Need help in a real analysis question

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zztc2004
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Analysis Real analysis
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that for a compact set K in R^m, a non-converging sequence {x_n} contains two subsequences that converge to different points in K. The hint suggests identifying a converging subsequence {y_i} and leveraging the Heine-Borel Theorem and the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem to establish the existence of these subsequences. The argument hinges on the properties of compactness and the implications of non-convergence in metric spaces.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of compact sets in R^m
  • Familiarity with the Heine-Borel Theorem
  • Knowledge of the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem
  • Basic concepts of metric spaces and convergence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Heine-Borel Theorem in detail
  • Explore the implications of the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem
  • Investigate properties of compactness in metric spaces
  • Practice proving convergence of subsequences in various contexts
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, particularly those studying real analysis, and educators looking to deepen their understanding of compactness and convergence in metric spaces.

zztc2004
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am trying to prove a question :
Assume K[tex]\inR^{m}[/tex] is compact and {xn} (n from 1 to infinite) is a sequence of points in K that does not converge . Prove that there are 2 subsequences that converge to different points in K .
Hint : Let yi=x[tex]_{ni}[/tex] be one subsequence that converges to a point in K. what is the consequence of the fact that the whole sequence goes not converge to y .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi, zz:

You may be able to argue that if two subsequences {x_ni} and {x_nj} of {x_n}
converge to the same value x, then the original sequence {x_n} must itself converge
to x . It seems clear this would be true if X is metric/metrizable, when you can just use the triangle inequality, but let's see the more general case:

So assume that. Then for every 'hood U_x of x, ( 'hood :=neighborhood) there
is an N with : x_ni is in U_x for i>n, and x_nj is also in U_x.

I think that is almost it.
 
Look up Heine-Borel Theorem. See if that and the given condition of compactness tells you anything about K. Also look up Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem. See if that helps you show there is a convergent subsequence. Also, if you can show there is one converging subsequence why is it that the whole given sequence doesn't converge? Can you do a subsequence-ectomy, then B-W Th again on what's left? I won't say more.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K