Generalization of a theorem in Real Analysis

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a theorem in real analysis concerning the intersection of compact subsets in a metric space. The original statement asserts that if a collection of compact subsets has nonempty intersections for every finite subcollection, then the overall intersection is also nonempty. Participants are exploring potential generalizations of this theorem and questioning the implications of such generalizations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants express uncertainty about the generalization of the theorem, specifically whether changing "finite subcollection" to "infinite subcollection" is valid. Others question if this change renders the theorem redundant or weaker.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing their thoughts on the nature of the generalization and its implications. Some guidance has been offered regarding the exploration of generalizations in different types of spaces, but no consensus has been reached on the exact form of the generalization or its validity.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that there are various generalizations of metric spaces and compactness, which may influence the applicability of the theorem in broader contexts. The original poster seeks clarification on the generalization without requiring a proof at this stage.

Silviu
Messages
612
Reaction score
11

Homework Statement


If ##\{K_\alpha\}## is a collection of compact subsets of a metric space X, such that the intersection of every finite subcollection of {##K_\alpha##} is nonempty, then ##\cap K_\alpha## is nonempty. Generalize this theorem and proof the generalization. Why doesn't it make sense to state the theorem in its general form?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I know how to prove the actual theorem, but I don't really know what is its generalization in order to attempt to prove it. I don't want yet a proof of the generalization, just its statement. Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Silviu said:

Homework Statement


If ##\{K_\alpha\}## is a collection of compact subsets of a metric space X, such that the intersection of every finite subcollection of {##K_\alpha##} is nonempty, then ##\cap K_\alpha## is nonempty. Generalize this theorem and proof the generalization. Why doesn't it make sense to state the theorem in its general form?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I know how to prove the actual theorem, but I don't really know what is its generalization in order to attempt to prove it. I don't want yet a proof of the generalization, just its statement. Thank you.
Seems to me that the generalization would change "finite subcolledtion" to "infinite subcollection."
 
Mark44 said:
Seems to me that the generalization would change "finite subcolledtion" to "infinite subcollection."
Thank you for your reply. However, doesn't that make the statement redundant? If any infinite intersection is non-empty, the intersection of all K is by assumption non-empty, so there is nothing left to prove (and it seems actually weaker than the other one).
 
Silviu said:

Homework Statement


If ##\{K_\alpha\}## is a collection of compact subsets of a metric space X, such that the intersection of every finite subcollection of {##K_\alpha##} is nonempty, then ##\cap K_\alpha## is nonempty. Generalize this theorem and proof the generalization. Why doesn't it make sense to state the theorem in its general form?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I know how to prove the actual theorem, but I don't really know what is its generalization in order to attempt to prove it. I don't want yet a proof of the generalization, just its statement. Thank you.

There are generalizations of metric spaces. See, eg., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_space . In some of those spaces you might be able to generalize the concept of "compactness"; see, eg., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_space

Perhaps a version of your cited theorem remains true for some of those generalizations.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K