Show that an open connected subset of R^2 is path-connected

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter adam512
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem in topology concerning the path-connectedness of open connected subsets of ℝ². Participants explore various approaches to demonstrate that if U is an open connected subset of ℝ², then U is also path-connected, engaging with hints and alternative methods of proof.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests using the hint to show that the set of points connected to a point x₀ by a path is both open and closed, and thus must be U if non-empty.
  • Another participant challenges the claim that connectedness implies non-empty intersections of open balls, clarifying that connectedness only prevents the separation into two disjoint open sets.
  • A participant proposes that open balls in ℝ² are path-connected due to their convexity, leading to the conclusion that the set A of points connected to x₀ is non-empty.
  • Concerns are raised about proving that the set A is open, with one participant questioning the justification for A being a union of open balls.
  • Another participant refines their argument, demonstrating that for any point in S₀, there exists an open ball fully contained in S₀, thus proving it is open.
  • A later reply introduces an alternative proof using equivalence relations, suggesting that if U is open and connected, it must consist of a single equivalence class, thereby establishing path-connectedness.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of connectedness and the methods for proving path-connectedness. While some agree on the utility of the hint provided, others propose alternative approaches, indicating that no consensus has been reached on a single method of proof.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their arguments, such as the need to clarify assumptions about the nature of open sets and the properties of path-connectedness in relation to convexity.

adam512
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi!

I have a question regarding my solution to a problem in topology.

Problem: Show that if U is an open connected subset of ℝ2, then U is also path-connected.

Hint: Show that given any x0 in U, show that the set of points that can be joined to x0 by a path in U is both open and closed.

First of all, I know that since U is connected, the only sets which are both open and closed are ∅ and U itself. Therefore, if I can show that the set of points which can be joined to x0 by a path is indeed open and closed, and non-empty, it is U. But I am stuck, and think I found an alternative solution to this problem, not using the hint, and was wondering if it is correct or not.

My idea is this. Since U is an open subset of ℝ2, U can be written as a (possibly infinite) union of open balls Bn(x,ε), centered at x and with radius ε, positive, where x lies in U. And U is connected, which implies that given any ball, there is another ball with nonempty intersection. If it was empty, then U could be separated and hence not connected.

Now there is a path between any two pair of balls, which can be shown to imply that there is a path between any two points in the union of open balls.

It is very informal but do you guys think it could work? If not, any tips on how I find the set of all points in U connected to x0 by a path in U as the hint suggests?

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
"And U is connected, which implies that the intersection of any two balls, can not be empty"; this is not true I'm afraid. Certainly two open balls in the union can be disjoint even if the set is connected; the set being connected just means that it cannot be written as the disjoint union of specifically two open sets.

Go with the given hint. Let ##S_{0}## be the set defined in the hint and let ##x\in S_0##. ##U## is open so there exists an open ball ##B_{\epsilon}(x)## contained entirely in ##U##. Use the fact that ##B_{\epsilon}(x)## is convex to show ##S_0## must be open. Then all you have to do is show that ##S_0## is closed as well (use a similar argument).
 
adam512 said:
Hi!

I have a question regarding my solution to a problem in topology.

Problem: Show that if U is an open connected subset of ℝ2, then U is also path-connected.

Hint: Show that given any x0 in U, show that the set of points that can be joined to x0 by a path in U is both open and closed.

First of all, I know that since U is connected, the only sets which are both open and closed are ∅ and U itself. Therefore, if I can show that the set of points which can be joined to x0 by a path is indeed open and closed, and non-empty, it is U. But I am stuck

First show that an open ball in [itex]\mathbb{R}^2[/itex] is path connected.

Let [itex]x_0 \in U[/itex], and let [itex]A \subset U[/itex] be the set of points in U which can be joined to [itex]x_0[/itex] by a path in U.

Given that U is open, and that open balls are path connected, why does it follow that:
(1) A is not empty.
(2) A is open.
(3) A is closed, ie. the complement of A in U is open.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks for the replies!

Before I post my reply, how do I write math? To the right it says "Click the sigma symbol in the toolbar for complex equations" but I can't find the sigma-symbol.
 
Thank you micromass.

WannabeNewton: I found my error and changed it from "And U is connected, which implies that the intersection of any two balls, can not be empty" to "And U is connected, which implies that given any ball, there is another ball with nonempty intersection"

But I just realized why this is wrong too. Just to illustrate the error, one can have three open balls in a "chain" (the audi logo) and three other open balls in a "chain" (another audi logo), with the chains disjoint, but yet every ball intersects some other ball.

pasmith:

Open balls in [itex]\mathbb{R}^2[/itex] are path connected since they are convex.

1) [itex]A[/itex] is nonempty, since [itex]x_0 \in A[/itex], and also some open ball containing [itex]x_0[/itex].

2) It is open since it is a union of open sets (all the balls)?

3) Now the closedness of A is where I get stuck. I already know that A's complement is the empty set, but I still need to show it is open. Where do I start? By assuming the complement is the set of all numbers with no path between them? By the way, if I did not know that this in fact was the empty set, could this complement ever contain anything else than a finite number of points? Is this what I need to use? It would at least be a closed set.

Thanks again for the replies!
 
Your argument for ##(2)## doesn't really prove anything. Why should it be a union of open balls? This is what you have to actually show. See what I said above in post #2. ##(3)## will become clear if you can show ##(2)##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thank you again.

I believe I have got it right now.

Let [itex]S_0[/itex] be the set of points which can be joined to [itex]x_0 \in U[/itex] by a path in [itex]U[/itex]. Now for any [itex]y \in S_0[/itex] there is some open ball [itex]B_{\epsilon}(y)[/itex] fully contained in [itex]S_0[/itex]. This is true because by our definition of [itex]S_0[/itex], there is path between [itex]x_0[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex], and we can find a path between [itex]x_0[/itex] and any point in the ball too, since the ball is convex (putting the path between [itex]x_0[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex] together with the straight line segment between [itex]y[/itex] and any point in the ball). So for every point [itex]y \in S_0[/itex], there is an open set (the ball) fully contained in [itex]S_0[/itex], hence it is open.

We use a similir argument to show that the complement is open. Take some [itex]y \in U\setminus S_0[/itex]. Now there is some open ball [itex]B_{\epsilon}(y)[/itex] fully contained in [itex]U \setminus S_0[/itex]. By the definition of the complement, there is no path between [itex]x_0[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex], and therefore no path between the points in the ball (if there were, we could find a path between [itex]x_0[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex] too). So the complement is open too!

Thanks for all the replies.

I believe my next problem is a generalization of this problem, instead of [itex]\mathbb{R}^2[/itex] the space is just locally path connected.
 
Seems ok!
 
  • #10
On reflection, there is another proof which doesn't require showing expressly that [itex]U \setminus S_0[/itex] is open:

"Can be joined by a path lying wholly in U to" is an equivalence relation on U (the proof of this is straightforward). To show that U is path connected, one must show that there is exactly one equivalence class.

Since U is open, by definition for all [itex]x \in U[/itex] there exists [itex]r > 0[/itex] such that [itex]B_r(x) \subset U[/itex], and because [itex]B_r(x)[/itex] is path connected we have [itex]B_r(x) \subset [x][/itex]. Thus every equivalence class is open.

Since U is open, if there are at least two equivalence classes then U is the union of at least two disjoint non-empty open sets, and so by definition U is disconnected. But by assumption U is connected. Thus there is exactly one equivalence class, as required.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
615
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K