This shows that the intervals (0,1) and [0,1] are equivalent.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the equivalence of the intervals (0,1) and [0,1] by establishing a bijection. A function has been identified that maps irrationals from (0,1) to [0,1], but the challenge lies in addressing the rationals. It is noted that both intervals share the same supremum and infimum, reinforcing their relationship. A proposed method involves using a delta-epsilon approach to demonstrate the equivalence of the two intervals. The countability of rational numbers allows for a sequential arrangement that aids in defining a bijective function between the two sets.
tink
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Show that the intervals (0,1) and [0,1] are equivalent. (Hint: consider rationals and irrationals separately).

I'm able to find a function that shows a bijection between (0,1) an [0,1] under the irrationals, but i can't figure out the rationals. Also... the next step (i believe) would be to find a bijection between these two functions. If anybody can help me figure out an answer to this problem that would be so awesome! Thanks so much, guys!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i'm not really good at this but i think this would be relevant to the proof

In both cases the supremum (least upper bound) is 1 and the greatest lower bound is 0.

Also for all x in (0,1) 0<x<1
and for for all x in [0,1], 0<=x<=1, and it follows that 0<x<1 for this interval as well.

Thus (0,1) is a subinterval of [0,1]

If you are familiar with delta-epsilon proofs you might want to prove that

0 + delta < x < 1 + delta is equivalent to 0<=x<=1 for a suitable delta > 0.
 
The set of rational numbers is countable. That means that the set of rationals in (0,1) can be arranged in a sequence, like this:

r_2, r_3, r_4,\dots

If you define

r_0=0

and

r_1=1

The function f defined by

f(r_n)=r_{n+2}

maps the rationals in [0,1] bijectively onto the rationals in (0,1).
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanged mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top