I would like to prove [0,1], as a subset of R with the standard Euclidean topology, is compact. I do not want to use Heine Borel. I was wondering if someone could check what I've done so far. I'm having trouble wording the last part of the proof.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Claim: Let [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex] have the usual Euclidean topologyT. Then [0,1] is a compact subset in [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex].

Proof:

Denote the set S_{m}as all [itex]m \in \mathbb{R}[/itex] such that [itex]m < 1[/itex] and the set [0,m] can be covered by a finite number of open sets inT.

We first show that [itex]S_{m} \neq \emptyset[/itex], and has an upper bound.

To show that [itex]S_{m}[/itex] is non-empty, note that 0 [itex]\in S_{m}[/itex]. This can be shown by noting that if m = 0, then the corresponding set is [0,0], which is just the singleton element [itex]\{0\}[/itex]. To find a finite covering of [itex]\{0\}[/itex] inT, select any [itex]\epsilon \in \mathbb{R}[/itex]. Then [itex](-\epsilon,\epsilon)[/itex] in a basis element inT, and it contains the singleton element 0. This shows that the set [0,0] can be covered by a finite number of open sets from T, [itex]\Rightarrow 0 \in S_{m}[/itex]. Also, by assumption, we know that [itex]\leq 1 \Rightarrow[/itex] has an upper bound. By the completeness property of [itex]\mathbb{R} S_{m}[/itex] must have a least upper bound. Let's denote this as [itex]m_{u}[/itex].

As a next step, I'll assume that [itex]m_{u} < 1[/itex], and arrive at a contradiction. This will then prove that [itex]m_{u} = 1 \Rightarrow 1 \in S_{m} \Rightarrow [0,1][/itex], by definition of [itex]S_{m}[/itex] can be covered by a finite number of open sets inT. (Since the definition of compactness is that any open cover of a set has a finite subcover, this will be sufficient to show that [0,1] is compact)

So, assume that [itex]m_{u} < 1[/itex]. Since [itex]m_{u} \in S_{m} \Rightarrow [0,m_{u}][/itex] can be covered by a finite number of open sets in T. Let [itex]O_{a}[/itex] be the union of all such open sets. By topology axioms, we know that [itex]O_{a}[/itex] is an open set itself.**This is where I am having trouble wording things.**My goal now is to essentially say that, since [itex]m_{u} \in O_{a}[/itex] andTis the Euclidean topology, I can find some [itex] \delta[/itex] where [itex] \delta < |1-m_{u}|[/itex] s.t. [itex]m_{u} + \delta \in O_{a}[/itex]. This would then mean that [itex][0,m_{u}+\delta][/itex] is covered by [itex]O_{a}[/itex] as well, and since [itex]m_{u}+\delta < 1 \Rightarrow m_{u}+\delta \in S_{m} \Rightarrow m_{u} [/itex] can't be the least upper bound, which would be my contradiction.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Proof that [0,1] is compact (not using Heine Borel). Proof check

Loading...

Similar Threads - Proof compact using | Date |
---|---|

A Proof of Seifert-Van Kampen Theorem | Oct 14, 2017 |

I Proof that retract of Hausdorff space is closed | Oct 8, 2017 |

I Simple convergence proof | Sep 30, 2017 |

Spivak's proof of A closed bounded subset of R^n is compact | Sep 20, 2012 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**