Proving Openness of a Set in n-Dimensional Space | Math Proof

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter stauros
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Set
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 2K views
stauros
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Prove if the following set is open

[tex]\displaystyle{A=\begin{cases}<br /> \vec{x}=(x_1,...,x_n)\in\mathbb{R}^n:x_n>0\\<br /> \end{cases}}[/tex] .


I have written the following proof and please correct me if i am wrong

Let : [tex]\displaystyle{\vec{x}\in A}[/tex]


Then we have : [tex]\displaystyle{\vec{x}=(x_1,...,x_n)}[/tex] with [tex]\displaystyle{x_n>0}[/tex]

Choose [tex]\epsilon[/tex] such that [tex]\displaystyle{0<\epsilon<x_n}[/tex] and then [tex]\displaystyle{B(\vec{x},\epsilon)\subseteq A}[/tex]


This happens because if [tex]\displaystyle{\vec{y}=(y_1,...,y_n)\in B(\vec{x},\epsilon)}[/tex] then [tex]\displaystyle{||\vec{y}-\vec{x}||<\epsilon}[/tex]

and [tex]\displaystyle{y_i\in\left(x_i-\epsilon,x_i+\epsilon\right)}[/tex]

Then we have [tex]\displaystyle{y_n\in\left(x_n-\epsilon,x_n+\epsilon\right)}[/tex] and thus [tex]\displaystyle{y_n>0}[/tex][/quote]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
stauros said:
Prove if the following set is open

[tex]\displaystyle{A=\begin{cases}<br /> \vec{x}=(x_1,...,x_n)\in\mathbb{R}^n:x_n>0\\<br /> \end{cases}}[/tex] .


I have written the following proof and please correct me if i am wrong

Let : [tex]\displaystyle{\vec{x}\in A}[/tex]


Then we have : [tex]\displaystyle{\vec{x}=(x_1,...,x_n)}[/tex] with [tex]\displaystyle{x_n>0}[/tex]

Choose [tex]\epsilon[/tex] such that [tex]\displaystyle{0<\epsilon<x_n}[/tex] and then [tex]\displaystyle{B(\vec{x},\epsilon)\subseteq A}[/tex]
That makes no sense because there is no one number labeled "[itex]x_n[/itex]". What you mean to say is that [itex]\epsilon< min(x_n)[/itex].


This happens because if [tex]\displaystyle{\vec{y}=(y_1,...,y_n)\in B(\vec{x},\epsilon)}[/tex] then [tex]\displaystyle{||\vec{y}-\vec{x}||<\epsilon}[/tex]
Can you prove this? That is, after all the whole point of the exercise! In particular, what is the definition of [itex]||\vec{y}-\vec{x}||[/itex]?

and [tex]\displaystyle{y_i\in\left(x_i-\epsilon,x_i+\epsilon\right)}[/tex]

Then we have [tex]\displaystyle{y_n\in\left(x_n-\epsilon,x_n+\epsilon\right)}[/tex] and thus [tex]\displaystyle{y_n>0}[/tex]
 
HallsofIvy said:
That makes no sense because there is no one number labeled "[itex]x_n[/itex]". What you mean to say is that [itex]\epsilon< min(x_n)[/itex].



Can you prove this? That is, after all the whole point of the exercise! In particular, what is the definition of [itex]||\vec{y}-\vec{x}||[/itex]?


Yes you right,how about the inequality: [tex]\displaystyle{0<\epsilon<x_k, \forall 1\le k \le n}[/tex].

But i think the center point of the problem is that:

[itex]|x_{i}-y_{i}|\leq ||x_{i}-y_{i}||<\epsilon[/itex] using the Euclidian norm
 
Last edited: