Is there a smallest closed ball containing a closed set in a metric space?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter hypermonkey2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Closed Sequence Sets
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the existence of the smallest closed ball containing a closed set in a metric space, particularly in the context of the Nested Sphere Theorem. It is established that while a sequence of decreasing closed spheres can converge to a single point, this does not extend to arbitrary closed sets without boundedness conditions. Specifically, in a complete metric space, a closed set can have a smallest closed ball containing it if it is bounded, but not all closed sets contain a closed ball of positive radius. The conversation emphasizes the necessity of boundedness for the existence of such closed balls.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of metric spaces and their properties
  • Familiarity with the Nested Sphere Theorem
  • Knowledge of closed and open sets in topology
  • Concept of boundedness in metric spaces
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of closed sets in complete metric spaces
  • Study the implications of the Nested Sphere Theorem in various contexts
  • Explore boundedness conditions and their effects on closed sets
  • Learn about the relationship between open and closed balls in metric spaces
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of topology, and anyone interested in the properties of metric spaces and closed sets will benefit from this discussion.

hypermonkey2
Messages
101
Reaction score
0
I was reading about the Nested sphere theorem and a thought occurred. if you have a sequence of decreasing closed sets whose diameter goes to zero in the limit,
we can show that the intersection of all these sets is a single point.

my idea was to show this using nested sphere theorem if we can say that for any closed set we can find a smallest closed sphere containing this set as well as a biggest sphere contained in this set.
that way we can trap our original sequence between two sequences of decreasing spheres.

Is this if fact possible? if so/not, why?

cheers!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
essentially, my question can be boiled down to:

for any closed set, can we find a smallest closed sphere containing it? what about a smallest closed sphere contained IN it?
 
Consider instead of something like the interval [0,1/n] we look at the union of ALL intervals of the form

\bigcup [k,k+1/n] = K_n (over R of course)

then the limit of the intersection of these \bigcap K_n... this is Z which has measure 0, even though each Kn has unbounded measure.

EDIT: Obviously we could make this conform to limn->infinitym(Kn) = 0 by using just [1,1+1/n] \cup [0,1/n]
 
thanks for the reply! it is true what you write, but i am having trouble making the connections...

What does this imply?

cheers!
 
You said
if you have a sequence of decreasing closed sets whose diameter goes to zero in the limit,
we can show that the intersection of all these sets is a single point.

This isn't true. It's if you have a sequence of decreasing closed spheres that this happens... so when trying to extend the result, you get examples like I gave. The first one in fact isn't contained in any sphere. You'll need a boundedness condition to get anywhere
 
of course! yes i apologize i mean in a complete metric space where the diameter of each set in the sequence is bounded.

Thanks for pointing that out :D

so how would i go about finding these spheres?
 
is it even reasonable to say that any closed set in this space will have a closed sphere containing it?
And if so, can we simply define a set this way and take the infimum along the radii?
 
That can only be done if the closed set is bounded; from that, there is a ball containing it by the definition of boundedness. I want to say that there is a smallest closed ball containing a closed set, but I haven't figured out how to prove it yet. (However, it is true that for any point in the metric space, there is a smallest closed ball centered on it containing the closed set.)

As for closed sets containing spheres, this does not necessarily hold even if the set is nonempty. For example, in the metric space Rn with the Euclidean metric, any one-point set is closed, but does not contain any ball of positive radius. It is true, however, that any nonempty open set in a metric space contains a ball; if U is nonempty and open and x is a point in U, there is an open ball B(x, r) centered on x with radius r contained in it (by the definition of the induced topology). I haven't tried to show that there is a largest open ball contained in a bounded open set, but I think that's true as well. (Again, it certainly is true that for any point in the open set, there is a largest open ball centered on it contained in the open set.)This thread is probably more appropriate in the Topology & Geometry forum.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
10K