Proving an equivalence concerning sequences

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving an equivalence concerning sequences within the context of closed subsets A and B of R^d, specifically focusing on the implications of the existence of sequences converging to a point and the non-emptiness of their intersection.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the existence of sequences in A and B converging to a common point, questioning how to establish the connection between these sequences and the intersection of the sets.
  • Some participants discuss the application of the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem and its relevance to the boundedness of sequences.
  • There are inquiries about the necessity of showing specific sequences converge to certain points and the implications of closed sets containing their limit points.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the proofs and questioning the validity of their reasoning. Some guidance has been offered regarding the properties of closed sets and the nature of convergent sequences, but no consensus has been reached on the correctness of the proofs presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the constraints of the problem, including the definitions of closed sets and the implications of bounded sequences, while also addressing the need for clarity in their proofs and reasoning.

RVP91
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
given closed subsets, A and B, of R^d with A bounded prove the equivalence of:
1) There exists a pair of sequences x_n in A and y_n in B such that |x_n - y_n| -> 0 as n -> infinity
2) A intersection B is non empty.


I have attempted this question but am a bit stuck on proving 1 implies 2 and not sure about my attempt at 2 implies 1.

For 2 implies 1:

Let p be a point of intersection between A and B.
Then let x_n be a sequence in A that tends to p as n -> infinity.
Let y_n be a sequence in B that tends to p as n -> infinity.
Then we have that ||x_n - y_n|| -> 0 as n ->infinity.
Thus we have shown a pair of sequences exists.

For 1 implies 2:
I'm actually clueless as to where to start. I've been told the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem may help. I know this says that each bounded sequence in R^d has a convergent subsequence. I don't know how to use this though or really where to begin at all.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
x_n is a sequence in A. A is bounded. So x_n must be a bounded sequence in R^d. Now keep going.
 
x_n is a sequence in A. A is bounded. So x_n must be a bounded sequence in R^d.
Then using B-W we know a bounded sequence has a a convergent subsequence let us call it x_n_k and so we have x_n_k -> Q.
Now ||x_n - y_n|| -> 0 and ||x_n_k - Q|| -> 0 then the subsequence of y_n, y_n_k -> Q since
||y_n_k - Q||-> 0 = ||y_n_k - x_n_k + x_n_k - Q||-> 0 = ||y_n_k - x_n_k|| + ||x_n_k - Q|| -> 0
and we know ||x_n_k - Q|| tends to 0 and so ||y_n_k - x_n_k|| must tend to 0 ans this implies x_n_k = y_n_k and so y_n_k also tends to Q.
This implies the sets E and F have a intersection point and thus E intersection F is non empty.

Is this correct?
Apologies for the fact the proof above is probably rather messy.

Also was my proof for 2 implies 1 correct?
 
RVP91 said:
x_n is a sequence in A. A is bounded. So x_n must be a bounded sequence in R^d.
Then using B-W we know a bounded sequence has a a convergent subsequence let us call it x_n_k and so we have x_n_k -> Q.
Now ||x_n - y_n|| -> 0 and ||x_n_k - Q|| -> 0 then the subsequence of y_n, y_n_k -> Q since
||y_n_k - Q||-> 0 = ||y_n_k - x_n_k + x_n_k - Q||-> 0 = ||y_n_k - x_n_k|| + ||x_n_k - Q|| -> 0
and we know ||x_n_k - Q|| tends to 0 and so ||y_n_k - x_n_k|| must tend to 0 ans this implies x_n_k = y_n_k and so y_n_k also tends to Q.
This implies the sets E and F have a intersection point and thus E intersection F is non empty.

Is this correct?
Apologies for the fact the proof above is probably rather messy.

Also was my proof for 2 implies 1 correct?

Yes, the proof is written pretty sloppily. I'd try and clean it up. But you didn't say why Q is in either A or B! You've got the right idea, though. For 2->1 you can't just say that there is a sequence a_n->p. You'd better show that there is one.
 
Would the explanation of why Q is in A be because A is closed and bounded and so the sequence must tend to a point in A? And then since Q is in A and we have a sequence in B that converges to Q, the point Q must be in both A and B and hence A intersection B is non-empty? Also where I bought in a subsequence and used y_n_k in the proof would it have worked if I had just used y_n and showed that converges to Q?

How would I show there is a sequence a_n->p? Could you give me a hint please.

Thanks for the help s far and any future help, it is much appreciated!
 
RVP91 said:
Would the explanation of why Q is in A be because A is closed and bounded and so the sequence must tend to a point in A? And then since Q is in A and we have a sequence in B that converges to Q, the point Q must be in both A and B and hence A intersection B is non-empty? Also where I bought in a subsequence and used y_n_k in the proof would it have worked if I had just used y_n and showed that converges to Q?

How would I show there is a sequence a_n->p? Could you give me a hint please.

Thanks for the help s far and any future help, it is much appreciated!

Closed sets contain all of their limit points, don't they? And {p,p,p,p,p,...} is a in A. What does it converge to?
 
Oh right, so Q must be in A since A is a closed set and so contains it's limit points?

And {p,p,p,p,...} is a constant sequence and so converges to p?
 
RVP91 said:
Oh right, so Q must be in A since A is a closed set and so contains it's limit points?

And {p,p,p,p,...} is a constant sequence and so converges to p?

Why the question marks?
 
Just wanted to make sure :)

Thanks for the help
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K