Closed separated sets in disjoint open sets

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

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of closed separated sets within the context of disjoint open sets in topology. Participants are examining a problem related to the definitions and properties of separated sets, particularly in relation to compact spaces and closed sets.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning how to establish the existence of disjoint open sets for separated sets and whether this relates to the covers for the sets involved. There is also discussion about the intersection of certain sets being empty and the implications of closed sets being compact.

Discussion Status

Several participants have provided insights and definitions regarding separated sets, while others are exploring the implications of compactness and the need for disjoint open sets. There is an ongoing examination of definitions and conditions necessary for the problem, with hints and suggestions being offered to guide further exploration.

Contextual Notes

Participants have noted that the interior of a set is contained within the set itself, raising questions about its use in finding open sets that contain closed sets. The discussion also touches on the need to verify the use of all hypotheses in the context of metric spaces.

modnarandom
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I was reading over a solution after working on a problem and got confused about some parts:

http://nweb.math.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/pages/f10solutions.pdf
(first problem)

First, how do we know that there are disjoint open sets U and V for each of the separated sets? (does this have anything to do with the covers for A and B?) Also, I'm not sure why the intersection of the sets F_i is empty.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
modnarandom said:
Hi,

I was reading over a solution after working on a problem and got confused about some parts:

http://nweb.math.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/pages/f10solutions.pdf
(first problem)

First, how do we know that there are disjoint open sets U and V for each of the separated sets? (does this have anything to do with the covers for A and B?) ...

I think that's by definition of ##\bigcap X_i## not being connected (mostly, you may have to justify ##A,B## are each closed).

...Also, I'm not sure why the intersection of the sets F_i is empty.

Thanks!...

##\bigcap F_i=\bigcap (X_i-U\cup V)=\bigcap X_i-(U\cup V)=\emptyset.##

I'll let you do the hard work, you need to check the second and third equalities, I'm lazy (exercise left to the reader).
 
Last edited:
The usual definition of "separated" is that A and B are separated if and only if [itex]\overline{A}\cup B= A\cup\overline{B}= \phi[/itex]. Let U be the interior of A and V the interior of B.
 
HallsofIvy said:
The usual definition of "separated" is that A and B are separated if and only if [itex]\overline{A}\cup B= A\cup\overline{B}= \phi[/itex]. Let U be the interior of A and V the interior of B.

But how can you guarantee that ##A\subset U##?
 
HallsofIvy said:
The usual definition of "separated" is that A and B are separated if and only if [itex]\overline{A}\cup B= A\cup\overline{B}= \phi[/itex]. Let U be the interior of A and V the interior of B.

I have seen [STRIKE]lots of[/STRIKE] other "usual" definitions of separated.

OP modnarandom, which definition of separated would you like to use?
 
Thanks for the replies! I think I understand why the intersection of F_i is empty. But I'm still confused about the existence of the disjoint open sets. I think the interior of a set A is contained in A, so I don't think that can be used for an open set containing A. I already showed that A and B are closed sets. Can this be used for anything?

algebrat: I usually use the definition that HallsofIvy gave, but I've seen others too.
 
Last edited:
modnarandom said:
Thanks for the replies! I think I understand why the intersection of F_i is empty. But I'm still confused about the existence of the disjoint open sets. I think the interior of a set A is contained in A, so I don't think that can be used for an open set containing A. I already showed that A and B are closed sets. Can this be used for anything?

algebrat: I usually use the definition that HallsofIvy gave, but I've seen others too.

Then, once we have ##A,B## are closed, my guess is that we may have to use the metric space condition (we have not used yet right?) to find ##U,V##.
 
I tried to use the fact that X is a compact space but I'm not sure how to do that. Since A and B are closed subsets of a compact space, they are also compact. So, maybe U and V might be the open covers of A and B. But I don't think they're necessarily disjoint.
 
modnarandom said:
I tried to use the fact that X is a compact space but I'm not sure how to do that. Since A and B are closed subsets of a compact space, they are also compact. So, maybe U and V might be the open covers of A and B. But I don't think they're necessarily disjoint.

Right, ##U,V## will need some work. Also, be careful about the "the" when you say open cover. I'm not sure what you meant by that, leaving me with little to give feedback on. I don't mean to be discouraging.

What about the condition of ##X## being a metric space, has that been used yet? Remember, when proving an exercise, we should check that we've used all the hypotheses (unlike in physics problems, where they often give red herrings).

Here is a big hint, for any ##x\in A##, find open sets ##U,V## that separate ##x## from ##B##.

The last hint is not easy to prove, but it is a good foothold. You should figure out how to prove it, and how it's truth helps your problem. (Both are tricky, and both use compactness.)
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Just to clarify, do you mean two open sets U and V such that one contains x and the other doesn't? Also the "the" was a mistake (wasn't supposed to be there).
 
  • #11
modnarandom said:
Just to clarify, do you mean two open sets U and V such that one contains x and the other doesn't?

Right. More specifically, I suggested they should separate ##x## from ##B##.

Also the "the" was a mistake (wasn't supposed to be there).

Sounds good.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K