Understanding Cantor's Theorem and Diameter

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diameter Theorem
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding a specific aspect of the proof of Theorem 1.4 from John B. Conway's "Functions of a Complex Variable I," particularly in relation to Cantor's Theorem and the concept of diameter in the context of complex integration. Participants are exploring the implications of certain conditions and how they contribute to the proof.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Peter expresses confusion regarding how the inclusion of the set \( F_m \) in the ball \( B(I; \epsilon) \) leads to the conclusion that the theorem is proved, specifically questioning the relationship between \( F_m \subset B(I; \epsilon) \) and the existence of \( \delta > 0 \).
  • Peter references the conditions under which a partition \( P \) of the interval \([a,b]\) leads to the conclusion that the sum \( \sum f(\tau_k) [\gamma(t_k) - \gamma(t_{k-1})] \) is in \( F_m \) and thus within the specified bounds of \( \epsilon \).
  • Peter acknowledges a response from Euge, indicating a continued reflection on the topic without resolving his initial confusion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion appears to be unresolved, with Peter seeking clarification on specific points without a consensus on the interpretation of the theorem's proof or the implications of Cantor's Theorem.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of the proof, which involves assumptions about partitions and the behavior of sums in the context of limits and continuity. There may be missing assumptions or dependencies on definitions that are not fully articulated in the discussion.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading John B. Conway's book, "Functions of a Complex Variable I" (Second Edition) ...

I am currently focussed on Chapter IV: Complex Integration ... Section 1: Riemann-Stieljes Integral ... ...

I need help in fully understanding an aspect of the proof of Theorem 1.4 ... ...

Theorem 1.4 and its proof read as follows:View attachment 7443
View attachment 7444In the above text from Conway we read the following:

" ... ... Let us show that this will complete the proof. If $$\epsilon \gt 0$$ let $$m \gt ( 2/ \epsilon ) V( \gamma ) \ge \text{ diam } F_m$$. Since $$I \in F_m$$ , $$F_m \subset B( I ; \epsilon )$$. Thus if $$\delta = \delta_m$$ the theorem is proved. ... ... "I confess I am a little lost here ...I can see that if $$\epsilon \gt 0$$ then $$F_m \subset B( I ; \epsilon )$$ ... but how exactly does this fact together with $$\delta = \delta_m$$ assure us that the theorem is proved ...

... ... that is ... how does $$F_m \subset B( I ; \epsilon )$$

$$\Longrightarrow$$ there exists a complex number $$I$$ such that for every $$\epsilon \gt 0$$ there exists a $$\delta \gt 0$$ sch that for $$\lvert \lvert P \rvert \rvert \lt \delta$$ ... then ...

$$\left\lvert I - \sum_{ i = 1}^m f( \tau_k ) [ \gamma (t_k) -\gamma ( t_{ k-1 } ) ] \right\rvert $$
Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter==================================================================================

In the above proof, Conway mentions Cantor's Theorem ... so I am providing MHB readers with Conway's statement of Cantor's Theorem together with the relevant definition of the diameter of a set ... as follows:

View attachment 7445
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If $\delta = \delta_m$ and $P = \{t_0 < t_1 < \cdots < t_n\}$ is a partition of $[a,b]$ with $\|P\| < \delta$ and $\tau_k\in [t_{k-1},t_k]$ for all $k$, then $P \in \mathscr{P}_m$ and $\sum f(\tau_k) [\gamma(t_k) - \gamma(t_{k-1})] \in F_m\subset B(I, \epsilon)$, which implies $\lvert I - \sum f(\tau_k)[\gamma(t_k) - \gamma(t_{k-1})\rvert < \epsilon$.
 
Euge said:
If $\delta = \delta_m$ and $P = \{t_0 < t_1 < \cdots < t_n\}$ is a partition of $[a,b]$ with $\|P\| < \delta$ and $\tau_k\in [t_{k-1},t_k]$ for all $k$, then $P \in \mathscr{P}_m$ and $\sum f(\tau_k) [\gamma(t_k) - \gamma(t_{k-1})] \in F_m\subset B(I, \epsilon)$, which implies $\lvert I - \sum f(\tau_k)[\gamma(t_k) - \gamma(t_{k-1})\rvert < \epsilon$.
Thanks Euge ...

Still reflecting on this ...

Peter
 
Peter said:
Thanks Euge ...

Still reflecting on this ...

Peter
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K