Is Every Continuous Real-Valued Function on a Subset of R Bounded?

  • Thread starter Useful nucleus
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Continuity
In summary: I'm glad we're on the same page!In summary, the author is seeking a neater proof for the following:E is compact.They tried to argue based on Heine-Borel theorem, but their argument was not very solid. They think that a more elegant way to avoid the dichotomy is to use covers and subcovers.
  • #1
Useful nucleus
370
58
I'm seeking a neater proof for the following:
Let E [itex]\subseteq[/itex] R. Let every continuous real-valued function on E be bounded. Show that E is compact.
I tried to argue based on Heine-Borel theorem as follows:
E cannot be unbounded because if it is the case, define f(x)=x on E and f(x) is continuous but unbounded.
E cannot be not closed, because E=(0,1] is not closed and we can define f(x)=1/x which is continuous but still unbounded.
Thus, E has to be both bounded and closed and hence compact.
I think this argument is not very solid and I'd appreciate any hints.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Useful nucleus said:
E cannot be unbounded because if it is the case, define f(x)=x on E and f(x) is continuous but unbounded.

This part is okay.

E cannot be not closed, because E=(0,1] is not closed and we can define f(x)=1/x which is continuous but still unbounded.

This part is not. You've shown that the specific non-closed set (0, 1] admits an unbounded continuous real-valued function, but you have said nothing about the other [itex]\beth_2[/itex] non-closed subsets of R.

Here's a hint: if a set is closed, then there is a limit point c not in the set. What can you say about 1/(x-c)?
 
  • #3
I see your point. So it would be better to say the following:
Let E be not closed by missing the limit point c. Then f(x)=1/(x-c) is continuous on E but clearly undbounded.
I realize now that the argument has improved a lot, but is there a neater way to avoid the the dichotomy I made.
 
  • #4
What dichotomy are you referring to? Do you mean treating the cases of E being

closed and E being bounded? If so, only way of avoiding it I can think of is using

covers and subcovers, but I don't see how that would work. The arguments, yours

and Uzuki's, are perfectly fine IMHO, tho.
 
  • #5
By dichotomy I refer to examining each case of E (according to Heine-Borel theorem) and giving a counter example for each.
 
  • #6
Didn't you just do that?

Using the arguments you and Uzuki gave:

i)Assume E not bounded. Then f(x)=x is unbounded

ii)Assume E not closed , then there is a limit point c of E not contained in E. Then

f(x)=1/(x-c) is unbounded in E.
 
  • #7
Bacle2 said:
Didn't you just do that?

Using the arguments you and Uzuki gave:

i)Assume E not bounded. Then f(x)=x is unbounded

ii)Assume E not closed , then there is a limit point c of E not contained in E. Then

f(x)=1/(x-c) is unbounded in E.

Exactly! What I'm looking for is a more elegant way to prove the statement (if any) and to see whether there is a flaw in current proof we have in hand.

May be classifying this proof as proof by dichotomy was not the best way to describe it.
 
  • #8
As it stands now your proof is fine. In fact, this is the proof that I would use :wink:. The fact that you have to divide into two cases is built right into the statement of the Heine-Borel theorem (compactness is equivalent to closed and bounded). So the only way to avoid it would be to avoid using the Heine-Borel theorem altogether. But the result you're trying to prove (that pseudocompactness implies compactness) is not true for general topological spaces, so [strike]you can't avoid invoking Heine-Borel[/strike]. As such, I think that this is actually the most elegant proof possible.

Edit: Actually, I'm wrong about that. You do have to use the subset of R condition, but you don't have to go through Heine-Borel to do it. You could use the equivalence (in metric spaces) of compactness and limit point compactness, combined with the Tietze extension theorem. This has the nice advantage of generalizing quickly to all metric spaces. Of course if you only want to prove it for subsets of R, invoking the Teitze extension theorem is like using a sledgehammer to kill a mosquito, but sometimes that can be immensely satisfying. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #9
Citan Uzuki said:
but sometimes that can be immensely satisfying. :biggrin:

Completely agree! :approve:

Thank you for your comment. I'm not familiar yet with Teitze extension theorem, but hopefully in the near future I will be.
 
  • #10
I happen to remember something obscure about this subject. If E is a topological space with the property that every continuous function from E to the reals is bounded, is E compact?

The answer is no. A space with the above property is pseudocompact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudocompact_space

An example of a psuedocompact space that's not compact is any infinite set with the particular point topology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particular_point_topology

(edit) I see that Citan Uzuki mentioned psuedocompactness earlier. Good knowledge!
 

1. What is continuity and compactness?

Continuity and compactness are two important concepts in mathematics that are used to study the behavior of functions and sets. Continuity refers to the smoothness and connectedness of a function, while compactness refers to the size and shape of a set.

2. How is continuity defined?

Continuity is defined as the property of a function where small changes in the input result in small changes in the output. In other words, a function is continuous if it has no sudden jumps or breaks in its graph.

3. What is the importance of continuity in mathematics?

Continuity is important in mathematics because it allows us to analyze and understand the behavior of functions. It is also a fundamental concept in calculus, where it is used to define the derivative and integral of a function.

4. What does it mean for a set to be compact?

A set is compact if it is finite or if it contains all of its limit points. In other words, a compact set is a set that is closed and bounded.

5. How are continuity and compactness related?

Continuity and compactness are closely related concepts. In fact, a function is continuous if and only if the preimage of any open set is an open set, and a set is compact if and only if every open cover has a finite subcover. This means that continuity and compactness are two different ways of characterizing the same type of behavior.

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
792
  • Topology and Analysis
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
335
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
25
Views
3K
Back
Top