Understanding the Closed Set of Natural Numbers

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the closed set of natural numbers, particularly in the context of topology and metric spaces. Participants explore various interpretations and definitions of closure in different mathematical frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the definition of "closed" in relation to the natural numbers, asking in what topological or metric space this closure is being considered.
  • One participant suggests that the natural numbers can be viewed as closed in the context of a discrete topological space, noting that this perspective is somewhat trivial.
  • Another participant mentions that the natural numbers are closed in the real numbers under the usual metric, as their complement is open.
  • There is a discussion about the lack of a natural definition of natural numbers in a generic metric space, with a call for specific embeddings to be clarified.
  • Some participants express that the simplicity of the question may imply an embedding of natural numbers within the real numbers using the Euclidean metric, although this has not been explicitly stated.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the definition of closure for natural numbers, with multiple competing views and interpretations remaining unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity surrounding the specific metric space or topological space being referenced, as well as the lack of clarity in the original question posed by the OP.

Parag Kulkarni
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi,
How and why set of natural numbers is closed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Closed in what topological/metric space?

What are your thoughts?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Parag Kulkarni
micromass said:
Closed in what topological/metric space?

What are your thoughts?
Good question. I think it's about metric space.
 
What metric space?
 
OP:There is no natural definition of natural numbers in a generic metric space. Do you have any particular embedding of the natural numbers in mind?
 
ℕ as a half-group is closed under addition.
ℕ as a discreet topological space is closed by itself. A discreet metric won't change anything. But both is more or less trivial.
ℕ⊆ℝ is closed since its complement is open, i.e. you can find to each real number r, that is not natural, an open intervall that contains r but still no natural number.
 
Every topological space is "closed' as a subset of itself. If you have it embedded in the real numbers with the "usual metric", d(x, y)= |x- y|, then it is closed as fresh_42 says.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Every topological space is "closed' as a subset of itself. If you have it embedded in the real numbers with the "usual metric", d(x, y)= |x- y|, then it is closed as fresh_42 says.
I assume you are replying to my post. There is no assumed embedding of the naturals into the generic metric space.
 
WWGD said:
I assume you are replying to my post. There is no assumed embedding of the naturals into the generic metric space.
Yes, you are right. And I can imagine a couple of very funny embeddings, metric or not. But considering the simplicity of the question it's not very unlikely that ℕ⊂ℝ with it's euclidean metric is meant. And yes, it hasn't been mentioned. Reading the questions here I found that most of them are far from being precise or even clear.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
501
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
9K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K