User submissions are the sole responsibility of contributors, with TuteeHUB disclaiming liability for accuracy, copyrights, or consequences of use; content is for informational purposes only and not professional advice.
When every subset of A has a lub and glb, we say that the order is a complete lattice, but this takes us beyond the syllabus. It is notable that QQ, ordered by ≤≤, is not a complete lattice but RR, ordered by ≤≤, is a complete lattice. This is the fundamental difference between QQ and RR.
Please can someone explain why this is true? I can't see what the lub of RR would be, in the same way I can't see a lub for QQ.
The book is mistaken; for instance, A=R⊆RA=R⊆R has no g.l.b. or l.u.b. in RR, so RR is not a complete lattice. However, Rˆ=R∪{−∞,∞}R^=R∪{−∞,∞}is a complete lattice, where we declare −∞<r<∞−∞<r<∞ for all r∈Rr∈R.
But even this modification doesn't help in the case of Qˆ=Q∪{−∞,∞}Q^=Q∪{−∞,∞}.
No matter what stage you're at in your education or career, TuteeHUB will help you reach the next level that
you're aiming for. Simply,Choose a subject/topic and get started in self-paced practice
sessions to improve your knowledge and scores.
manpreet
Best Answer
3 years ago
To quote from my lecture notes:
Please can someone explain why this is true? I can't see what the lub of RR would be, in the same way I can't see a lub for QQ.