Mysteriously simple containment questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter trap101
  • Start date Start date
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
1 reply · 1K views
trap101
Messages
339
Reaction score
0
Prove that the set i) S[itex]\subseteq[/itex] S(Closure)
ii) (Sint)int = Sint

Ok these supposedly simple containment questions irk me every time, how simplistic do I have to unravel the darn definitions:

Attempts: i) Let x [itex]\in[/itex] S(Closure)
==> x[itex]\in[/itex]S or x[itex]\in[/itex][itex]\partial[/itex]S (Boundary of S)
==> if x[itex]\in[/itex]S the there exists a B(r,x) [itex]\subseteq[/itex] S
likewise if x[itex]\in[/itex][itex]\partial[/itex]S then there exists the
B(r,x)[itex]\cap[/itex]S ≠∅ and B(r,x)[itex]\cap[/itex]Sc≠∅

==> S[itex]\subseteq[/itex] S(Closure) I really don't see what else can be done



ii) isn't this just direct from the definition of the Sint? I mean it's the interior of an interior.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i) First try to prove a simpler statement that is analogous to what you are asked to prove. For example, how would you prove that S⊆ S?

PS. This is all the help I can give here.