Irrational Number and the Borel Sets

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the classification of the set of irrational numbers as a Borel set within the context of real analysis. Participants explore different approaches to proving this classification, including direct methods and reliance on the properties of rational numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in proving that the set of irrational numbers is a Borel set and suggests that they showed the set of rational numbers is a Borel set, implying that the complement (irrationals) should also be a Borel set.
  • Another participant questions the need for an "easier" method and suggests that proving the rationals are a Borel set should be straightforward.
  • A different participant clarifies that a direct proof can be constructed by utilizing properties of sigma algebras and deMorgan's law, indicating that the complement of a closed set (the rationals) is an open set (the irrationals), thus supporting the classification of irrationals as a Borel set.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best method for proving the set of irrational numbers is a Borel set, with differing opinions on the ease and directness of various approaches.

Contextual Notes

The discussion assumes familiarity with concepts such as Borel sets, sigma algebras, and deMorgan's law, but does not resolve the specifics of the proof steps or the definitions involved.

BSMSMSTMSPHD
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Took a test in my Analysis class today. One question asked us to prove that the set of Irrational numbers was a Borel Set. After working on the other problems for 90 minutes, I stared blankly at this one for what seemed life a long time. I eventually showed (I think) that the set of Rational numbers is a Borel Set, and therefore, its complement is also.

Is there an easier was to do this??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you mean "easier"? Showing that the rationals form a borel set should only take one or two lines.
 
I guess what I meant is - can it be done directly, instead of relying on the rationals.
 
What do you know about Borel sets? Well you know they form a sigma algebra, so what do you know about sigma algebras? Assuming you know enough things about sigma algebras, you can take your proof that the rationals are a Borel set, notice that the rationals are the complement of the irrationals, the complement of an closed set is an open set, apply deMorgan's law and you should have your self a "direct" proof of the Borel set-ness of the irrationals.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
16K