Apostol definition of component interval

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of "component intervals" as defined by Apostol in "Mathematical Analysis." Participants explore the definition, implications, and visual representations of component intervals within the context of open subsets of real numbers. The conversation touches on theoretical aspects of analysis and the decomposition of open sets into disjoint intervals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on Apostol's definition of component intervals, suggesting that they represent disjoint open intervals that make up an open subset of R1.
  • Another participant proposes that component intervals may relate to the unique decomposition of open subsets of ℝ into countably many disjoint open intervals.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about whether two component intervals can intersect and discuss the implications of certain sets having empty component intervals.
  • There is mention of other analysis texts, with participants sharing recommendations and discussing the relevance of the result about open sets to definitions in measure theory.
  • A participant humorously references the names "Luke" and "Mark," leading to a light-hearted exchange about the misunderstanding of the joke.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of component intervals, and while some agree on their relation to disjoint open intervals, others raise questions about intersections and the nature of certain sets. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of component intervals and their properties.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that some sets may have only an empty component interval, such as single points or the rationals and irrationals. The discussion also highlights the dependence on definitions and the unique decomposition of open sets, which may not be universally understood.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and scholars of mathematical analysis, particularly those exploring concepts related to open sets, intervals, and measure theory.

kahwawashay1
Messages
95
Reaction score
0
Apostol in his "Mathematica Analysis" defines something called a "component interval". However, I cannot find it anywhere on google or in other books I have on analysis, and I really would like to see a picture of what he means..

Apostol's definition is that the component interval of an open subset S of R1 is an open interval I such that I[itex]\subseteq[/itex]S and such that no open interval J≠I exists such that I[itex]\subseteq[/itex]J[itex]\subseteq[/itex]S

In other words, a component interval of S is not a proper subset of any other open interval in S.

So does this mean basically that if we cut up R1 into disjoint open intervals and define their union as S, then a component interval I will be the anyone of those disjoint open intervals such that I spans the whole of one such disjoint open interval?

I attached to this post an image i drew in Paint of how I visually see component intervals. If someone could please look on it and tell me if i am correct i would be grateful
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
kahwawashay1 said:
Apostol in his "Mathematica Analysis" defines something called a "component interval". However, I cannot find it anywhere on google or in other books I have on analysis, and I really would like to see a picture of what he means..

Apostol's definition is that the component interval of an open subset S of R1 is an open interval I such that I[itex]\subseteq[/itex]S and such that no open interval J≠I exists such that I[itex]\subseteq[/itex]J[itex]\subseteq[/itex]S

In other words, a component interval of S is not a proper subset of any other open interval in S.

So does this mean basically that if we cut up R1 into disjoint open intervals and define their union as S, then a component interval I will be the anyone of those disjoint open intervals such that I spans the whole of one such disjoint open interval?

I attached to this post an image i drew in Paint of how I visually see component intervals. If someone could please look on it and tell me if i am correct i would be grateful

I would think about whether a if you had two component intervals in a set whether they can intersect or not. This should give you a picture of what they are.

Some sets have only an empty component interval - like a single point or the rational numbers or the irrational numbers.
 
This may have to see with the result that every open subset of ℝ can be expressed uniquely as the disjoint union of countably-many open intervals (e.g., for countability, select a rational for each interval). A component interval may be one of the intervals in the decomposition of the set. Are you reading Luke, Mark, etc?
 
Bacle2 said:
This may have to see with the result that every open subset of ℝ can be expressed uniquely as the disjoint union of countably-many open intervals (e.g., for countability, select a rational for each interval). A component interval may be one of the intervals in the decomposition of the set. Are you reading Luke, Mark, etc?

ok i think i get it then. And no I haven't heard of Luke or Mark, I am reading Apostol's "Mathematical Analysis" and Rudin's "Principles of Mathematical Analysis". Do Luke, Mark also have good analysis books? Could you please recommend?
 
Sorry, Kawashay, it was a stupid joke about apostols (of which I really know nothing). I personally like M. Rosenlicht's book and Wilcox and Myers' Intro to Lebesgue Integration and Fourier series for intro/review books.

BTW: this result about open sets simplifies a lot of definitions about measure.
 
Bacle2 said:
Sorry, Kawashay, it was a stupid joke about apostols (of which I really know nothing). I personally like M. Rosenlicht's book and Wilcox and Myers' Intro to Lebesgue Integration and Fourier series for intro/review books.

BTW: this result about open sets simplifies a lot of definitions about measure.

Ohh you meant those religious guys ahah. Sorry i am not christian or whoever believes in them lol so i didnt get joke. But thanks I will try to find those books you mentioned, and what do you mean about this result simplifying definitions about measure?
 
I learned all the names by watching Jeopardy; I want to play one day, make it big, and retire and do math and hang-out all day .

Anyway, enough daydreaming: one of the ways this helps is in the definition of outer measure m*of a set, which is defined (sort of) recursively: the outer measure m*(a,b):=b-a,
and m* of any subset (notice _every_ set has a well-defined outer-measure) is defined as the inf m* over all covers by open sets. Since open sets have a unique decomposition, this allows us well-define, e.g., the measure of any open set as the disjoint union of open intervals as Ʃ(an-bn) , since the decomposition into open intervals is unique.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K