Accumulation point of rational numbers in (0,1)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The accumulation points of the enumeration of all rational numbers in the interval (0,1) are every rational number within that interval. According to the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem, every bounded sequence must have a convergent subsequence, leading to the conclusion that there are infinitely many accumulation points in (0,1). The definition of an accumulation point requires that for every epsilon, there exist infinitely many distinct elements of the sequence within epsilon distance from that point. This discussion clarifies that while a bounded sequence has convergent subsequences, it does not guarantee a single accumulation point.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem
  • Familiarity with the concept of accumulation points in real analysis
  • Knowledge of rational and real numbers
  • Basic principles of sequences and convergence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem in different contexts
  • Explore the concept of convergence in sequences of rational numbers
  • Investigate the properties of accumulation points in metric spaces
  • Learn about the distinction between convergent sequences and accumulation points
USEFUL FOR

Students of real analysis, mathematicians exploring properties of sequences, and educators teaching concepts related to convergence and accumulation points.

PirateFan308
Messages
91
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find all accumulation points of the following sequence:
an enumeration of all rational numbers in (0,1)

Homework Equations


Boltzano-Weirstrass Theorem:
Every bounded sequence has a convergent sequence (hence, an accumulation point)

The Attempt at a Solution


Because the enumeration of all rational numbers in (0,1) is bounded, it must have at least one convergent sequence. But if there is an accumulation point for the rational numbers in (0,1) there must also be an accumulation point for the rational numbers in (0,0.5), and the logic continues so there must be infinitely many accumulation points in (0,1). So are the accumulation points every rational number in (0,1)?

This seems odd to me that any rational number can be an accumulation point
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you know the fact that for every real number y there is a rational r such that |r-y| < epsilon for any epsilon > 0? Or, in a similar fashion, for any real number y there is a sequence of rationals converging to it? Perhaps these facts will help.
 
In fact, the real numbers can be defined as equivalence classes of sequences of rational numbers, the equivalence being "\{a_n\} is equivalent to \{b_m\} if and only if \{a_n- b_n\} converges to 0".
 
PirateFan308 said:
Boltzano-Weirstrass Theorem:
Every bounded sequence has a convergent sequence (hence, an accumulation point)

I think there is a mistake here, that a bounded sequence has a convergent subsequence doesn't mean that it as an accumulation point. For example the constant bounded sequence a_n = 1 is such that every subsequence converges to 1, but 1 is not an accumulation point of the set \{ a_n : n \in \mathbb{N} \}.

Am I right? The definition of accumulation point is that for every epsilon there exists infinitely different elements of the sequence distant less that epsilon from that number.
 
blinktx411 said:
Do you know the fact that for every real number y there is a rational r such that |r-y| < epsilon for any epsilon > 0? Or, in a similar fashion, for any real number y there is a sequence of rationals converging to it? Perhaps these facts will help.

Thanks! That helped a lot. I get it now. :)
 
Damidami said:
The definition of accumulation point is that for every epsilon there exists infinitely different elements of the sequence distant less that epsilon from that number.

I believe the definition of an accumulation point is just that there exists infinite elements of the sequence that converges to c. So from this definition, the subsequence can consist of the same element repeated.

Our professor used the example of (xn) = (-1)n
(xn) does not converge but it has the convergent subsequences (-1)2n and the subsequence (-1)2n+1. Hence, -1 and 1 are accumulation points.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K