Definition 6
Tag 03JJ, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 03JJ].
Theory of Sets, chapter III, § 1. Order relations. Ordered sets
Let be an ordered set and let be a subset of . An element of is said to be the greatest lower bound or infimum (resp. least upper bound or supremum) of in if it is the greatest (resp. least) element of the set of lower (resp. upper) bounds of in .
Given a subset of an ordered set , the least upper bound (resp. greatest lower bound) of in , when it exists, is denoted by
or by sup X (resp. inf X) if there is no risk of ambiguity. The least upper bound (resp. greatest lower bound) of a set of two elements, when it exists, is denoted by sup (resp. inf ). Similarly for the least upper bound and greatest lower bound of a set of three elements, etc.
¶ If a subset X of E has a greatest element , then is the least upper bound of X in E.
¶ If X has a greatest lower bound in E, then is the least upper bound of X with respect to the opposite ordering on E. For this reason we may restrict ourselves for the most part, in what follows, to consideration of the properties of least upper bounds.
Examples
(1) The set of upper bounds of the empty set in an ordered set E is evidently E itself; hence has a supremum in E if and only if E has a least element, which is then the least upper bound of .
(2) In the set of subsets of a set E, ordered by inclusion, every subset of has a least upper bound, namely the union of the sets of , and a greatest lower bound, namely the intersection of the sets of .
(3) Let E, F be two sets and let be a subset of the of mappings of subsets of E into F, ordered by extension of mappings (no. 1, Example 3). For each let be the domain of . The condition for the existence of a common extension of a family of mappings belonging to (Chapter II, § 4, no. 6, Proposition 7) shows that has a least upper bound in if and only if for each pair of elements of we have whenever .
A mapping of a set A into an ordered set E is said to have a least upper bound if the image has a least upper bound in E; this bound is then called the least upper bound of f and is written . Similarly for the greatest lower bound.
In particular, if a subset A of E has a least upper bound in E, this bound is the least upper bound of the canonical injection of A into E, and may therefore be written as .
Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.
Cited by
Nothing.