Re: Nowhere dense sets question..,
- From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 10:49:41 -0300
In <1118347510.934528.314660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, on
06/09/2005
at 01:05 PM, barr@xxxxxxxxx said:
>Second show that the closure of a union is the union of the closures
That isn't true without additional conditions. consider the open balls
about a point with radius 1-2^{-n}, for n=1 to oo. The union is the
open ball with radius one, and its closure is the closed ball with
radius one. However, the union of the closures is just the open ball
with radius 1.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- References:
- Nowhere dense sets question..,
- From: James
- Re: Nowhere dense sets question..,
- From: barr
- Nowhere dense sets question..,
- Prev by Date: Re: field extension problem
- Next by Date: Re: mathematician salaries
- Previous by thread: Re: Nowhere dense sets question..,
- Next by thread: Re: Nowhere dense sets question..,
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|