Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

More Heine-Borel

  1. Apr 29, 2007 #1
    The other thread about heine-borel theorem just reminded me of something that has been unclear to me. I understand how you can prove, that a closed and bounded subset of [tex]\mathbb{R}^n[/tex] is compact, but isn't this true also for an arbitrary metric space? The proof I've read relies on the fact that we can first put the subset in a box [tex][-R,R]^n[/tex], and then start splitting this box into smaller pieces, but how could you replace this procedure with something in an arbitrary metric space?
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 29, 2007 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I'm pretty sure no. Try looking at function spaces.
  4. Apr 29, 2007 #3
    Oh, well. No wonder I didn't understand how to extend this proof into general metric spaces...

    Now when you mentioned function spaces, I just remembered, that I do know the Riesz's theorem of non-compactness. Just couldn't put pieces together. :rolleyes: Ok, sorry for bothering!
  5. Apr 29, 2007 #4


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    You don't need function spaces. The Heine-Borel theorem, for the real numbers, is equivalent to the "least upper bound property". That means that it is NOT true for the set of rational numbers with the "usual" topology.

    In particular, {x| x2<= 2} is both closed and bounded as a subset of the rational numbers but is not compact. (The crucial point in the proof is that there is no rational number, x, such that x2= 2.)
  6. Apr 29, 2007 #5
    In general a metric space is compact if and only if it is complete and totally bounded.
  7. May 2, 2007 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    2015 Award

    deadwolfes remark means compactness follows if every sequence has a cauchy subsequence, and every cauchy sequence converges.

    notice R^n is already complete, so any closed subset is also complete. what property does R^n have causing every bounded subset to be totally bounded?
    Last edited: May 2, 2007
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: More Heine-Borel
  1. Heine-Borel Theorem (Replies: 42)

  2. Heine Borel Theorem (Replies: 1)