(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Problem:

I'm trying to make sure i understand the following proof:

Suppose we have the metric spaces (X, d) and (Y, d) with Y < X. Then

A is open in Y [itex]\Leftrightarrow[/itex] A = B [itex]\bigcap[/itex] Y where B is an open set in X.

Here is the proof I have written down:

([itex]\Rightarrow[/itex])

- Assume A open in Y. We need to produce a B s.t. A = B [itex]\bigcap[/itex] Y.

- For p [itex]\in[/itex] A, there exists a radius about p r > 0 s.t. { q [itex]\in[/itex] Y: d(p, q) <r} < A.

- Then let B[itex]_{p}[/itex] be the neighborhood of p in X with radius r[itex]_{p}[/itex].

- So we have constructed a set B open in X s.t. A = B [itex]\bigcap[/itex] Y.

([itex]\Leftarrow[/itex])

- Assume B open in X and A = B [itex]\bigcap[/itex] Y. Pick any p[itex]\in[/itex] A, which implies p is in B.

- So there exists some r > 0 s.t. { q [itex]\in[/itex] X: d(p, q) <r} < B.

- Observe that { q [itex]\in[/itex] X: d(p, q) <r} [itex]\bigcap[/itex] Y < B [itex]\bigcap[/itex] Y = A.

- Thus we make the left hand side equal to { q [itex]\in[/itex] Y: d(p, q) <r}, i.e. neighborhoods in Y.

- So there exists a neighborhood of p in Y, so it can also be contained in A.

- Thus we constructed a set A open in Y.

My points of confusion are...

1. Are there any stronger arguments to make? I feel like my proof is quite vague and shaky. I welcome any corrections or advice.

2. Does this theorem only work if Y has the subspace topology, i.e. the same topology which defines X? I suppose I should have been more careful in my notes unless I should assume that 'd' is the same for both X and Y...

3. Am I right in assuming that A cannot be open in Y by simplybeingin Y? It seems like we can just say A is open in Y relative to Y's topology. I guess this goes back to #2, since I am confused if X and Y are being defined with different topologies.

But does this mean we are also proving A is open in X? Again, this relates to my confusions in #2.

4. The theorem says A must have parts of both B and Y to be open in Y. I think of B as being any possible open set in X. Now if A is simply a subset of B, A is open in X, correct?

But since we want to prove A is open in a subset of X, namely Y, we need A to be the intersection of B and Y. B obviously isn't stated to be a subset of Y, so why is it that A is open in Y instead of simply being open in X?

I think I'm getting confused as to why there needs to be an intersection of B and Y. I know that A is a subset of Y, but I can't figure out why else. Like, I feel that the theorem can simply say A is open in Y and that's it... Why is it that A must contain some of B?

Is the theorem saying that for a subset A to be open in a subspace Y of X, then that subset must also contain some of the set B which is open in X? Again, doesn't that mean A is open in X as well?

I'm confusing myself. I'd appreciate any clarity, thank you.

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Homework Help: Set A is open relative to Y iff A also contains points of a set B open in X?

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**