Re: Question on union of open sets
- From: José Carlos Santos <jcsantos@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 19:37:00 +0000
On 02-03-2008 9:47, William Elliot wrote:
On 1 Mar, 23:18, José Carlos Santos <jcsan...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:Not so fast. You have to show I_x exists.Let A be your set. For each _x_ in A, let I_x be the union of all openRight! If for another y in A the intersection I_x and I_y is non
intervals contained in A of which _x_ is an element. Consider the set
{ I_x : x in A }
Each element of this set is open, any two elements of this set are
disjoint and their union is A.
empty, we have I_x subset of I_x U I_y thus, (because I_x is
"maximal") I_x = I_y.
No he doesn't. The set I_x always exists and it is empty if and only if
_x_ is not an interior point of A.
That for all x in A, there is
an open interval U such that x in U subset A. This is not difficult, but
is an essential step. Otherwise, the same prove could be used for closed
sets and other sets, neither closed nor open.
In general, the proof that I described proves that the interior of A can
be written as an union of a disjoint family of open intervals.
Best regards,
Jose Carlos Santos
.
- References:
- Question on union of open sets
- From: polymedes
- Re: Question on union of open sets
- From: Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
- Re: Question on union of open sets
- From: polymedes
- Re: Question on union of open sets
- From: Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
- Re: Question on union of open sets
- From: polymedes
- Re: Question on union of open sets
- From: José Carlos Santos
- Re: Question on union of open sets
- From: polymedes
- Re: Question on union of open sets
- From: William Elliot
- Question on union of open sets
- Prev by Date: Re: If von Neumann was #3, who were #1 and #2?
- Next by Date: Statistics -please help
- Previous by thread: Re: Question on union of open sets
- Next by thread: Re: Question on union of open sets
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|