
Let be a set ( and subsets of ). Then there is a function whose set of continuity points (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point) is exactly .
Together with For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright, which says that the continuity set of every is a set, this identifies the two classes:
The construction. Write with each open and put , so that the are open and decreasing with . For let be the least with , and set
The sign carries the whole of the discontinuity: near a point outside there are points of the opposite rationality, where has the opposite sign or is , and the values cannot come close.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A set with each open.
A finite intersection of open subsets of is open (Arbitrary unions and finite intersections of open subsets of are open, and dually for closed sets, claim 2); a set is open exactly when every point of it has a neighbourhood (Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen, The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ).
Every nonempty subset of has a least element (The well-ordering principle).
Both and are dense in , so every neighbourhood of every real contains a rational and an irrational (Both and are dense in , and every nonempty open subset of is uncountable, The closure equals the set together with its limit points, equals the set of points every neighbourhood of which meets it, and is the smallest closed superset; a set is closed iff it contains its limit points, The rationals embed densely in the reals).
For every real there is a natural with , and is positive and strictly increasing on the naturals , so gives (For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with , The canonical natural of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
Proof
Put for . Each is open, being a finite intersection of open sets; ; and , since a point lies in every exactly when it lies in every .
For the set is nonempty, so is defined; and for every , by minimality.
is continuous at every . Let be real and take a natural with . Since and is open, there is a real with .
Define by for , for with rational, and for with irrational. Then exactly for , since for every ; moreover at a rational outside and at an irrational outside .
With and as in step 2.2, let . If then . If then , so and indeed , because forces for every ; hence , using . In both cases , since .
is discontinuous at every . Put , so that , and let be real. If is rational then ; the neighbourhood contains an irrational , and , whether or not. If is irrational then ; the neighbourhood contains a rational , and .
In either case of step 4.2 the point satisfies , since and have opposite weak signs and . So no witnesses the continuity condition at for this , and is discontinuous at .
By steps 4.1 and 5.1 the set of continuity points of the function constructed in step 3.1 is exactly , which proves the theorem. Combined with the fact that every continuity set is , the two classes coincide.
Remarks
-
Why the are replaced by the decreasing . The index is useful only because implies for all , which is what makes in step 4.1. For an arbitrary sequence that implication fails, and would carry no information about how deep sits in the intersection. Passing to the finite intersections costs nothing, since they are still open and still intersect to .
-
Two extreme cases. For the construction gives , continuous everywhere. For , obtained as the intersection of the sequence constantly , every lies outside , so and takes the value at every rational and at every irrational; it is nowhere continuous, as the Dirichlet function is (The Dirichlet function is continuous at no point of , and Thomae's function is continuous at every irrational and at no rational, so its set of continuity points is exactly the set of irrationals and its oscillation at equals ).
-
The construction does not guarantee monotonicity, and the theorem does not claim it. The function built above always takes values in , so it is bounded; no further behaviour beyond its continuity set is asserted.
No function is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational, because is not
Statement
There is no function that is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, The rationals embed densely in the reals).
Equivalently: is not the continuity set of any function .
The contrast with Thomae's function is the point. There is a function continuous exactly at the irrationals, namely (The Dirichlet function is continuous at no point of , and Thomae's function is continuous at every irrational and at no rational, so its set of continuity points is exactly the set of irrationals and its oscillation at equals ), and one might expect the two arrangements to be symmetric. They are not, because the classes and are exchanged by complementation while and the irrationals are, and only one of the two sets is ( is , meager and not , while the irrationals are , residual and not ).
Facts & Assumptions
Given: denotes the canonical copy of the rationals inside (The rationals embed densely in the reals).
For every the set of points at which is continuous is a subset of (For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright, case , and subsets of ).
is not a subset of ( is , meager and not , while the irrationals are , residual and not , claim 3).
Proof
Suppose, for contradiction, that there is continuous at every rational and discontinuous at every irrational.
Then the set of continuity points of is exactly : it contains every rational by hypothesis, and it contains no irrational, again by hypothesis.
By the theorem the set of continuity points of is a subset of , so is . This contradicts the fact that is not , so no such exists.
Remarks
-
Where the work actually is. Nothing in this corollary is hard; all of it was done earlier. The theorem is For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright, which rests on the oscillation, and the failure of to be is is , meager and not , while the irrationals are , residual and not , which is where the Baire category theorem is spent. The corollary is the place where those two meet.
-
A weaker statement is true and much cheaper, and is not what is proved here. That no monotone function is continuous exactly at the rationals follows from Froda's theorem: the set of discontinuities of a monotone function on an interval is at most countable, the injection into being built from one fixed enumeration of the rationals by least index, so no choice principle is used alone, since the irrationals are uncountable. The statement above is about all functions and needs category.
The intermediate value property (Darboux property) of a function on an interval: the image of every subinterval is order-convex
Definition
Let be order-convex (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length) and let . Then has the intermediate value property, also called the Darboux property, when
As everywhere in this library, "interval" is read as "order-convex" (A subset of is connected if and only if it is order-convex, that is, an interval is what licenses the word; Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length records that the classification of the order-convex subsets of into the nine written forms is not proved here).
The equivalent pointwise form
has the intermediate value property if and only if
for all with and every real with or , there is with .
From the displayed condition to the pointwise one. Given in , the set is order-convex and contained in by order-convexity of , so is order-convex; it contains and , hence every between them, and such a is for some .
From the pointwise condition to the displayed one. Let be order-convex, let and let . Write and with . If then and . If , the pointwise condition gives with , and because is order-convex and ; so . If the same argument applies with the roles of and exchanged, the pointwise condition being stated symmetrically in the two orders. Hence is order-convex.
Both forms are used below, and they are used interchangeably.
Every continuous function on an interval has the property
If is continuous on (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point) then is order-convex for every order-convex (The image of an interval under a continuous real function is order-convex, hence an interval, and the image of a closed bounded interval is a closed bounded interval, claim 1). So continuity implies the intermediate value property.
The converse is false, and that is the whole reason the property is given a name of its own: a function may take every intermediate value on every subinterval and be continuous nowhere. The failure is recorded as FALSE: a function with the intermediate value property on an interval is continuous.
A monotone function with the intermediate value property is continuous. This is not a further theorem but a reading of A function on an interval satisfying whenever , whose image is order-convex, is continuous: for a function satisfying whenever on an order-convex , order-convexity of the single image already forces continuity. So the pathologies live entirely among the non-monotone functions.
Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on
Definition
Let , let and let , with neighbourhoods as in The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of .
- is upper semicontinuous at when for every real there is a real with
- is lower semicontinuous at when for every real there is a real with
- is upper semicontinuous on , respectively lower semicontinuous on , when it is so at every point of .
In words: an upper semicontinuous function cannot jump up in the limit, and a lower semicontinuous one cannot jump down. Both conditions are pointwise, both quantify over the same unpunctured neighbourhoods as Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, and at each holds automatically, since and .
Continuity is exactly the conjunction
is continuous at if and only if it is both upper and lower semicontinuous at .
If is continuous at , a witnessing on witnesses both displayed conditions, since gives (Basic properties of the absolute value).
Conversely, given take for the upper condition and for the lower one and put . For both and hold, that is (Basic properties of the absolute value). So is continuous at .
Consequently is continuous on exactly when it is both upper and lower semicontinuous on .
Negation exchanges the two
is upper semicontinuous at if and only if is lower semicontinuous at , since says the same thing as (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)). Every statement about one notion below is therefore proved for one of them and transferred to the other by this substitution, never proved twice.
Neither notion implies the other, and neither implies continuity. The indicator of a closed set is upper semicontinuous and the indicator of an open set is lower semicontinuous, and neither is continuous unless the set is clopen; the companion page uses an upper semicontinuous function on that attains no minimum.
is upper semicontinuous on if and only if is relatively open in for every real , lower semicontinuous if and only if is, and continuous if and only if it is both
Statement
Let and let . Call relatively open in when for some open (Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen). Then:
- is upper semicontinuous on (Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on ) if and only if is relatively open in for every real ;
- is lower semicontinuous on if and only if is relatively open in for every real ;
- is continuous on (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point) if and only if both families of sets are relatively open.
The open set is produced canonically, not chosen. For each the proof exhibits one specific open with , namely the set of reals admitting a radius with . No choice of a radius per point is made, which matters because the level set may be uncountable.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: and a function .
is upper semicontinuous at when for every real there is a real with for every ; lower semicontinuity is the same with ; and continuity at is the conjunction of the two (Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on , Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point).
is open exactly when every has a real with ; and if then (Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen, The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ).
is lower semicontinuous at exactly when is upper semicontinuous at , and (Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on ).
Proof
Fix a real and put and .
Conversely suppose every is relatively open in , say with open, and let and be real. Put ; then , so , and there is a real with .
is open: if with witness and , then , so with witness ; hence .
: if with witness then .
Suppose is upper semicontinuous on and let . Apply the definition at with : there is a real with for every , that is ; so .
Hence , and with step 2.2 this gives , a relatively open subset of ; since was arbitrary, one direction of claim 1 holds.
With as in step 1.2, every lies in , so . As and were arbitrary, is upper semicontinuous on , which completes claim 1.
Claim 2 follows by applying claim 1 to : is lower semicontinuous on exactly when is upper semicontinuous on , exactly when is relatively open for every real , and that set is ; as ranges over the reals so does .
Claim 3 follows: is continuous on exactly when it is both upper and lower semicontinuous on , and by claims 1 and 2 that is exactly the conjunction of the two families of sets being relatively open.
Remarks
-
Why "relatively" open and not open. is a subset of , so it cannot be open in unless is; the correct statement is the one above, exactly as in is continuous on if and only if the preimage of every open subset of is the intersection with of an open subset of , and dually for closed sets, where the same phrase is fixed inline for the same reason. For the qualifier disappears and the level sets are open outright.
-
The strict inequalities are not interchangeable with the weak ones. Upper semicontinuity says the strict sublevel sets are relatively open, equivalently that the sets are relatively closed. It does not say that the sets are relatively closed; the indicator of a closed set is upper semicontinuous while is the complement of that closed set, which is relatively open and generally not closed.
Semicontinuous extreme value theorem: an upper semicontinuous function on a nonempty compact is bounded above and attains a maximum, and a lower semicontinuous one is bounded below and attains a minimum
Statement
Let be nonempty and compact (Open cover, subcover, compact subset of (every open cover has a finite subcover), and sequentially compact subset).
- If is upper semicontinuous on (Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on ) then is bounded above (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set) and attains a maximum: there is with for every (Maximum and minimum of a set).
- If is lower semicontinuous on then is bounded below and attains a minimum.
The theorem is genuinely one-sided. An upper semicontinuous function on a compact set need not attain its infimum; the companion page gives such a function on . Only the maximum is asserted in claim 1, and only the minimum in claim 2.
Taking continuous, which is upper and lower semicontinuous at once (Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on ), recovers the classical extreme value theorem on a compact subset of .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A nonempty compact and an upper semicontinuous .
For every real there is an open with , namely for some real ( is upper semicontinuous on if and only if is relatively open in for every real , lower semicontinuous if and only if is, and continuous if and only if it is both, Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on , Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen).
The set of [L1] is monotone in : gives and hence , directly from the displayed description.
compact means: every family of open subsets of whose union contains has a finite subfamily whose union contains (Open cover, subcover, compact subset of (every open cover has a finite subcover), and sequentially compact subset).
For every real there is a natural with , and for every real a natural with ; is positive and strictly increasing on the naturals (Every complete ordered field is Archimedean, For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with , The canonical natural of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
A nonempty set of reals bounded above has a least upper bound, and for every real some member of the set exceeds (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Epsilon characterisation of the supremum, Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set).
A nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum (Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum, Maximum and minimum of a set).
For any , is upper semicontinuous if and only if is lower semicontinuous; hence a lower semicontinuous makes upper semicontinuous (Upper and lower semicontinuity of at a point of and on , section “Negation exchanges the two”).
Proof
For each real let be the open set of [L1], so that and implies .
The family covers : every has for some natural , and then .
By compactness finitely many members cover , say with each ; let be the greatest of , which exists as the maximum of a nonempty finite set of reals. Then each , so and hence . So is bounded above by .
is nonempty, since is, and bounded above, so exists.
For each natural put . The family has no finite subfamily covering . Indeed, let be finitely many of them; if the list is empty its union is empty and does not contain the nonempty . Otherwise let be a natural among with greatest, so that every member of the list is contained in . Since , there is with , and such an lies in but not in , hence in no member of the list.
By compactness, a family of open sets with no finite subfamily covering cannot itself cover . So there is with for every natural , that is for every such .
Hence . If then and there is a natural with , that is , contradicting step 6.1; and because is an upper bound of .
So is bounded above on and attains the value at , which is a maximum of : this is claim 1.
Claim 2 follows by applying claim 1 to , which is upper semicontinuous on when is lower semicontinuous; then is bounded above and attains a maximum at some , so is bounded below and for every , a minimum.
Remarks
-
Where compactness is spent, and in which form. Twice, and both times as the open-cover property of Open cover, subcover, compact subset of (every open cover has a finite subcover), and sequentially compact subset: once to bound above, once to find the point where the supremum is attained. No sequence is extracted and no countable choice is used; the second application is stated as the contrapositive of the covering property, which is why step 5.1 proves that no finite subfamily covers rather than assuming a limit point.
-
Semicontinuity cannot be dropped. Both applications use only that the sets are relatively open ( is upper semicontinuous on if and only if is relatively open in for every real , lower semicontinuous if and only if is, and continuous if and only if it is both), which is exactly upper semicontinuity, and nothing else about is used at all. A function whose strict sublevel sets are not relatively open can be unbounded above on a compact set: the function on equal to for and to at is one.
Baire category inside a closed bounded interval: if with is covered by a sequence of closed sets, then one of them contains a nondegenerate closed subinterval of ; no choice principle is used
Statement
Let with and let be a sequence of closed subsets of (Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen) with
(Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length). Then there are and reals with
No choice principle is used. The only category input is Baire category in , by nested intervals with canonically chosen rational endpoints: a countable intersection of dense open sets is dense, so is not a countable union of nowhere dense sets, whose own proof selects nothing: it fixes one enumeration of the rationals and takes least indices. Nothing further is chosen below, the argument being a direct application of that theorem to the complements of the .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Reals and a sequence of closed subsets of with .
A countable intersection of dense open subsets of is dense in (Baire category in , by nested intervals with canonically chosen rational endpoints: a countable intersection of dense open sets is dense, so is not a countable union of nowhere dense sets); dense means that the closure is (Limit point, isolated point, adherent point, derived set, and dense subset of ).
if and only if for every real and every real (The closure equals the set together with its limit points, equals the set of points every neighbourhood of which meets it, and is the smallest closed superset; a set is closed iff it contains its limit points, claim 1, Interior, closure, boundary and exterior of a subset of , The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of ).
An intersection of two closed sets is closed, and the complement of a closed set is open (Arbitrary unions and finite intersections of open subsets of are open, and dually for closed sets, claim 3, Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen).
is closed: its complement is open, since gives and gives (Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen, The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of , Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
, and for the midpoint and radius give (The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of , Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
Proof
Put for . Each is closed, being an intersection of two closed sets, and , since is contained in the union of the and each is contained in .
Suppose, for contradiction, that no contains a nondegenerate closed interval, that is, that there are no and no reals with .
Each is open, and it is dense. Openness is the complement of a closed set. For density, let be real and real; if were empty then , and then would be a nondegenerate closed interval inside , contrary to step 1.2.
By the Baire category theorem the intersection is dense in , so it meets the neighbourhood : there is with for every .
But , so for some , contradicting step 3.1. The assumption of step 1.2 is therefore false, and some contains a nondegenerate closed interval .
Remarks
-
Why the statement is about and not about . Baire category in , by nested intervals with canonically chosen rational endpoints: a countable intersection of dense open sets is dense, so is not a countable union of nowhere dense sets says that is not a countable union of nowhere dense sets. What is needed for Baire's theorem on functions of the first class (Baire's theorem: a Baire class one function on a closed bounded interval is continuous at the points of a dense subset of that is the trace of a set, so its set of discontinuities is meager) is the same statement localised to a closed bounded interval, and the localisation is not formal: a closed set may be nowhere dense in and yet fill an interval, so the conclusion has to be stated as "contains a nondegenerate closed subinterval" rather than "has nonempty interior in ". The two are in fact the same condition here, which is what step 2.1 uses.
-
The hypothesis is not decoration. For the set is a single point, it is covered by the constant sequence , and no contains a nondegenerate closed interval; the conclusion fails, and the proof breaks at step 3.1, where is empty.
Pointwise convergence of a sequence of real functions, and the Baire class one functions as the pointwise limits of sequences of continuous functions
Definition
Let . A sequence of functions on is a function assigning to each a function ; it is written . As everywhere in this library contains , so the first term is (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences).
Pointwise convergence. converges pointwise on to when, for every , the sequence of reals converges to (Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals); written out, for every and every real there is with for every .
The limit function is unique. A sequence of reals has at most one limit (A sequence has at most one limit), so if converges pointwise to and to then for every , hence . We may therefore speak of the pointwise limit and write pointwise.
The index is allowed to depend on , and that is the whole content of the word pointwise. No uniformity over is asserted anywhere below.
Baire class one
is of Baire class one on when there is a sequence of functions , each continuous on (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point), converging pointwise on to .
Every continuous function is of Baire class one, by the constant sequence , which converges pointwise to because a constant sequence of reals converges to its value.
The class is strictly larger than the continuous functions, and it is strictly smaller than the class of all functions. The first is visible already on (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length): the indicator of a single point is of Baire class one and is not continuous. The second is Baire's theorem: a Baire class one function on a closed bounded interval is continuous at the points of a dense subset of that is the trace of a set, so its set of discontinuities is meager, which shows that a Baire class one function on a closed bounded interval has a dense set of continuity points, and the companion page uses it to exhibit a function that is not of Baire class one.
On the higher classes. The pointwise limits of sequences of Baire class one functions form what is classically called Baire class two, and the construction iterates. No definition of the higher classes is given here and none is used; where the phrase is needed below it is stated as "a pointwise limit of a sequence of Baire class one functions", which is a condition already expressible with the words above.
Baire's theorem: a Baire class one function on a closed bounded interval is continuous at the points of a dense subset of that is the trace of a set, so its set of discontinuities is meager
Statement
Let with and let be of Baire class one (Pointwise convergence of a sequence of real functions, and the Baire class one functions as the pointwise limits of sequences of continuous functions). Write
- for every real the set (The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals) is a closed subset of containing no nondegenerate closed interval, hence nowhere dense (Nowhere dense, meager (first category), residual, and second category subsets of );
- is meager, being the union of the sequence of nowhere dense sets;
- is dense in : for every and every real the set contains a point of ;
- for a subset ( and subsets of ).
On the phrase "dense ". Claims 3 and 4 together are what the classical statement calls a dense subset of : the continuity set is dense in and it is the trace on of a subset of . It is not claimed that is as a subset of , nor that it is dense in ; neither is true in general, since .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Reals , a function of Baire class one, and a sequence of continuous functions on converging pointwise to .
of Baire class one on means: there are continuous with for every (Pointwise convergence of a sequence of real functions, and the Baire class one functions as the pointwise limits of sequences of continuous functions, Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals, Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences).
; ; is monotone under inclusion and (The oscillation of on a set and the oscillation at a point, both taken in the extended reals).
For every real there is a closed with (For every real the set is the intersection with of a closed subset of ; in particular it is closed in when ).
If , are closed and , then some contains a nondegenerate closed interval (Baire category inside a closed bounded interval: if with is covered by a sequence of closed sets, then one of them contains a nondegenerate closed subinterval of ; no choice principle is used).
and every with are closed; an intersection of a nonempty family of closed sets is closed; a set is closed exactly when its complement is open (Arbitrary unions and finite intersections of open subsets of are open, and dually for closed sets, claim 3, Open subset of (every point has a neighbourhood inside it), closed subset (complement open), and clopen, Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
For a continuous on and a closed , the preimage is for some closed ( is continuous on if and only if the preimage of every open subset of is the intersection with of an open subset of , and dually for closed sets); differences and absolute values of continuous functions are continuous (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).
A closed set with empty interior is nowhere dense, and a union of a sequence of nowhere dense sets is meager (Nowhere dense, meager (first category), residual, and second category subsets of , Interior, closure, boundary and exterior of a subset of , The closure equals the set together with its limit points, equals the set of points every neighbourhood of which meets it, and is the smallest closed superset; a set is closed iff it contains its limit points).
The set of continuity points of is for a set , and the discontinuity set is (For the set of points of at which is discontinuous is the intersection with of an subset of , and the set of points at which is continuous is the intersection with of a subset; for the two sets are and outright, claims 1 and 2, and subsets of ).
For every real there is a natural with ; is positive on the naturals (For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with , The canonical natural of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
, , and a real that is for every real and is (Basic properties of the absolute value).
and of two reals exist; ; a point interior to a set has a neighbourhood inside it (Maximum and minimum of a set, The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of , Interior, closure, boundary and exterior of a subset of , Limit point, isolated point, adherent point, derived set, and dense subset of ).
Proof
Refinement claim. Let with and let be real. For put .
Claim 1. Fix a real and let . It is closed in , being with closed and closed.
Claim 4. The set of continuity points of on the domain is for a subset .
Claim 3. Let and let be real. The set contains a nondegenerate closed interval with , because : taking and gives and : if then and ; if then and ; and if then .
Each is closed: for fixed the set is the preimage under the continuous function of the closed set , hence of the form with closed, hence closed since is; and is the intersection of that nonempty family of closed sets over the pairs .
: for the sequence converges to , so there is with for all , and then for all .
By the interval form of Baire category applied to and the sequence , there are and reals with .
For every one has . Indeed, let be real; since there is with , and then ; as was arbitrary this gives .
Put , so . Since is continuous at there is a real with for every with . Put and , so that and with for every .
For : . Hence , being an upper bound of the set whose supremum that is.
The refinement claim is proved: for every with and every real there are with and . Moreover every with satisfies , since for and is monotone under inclusion.
contains no nondegenerate closed interval. Were with , the refinement claim applied to and to the positive real would give with and for every with ; such an lies in and so satisfies , which is impossible.
Hence is nowhere dense: it is closed, so it equals its own closure, and its interior is empty, since an interior point would have a neighbourhood and then would be a nondegenerate closed interval inside .
Claim 2. , and each is nowhere dense by step 8.1, so is a union of a sequence of nowhere dense sets, that is, meager.
Suppose with as in step 1.4. Then is covered by the sequence of closed sets, so by the interval form of Baire category some contains a nondegenerate closed interval, contradicting step 7.1. So , and any point of is a point of inside .
Claims 1, 2, 3 and 4 are therefore proved: claim 1 by steps 1.2, 7.1 and 8.1, claim 2 by step 9.1, claim 3 by steps 1.4 and 10.1, and claim 4 by step 1.3.
Remarks
-
Where the hypothesis of Baire class one is used. The hypothesis enters through the approximating sequence fixed in step 1.1. Pointwise convergence is used in steps 2.2 and 4.1, and continuity of the approximants is used in steps 2.1 and 4.2. These facts establish the refinement claim in step 6.1. From step 7.1 onward the proof uses only that claim, oscillation, and category.
-
The conclusion is sharp in the sense that "meager" cannot be improved to "at most countable". The theorem constrains the discontinuity set by category, not by cardinality. Nothing above bounds the size of ; a meager set can be uncountable, the Cantor set being one (The Cantor set is compact, perfect, uncountable, nowhere dense and of measure zero, and it contains no interval of positive length, so its only nonempty connected subsets are single points), so the theorem leaves open how large a discontinuity set a Baire class one function may have. What it does exclude outright is a Baire class one function on that is nowhere continuous, and the companion page spends exactly that on the Dirichlet function.
-
The dense set is not claimed to be uncountable, and no measure statement is made. Meagerness is a statement about category alone (Nowhere dense, meager (first category), residual, and second category subsets of ); nothing above bears on the measure of , and the two notions of smallness are independent, as is , meager and not , while the irrationals are , residual and not and the fat Cantor set already record.
Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions
Definition
Let be the complete ordered field (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Ordered field, Field). A function is additive when it satisfies Cauchy's functional equation
Equivalently, is a homomorphism of the additive group of into itself.
The linear maps are additive. For a fixed real the function satisfies by distributivity, so it is additive. Cauchy's question is whether these are the only additive functions, and the answer is a genuine dichotomy: with any one of a short list of regularity conditions the answer is yes (Six regularity conditions each force an additive to be : continuity at a single point, monotonicity on a nondegenerate interval, boundedness above on one, boundedness below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in ), and without any of them it is no (FALSE: every additive is of the form for a single real ).
No continuity, no monotonicity and no measurability is part of the definition. The equation is purely algebraic, and every regularity hypothesis below is stated explicitly where it is used.
A first consequence, recorded here because it is used immediately. An additive satisfies : putting gives , and subtracting gives . The remaining elementary consequences, including and -homogeneity, are collected in An additive satisfies , and for every rational and every real ; in particular at every rational .
An additive satisfies , and for every rational and every real ; in particular at every rational
Statement
Let be additive (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ), and identify along the canonical embeddings (The naturals embed in the integers, The integers embed in the rationals, The rationals embed densely in the reals), writing for the canonical natural of in (The canonical natural of a field). Then, for every real :
- ;
- ;
- for every ;
- for every integer ;
- for every rational .
In particular, taking in claim 5, at every rational : an additive function is determined on by its value at .
What this does not say. Claim 5 is -homogeneity, not -homogeneity: nothing here gives for irrational , and that is exactly the gap that FALSE: every additive is of the form for a single real shows cannot be closed without a regularity hypothesis.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An additive , so for all reals .
for all reals (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ).
Induction on (The principle of mathematical induction).
The canonical natural satisfies and , and it agrees with the additive multiple (The canonical natural of a field, In a field, the additive multiple is the canonical natural : the additive power of the group-power definition and the canonical natural are the same function, both being the unique one given by the recursion , , Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
Every integer is or for a natural , and every rational is with an integer and a natural ; the embeddings preserve sums and products, and for (The naturals embed in the integers, The integers embed in the rationals, The rationals embed densely in the reals, The integers as equivalence classes of pairs of naturals, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
is a field, so cancellation, distributivity and inverses of nonzero elements are available (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)).
Proof
Claim 1: taking in the functional equation gives , and adding to both sides gives .
Claim 3, inductive hypothesis: suppose for a given and every real .
Claim 2: taking gives , so .
Claim 3, base case : , so .
Claim 3, inductive step: , so .
Claim 3 holds for every and every real , by induction on from steps 2.2 and 2.3.
Claim 4: an integer is or for some natural . In the first case claim 3 applies directly. In the second, .
Claim 5: let be rational and write with an integer and a natural , so . Applying claim 4 with the integer to the real gives , and dividing by gives .
Taking in claim 5 gives for every rational , and all five claims are proved.
Remarks
-
The induction is on and everything else is algebra. Only claim 3 needs induction; claims 4 and 5 are obtained from it by the two field operations, and claims 1 and 2 are two substitutions into the equation. The base case is , where and the identity reads ; it is a genuine case and not a convention, since contains .
-
This is the whole of the algebraic theory. Every regularity theorem about Cauchy's equation (Six regularity conditions each force an additive to be : continuity at a single point, monotonicity on a nondegenerate interval, boundedness above on one, boundedness below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in ) works by combining claim 5 with density of in : the value of is pinned on a dense set, and a regularity hypothesis is what forbids the values off that set from being arbitrary.
If an additive is bounded above on some nondegenerate interval, then for every real
Statement
Let be additive (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ) and suppose there are reals and a real with for every ; that is, is bounded above on a nondegenerate interval (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length, Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set). Then
A nondegenerate interval is all that is needed, and its position is irrelevant. Any order-convex set with two distinct points contains a closed with , and the hypothesis is used only through that closed interval; the argument then translates the interval along to cover the whole line.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An additive , reals , and a real with for every .
for all reals (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ).
for every with , where (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length, Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set).
An additive satisfies , , for every rational and every real , and for every (An additive satisfies , and for every rational and every real ; in particular at every rational ).
Strictly between any two distinct reals there lies a rational (The rationals embed densely in the reals).
For every real there is a natural with , and is positive and strictly increasing on the naturals (Every complete ordered field is Archimedean, For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with , The canonical natural of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
is an ordered field: sums and products of positives are positive, and with gives (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Basic properties of the absolute value).
Proof
Put and define by . Then is additive, since both and are, and for every rational .
is bounded above on : for one has , where , because and hence . Write for this bound.
for every real and every rational : additivity gives and .
is identically . Suppose for some real . Replacing by if necessary, which changes the sign of since , we may take .
is bounded above by on the whole of . Let be real. The two reals and satisfy , so there is a rational with ; then , so and .
With as in step 2.3, take a natural with ; then . But , contradicting step 3.1. So no such exists and vanishes identically.
Therefore for every real .
Remarks
-
Only an upper bound is used, and only on one interval. The proof never bounds below and never uses more than the single closed interval ; the translation invariance of step 2.2 and the sliding argument of step 3.1 do the rest. A lower bound on an interval gives the same conclusion by applying the lemma to , which is additive and bounded above there, and that is how Six regularity conditions each force an additive to be : continuity at a single point, monotonicity on a nondegenerate interval, boundedness above on one, boundedness below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in obtains five of its six clauses from this one lemma, the sixth being argued separately there.
-
Where the Archimedean property enters. Once, in step 4.1, to make the multiples exceed the bound . Over a non-Archimedean ordered field the argument fails at exactly that point, and the statement is not asserted there.
Six regularity conditions each force an additive to be : continuity at a single point, monotonicity on a nondegenerate interval, boundedness above on one, boundedness below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in
Statement
Let be additive (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ) and put . Write for the set of functions with the metric ( as the set of functions , and , , are metrics on it, Metric space: iff , symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric), and let
be the graph of . If any one of the following six conditions holds, then for every real .
- is continuous at some single point of (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point).
- is monotone on some nondegenerate interval (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences, Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
- is bounded above on some nondegenerate interval (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set).
- is bounded below on some nondegenerate interval.
- has constant sign on some nondegenerate interval : either for every , or for every .
- is not dense in (Interior, closure, boundary, limit point, isolated point and dense subset of a metric space).
Conditions 3, 4 and 5 are not independent, and the proof does not pretend they are. Condition 5 is the special case of 3 or of 4 with the bound , and condition 4 is condition 3 applied to ; they are listed separately only because each is the form in which the hypothesis usually arises. Condition 1 and condition 2 are each reduced to condition 3 in one line. Condition 6 is the only one that is not, and it is proved in the contrapositive: if is not of the form , then is dense.
Two classical clauses are absent. Boundedness on a set of positive measure and Lebesgue measurability also force linearity, and neither is stated here: both require a measure, and this library develops none as it stands. Each is an independent sufficient condition, so restoring them would change nothing else on this page.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An additive with , and its graph .
for all reals (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ).
An additive satisfies , and for every rational and every real (An additive satisfies , and for every rational and every real ; in particular at every rational ).
If an additive is bounded above on some with , then for every real (If an additive is bounded above on some nondegenerate interval, then for every real ).
A nondegenerate interval contains a closed with , by order-convexity (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
continuous at means: for every real there is a real with whenever ; and gives (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point, The -neighbourhood and the punctured -neighbourhood of a point of , Basic properties of the absolute value).
nondecreasing on means for in , and nonincreasing means ; monotone means one of the two (Nondecreasing, increasing (strictly increasing), nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone and strictly monotone real functions on a subset of , with the dictionary to monotone sequences).
is a metric on and its open ball of centre and radius is ; a subset of a metric space is dense exactly when every open ball meets ( as the set of functions , and , , are metrics on it, Open ball, closed ball and sphere in a metric space, Interior, closure, boundary, limit point, isolated point and dense subset of a metric space, The closure of a nonempty is , equals together with its limit points, and is the smallest closed superset).
Strictly between any two distinct reals there lies a rational; is a field, so a nonzero real is invertible (The rationals embed densely in the reals, Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with ).
Proof
Assume at least one of the six conditions holds. The six steps below treat the six conditions in turn and are exhaustive for that assumption; in each the conclusion reached is for every real .
Condition 3. If is bounded above on a nondegenerate interval, that interval contains a closed with on which is bounded above, and the boundedness lemma gives for every real .
Condition 6, in the contrapositive: if is not then is dense in . Suppose for some real . Then , since . Put , and , and put , which is nonzero by assumption.
Condition 4. If is bounded below on a nondegenerate interval , say for , then is additive and satisfies on , so is bounded above on ; by step 2.1 applied to we get , hence .
Condition 2. Let be monotone on a nondegenerate interval, which contains with . If is nondecreasing there then for every , and if is nonincreasing there then ; either way is bounded above on and step 2.1 applies.
Condition 1. Let be continuous at a point . Taking gives a real with , hence , for every with . The set of such is the nondegenerate interval , so is bounded above on a nondegenerate interval and step 2.1 applies.
Let and let be real. Put and . Then and , as multiplying out and cancelling shows in each case.
Condition 5. If for every in a nondegenerate interval then is bounded below on by and step 3.1 applies; if for every then is bounded above on by and step 2.1 applies. So sign-constancy is a special case of the two preceding conditions and needs no separate argument.
Choose rationals with and , where is a real chosen with and ; such rationals exist because a rational lies strictly between any two distinct reals, and such an exists because for a real the inequality holds for all small enough .
Put . Then by additivity and rational homogeneity, so . Moreover and likewise .
So every open ball of meets , that is, is dense in . Reading this contrapositively: if is not dense in then for every real , which is condition 6.
Each of the six conditions has now been shown to force for every real : condition 1 at step 3.3, condition 2 at step 3.2, condition 3 at step 2.1, condition 4 at step 3.1, condition 5 at step 4.1 and condition 6 at step 6.1.
Remarks
-
Every clause reduces to one lemma. The engine is If an additive is bounded above on some nondegenerate interval, then for every real ; five of the six conditions are shown to imply its hypothesis, and the sixth is proved separately because a non-dense graph gives no bound on anywhere. The economy is deliberate: proving each clause from scratch would repeat the same translation-and-scaling argument five times.
-
The list is not a list of equivalent conditions. Each of the six implies linearity, and linearity implies all six, so over the additive functions they are indeed equivalent; but the theorem as stated is six implications in one direction, and that is what the proof establishes.
-
None of the six is dispensable in the sense that additivity alone suffices. There is an additive satisfying none of them (FALSE: every additive is of the form for a single real ), and by the theorem it is unbounded above and below on every nondegenerate interval, monotone on none, continuous at no point, of constant sign on no nondegenerate interval, and has dense graph. The construction costs the Axiom of Choice, and the companion page records what it looks like.
Assuming the Axiom of Choice, has a Hamel basis over : there is such that every real is a finite -linear combination of elements of in exactly one way, and each basis vector carries a well-defined -linear coefficient map
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice). The hypothesis is genuinely used: it enters through Every vector space has a basis, whose own Statement begins "Assume the Axiom of Choice", and which rests on Zorn's lemma.
Write for the canonical copy of the rationals inside (The rationals embed densely in the reals). Then is a subfield of (Subfield: a subring of a field closed under inverses of its nonzero elements, and therefore a field with the restricted operations) and is a vector space over by restriction of scalars (A field is a vector space over itself, and over any subfield every -vector space is a -vector space by restricting the scalars, Vector space over a field); all spans, linear independence and bases below are taken in that structure. Then:
- Existence. has a basis over (Basis of a vector space: a linearly independent spanning subset; and ordered basis: an injective finite list whose image is a basis), called a Hamel basis.
- Representation. Every real is for some , some injective list (Injection, surjection, bijection) and some (Linear combination of a finite list, and the span as the smallest linear subspace containing ).
- Uniqueness along a list. For a fixed and a fixed injective , if satisfy , then for every .
- The coefficient map of a basis vector. Fix and put . Every real is with and in exactly one way. Writing for that unique scalar, the map satisfies its range is the whole of , and .
- The complement is not trivial. for every .
Claim 2 together with claim 4 is the precise content of the phrase "in exactly one way" in the title: a real is a finite -combination of basis vectors, and the coefficient attached to each single basis vector is determined by the real alone.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The field , the canonical copy of the rationals, and the Axiom of Choice.
The Axiom of Choice, used only through [L4] (The Axiom of Choice, Zorn's lemma).
The map is an embedding of ordered fields of into (The rationals embed densely in the reals); a subfield is a subset containing , closed under and , and containing for each nonzero in it (Subfield: a subring of a field closed under inverses of its nonzero elements, and therefore a field with the restricted operations, Field, Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)).
A field is a vector space over itself, and an -vector space is a -vector space for every subfield by restricting the scalars (A field is a vector space over itself, and over any subfield every -vector space is a -vector space by restricting the scalars, Vector space over a field).
is the smallest linear subspace containing ; it is extensive, monotone and idempotent; , and for the scalar in is determined (Linear combination of a finite list, and the span as the smallest linear subspace containing , Linear subspace of a vector space, The span is monotone and idempotent, exactly when is a linear subspace, and , , which is when , and when contains only as the multiple ).
Assume the Axiom of Choice. Then every vector space over every field has a basis, that is a linearly independent spanning subset (Every vector space has a basis, Basis of a vector space: a linearly independent spanning subset; and ordered basis: an injective finite list whose image is a basis, Linear independence: a finite list is independent when forces every , and a subset is independent when every injective finite list into is independent).
For : is linearly dependent if and only if some lies in ; and is already the set of linear combinations of injective finite lists into (A subset is linearly dependent if and only if some lies in ; and is already the set of linear combinations of INJECTIVE finite lists into , claims 1 and 2, is exactly the set of linear combinations of finite lists of elements of , and ).
A finite list is an ordered basis of if and only if every is for exactly one ; an ordered basis is an injective list whose image is a basis; and for a linear subspace and the readings of " is linearly independent" and " is a basis" computed in and in agree (A finite list is an ordered basis if and only if every equals for exactly one ; those scalars are the coordinates of in that ordered basis, Basis of a vector space: a linearly independent spanning subset; and ordered basis: an injective finite list whose image is a basis, The natural numbers (von Neumann)).
For finitely many linear subspaces, ; and if and only if every is with in exactly one way, which for reads (, so the sum is the smallest linear subspace containing every , The sum of two linear subspaces and the sum of a finite family, Internal direct sum : the sum is everything and each summand meets the sum of the others only in , if and only if every is with in exactly one way; equivalently, if and only if the sum is and with forces every ).
and is uncountable; a nonempty at most countable set is the image of a surjection from , and the image of a surjection from is at most countable ( is countably infinite, is uncountable (Cantor's nested intervals, 1874), A nonempty set is at most countable iff it is a surjective image of , Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).
Proof
is a subfield of : it contains ; it is closed under differences and products, since and ; and if then and lies in it.
is a vector space over itself, so restricting the scalars to the subfield makes a vector space over , with the field addition as vector addition and the field multiplication restricted to as scalar multiplication.
Claim 1: assuming the Axiom of Choice, that vector space has a basis , a linearly independent subset of with .
Claim 2: since and the span of a set is already the set of linear combinations of injective finite lists into it, every real is with injective and .
Claim 3: let be injective and put , a linear subspace of . The list is linearly independent, since is a linearly independent subset and is an injective finite list into ; its image spans by construction, so is a basis of and is an ordered basis of , independence and spanning being the same conditions read in as in .
Fix and put and , both linear subspaces of .
With and as in step 4.2, the coordinate theorem applied to the vector space says that every is for exactly one ; in particular forces , which is claim 3.
. Indeed ; the set is contained in , since and by extensiveness of the span, so by monotonicity; and , again by monotonicity, so by idempotence.
and . If lay in then would be linearly dependent, contrary to step 3.1; and would likewise make dependent, since , every span containing the zero vector.
. Let and write with . If then , because is a linear subspace and , contradicting step 5.3; so and .
Hence : condition (D1) is step 5.2, and condition (D2) is step 6.1, since for the two-member family the sum of the other summands is in the one case and in the other. By the direct-sum criterion every real is with and in exactly one way.
Writing , the scalar is determined by , since ; so is a well-defined map , and with in exactly one way.
is additive and -homogeneous: if and with , then with , and with for , both because is a linear subspace; uniqueness in step 8.1 then identifies the coefficients.
, from the representation ; the range of is all of , since for every ; and holds exactly when . Claim 4 is proved.
Claim 5: if then step 8.1 gives . That set is the image of under , and is the image of a surjection from , so composing gives a surjection from onto and would be at most countable, contradicting its uncountability. So .
Remarks
- How this differs from as a vector space over has a basis, and every such basis is infinite; the existence proof exhibits none, exactly. That item, homed on the examples page of Linear independence, bases and dimension, proves three things: that is a vector space over the canonical copy of , that it has a basis there, and that every such basis is infinite, together with the observation that the existence proof exhibits none. The present lemma proves the first two and does not prove the third: nothing above says that a Hamel basis is infinite. What it adds instead is claims 2 to 5 — the representation by injective lists, uniqueness of the coefficients along a list, the coefficient map of a single basis vector with its kernel, and the fact that — none of which appears there. So neither statement contains the other, and they are not the same statement.
The duplication of the two shared clauses is deliberate. An examples page is a leaf of this library and nothing outside it may depend on an item homed there, so a citable Hamel basis had to be built on a page that is not a leaf. The proofs of those clauses are the same proof, and no originality is claimed for them.
-
Where the choice is spent. Once, in Every vector space has a basis, which runs through Zorn's lemma. Everything after step 3.1 is elementary linear algebra over an arbitrary field, applied to over . Nothing here exhibits a Hamel basis, and nothing here claims that none can be exhibited; that would be an assertion about definability, and this library has established nothing of the kind.
-
The coefficient map is the source of the pathology. is additive (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ) and takes only rational values, so it is not of the form ; that is the whole of FALSE: every additive is of the form for a single real , and the companion page reads off from it a function unbounded on every interval, with dense graph and dense level sets.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
FALSE: a function with the intermediate value property on an interval is continuous
Statement
FALSE. If is an interval and has the intermediate value property (The intermediate value property (Darboux property) of a function on an interval: the image of every subinterval is order-convex), then is continuous on (Continuity of at a point of and on : the - condition, its agreement with at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point).
The converse implication is true and is The image of an interval under a continuous real function is order-convex, hence an interval, and the image of a closed bounded interval is a closed bounded interval: every continuous function on an interval has the intermediate value property. The claim above asserts that the implication reverses, and it does not.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The interval (Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).
For every real there is exactly one integer with , written (Integer part: for every real there is exactly one integer with ); in particular no integer lies strictly between and .
and exist for reals , and a nonempty finite set of reals has a minimum and a maximum (Maximum and minimum of a set, Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum).
Sums, scalar multiples, absolute values, maxima, minima and quotients with nonvanishing denominator of continuous functions are continuous, as are constants and the identity; composites of continuous functions are continuous (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, A composite of continuous functions is continuous, with no side hypothesis of the kind the composition of limits needs).
Intermediate value theorem: a continuous function on takes every value between its values at the endpoints (Intermediate value theorem, by bisection with a canonical left-half rule: a continuous function on takes every value between and ).
For every real there is a natural with , and the canonical naturals are cofinal in (For every in a complete ordered field there is a natural with , Every complete ordered field is Archimedean, The canonical natural of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
, only for , and (Basic properties of the absolute value).
has the intermediate value property on an order-convex exactly when for all in and every between and in either order there is with (The intermediate value property (Darboux property) of a function on an interval: the image of every subinterval is order-convex).
Refutation
Define by , the distance from to the nearest integer, and define by for and .
for every real : writing , the two entries are and , and their minimum is at most their average . Consequently for every .
in the sense that for every integer , with equality for or . Indeed, with : for one has , and for one has .
For every real and every there is with and : take a natural with and put . Then and with , so and .
is continuous on , because for all reals : choose an integer with , which exists by step 2.2; then , and exchanging and gives the other inequality. So witnesses continuity at every point.
For every real and every there is with and : with as in step 2.3 put , so and . If then is an integer and ; if then and , so .
is discontinuous at : , and by step 2.3 every real admits with and , so . Hence no witnesses the continuity condition at for .
is continuous at every with : on the set the map is continuous, and is its composite with ; continuity at a point of that set is continuity of there, since the set contains a whole neighbourhood of inside when .
If then, since , either or . In the first case step 2.3 with gives with and , and ; in the second case step 3.2 with gives with and . Either way .
has the intermediate value property on . Let in and let lie between and in either order; in particular by step 2.1. If then restricted to is continuous by step 4.1, and the intermediate value theorem supplies with .
So is a function on the interval with the intermediate value property that is not continuous on , and the claim in the Statement is false.
Remarks
-
What survives the refutation. The implication continuous intermediate value property is true and is The image of an interval under a continuous real function is order-convex, hence an interval, and the image of a closed bounded interval is a closed bounded interval. So is the partial converse for monotone functions: a function satisfying whenever , whose image is order-convex, is continuous (A function on an interval satisfying whenever , whose image is order-convex, is continuous). The witness above is therefore necessarily non-monotone, and it is: it rises and falls infinitely often in every neighbourhood of .
-
The witness fails continuity at exactly one point. That is all a refutation needs, and it is all that is claimed: nothing above says that the failure cannot be worse. Functions with the intermediate value property that are continuous at no point at all do exist, the standard one being Conway's base-13 function; it is not constructed at this point in the reading order, and no statement here depends on it.
-
Nothing above defines the derivative, and Darboux's theorem is not used. The classical source of non-continuous functions with the intermediate value property is the class of derivatives, which have the property by Darboux's theorem; no notion of derivative is available at this point in the reading order, and the witness here is built by hand instead.
FALSE: every additive is of the form for a single real
Statement
FALSE. Every additive (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ) is of the form for a single real .
What is true is the -linear part of it, for rational (An additive satisfies , and for every rational and every real ; in particular at every rational ), and the conditional statements of Six regularity conditions each force an additive to be : continuity at a single point, monotonicity on a nondegenerate interval, boundedness above on one, boundedness below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in , each of which adds a regularity hypothesis. The claim above asserts the conclusion with no hypothesis at all, and it is false.
The refutation assumes the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice), which it uses through Assuming the Axiom of Choice, has a Hamel basis over : there is such that every real is a finite -linear combination of elements of in exactly one way, and each basis vector carries a well-defined -linear coefficient map and hence through Zorn's lemma. The hypothesis is carried explicitly in the Facts below and in every step that needs it. It is an axiom already adopted in this library, so the refutation is a refutation and not a conditional one; what it does not settle is whether a counterexample exists without choice, and nothing here bears on that question.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Choice, and denoting the canonical copy of the rationals inside (The rationals embed densely in the reals).
The Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice, Zorn's lemma).
Assume the Axiom of Choice. Then there is , a basis of as a vector space over by restriction of scalars, and for each a map with for all reals , with , and with range the whole of (Assuming the Axiom of Choice, has a Hamel basis over : there is such that every real is a finite -linear combination of elements of in exactly one way, and each basis vector carries a well-defined -linear coefficient map, claims 1 and 4, A field is a vector space over itself, and over any subfield every -vector space is a -vector space by restricting the scalars, Vector space over a field, Linear combination of a finite list, and the span as the smallest linear subspace containing ).
A function is additive when for all reals (Cauchy's functional equation , and the additive functions ).
There exists an irrational real, that is a real not lying in : the irrationals are dense in and in particular nonempty (Both and are dense in , and every nonempty open subset of is uncountable).
is a field, so a nonzero real is invertible (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)).
Refutation
Assume the Axiom of Choice and fix a Hamel basis of over together with an element ; such an element exists because spans , which is not , so is nonempty. Put , regarded as a function .
is additive: for all reals is one of the properties of the coefficient map.
Every value of is rational, and .
Suppose there were a real with for every real . Then , so and is invertible.
Take an irrational real and put . Then , which is irrational; but every value of is rational by step 2.2. This is impossible, so no such exists.
So is an additive function that is not of the form for any real , and the claim in the Statement is false.
Remarks
-
What the witness looks like, by the regularity theorem. Since is additive and not of the form , the contrapositive of each clause of Six regularity conditions each force an additive to be : continuity at a single point, monotonicity on a nondegenerate interval, boundedness above on one, boundedness below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in applies: is continuous at no point of , is bounded neither above nor below on any nondegenerate interval, is monotone on no nondegenerate interval, is of constant sign on none, and its graph is dense in . The companion page states and uses exactly this in full.
-
The cost is the Axiom of Choice, and only that. The construction uses no other principle, and AC is an axiom this library has adopted, so nothing here is conditional in the sense of resting on unproved material. It is worth being precise about what is not claimed: it is not claimed that no explicit non-linear additive function can be written down, only that this one is produced by a proof that exhibits nothing.
-
Every hypothesis that would rescue the claim is already recorded. Adding any single one of the six conditions of Six regularity conditions each force an additive to be : continuity at a single point, monotonicity on a nondegenerate interval, boundedness above on one, boundedness below on one, constancy of sign on one, and a graph that is not dense in turns the false statement into a theorem. That is the reason the false statement is worth stating: the failure is not marginal, and yet it is repaired by an extremely weak hypothesis, as little as continuity at one single point.
Sources
Standard references
Recommended treatments; not extraction sources.
- Monotonic function (Wikipedia)
- Monotone Functions (Analysis WebNotes)
- W. Rudin, Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 3rd ed., Ch. 4
- Discontinuities of monotone functions (Wikipedia)
- Classification of discontinuities (Wikipedia)
- Froda's theorem (Wikipedia)
- Intermediate value theorem (Wikipedia)
- Continuous Injection of Interval is Strictly Monotone (ProofWiki)
- Inverse function theorem (Wikipedia)
- Real Analysis Notes 10 (California State University, Dominguez Hills)
- Cantor function (Wikipedia)
- Cantor set (Wikipedia)
- Oscillation (mathematics) (Wikipedia)
- Real Function is Continuous at Point iff Oscillation is Zero (ProofWiki)
- Gdelta set (Wikipedia)
- Thomae's function (Wikipedia)
- Dirichlet function (Wikipedia)
- Baire category theorem (Wikipedia)
- Darboux's theorem (analysis) (Wikipedia)
- Darboux property (Encyclopedia of Mathematics)
- Semi-continuity (Wikipedia)
- Characterization of Lower Semicontinuity (ProofWiki)
- Extreme value theorem (Wikipedia)
- Upper Semicontinuous Function on Compact Space Attains Maximum (ProofWiki)
- Baire function (Wikipedia)
- Pointwise convergence (Wikipedia)
- Baire classes (Encyclopedia of Mathematics)
- Cauchy's functional equation (Wikipedia)
- Additive operators approximately preserving Birkhoff-James orthogonality (Aequationes mathematicae)
- Hamel basis (Wikipedia)
- Hamel basis, in Basis (linear algebra) (Wikipedia)
- Axiom of choice (Wikipedia)
- Hamel Basis (MathWorld)