Following Barto and Sutton's "Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction", I am having trouble rigorously proving the Bellman Optimality Equation for finite MDPs.
Namely, why does $v_*(s) = \max\limits_{a \in A(s)} q_{\pi_*}(s, a)$?
My attempt to see this is true:
Let $v_* := \max\limits_{a \in A(s)} q_{\pi_*}(s, a)$
$v_*(s) = \sum\limits_{a \in A(s)} \pi_*(a | s) q_{\pi_*}(s, a) \leq v_*$
However, I'm not sure I see why equality must hold. I'm thinking that we construct $\pi'$ such that $\pi'(s) \in \arg\max \limits_{a \in A(s)} q_{\pi_*}(s, a)$, $\pi(s') = \pi_*(s')$ $\forall s' \neq s$ and show that $v_\pi(s) = v_*$?.
Intuitively I see this statement being true if we allow non-stationary policies and that stationary rewards should mean that we could "just take" our policy to be stationary, but I don't see the clear reasoning behind this.
In a similar vein, why does does $\pi_*(s) = \arg\max \limits_{a \in A(s)} q_{\pi_*}(s, a)$ constitute an optimal policy?