Proof that p is interior if p is not limit of complement

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jamalkoiyess
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interior Limit Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a theorem related to interior points in metric spaces. Specifically, the theorem states that a point \( p \) in a set \( E \) is an interior point if and only if \( p \) is not a limit point of the complement of \( E \). The scope includes mathematical reasoning and proof techniques within the context of metric spaces.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express a need for a proof of the theorem regarding interior points and limit points.
  • One participant suggests using contradiction as a method to approach the proof.
  • A participant presents a proof attempt, outlining the logic and steps taken, including the use of neighborhoods and the definition of limit points.
  • Another participant points out a small mistake in the proof regarding the notation of neighborhoods and notes that only one implication of the theorem has been shown.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus on the proof's correctness, as there are corrections and suggestions for improvement. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the completeness and accuracy of the proof presented.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential missing assumptions in the proof and the need to show both implications of the theorem for completeness.

jamalkoiyess
Messages
217
Reaction score
22
Hello PF,

I am searching for a proof that I couldn't find on the internet.

Theorem: E in X a metric space. p in E. p is an interior point of E if and only if p is not a limit point of (E complement)'

Sorry for notations but I have no idea how to insert Latex here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jamalkoiyess said:
Hello PF,

I am searching for a proof that I couldn't find on the internet.

Theorem: E in X a metric space. p in E. p is an interior point of E if and only if p is not a limit point of (E complement)'

Sorry for notations but I have no idea how to insert Latex here.

What have you tried? Contradiction seems a promising method. (Didn't try yet)
 
Math_QED said:
What have you tried? Contradiction seems a promising method. (Didn't try yet)

I didn't even try... :sorry:
I will see if contradiction works.
 
jamalkoiyess said:
I didn't even try... :sorry:
I will see if contradiction works.

Well, it are the forum rules that you at least try yourself, and post what you tried.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jamalkoiyess
Math_QED said:
Well, it are the forum rules that you at least try yourself, and post what you tried.
So this is the proof I came up with, tell me if something is wrong:
## E \in X ##
Suppose that ##p \in \mathring{E} ## and ## p \in (E^c)' ##
Then ##\exists \quad \gamma>0 \quad s.t. \quad B_\gamma(p) \in E##
and ## \forall \quad r>0 \quad \exists q \in E^c \cap B_r(p) ##
now let ##r = \gamma ##
So ## q \in B_r(p) \subset E \quad and \quad q \in E^c ##
contradiction.
 
jamalkoiyess said:
So this is the proof I came up with, tell me if something is wrong:
## E \in X ##
Suppose that ##p \in \mathring{E} ## and ## p \in (E^c)' ##
Then ##\exists \quad \gamma>0 \quad s.t. \quad B_\gamma(p) \in E##
and ## \forall \quad r>0 \quad \exists q \in E^c \cap B_r(p) ##
now let ##r = \gamma ##
So ## q \in B_r(p) \subset E \quad and \quad q \in E^c ##
contradiction.

Yes, one small mistake ##B(p) \subseteq E## instead of ##B(p) \in E##. And you showed only one implication ( the other one is pretty much the same I think though)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim mcnamara and jamalkoiyess

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
5K