Is there a "Nice" proof that R^2 is not disconnected when we remove 2 points

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter WWGD
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Points Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether there are "nice" proofs, particularly at an undergraduate level, that demonstrate the connectedness of the space ## X:=R^2 - \{p,q\} ## when two points are removed. The focus is on exploring various approaches to establish this property without relying on more advanced results.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests considering path-connectedness to show that ## X ## is connected, seeking a proof that avoids the need to establish that path-connectedness implies connectedness.
  • Another participant questions whether proving that path-connectedness implies connectedness is indeed difficult, suggesting it is a standard undergraduate result.
  • A participant proposes a method involving the contradiction that arises from assuming ## X ## is not connected, using a continuous mapping from an interval to demonstrate the connectedness of the interval itself.
  • There is a discussion about proving the connectedness of the unit interval and how that leads to proving the connectedness of other sets, including the plane.
  • One participant mentions the idea of using star-shaped sets to show that the twice punctured plane is connected, but expresses uncertainty about how to prove that.
  • Another participant notes that a set is connected if every continuous map from it to a two-point set is constant, but acknowledges the difficulty in applying this to specific sets like intervals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the difficulty of proving that path-connectedness implies connectedness. There is no consensus on the best approach to prove the connectedness of ## X ##, and multiple methods are discussed without resolution.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the reliance on various properties of connectedness and path-connectedness, as well as the challenges in establishing these properties for specific sets. Some assumptions and definitions are not fully explored, leaving certain aspects unresolved.

WWGD
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
7,785
Reaction score
13,076
TL;DR
Trying to show R^2 -{p,q} is connected.
Are there "nice" ( without heavy machinery) proofs that ## X:=R^2 - \{p,q\} ## is connected? All I can think is using that path-connectedness implies connectedness. So we consider x,y in X and show there is a path joining them. I am looking for an argument at undergrad level, so that I would not have to prove , as in here, that path-connectedness implies connectedness.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is path connected -> connected really that hard to prove? I would have thought it's a pretty standard undergraduate result.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD
Office_Shredder said:
Is path connected -> connected really that hard to prove? I would have thought it's a pretty standard undergraduate result.
Guess you're right. Maybe I am being too lazy.
 
If X is not connected, and U,V are two disjoint non empty open subsets that cover X, let p be in U and q in V. Then continuously map an interval f:I-->X so that f(0) = p and f(1) = q. Then f^-1(U) and f^-1(V) are disjoint non empty open sets covering I, a contradiction since I is connected.

The point is that I is connected and the image of a connected set is connected, hence any path connected set is connected.

Just out of curiosity, how would you prove to this class that the plane itself is connected without this result?

thinking again about this topic, the hard part of course is to prove the unit interval is connected in the sense of open sets. then after that, proving other sets are connected seems to proiceed naturally via the route outlined here, i.e. iamges of connected sets are conncted and then path connected implies connected. the theorem that products of connected sets are connected seems more difficult, maybe easier to prove products preserve path connectedness.

If you knew star shaped sets are connected, then one could write the twice punctured plane as a union of two such with overlap, but how to prove that?

in gheneral the easiest way to prove facts about sets you know are connected is to use the fact that a set is connected iff every continuous map from it to a 2 point set is constant, but that does not easily help greatly to establish connectivity of a specific set like an interval. or rather, evben with that aid, you still need to use the lub property.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K