Proof: open sphere is an open set

  • Thread starter Thread starter nuuskur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof Set Sphere
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that an open sphere in \(\mathbb{R}^m\) is an open set. The original poster attempts to establish that any point within the sphere is an interior point, using definitions and properties related to distances and the triangle inequality.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster explores the relationship between points within the sphere and their distances to the center, questioning the justification of an inequality derived from the triangle inequality. Some participants suggest a clearer structure for the argument, while others raise concerns about terminology, preferring "open ball" over "open sphere."

Discussion Status

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the definitions of open sets and the appropriate terminology in the context of metric spaces, indicating a potential area of confusion regarding the terms "open sphere" and "open ball."

nuuskur
Science Advisor
Messages
928
Reaction score
1,226

Homework Statement


Prove that an open sphere in \mathbb{R}^m is an open set.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

To show that an open sphere is an open set, any point inside the sphere has to be an interior point:
Let us have a sphere B(P_0, r), r > 0, where P_0 is the centerpoint and r is the radius of the sphere and also an arbitrary point P inside the sphere. Hence \exists\varepsilon>0\colon B(P,\varepsilon)\subset B(P_0, r) and as we assumed the B(P_0, r) to be open, then it does not contain its boundary.

The idea is to use the triangle inequality by taking another random point in a sphere around the already random point P in the large sphere: S\in B(P, \varepsilon). The distance between two points d(A,B) (Pythagorean)
d(S, P_0)\leq d(S,P) + d(P,P_0) <\varepsilon + d(P,P_0). This is a shaky part - how can I justify this inequality is always correct? I can visualize it in my head, but is it accurate?

Per that assumption I would fix \varepsilon\colon = r - d(P,P_0) > 0 since P is an interior point and its distance cannot be greater than or equal to the radius of the large sphere, therefore \varepsilon is always strictly positive and \forall S\in B(P, \varepsilon_1) I can state that the distance d(S,P_0) < \varepsilon + d(P,P_0) = r which would mean that the open sphere is an open set as all its points are interior points.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The argument is essentially correct, but things are a bit mixed up and it doesn't flow. I suggest trying to tidy it up. I would start with something like this:

Let ##B(P_0, r)## be an open sphere in ##\mathbb{R}^m##

Let ##P \in B(P_0, r)##

##d(P_0, P) < r## hence ##\exists \epsilon > 0## ...
 
A silly comment, but I don't like the term "open sphere". The terminology "open ball" is standard, because a sphere is usually the name given to the boundary of the ball, not something in the interior.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nuuskur
micromass said:
A silly comment, but I don't like the term "open sphere". The terminology "open ball" is standard, because a sphere is usually the name given to the boundary of the ball, not something in the interior.
I knew there was something off in the translation. I'll use ball to describe the set and sphere to describe its boundary, then.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K