Which sets are open, closed, or neither?

  • Thread starter Thread starter calvino
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Closed Sets
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the nature of various sets in terms of being open, closed, or neither, within the context of topology and set theory. The sets involve inequalities in three-dimensional and two-dimensional spaces.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the definitions of open and closed sets, questioning the clarity of methods for identifying boundary points. There is a discussion about the implications of containing boundary points and the criteria for sets being neither open nor closed.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided definitions and examples to clarify the concepts of open, closed, and neither sets. There is an ongoing exploration of how to apply these definitions to the specific sets presented, with varying interpretations of the criteria involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the manipulation of functions related to the sets and the implications of boundary points in determining the nature of the sets. There is mention of specific examples to illustrate the concepts being discussed.

calvino
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Determine with justification which sets are open, closed, or neither

i) {(x,y,z): x^2+ y^2 + z^2 +(xyz)^2 >= -1}

ii) {(x,y,z): x^2 + y^2 +z^2 >= 1}

iii) {(x,y,z): x^2- y- z >1}

iv) {(x,y): 3>= x^2- xy + y^2 >1

v) {(x,y): x^2 - y^2 >=0 }


So, my first insinct is to go about it using the definition of open sets. So I try and find a neighbourhood around a point in the set that is not completely contained in the set. What confuses me is that that method is not very definite. What if I can't find that neighbourhood?

Any help on how I should go about starting this question off?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't understand what you mean by "that method is not very definite". The definition is very definite!

However, you might find it easier to use a property that some text use as the definition: a set is open if and only if it contains none of its boundary points. "boundary" points may be difficult to define in general but with sets like you are given they are easy.
 
thanks.

now I'm just curious about what neither open nor closed means. Do you think you could explain to me a bit about that (or give an example?)?
 
A set is open if it contains none of its boundary points. A set is closed if it contains all of its boundary points. A set is neither open nor closed if it contains some but not all of its boundary points.

The set {x| 0<= x< 1} has "boundary" {0, 1}. It contains one of those but not the other and so is neither open nor closed.

For simple intervals like these, a set is open if it is defined entirely in terms of "<" or ">", closed if it is defined entirely in terms of "<=" or ">=", neither if it has both.

That is, however, for "simple intervals". Is the "set of all rational numbers between 0 and 1 (but not including 0 and 1)" open or closed (or neither)?
 
So in this case, by simply looking at the boundary points of the set, I come up with the following answers, in order.

closed, closed, open, neither, closed

Is this right, or do I have to consider manipulating the functions which make the set?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K