MHB The Union of Two Open Sets is Open

  • Thread starter Thread starter G-X
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sets Union
G-X
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Let [Math]x ∈ A1 ∪ A2[/Math] then [Math]x ∈ A1[/Math] or [Math]x ∈ A2[/Math]

If [Math]x ∈ A1[/Math], as A1 is open, there exists an r > 0 such that [Math]B(x,r) ⊂ A1⊂ A1 ∪ A2[/Math] and thus B(x,r) is an open set.

Therefore [Math]A1 ∪ A2[/Math] is an open set.

How does this prove that [Math]A1 ∪ A2[/Math] is an open set. It just proved that [Math]A1 ∪ A2[/Math] contains an open set; not that the entire set will be open? This is very similar to the statement: An open subset of R is a subset E of R such that for every x in E there exists ϵ > 0 such that Bϵ(x) is contained in E.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The point is that the argument is valid for every $x\in A_1\cup A_2$.

If $C = A_1\cup A_2$, we have proved that, for every $x\in C$, there is an open ball $B(x,r)\subset C$ (where $r>0$ depends on $x$). That is precisely the definition of an open set.
 
G-X said:
If [Math]x ∈ A1[/Math], as A1 is open, there exists an r > 0 such that [Math]B(x,r) ⊂ A1⊂ A1 ∪ A2[/Math] and thus B(x,r) is an open set.

Therefore [Math]A1 ∪ A2[/Math] is an open set.

Hi G-X, welcome to MHB!As castor28's pointed out, it's about the definition of an open set, which he effectively quoted.Additionally that proof is not entirely correct and it is incomplete.
It should be for instance:

If [Math]x ∈ A1[/Math], as $A1$ is open, there exists an $r > 0$ such that [Math]B(x,r) ⊂ A1[/Math] (from the definition of an open set), which implies that [Math]B(x,r)⊂ A1 ∪ A2[/Math].
If [Math]x ∈ A2[/Math], as $A2$ is open, there exists an $r > 0$ such that [Math]B(x,r) ⊂ A2⊂ A1 ∪ A2[/Math].
Therefore for all [Math]x ∈ A1∪ A2[/Math], there exists an $r > 0$ such that [Math]B(x,r) ⊂ A1 ∪ A2[/Math].

Thus [Math]A1 ∪ A2[/Math] is an open set.
 
I see, I think I had the misunderstanding that something from A2 might close A1.

But I don't think that is an issue you technically need to wrap your head around.

Because the definition states: We define a set U to be open if for each point x in U there exists an open ball B centered at x contained in U.

So, essentially looping over A1, A2 - making the reference that open balls exist at each of these points then all points in A1 ∪ A2 have open balls contained in the union thus by the definition it must be open.
 
Last edited:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
57
Views
7K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top