Prove Continuous Function f(x) on Metric Space & Compact Set C

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter curtdbz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuous
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving the continuity of the function f(x) = min_{y ∈ C} d(x,y) within a metric space (X,d) where C is a compact subset. Two approaches are considered: the epsilon-delta definition of continuity and the open set method. The latter is favored due to the compactness of C, leading to the conclusion that f^{-1}(U) is open, thus establishing the continuity of f. The proof demonstrates that for any point in f^{-1}(U), a neighborhood can be constructed, confirming the continuity of the function.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of metric spaces and their properties
  • Familiarity with the concept of compact sets in topology
  • Knowledge of the epsilon-delta definition of continuity
  • Experience with open sets and their role in topology
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the epsilon-delta definition of continuity in depth
  • Explore the properties of compact sets in metric spaces
  • Learn about the relationship between open sets and continuity
  • Investigate other continuity proofs in metric spaces using different functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying real analysis, and anyone interested in topology and the properties of continuous functions in metric spaces.

curtdbz
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
A problem on the final exam is to show for a metric space (X,d) and a compact subset C in X prove that the function [tex]f(x) = min_{y \in C} d(x,y)[/tex] is continuous.

Now, there are two approches you can take. One is to go to the episolon delta definition of continuous, and the other is to use open sets.

Seeing as how C is compact, I think the better approach is to use open sets. That is, to show that for a point y = f(x), make a neighborhood around it, call it U. Then [tex]f^{-1}(U)[/tex] must be shown to be open somehow.

Taking the second approach, I can see that for any point p in [tex]f^{-1}(U)[/tex] we can construct a neighborhood V around it, so that [tex]p \subset V \subset f^{-1}(U)[/tex]. Um.. let me think... I know I can cover [tex]f^{-1}(U)[/tex] with finitely many open sets, due to the compactness of C, but I really am stuck. And the thing is, I have no idea where to begin to use the definition of f, [tex]f(x) = min_{y \in C} d(x,y)[/tex]. I'm pretty sure I'm appraoching this totally wrong but I can't think of anything else to do. Any help is greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the epsilon-delta approach may be better. In fact, for this function show you can use delta=epsilon. That is, prove [tex]|f(x)-f(x')| \le d(x,x')[/tex]
 
That question is somewhat odd - by using "min" rather than infinum they must be trying to give a hint. Here's how to make use of that:

Supposing [tex]f^{-1}(U)[/tex] is not empty for some open set [tex]U[/tex] (otherwise we are done), fix some point [tex]x_0 \in f^{-1}(U)[/tex].

As [tex]U[/tex] open, there exists [tex]r > 0[/tex] such that the interval [tex]( f(x_0) - r, f(x_0) + r ) \subset U[/tex].

As [tex]C[/tex] is compact, there exists a [tex]y_0 \in C[/tex] such that [tex]d(x_0, y_0) = f(x_0)[/tex].

Let [tex]x \in B(x_0, r/2)[/tex].

Then, [tex]f(x) \leq d(x, y_0) \leq d(x, x_0) + d(x_0, y_0) \leq r/2 + f(x_0)[/tex].
Similarily, [tex]f(x) \geq f(x_0) - r/2[/tex], and so [tex]x \in f^{-1}(U)[/tex].

Therefore, [tex]B(x_0, r/2) \subset f^{-1}(U)[/tex], hence [tex]f^{-1}(U)[/tex] is open. It follows that [tex]f[/tex] is continuous.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K