Micromass' big counterexample challenge

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
62 replies · 10K views
mfb said:
That is basically what @Samy_A constructed, just with a much shorter argument.
Didn't he remove whole intervals? I am saying:
Take x irrational, then ##\mathbb R ## -{##x##} is your desired open set .

EDIT: It is open as the complement of the closed set {x}, and clearly ##\mathbb Q \subset G \subset \mathbb R ##.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
WWGD said:
Didn't he remove whole intervals?
If you take the union of all his sets (to get the final set) you should get the same with both approaches.
 
micromass said:
I hope some of these statements were surprising to some of you
o yes, especially for those who did not read Bernard R. Gelbaum, John M. H. Olmsted: Counterexamples in Analysis. :)