Register to reply

Connected subset

by tarheelborn
Tags: connected, subset
Share this thread:
tarheelborn
#1
Oct19-10, 07:29 PM
P: 123
If [tex]S[/tex] is a connected subset of [tex]\mathbb{R} [/tex] and [tex]S[/tex] is bounded below, but not above, then either [tex]S=[a, \infty)[/tex] or [tex]S=(a, \infty)[/tex] for some [tex]a \in \math{R}[/tex].
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
World's largest solar boat on Greek prehistoric mission
Google searches hold key to future market crashes
Mineral magic? Common mineral capable of making and breaking bonds
Office_Shredder
#2
Oct19-10, 08:18 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 4,500
What have you tried so far? Do you know what connected subsets of R look like?
tarheelborn
#3
Oct19-10, 08:45 PM
P: 123
Yes I am familiar with the types of connected subsets of [tex] \mathbb{R}[/tex]. I know that if [tex]a<b \in S[/tex] then [tex] [a,b] \subseteq S[/tex]. I think I need to find some point in [tex] [a,b][/tex] and show that [tex]a[/tex] is the least greatest lower bound of that interval whether or not [tex]a[/tex] is included in the interval. But I am not sure how to start.

tarheelborn
#4
Oct20-10, 03:04 PM
P: 123
Connected subset

I see that if a is the glb for S, then a is either in S or s is approaching a for s in S. And I see that there is no upper bound, so the right end of the interval is infinity. But I need help on writing that up formally. Please. Thank you!
Office_Shredder
#5
Oct20-10, 06:11 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 4,500
Quote Quote by tarheelborn View Post
Yes I am familiar with the types of connected subsets of [tex] \mathbb{R}[/tex]. I know that if [tex]a<b \in S[/tex] then [tex] [a,b] \subseteq S[/tex].
More specifically than just this, the only connected subsets of R are intervals
tarheelborn
#6
Oct20-10, 08:25 PM
P: 123
I know. I must not be stating my problem clearly. I need to prove that a connected subset of R that is bounded below but not above is equal to either [tex][a, \infty)[/tex] or [tex](a, \infty)[/tex] specifically. I am supposed to use a lemma that says if two points are in a connected subset of the real numbers, then all points in between these two points are also in the subset.
tarheelborn
#7
Oct21-10, 12:24 PM
P: 123
I have gotten this far with the proof:


Since [tex]S[/tex] is bounded below, [tex]S[/tex] has a greatest lower bound, say [tex]a[/tex]. Since [tex]S[/tex] is not bounded above, I claim that [tex]S=(a, \infty)[/math] or [tex]S=[a, \infty)[/tex].
Case 1: Suppose [tex]a,x \in S[/tex] such that [tex]a \neq x[/tex]. Since [tex]a=g.l.b.(S)[/tex], [tex]a<x[/tex]. Now since [tex]S[/tex] is unbounded, there is some [tex]s \in S[/tex] such that [tex]s>x[/tex]. but since [tex]a,s,x \in S[/tex], by previously proved lemma, [tex][a,x] \in S[/tex] and [tex][x,s] \in S[/tex]. Henc e [tex]S=[a, \infty)[/tex].
Case 2: Suppose [tex]a \notin S[/tex] and suppose [tex]x \in S[/tex], [tex]x>a[/tex].

Now I am not sure how to move on to say that everything approaching a is in S but a is not in S.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Subset vs proper subset? Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 22
Connected vs. Path Connected Sets Differential Geometry 6
An open connected set is path(polygon) connected Calculus 1
Subset and proper subset Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 6
Is every subspace of a connected space connected? General Math 12