Infinite Unions of Open/Closed Sets: Explained

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter aaaa202
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infinite Sets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of infinite unions of open and closed sets within the context of topology and metric spaces. Participants explore why the union of infinitely many open sets remains open, while the same does not hold for closed sets, and seek to clarify the underlying properties that differentiate these two types of sets.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that the union of infinitely many open sets is open, while this is not necessarily true for closed sets, and asks for an explanation of the properties involved.
  • Another participant references the concept of clopen sets, suggesting that the definitions of open and closed are not mutually exclusive and provides a link to further information.
  • A third participant notes that in topological spaces, the property of open sets being closed under arbitrary unions is a definition, and mentions that in metric spaces, the proof depends on the definition of "open." They suggest a method to prove that a union of open sets is open by showing that any point in the union is an interior point.
  • A later post reiterates the initial claim about the properties of open and closed sets, emphasizing that open sets are defined to be closed under all unions and finite intersections, while closed sets are defined as complements of open sets and are closed under finite unions and all intersections.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express similar views regarding the properties of open and closed sets, but there is no consensus on the specific explanations or proofs related to the properties of infinite unions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the deeper understanding of these properties.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the dependence on definitions of open and closed sets, as well as the context of topological versus metric spaces, which may affect the interpretations and proofs presented.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
If you unite infinitely many open sets you still get an open set whilst the same is not necessarily true for a closed set. Can someone try to explain what property of a union of open sets it is, that assures that an infinite union is still open (and what property is the closed sets missing?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
While not directly related to your question, wikipedia discusses the clopen set:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clopen_set

They mention that a set may be both open and closed mathematically, that the definitions of open and closed are not mutually excluse and provide examples.

Perhaps from this you can answer your question.
 
In the context of topological spaces, it's a definition (of "topology" and "topological space"), so it doesn't require an explanation. In the context of metric spaces, it's easy to prove, but the details depend on what definition of "open" you're using. One very common definition says that a set is open if and only if all its elements are interior points. I suggest that you use this definition to prove it yourself. You can start the proof like this:

Let ##\{E_i:i\in I\}## be an arbitrary sequence of open sets. Let ##x\in\bigcup_{i\in I}E_i## be arbitrary.

Now you just need to show that x is an interior point of ##\bigcup_{i\in I}E_i##.

For closed sets, you just need a counterexample. Consider e.g. the intervals [0+1/n,2-1/n] where n is a positive integer. What is the union of all of them?
 
aaaa202 said:
If you unite infinitely many open sets you still get an open set whilst the same is not necessarily true for a closed set. Can someone try to explain what property of a union of open sets it is, that assures that an infinite union is still open (and what property is the closed sets missing?)

To some extent it depends on what you are starting with. In the abstract the open sets are defined to have the properties, closed under all unions and finite intersections. Closed sets are then defined as complements of open sets, and therefore closed under finite unions and all intersections.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K