Another question on Open and Closed in V .... D&K Proposition 1.2.17 .... ....

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Closed
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Proposition 1.2.17 from "Multidimensional Real Analysis I: Differentiation" by J. J. Duistermaat and J. A. C. Kolk, specifically regarding the definitions of open and closed sets in a set V. The proof of the proposition is established by demonstrating that if a set A is open in V, it can be expressed as the intersection of V with an open subset U of ℝⁿ, confirming that A remains open in ℝⁿ. The participants emphasize the importance of Definitions 1.2.16 and the properties of finite intersections of open sets in their arguments.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of open and closed sets in topology
  • Familiarity with the definitions from "Multidimensional Real Analysis I: Differentiation"
  • Knowledge of finite intersections of open sets in ℝⁿ
  • Basic concepts of set theory and intersections
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the definitions and properties of open and closed sets in topology
  • Review Proposition 1.2.17 and Definition 1.2.16 in Duistermaat and Kolk's text
  • Learn about the implications of finite intersections of open sets in ℝⁿ
  • Explore rigorous proof techniques in real analysis
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in mathematics, particularly those focused on real analysis and topology, will benefit from this discussion, especially those studying the properties of open and closed sets.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading "Multidimensional Real Analysis I: Differentiation" by J. J. Duistermaat and J. A. C. Kolk ...

I am focused on Chapter 1: Continuity ... ...

I need help with another aspect of the proof of Proposition 1.2.17 ... ...

Duistermaat and Kolk's Proposition 1.2.17 and the preceding definition (regarding open and closed sets in a set V) read as follows:
View attachment 7735
View attachment 7736D&K write that the proof of (i) is immediate from the definitions ... but I have been unable to formulate a rigorous proof of (i) ... could someone please demonstrate a rigorous proof of (i) ... ...Hope that someone can help ...

Peter========================================================================================
D&K's definitions and early results on open and closed sets may be helpful to MHB members reading and following the above post ... so I am providing the same ... as follows:View attachment 7737
View attachment 7738Hope that helps ... ...

Peter
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi, Peter.

Suppose $A$ is open in $V$. By Definition 1.2.16 there is an open subset, say U, of $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ such that $A=V\cap U.$ Since both $U$ and $V$ are open in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ and finite intersections of open sets are open, $A$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^{n}.$

If $A$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, then it is open in $V$ because $A=V\cap A$ (since $A\subseteq V$).
 
GJA said:
Hi, Peter.

Suppose $A$ is open in $V$. By Definition 1.2.16 there is an open subset, say U, of $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ such that $A=V\cap U.$ Since both $U$ and $V$ are open in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ and finite intersections of open sets are open, $A$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^{n}.$

If $A$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, then it is open in $V$ because $A=V\cap A$ (since $A\subseteq V$).
THanks GJA ... appreciate the help ...

Peter
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
3K