Proving something is not the empty set

  • Thread starter Thread starter l888l888l888
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Empty Set
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves demonstrating that the intersection of a sequence of nonempty closed subsets \( V_n \) of a compact space \( T \) is not empty. The subsets are nested, meaning \( V_{n+1} \subseteq V_n \) for all natural numbers \( n \).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts a proof by contradiction, assuming the intersection is empty and deriving a contradiction based on the nonemptiness of each \( V_n \).
  • One participant questions the original poster's approach, emphasizing the importance of the compactness of space \( T \) in the argument.
  • Another participant references a necessary and sufficient condition for compactness and suggests using it to support the proof.
  • There is a suggestion to explore the implications of an empty intersection in relation to constructing an open cover of \( T \) without a finite subcover.

Discussion Status

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of topology, particularly the implications of compactness and the properties of closed sets. There is an acknowledgment of the difficulty in conveying mathematical concepts without formal notation.

l888l888l888
Messages
49
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


for every n in the natural numbers, Vn is a nonempty closed subset of a compact space T. Vn+1 is contained in Vn. Prove the Intersection of all the Vn's from n=1 to infinity does not equal the empty set.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


This question seems rather easy, actually a little too easy for an advanced topology class. but this is what i did. I tried to prove by contradiction and assume that the Intersection of all the Vn's from n=1 to infinity EQUALS the empty set. By this assumption this would imply that there exists an n in the natural numbers such that that Vn is the empty set. I say this because... for any set A, A n {empty set} = {empty set}. so choosing a Vn to be the empty set would guarantee that the intersection of all the Vn's is the empty set. But this is a contradiction because in the original problem it says for every n in the natural numbers, Vn is NONEMPTY. Is this enough?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. Your proof doesn't use that the space T is compact. Take the space to be T=(0,1]. Take Vn=(0,1/n]. The intersection of the Vn's is empty, but none of them are empty. You need to use that T is compact.
 
OH I SEE. UR RITE. DONT KNOW WHAT I WAS THINKING... ANYWAY I THINK I HAVE IT NOW. THERE WAS A PREVIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE END RESULT BEING THAT... A NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR A SPACE TO TO BE COMPACT IS : IF {Vi : i in I} is an indexed family of subsets of T such that the intersection of the Vi's does not equal the empty set with the i's in a finite subset J of I, then the intersection of the Vi's for all the i's in I is not the empty set. So using this result and taking a finite subset of the natural numbers, if the intersection of the Vn's with the n's being in the subset is not equal to the empty set the the intersection of all the Vn's does not equal the empty set. I hope this is making sense. It is hard to explain without all the mathematical symbols.
 
l888l888l888 said:
OH I SEE. UR RITE. DONT KNOW WHAT I WAS THINKING... ANYWAY I THINK I HAVE IT NOW. THERE WAS A PREVIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE END RESULT BEING THAT... A NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR A SPACE TO TO BE COMPACT IS : IF {Vi : i in I} is an indexed family of subsets of T such that the intersection of the Vi's does not equal the empty set with the i's in a finite subset J of I, then the intersection of the Vi's for all the i's in I is not the empty set. So using this result and taking a finite subset of the natural numbers, if the intersection of the Vn's with the n's being in the subset is not equal to the empty set the the intersection of all the Vn's does not equal the empty set. I hope this is making sense. It is hard to explain without all the mathematical symbols.

I'm not sure I even understand that without trying harder. Which I'm not going to do because there is a much simpler and instructive approach. Why don't you try to show if the intersection of all of Vn's is empty then you can construct an open cover of T with no finite subcover?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
20
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
7K