L.abs_sub_comm – Calculemus

Las clases de equivalencia de elementos no relacionados son disjuntas

PorJosé A. Alonso 23 agosto 202121 agosto 2021

Demostrar que las clases de equivalencia de elementos no relacionados son disjuntas.

Para ello, completar la siguiente teoría de Lean:

import tactic

variable  {X : Type}
variables {x y: X}
variable  {R : X → X → Prop}

def clase (R : X → X → Prop) (x : X) :=
  {y : X | R x y}

example
  (h : equivalence R)
  (hxy : ¬ R x y)
  : clase R x ∩ clase R y = ∅ :=
sorry

import tactic

variable {X : Type}

variables {x y: X}

variable {R : X → X → Prop}

def clase (R : X → X → Prop) (x : X) :=

{y : X | R x y}

example

(h : equivalence R)

(hxy : ¬ R x y)

: clase R x ∩ clase R y = ∅ :=

sorry

[expand title=»Soluciones con Lean»]

import tactic

variable  {X : Type}
variables {x y: X}
variable  {R : X → X → Prop}

def clase (R : X → X → Prop) (x : X) :=
  {y : X | R x y}

-- 1ª demostración
example
  (h : equivalence R)
  (hxy : ¬ R x y)
  : clase R x ∩ clase R y = ∅ :=
begin
  rcases h with ⟨hr, hs, ht⟩,
  by_contradiction h1,
  apply hxy,
  have h2 : ∃ z, z ∈ clase R x ∩ clase R y,
    { contrapose h1,
      intro h1a,
      apply h1a,
      push_neg at h1,
      exact set.eq_empty_iff_forall_not_mem.mpr h1, },
  rcases h2 with ⟨z, hxz, hyz⟩,
  replace hxz : R x z := hxz,
  replace hyz : R y z := hyz,
  have hzy : R z y := hs hyz,
  exact ht hxz hzy,
end

-- 2ª demostración
example
  (h : equivalence R)
  (hxy : ¬ R x y)
  : clase R x ∩ clase R y = ∅ :=
begin
  rcases h with ⟨hr, hs, ht⟩,
  by_contradiction h1,
  have h2 : ∃ z, z ∈ clase R x ∩ clase R y,
    { by finish [set.eq_empty_iff_forall_not_mem]},
  apply hxy,
  rcases h2 with ⟨z, hxz, hyz⟩,
  exact ht hxz (hs hyz),
end

import tactic

variable {X : Type}

variables {x y: X}

variable {R : X → X → Prop}

def clase (R : X → X → Prop) (x : X) :=

{y : X | R x y}

-- 1ª demostración

example

(h : equivalence R)

(hxy : ¬ R x y)

: clase R x ∩ clase R y = ∅ :=

begin

rcases h with ⟨hr, hs, ht⟩,

by_contradiction h1,

apply hxy,

have h2 : ∃ z, z ∈ clase R x ∩ clase R y,

{ contrapose h1,

intro h1a,

apply h1a,

push_neg at h1,

exact set.eq_empty_iff_forall_not_mem.mpr h1, },

rcases h2 with ⟨z, hxz, hyz⟩,

replace hxz : R x z := hxz,

replace hyz : R y z := hyz,

have hzy : R z y := hs hyz,

exact ht hxz hzy,

end

-- 2ª demostración

example

(h : equivalence R)

(hxy : ¬ R x y)

: clase R x ∩ clase R y = ∅ :=

begin

rcases h with ⟨hr, hs, ht⟩,

by_contradiction h1,

have h2 : ∃ z, z ∈ clase R x ∩ clase R y,

{ by finish [set.eq_empty_iff_forall_not_mem]},

apply hxy,

rcases h2 with ⟨z, hxz, hyz⟩,

exact ht hxz (hs hyz),

end

Se puede interactuar con la prueba anterior en esta sesión con Lean.

En los comentarios se pueden escribir otras soluciones, escribiendo el código entre una línea con <pre lang="lean"> y otra con </pre>
[/expand]

[expand title=»Soluciones con Isabelle/HOL»]

theory Las_clases_de_equivalencia_de_elementos_no_relacionados_son_disjuntas
imports Main
begin

definition clase :: "('a ⇒ 'a ⇒ bool) ⇒ 'a ⇒ 'a set"
  where "clase R x = {y. R x y}"

(* 1ª demostración *)
lemma
  assumes "equivp R"
          "¬(R x y)"
  shows "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"
proof -
  have "∀z. z ∈ clase R x ⟶ z ∉ clase R y"
  proof (intro allI impI)
    fix z
    assume "z ∈ clase R x"
    then have "R x z"
      using clase_def by (metis CollectD)
    show "z ∉ clase R y"
    proof (rule notI)
      assume "z ∈ clase R y"
      then have "R y z"
        using clase_def by (metis CollectD)
      then have "R z y"
        using assms(1) by (simp only: equivp_symp)
      with ‹R x z› have "R x y"
        using assms(1) by (simp only: equivp_transp)
      with ‹¬R x y› show False
        by (rule notE)
    qed
  qed
  then show "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"
    by (simp only: disjoint_iff)
qed

(* 2ª demostración *)
lemma
  assumes "equivp R"
          "¬(R x y)"
  shows "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"
proof -
  have "∀z. z ∈ clase R x ⟶ z ∉ clase R y"
  proof (intro allI impI)
    fix z
    assume "z ∈ clase R x"
    then have "R x z"
      using clase_def by fastforce
    show "z ∉ clase R y"
    proof (rule notI)
      assume "z ∈ clase R y"
      then have "R y z"
        using clase_def by fastforce
      then have "R z y"
        using assms(1) by (simp only: equivp_symp)
      with ‹R x z› have "R x y"
        using assms(1) by (simp only: equivp_transp)
      with ‹¬R x y› show False
        by simp
    qed
  qed
  then show "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"
    by (simp only: disjoint_iff)
qed

(* 3ª demostración *)
lemma
  assumes "equivp R"
          "¬(R x y)"
  shows "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"
  using assms
  by (metis clase_def
            CollectD
            equivp_symp
            equivp_transp
            disjoint_iff)

(* 4ª demostración *)
lemma
  assumes "equivp R"
          "¬(R x y)"
  shows "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"
  using assms
  by (metis equivp_def
            clase_def
            CollectD
            disjoint_iff_not_equal)

end

theory Las_clases_de_equivalencia_de_elementos_no_relacionados_son_disjuntas

imports Main

begin

definition clase :: "('a ⇒ 'a ⇒ bool) ⇒ 'a ⇒ 'a set"

where "clase R x = {y. R x y}"

(* 1ª demostración *)

lemma

assumes "equivp R"

"¬(R x y)"

shows "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"

proof -

have "∀z. z ∈ clase R x ⟶ z ∉ clase R y"

proof (intro allI impI)

fix z

assume "z ∈ clase R x"

then have "R x z"

using clase_def by (metis CollectD)

show "z ∉ clase R y"

proof (rule notI)

assume "z ∈ clase R y"

then have "R y z"

using clase_def by (metis CollectD)

then have "R z y"

using assms(1) by (simp only: equivp_symp)

with ‹R x z› have "R x y"

using assms(1) by (simp only: equivp_transp)

with ‹¬R x y› show False

by (rule notE)

qed

then show "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"

by (simp only: disjoint_iff)

qed

(* 2ª demostración *)

lemma

assumes "equivp R"

"¬(R x y)"

shows "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"

proof -

have "∀z. z ∈ clase R x ⟶ z ∉ clase R y"

proof (intro allI impI)

fix z

assume "z ∈ clase R x"

then have "R x z"

using clase_def by fastforce

show "z ∉ clase R y"

proof (rule notI)

assume "z ∈ clase R y"

then have "R y z"

using clase_def by fastforce

then have "R z y"

using assms(1) by (simp only: equivp_symp)

with ‹R x z› have "R x y"

using assms(1) by (simp only: equivp_transp)

with ‹¬R x y› show False

by simp

qed

then show "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"

by (simp only: disjoint_iff)

qed

(* 3ª demostración *)

lemma

assumes "equivp R"

"¬(R x y)"

shows "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"

using assms

by (metis clase_def

CollectD

equivp_symp

equivp_transp

disjoint_iff)

(* 4ª demostración *)

lemma

assumes "equivp R"

"¬(R x y)"

shows "clase R x ∩ clase R y = {}"

using assms

by (metis equivp_def

clase_def

CollectD

disjoint_iff_not_equal)

end

En los comentarios se pueden escribir otras soluciones, escribiendo el código entre una línea con <pre lang="isar"> y otra con </pre>
[/expand]

Las sucesiones convergentes son sucesiones de Cauchy

PorJosé A. Alonso 21 agosto 202121 agosto 2021

Nota: El problema de hoy lo ha escrito Sara Díaz Real y es uno de los que se encuentran en su Trabajo Fin de Máster Formalización en Lean de problemas de las Olimpiadas Internacionales de Matemáticas (IMO). Concretamente, el problema se encuentra en la página 52 junto con la demostración en lenguaje natural.

En Lean, una sucesión u₀, u₁, u₂, … se puede representar mediante una función (u : ℕ → ℝ) de forma que u(n) es uₙ.

Se define

el valor absoluto de x por

     notation `|`x`|` := abs x

1	notation `\|`x`\|` := abs x

a es un límite de la sucesión u, por

     def limite (u : ℕ → ℝ) (a : ℝ) :=
       ∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ n ≥ N, |u n - a| ≤ ε

1 2	def limite (u : ℕ → ℝ) (a : ℝ) := ∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ n ≥ N, \|u n - a\| ≤ ε

la sucesión u es convergente por

     def suc_convergente (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=
       ∃ l, limite u l

1 2	def suc_convergente (u : ℕ → ℝ) := ∃ l, limite u l

la sucesión u es de Cauchy por

     def suc_cauchy (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=
       ∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ p ≥ N, ∀ q ≥ N, |u p - u q| ≤ ε

1 2	def suc_cauchy (u : ℕ → ℝ) := ∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ p ≥ N, ∀ q ≥ N, \|u p - u q\| ≤ ε

Demostrar que las sucesiones convergentes son de Cauchy.

Para ello, completar la siguiente teoría de Lean:

import data.real.basic

variable {u : ℕ → ℝ }

notation `|`x`|` := abs x

def limite (u : ℕ → ℝ) (l : ℝ) : Prop :=
  ∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ n ≥ N, |u n - l| ≤ ε

def suc_convergente (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=
  ∃ l, limite u l

def suc_cauchy (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=
  ∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ p ≥ N, ∀ q ≥ N, |u p - u q| ≤ ε

example
  (h : suc_convergente u)
  : suc_cauchy u :=
sorry

import data.real.basic

variable {u : ℕ → ℝ }

notation `|`x`|` := abs x

def limite (u : ℕ → ℝ) (l : ℝ) : Prop :=

∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ n ≥ N, |u n - l| ≤ ε

def suc_convergente (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=

∃ l, limite u l

def suc_cauchy (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=

∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ p ≥ N, ∀ q ≥ N, |u p - u q| ≤ ε

example

(h : suc_convergente u)

: suc_cauchy u :=

sorry

[expand title=»Soluciones con Lean»]

import data.real.basic

variable {u : ℕ → ℝ }

notation `|`x`|` := abs x

def limite (u : ℕ → ℝ) (l : ℝ) : Prop :=
  ∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ n ≥ N, |u n - l| ≤ ε

def suc_convergente (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=
  ∃ l, limite u l

def suc_cauchy (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=
  ∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ p ≥ N, ∀ q ≥ N, |u p - u q| ≤ ε

-- 1ª demostración
example
  (h : suc_convergente u)
  : suc_cauchy u :=
begin
  unfold suc_cauchy,
  intros ε hε,
  have hε2 : 0 < ε/2 := half_pos hε,
  cases h with l hl,
  cases hl (ε/2) hε2 with N hN,
  clear hε hl hε2,
  use N,
  intros p hp q hq,
  calc |u p - u q|
       = |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf
   ... ≤ |u p - l|  + |l - u q|  : abs_add (u p - l) (l - u q)
   ... = |u p - l|  + |u q - l|  : congr_arg2 (+) rfl (abs_sub_comm l (u q))
   ... ≤ ε/2 + ε/2               : add_le_add (hN p hp) (hN q hq)
   ... = ε                       : add_halves ε,
end

-- 2ª demostración
example
  (h : suc_convergente u)
  : suc_cauchy u :=
begin
  intros ε hε,
  cases h with l hl,
  cases hl (ε/2) (half_pos hε) with N hN,
  clear hε hl,
  use N,
  intros p hp q hq,
  calc |u p - u q|
       = |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf
   ... ≤ |u p - l|  + |l - u q|  : abs_add (u p - l) (l - u q)
   ... = |u p - l|  + |u q - l|  : congr_arg2 (+) rfl (abs_sub_comm l (u q))
   ... ≤ ε/2 + ε/2               : add_le_add (hN p hp) (hN q hq)
   ... = ε                       : add_halves ε,
end

-- 3ª demostración
example
  (h : suc_convergente u)
  : suc_cauchy u :=
begin
  intros ε hε,
  cases h with l hl,
  cases hl (ε/2) (half_pos hε) with N hN,
  clear hε hl,
  use N,
  intros p hp q hq,
  have cota1 : |u p - l| ≤ ε / 2 := hN p hp,
  have cota2 : |u q - l| ≤ ε / 2 := hN q hq,
  clear hN hp hq,
  calc |u p - u q|
       = |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf
   ... ≤ |u p - l|  + |l - u q|  : abs_add (u p - l) (l - u q)
   ... = |u p - l|  + |u q - l|  : by rw abs_sub_comm l (u q)
   ... ≤ ε                       : by linarith,
end

-- 4ª demostración
example
  (h : suc_convergente u)
  : suc_cauchy u :=
begin
  intros ε hε,
  cases h with l hl,
  cases hl (ε/2) (half_pos hε) with N hN,
  clear hε hl,
  use N,
  intros p hp q hq,
  calc |u p - u q|
       = |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf
   ... ≤ |u p - l|  + |l - u q|  : abs_add (u p - l) (l - u q)
   ... = |u p - l|  + |u q - l|  : by rw abs_sub_comm l (u q)
   ... ≤ ε                       : by linarith [hN p hp, hN q hq],
end

-- 5ª demostración
example
  (h : suc_convergente u)
  : suc_cauchy u :=
begin
  intros ε hε,
  cases h with l hl,
  cases hl (ε/2) (by linarith) with N hN,
  use N,
  intros p hp q hq,
  calc |u p - u q|
       = |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf
   ... ≤ |u p - l|  + |l - u q|  : by simp [abs_add]
   ... = |u p - l|  + |u q - l|  : by simp [abs_sub_comm]
   ... ≤ ε                       : by linarith [hN p hp, hN q hq],
end

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

import data.real.basic

variable {u : ℕ → ℝ }

notation `|`x`|` := abs x

def limite (u : ℕ → ℝ) (l : ℝ) : Prop :=

∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ n ≥ N, |u n - l| ≤ ε

def suc_convergente (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=

∃ l, limite u l

def suc_cauchy (u : ℕ → ℝ) :=

∀ ε > 0, ∃ N, ∀ p ≥ N, ∀ q ≥ N, |u p - u q| ≤ ε

-- 1ª demostración

example

(h : suc_convergente u)

: suc_cauchy u :=

begin

unfold suc_cauchy,

intros ε hε,

have hε2 : 0 < ε/2 := half_pos hε,

cases h with l hl,

cases hl (ε/2) hε2 with N hN,

clear hε hl hε2,

use N,

intros p hp q hq,

calc |u p - u q|

= |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf

... ≤ |u p - l| + |l - u q| : abs_add (u p - l) (l - u q)

... = |u p - l| + |u q - l| : congr_arg2 (+) rfl (abs_sub_comm l (u q))

... ≤ ε/2 + ε/2 : add_le_add (hN p hp) (hN q hq)

... = ε : add_halves ε,

end

-- 2ª demostración

example

(h : suc_convergente u)

: suc_cauchy u :=

begin

intros ε hε,

cases h with l hl,

cases hl (ε/2) (half_pos hε) with N hN,

clear hε hl,

use N,

intros p hp q hq,

calc |u p - u q|

= |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf

... ≤ |u p - l| + |l - u q| : abs_add (u p - l) (l - u q)

... = |u p - l| + |u q - l| : congr_arg2 (+) rfl (abs_sub_comm l (u q))

... ≤ ε/2 + ε/2 : add_le_add (hN p hp) (hN q hq)

... = ε : add_halves ε,

end

-- 3ª demostración

example

(h : suc_convergente u)

: suc_cauchy u :=

begin

intros ε hε,

cases h with l hl,

cases hl (ε/2) (half_pos hε) with N hN,

clear hε hl,

use N,

intros p hp q hq,

have cota1 : |u p - l| ≤ ε / 2 := hN p hp,

have cota2 : |u q - l| ≤ ε / 2 := hN q hq,

clear hN hp hq,

calc |u p - u q|

= |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf

... ≤ |u p - l| + |l - u q| : abs_add (u p - l) (l - u q)

... = |u p - l| + |u q - l| : by rw abs_sub_comm l (u q)

... ≤ ε : by linarith,

end

-- 4ª demostración

example

(h : suc_convergente u)

: suc_cauchy u :=

begin

intros ε hε,

cases h with l hl,

cases hl (ε/2) (half_pos hε) with N hN,

clear hε hl,

use N,

intros p hp q hq,

calc |u p - u q|

= |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf

... ≤ |u p - l| + |l - u q| : abs_add (u p - l) (l - u q)

... = |u p - l| + |u q - l| : by rw abs_sub_comm l (u q)

... ≤ ε : by linarith [hN p hp, hN q hq],

end

-- 5ª demostración

example

(h : suc_convergente u)

: suc_cauchy u :=

begin

intros ε hε,

cases h with l hl,

cases hl (ε/2) (by linarith) with N hN,

use N,

intros p hp q hq,

calc |u p - u q|

= |(u p - l) + (l - u q)| : by ring_nf

... ≤ |u p - l| + |l - u q| : by simp [abs_add]

... = |u p - l| + |u q - l| : by simp [abs_sub_comm]

... ≤ ε : by linarith [hN p hp, hN q hq],

end

Se puede interactuar con la prueba anterior en esta sesión con Lean.

En los comentarios se pueden escribir otras soluciones, escribiendo el código entre una línea con <pre lang="lean"> y otra con </pre>
[/expand]

[expand title=»Soluciones con Isabelle/HOL»]

theory Las_sucesiones_convergentes_son_sucesiones_de_Cauchy
imports Main HOL.Real
begin

definition limite :: "(nat ⇒ real) ⇒ real ⇒ bool"
  where "limite u c ⟷ (∀ε>0. ∃k::nat. ∀n≥k. ¦u n - c¦ < ε)"

definition suc_convergente :: "(nat ⇒ real) ⇒ bool"
  where "suc_convergente u ⟷ (∃ l. limite u l)"

definition suc_cauchy :: "(nat ⇒ real) ⇒ bool"
  where "suc_cauchy u ⟷ (∀ε>0. ∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε)"

(* 1ª demostración *)
lemma
  assumes "suc_convergente u"
  shows   "suc_cauchy u"
proof (unfold suc_cauchy_def; intro allI impI)
  fix ε :: real
  assume "0 < ε"
  then have "0 < ε/2"
    by simp
  obtain a where "limite u a"
    using assms suc_convergente_def by blast
  then obtain k where hk : "∀n≥k. ¦u n - a¦ < ε/2"
    using ‹0 < ε / 2› limite_def by blast
  have "∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"
  proof (intro allI impI)
    fix p q
    assume hp : "p ≥ k" and hq : "q ≥ k"
    then have hp' : "¦u p - a¦ < ε/2"
      using hk by blast
    have hq' : "¦u q - a¦ < ε/2"
      using hk hq by blast
    have "¦u p - u q¦ = ¦(u p - a) + (a - u q)¦"
      by simp
    also have "… ≤ ¦u p - a¦  + ¦a - u q¦"
      by simp
    also have "… = ¦u p - a¦  + ¦u q - a¦"
      by simp
    also have "… < ε/2 + ε/2"
      using hp' hq' by simp
    also have "… = ε"
      by simp
    finally show "¦u p - u q¦ < ε"
      by this
  qed
  then show "∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"
    by (rule exI)
qed

(* 2ª demostración *)
lemma
  assumes "suc_convergente u"
  shows   "suc_cauchy u"
proof (unfold suc_cauchy_def; intro allI impI)
  fix ε :: real
  assume "0 < ε"
  then have "0 < ε/2"
    by simp
  obtain a where "limite u a"
    using assms suc_convergente_def by blast
  then obtain k where hk : "∀n≥k. ¦u n - a¦ < ε/2"
    using ‹0 < ε / 2› limite_def by blast
  have "∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"
  proof (intro allI impI)
    fix p q
    assume hp : "p ≥ k" and hq : "q ≥ k"
    then have hp' : "¦u p - a¦ < ε/2"
      using hk by blast
    have hq' : "¦u q - a¦ < ε/2"
      using hk hq by blast
    show "¦u p - u q¦ < ε"
      using hp' hq' by argo
  qed
  then show "∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"
    by (rule exI)
qed

(* 3ª demostración *)
lemma
  assumes "suc_convergente u"
  shows   "suc_cauchy u"
proof (unfold suc_cauchy_def; intro allI impI)
  fix ε :: real
  assume "0 < ε"
  then have "0 < ε/2"
    by simp
  obtain a where "limite u a"
    using assms suc_convergente_def by blast
  then obtain k where hk : "∀n≥k. ¦u n - a¦ < ε/2"
    using ‹0 < ε / 2› limite_def by blast
  have "∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"
    using hk by (smt (z3) field_sum_of_halves)
  then show "∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"
    by (rule exI)
qed

(* 3ª demostración *)
lemma
  assumes "suc_convergente u"
  shows   "suc_cauchy u"
proof (unfold suc_cauchy_def; intro allI impI)
  fix ε :: real
  assume "0 < ε"
  then have "0 < ε/2"
    by simp
  obtain a where "limite u a"
    using assms suc_convergente_def by blast
  then obtain k where hk : "∀n≥k. ¦u n - a¦ < ε/2"
    using ‹0 < ε / 2› limite_def by blast
  then show "∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"
    by (smt (z3) field_sum_of_halves)
qed

end

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

theory Las_sucesiones_convergentes_son_sucesiones_de_Cauchy

imports Main HOL.Real

begin

definition limite :: "(nat ⇒ real) ⇒ real ⇒ bool"

where "limite u c ⟷ (∀ε>0. ∃k::nat. ∀n≥k. ¦u n - c¦ < ε)"

definition suc_convergente :: "(nat ⇒ real) ⇒ bool"

where "suc_convergente u ⟷ (∃ l. limite u l)"

definition suc_cauchy :: "(nat ⇒ real) ⇒ bool"

where "suc_cauchy u ⟷ (∀ε>0. ∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε)"

(* 1ª demostración *)

lemma

assumes "suc_convergente u"

shows "suc_cauchy u"

proof (unfold suc_cauchy_def; intro allI impI)

fix ε :: real

assume "0 < ε"

then have "0 < ε/2"

by simp

obtain a where "limite u a"

using assms suc_convergente_def by blast

then obtain k where hk : "∀n≥k. ¦u n - a¦ < ε/2"

using ‹0 < ε / 2› limite_def by blast

have "∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"

proof (intro allI impI)

fix p q

assume hp : "p ≥ k" and hq : "q ≥ k"

then have hp' : "¦u p - a¦ < ε/2"

using hk by blast

have hq' : "¦u q - a¦ < ε/2"

using hk hq by blast

have "¦u p - u q¦ = ¦(u p - a) + (a - u q)¦"

by simp

also have "… ≤ ¦u p - a¦ + ¦a - u q¦"

by simp

also have "… = ¦u p - a¦ + ¦u q - a¦"

by simp

also have "… < ε/2 + ε/2"

using hp' hq' by simp

also have "… = ε"

by simp

finally show "¦u p - u q¦ < ε"

by this

qed

then show "∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"

by (rule exI)

qed

(* 2ª demostración *)

lemma

assumes "suc_convergente u"

shows "suc_cauchy u"

proof (unfold suc_cauchy_def; intro allI impI)

fix ε :: real

assume "0 < ε"

then have "0 < ε/2"

by simp

obtain a where "limite u a"

using assms suc_convergente_def by blast

then obtain k where hk : "∀n≥k. ¦u n - a¦ < ε/2"

using ‹0 < ε / 2› limite_def by blast

have "∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"

proof (intro allI impI)

fix p q

assume hp : "p ≥ k" and hq : "q ≥ k"

then have hp' : "¦u p - a¦ < ε/2"

using hk by blast

have hq' : "¦u q - a¦ < ε/2"

using hk hq by blast

show "¦u p - u q¦ < ε"

using hp' hq' by argo

qed

then show "∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"

by (rule exI)

qed

(* 3ª demostración *)

lemma

assumes "suc_convergente u"

shows "suc_cauchy u"

proof (unfold suc_cauchy_def; intro allI impI)

fix ε :: real

assume "0 < ε"

then have "0 < ε/2"

by simp

obtain a where "limite u a"

using assms suc_convergente_def by blast

then obtain k where hk : "∀n≥k. ¦u n - a¦ < ε/2"

using ‹0 < ε / 2› limite_def by blast

have "∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"

using hk by (smt (z3) field_sum_of_halves)

then show "∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"

by (rule exI)

qed

(* 3ª demostración *)

lemma

assumes "suc_convergente u"

shows "suc_cauchy u"

proof (unfold suc_cauchy_def; intro allI impI)

fix ε :: real

assume "0 < ε"

then have "0 < ε/2"

by simp

obtain a where "limite u a"

using assms suc_convergente_def by blast

then obtain k where hk : "∀n≥k. ¦u n - a¦ < ε/2"

using ‹0 < ε / 2› limite_def by blast

then show "∃k. ∀m≥k. ∀n≥k. ¦u m - u n¦ < ε"

by (smt (z3) field_sum_of_halves)

qed

end

En los comentarios se pueden escribir otras soluciones, escribiendo el código entre una línea con <pre lang="isar"> y otra con </pre>
[/expand]