Proving Continuity of Real-Valued Functions Using G_delta Sets

  • Thread starter Thread starter fourier jr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sets
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that the set of points where a real-valued function is continuous forms a G_delta set, defined as the intersection of a countable collection of open sets. Participants emphasize using the topological definition of continuity, specifically handling the "for every" condition through intersections of neighborhoods that approximate continuity. There is a consensus that while open sets are typically united in topology, intersecting them is valid for this proof. The conversation also touches on the relevance of this theorem in the context of advanced mathematical concepts like the Riesz-Fischer theorem. Overall, the participants share insights and strategies for successfully demonstrating the continuity of functions using G_delta sets.
fourier jr
Messages
764
Reaction score
13
"Let f be a real-valued function defined for all real numbers. Prove that the set of points at which f is continuous is a G_\delta."
(a set is a G_\delta if it is the intersection of a countable collection of open sets)

I think it's obvious that I should use the topological/open-set definition of continuous, and then intersect a bunch of open sets but I'm not sure how to write it down. (if that makes any sense)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ahh, question 53 from Royden..taking math 435? (I went to UVic years ago).

f is continuous at a point if for every epsilon there is a delta..blah blah, you know the rest. For a hint, try to make the "for every" part handled by the intersection of your sets, that is take your sequence of sets to characterize the points were f satisfies a weaker condition than full blown continuity, but one that is getting "closer" to the full definition as you move along your sequence of sets.
 
fourier jr said:
"Let f be a real-valued function defined for all real numbers. Prove that the set of points at which f is continuous is a G_\delta."
(a set is a G_\delta if it is the intersection of a countable collection of open sets)

I think it's obvious that I should use the topological/open-set definition of continuous, and then intersect a bunch of open sets but I'm not sure how to write it down. (if that makes any sense)

Well, in topology you're going to want to take unions, not intersections of open sets. That said, I think you'll be better off if you work with neighborhoods rather than abstract topology definitions.
 
Hrm, I spent a couple minutes thinking about the problem, and came up with the same approach as shmoe, so it must be right. :biggrin:


Nate, since he's after an element of G_{\delta}, and not an open set, it's okay to intersect his open sets. In fact, the theorem couldn't be true using just open sets, because there are functions continuous at exactly one point!
 
shmoe said:
..taking math 435?

yup... can't wait to get to the riesz-fischer theorem & related stuff (because I'm Fourier jr)



thanks for the tips everybody; i think it worked out ok. :smile:
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'

Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'

Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
View full post »

Thread 'Struggle to understand the concept of the question (ice cube in water optics question)'

TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
View full post »

Similar threads

I On theorem 1.19 in Folland's and completion of measure
Replies
1
Views
2K
I Connection between absolute continuity of function and measure
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Proving a function f is continuous given A U B = X
Replies
5
Views
3K
I How to define an open set using the four axioms of a neighborhood
Replies
2
Views
2K
B Topological neigborhoods that are not intervals in the real line?
Replies
15
Views
2K
I Homemorphism in quotient topology
Replies
5
Views
613
Prove that the concatenation function is continuous
Replies
12
Views
2K
I How do I use the four axioms of a neighborhood to define an open set?
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Exercise 2.23 in Folland's real analysis text
Replies
2
Views
2K
MHB Every Closed Set in R has a Countable Dense Subset
Replies
7
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top