(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Cl(A) = A' ??

Unraveling the definitions, I keep getting that Cl(A) = A'.

[tex]x\in \overline{A}[/tex]

[tex]\Leftrightarrow (\forall U\in \tau)[(A\subseteq X\setminus U)\Rightarrow (x\in X\setminus U)][/tex]

[tex]\Leftrightarrow (\forall U\in \tau)[\neg (x\in X\setminus U)\Rightarrow \neg(A\subseteq X\setminus U) ][/tex]

[tex]\Leftrightarrow (\forall U\in \tau)[(x\in U)\Rightarrow (A \cap U \neq \emptyset ) ][/tex]

[tex]\Leftrightarrow x\in A'.[/tex]

(The empty set is its own closure, so if x is in A, then A is not empty.)

I suspect the problem may lie in the substitution

[tex]\neg (x\in X\setminus U) \Leftrightarrow \neg((x\in X)\& \neg(x\in U))[/tex]

[tex]\Leftrightarrow \neg(x\in X) \vee (x\in U)[/tex]

[tex]\Leftrightarrow (\forall x\in X) [x\in U].[/tex]

On it's own, the final step of deleting this "for all X" looks sound to me (we're already implicitly talking about all x in X, so why do we need to consider the possibility that x is not in X?), but in the above context, I've moved from "for all x in X, if P is true or x is in X, then ..." (which is true of all x in X) to "for all x in X, if P is true ..." (which is not necessarily true of all x in X).

Can anyone help me understand what the logical rule is here? (I.e. if this isn't a legitimate substitution, what general rule makes it illegitimate.) Is this why I'm getting the anomalous result that Cl(A) = A'?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Cl(A) = A' ?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**