Nested sequence of compact sets in Rn has a non-empty intersection?

Click For Summary
A theorem states that any nested sequence of non-empty compact sets in Rn has a non-empty intersection. The discussion revolves around a counterexample involving intervals Un = [2-1/n, 1+1/n] for n=1, 2, and 3. It is questioned whether the intersection of these sets is the null set, as suggested by the claim that U3 is empty. However, the confusion arises from misunderstanding the conditions of the theorem, which applies only to non-empty compact sets. Therefore, the counterexample does not violate the theorem, as it does not meet the necessary criteria.
seeker101
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
There's a theorem that says any nested sequence of compact sets in Rn always has a non-empty intersection. So there is something wrong with this counterexample. I'm not able to see what's wrong:

Consider the interval Un = [2-1/n, 1+1/n] for n=1, 2 and 3.
Isn't the intersection of U1, U2 and U3 the null set? (since U3 is the null set?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
seeker101 said:
There's a theorem that says any nested sequence of compact sets in Rn always has a non-empty intersection. So there is something wrong with this counterexample. I'm not able to see what's wrong:

Consider the interval Un = [2-1/n, 1+1/n] for n=1, 2 and 3.
Isn't the intersection of U1, U2 and U3 the null set? (since U3 is the null set?)
There is a theorem that say any nested sequence of non-empty compact sets in Rn is has non-empty intersection.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K