Compactness of A in R2 with Standard Topology: Tychonoff's Theorem Applied

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the compactness of the set A in R² with the standard topology, where A is defined as the union of [0,1] x {0} and the set of points {1/n} x [0,1] for positive integers n.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the compactness of the set A by referencing Heine-Borel theorem and Tychonoff's theorem. There is a discussion about the structure of A and whether it is correctly expressed, with some questioning the operations involved in its definition.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants providing insights and clarifications about the definition of A and its components. Some guidance has been offered regarding the properties of compact sets, but no consensus has been reached on the compactness of A itself.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of potential typos or misinterpretations in the expression for A, which may affect the analysis of its compactness. Participants are also considering different definitions of compactness, which may influence their reasoning.

jangoc44
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
1. The question is to show whether A is compact in R2 with the standard topology. A = [0,1]x{0} U {1/n, n[tex]\in[/tex] Z+} x [0,1]

3. If I group the [0,1] together, I get [0,1] x {0,1/n, n [tex]\in[/tex] Z+ }, and [0,1] is compact in R because of Heine Borel and {0}U{1/n} is compact since you can show that every cover has a finite subcover. Now, if you take the product of two compact sets will they still be compact? Tychonoff's theorem says product of compact spaces is compact, but I'm not too sure if it applies here.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
jangoc44 said:
A = [0,1]x{0} U {1/n, n[tex]\in[/tex] Z+} x [0,1]

Where is the principal operation in the expression for [itex]A[/itex]. If [itex]A\subset \mathbb{R}_2[/itex] it can't have two product operations, so I'd go for the union as it stands. But this doesn't look too likely, and doesn't seem to tie up with what you say in 3., so I suspect there may be a typo.
 
Sorry I meant ([0,1]x{0}) U ({1/n}x[0,1]).
 
OK - it was your reference to {0}U{1/n} that was throwing me a bit. Look at the points on {0}x[0,1] and go direct from the definition. (That assumes you define compact as closed and bounded, otherwise you will no doubt have proved these properties in your course from whatever definition you use.)
 
I'm off to bed now so should you have any problems hopefully someone else will pick up the thread.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
586
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K