What Happens to the Intersection of Open Sets in Incomplete Spaces?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ka Yan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sequence
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the theorem regarding the intersection of closed, nonempty, and bounded sets in a complete metric space, specifically stating that if the sequence of sets {En} satisfies certain conditions, their intersection is a single point. The inquiry explores the implications when the sets are not closed or the space is not complete, particularly using the rational numbers as an example. The participants highlight the importance of understanding the completeness of the rationals and suggest examining simple examples of open sets whose intersection is empty.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of metric spaces and their properties
  • Familiarity with closed and open sets in topology
  • Knowledge of completeness in metric spaces
  • Basic proof techniques in mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of closed and open sets in metric spaces
  • Learn about completeness and its implications in real analysis
  • Examine examples of open sets and their intersections in various metric spaces
  • Review proofs related to the intersection of sets in incomplete spaces
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of topology, and anyone interested in the properties of metric spaces and set theory.

Ka Yan
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
There is a theorem: If {En} is a sequence of closed, nonempty and bounded sets in a complete metric space X, if En[tex]\supset[/tex]En+1, and if lim diam En = 0, then [tex]\cap[/tex]En consists exactly one point.

And what I'm asking is that, if either the sets were not closed or X was not a complete space (but not both), and all other condictions are still satisfied, then what will follow? And if I let X be the rational set, for instance, what will I get. And could you explain it?

Thks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you have the proof for this theorem? Then you could just scan through it and scrutinize each step to see which assumption(s) are used.
 
Hi, Ka Yan!

You should be able to find a simple example of open sets (on a plane, say) whose intersection is empty.

… there you go! :smile:

(and: hint: are the rationals complete? if not, why not?)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
605
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
10K