Neighbourhoods and Open Neighbourhoods .... Browder, Proposition 6.8 .... ....

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around Proposition 6.8 from Andrew Browder's "Mathematical Analysis: An Introduction," specifically regarding the concepts of neighborhoods and open neighborhoods within the context of topology. Participants are exploring the implications of the proposition and the definitions involved, seeking clarification on the relationship between open neighborhoods and general neighborhoods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Peter questions why the statement "$x \in \overline{E}$ if and only if $U \cap E \neq \emptyset$" holds for every neighborhood $U$ of $x$ if it is true for every open neighborhood $U$ of $x$.
  • One participant explains that $\overline{E}$ is the closure of $E$, defined as the intersection of all closed sets containing $E$, and discusses the concept of boundary points.
  • Another participant asserts that if $W$ is a neighborhood of $x$, it must contain an open neighborhood of $x$, which in turn intersects $E$ non-emptily, thus implying that $W$ also intersects $E$ non-emptily.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to agree on the definitions of neighborhoods and the implications of the proposition, but the discussion remains open regarding the nuances of the relationships between open neighborhoods and general neighborhoods.

Contextual Notes

The discussion relies on the definitions of neighborhoods and open neighborhoods as presented in Browder's text, and there may be assumptions about the reader's familiarity with these concepts that are not explicitly stated.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Andrew Browder's book: "Mathematical Analysis: An Introduction" ... ...

I am reading Chapter 6: Topology ... ... and am currently focused on Section 6.1 Topological Spaces ...

I need some help in order to fully understand an aspect of Proposition 6.8 ... ...


Proposition 6.8 (and the relevant Definition 6.8 ... ) read as follows:

View attachment 9163In the above text (in the statement of Proposition 6.8 ...) we read the following:

" ... ... $$x \in \overline{E}$$ if and only if $$U \cap E \neq \emptyset$$ for every open neighborhood $$U$$ of $$x$$ (and hence for every neighborhood $$U$$ of $$x$$) ... ..."My question is as follows:

Why, if the statement: " ... $$x \in \overline{E}$$ if and only if $$U \cap E \neq \emptyset$$ .. "

... is true for every open neighborhood $$U$$ of $$x$$ ...

... is the statement necessarily true for every neighborhood $$U$$ of $$x$$ ... ?

Help will be appreciated ...

Peter=====================================================================================The definition of a neighborhood is relevant to the above post ... so I am providing access to Browder's definition of the same as follows:
View attachment 9164

Hope that helps ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Browder - Defn of Closure 6.7 and Relevant Propn 6.8  ... .png
    Browder - Defn of Closure 6.7 and Relevant Propn 6.8 ... .png
    21 KB · Views: 138
  • Browder - 2 - Start of 6.1 - Relevant Defns & Propns ... PART 2 ... .png
    Browder - 2 - Start of 6.1 - Relevant Defns & Propns ... PART 2 ... .png
    18.7 KB · Views: 122
Physics news on Phys.org
Your question is "why does $x\in \overline E$ and U an open imply $U\cap E$ non-empty"

Okay, $\overline{E}$ is the "closure of E", the intersection of all closed sets that contain E. And a set is "closed" if it contains all of its boundary points with a "boundary point" being a point, p, such that every open set containing p also contains at least one point of E.
 
Peter said:
Why, if the statement: " ... $$x \in \overline{E}$$ if and only if $$U \cap E \neq \emptyset$$ .. "

... is true for every open neighborhood $$U$$ of $$x$$ ...

... is the statement necessarily true for every neighborhood $$U$$ of $$x$$ ... ?
If $W$ is a neighbourhood of $x$ then (by definition) it contains an open neighbourhood of $x$. That open neighbourhood has a nonempty intersection with $E$, hence so does $W$.
 
Opalg said:
If $W$ is a neighbourhood of $x$ then (by definition) it contains an open neighbourhood of $x$. That open neighbourhood has a nonempty intersection with $E$, hence so does $W$.
HallsofIvy and Opalg ... thanks for the help

Peter
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K