Compact Nested Sequences and Their Intersection

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamesF
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Compact Sequences
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem in topology concerning the intersection of a sequence of compact, nonempty subsets within a metric space. The original poster attempts to show that the intersection of these sets is non-empty, using a contradiction approach involving open covers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster explores a proof by contradiction, questioning the validity of their reasoning regarding the compactness of the space and the implications of the open cover. Another participant suggests that the open covers relate to the compactness of the first set in the sequence, hinting at a potential contradiction.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different aspects of the problem. Some guidance has been offered regarding the relationship between the sets and their compactness, but no consensus has been reached on the original poster's approach.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses uncertainty about the implications of the compactness of the space and the nature of the sets involved. There is also a separate question regarding the classification of a specific set in the real numbers, indicating a broader exploration of set properties.

JamesF
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone. I feel like I'm really close to the answer on this one, but just out of reach :) I hope someone can give me some pointers

Homework Statement



Let A1 \supseteq A2 \supseteq A3 \supseteq \ldots be a sequence of compact, nonempty subsets of a metric space (X, d). Show that \bigcap A_n \neq \emptyset. (Hint: Let U_n = X-A_n)

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried showing by contradiction.

Suppose \bigcap A_n = \emptyset
Choose an open subcover U_n = X-A_n (that's supposed to be set minus but I don't know how to do \ in tex). Then \bigcup U_n = (X-A_1) \cup (X - A_2) \ldots = X - (\bigcap A_n) = X

but where's the contradiction? So X is not compact, but that goes without saying and we can't infer much from that. What am I overlooking here? Or is this the wrong approach entirely?

Thank you for your assistance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
X may not be compact but A1 is. The U_n are a cover of A1 if you assume the intersection of all the Ai is empty. Hence there is a finite subcover. That seems headed for a contradiction.
 
Thanks for your help, Dick. I was able to get the solution.


I have one more question on my current HW.
Is a set A_n = [n, \infty) open or closed in \mathbb{R}? I would think so, but it's unbounded.
 
JamesF said:
Thanks for your help, Dick. I was able to get the solution.


I have one more question on my current HW.
Is a set A_n = [n, \infty) open or closed in \mathbb{R}? I would think so, but it's unbounded.

What do you think it would be?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
12K