# S.O.S. Mathematics CyberBoard

Your Resource for mathematics help on the web!
 It is currently Wed, 22 May 2013 16:01:22 UTC

 All times are UTC [ DST ]

 Page 1 of 1 [ 10 posts ]
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Compact SetsPosted: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 00:09:26 UTC
 S.O.S. Oldtimer

Joined: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:16:28 UTC
Posts: 228
Show that every compact set must be closed.

I am looking for a simple proof.

This is supposed to be Intro Analysis proof.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 00:15:06 UTC
 Moderator

Joined: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 04:25:14 UTC
Posts: 12098
Location: Austin, TX
glebovg wrote:
Show that every compact set must be closed.

I am looking for a simple proof.

This is supposed to be Intro Analysis proof.

Are you in a metric space?

_________________
(\ /)
(O.o)
(> <)
This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 00:29:12 UTC
 S.O.S. Oldtimer

Joined: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:16:28 UTC
Posts: 228
Unfortunately, we have not covered metric spaces, yet. I am supposed to use covers, open covers, subcovers, etc. and the fact that any compact set must be bounded.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 00:34:41 UTC
 Moderator

Joined: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 04:25:14 UTC
Posts: 12098
Location: Austin, TX
glebovg wrote:
Unfortunately, we have not covered metric spaces, yet. I am supposed to use covers, open covers, subcovers, etc. and the fact that any compact set must be bounded.

Well, you'll at least need that your ambient space is Hausdorff. Then let be compact. Select a point in the complement of and a point in and neighborhoods around each which do not intersect. Continue to produce a cover for , and extract a finite subcover. Then you can argue that the intersection of the finitely many complement neighborhoods does not intersect , and so points in the complement have neighborhoods around them, hence the complement is open.

_________________
(\ /)
(O.o)
(> <)
This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 00:35:13 UTC
 Moderator

Joined: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 04:25:14 UTC
Posts: 12098
Location: Austin, TX
Also, this belongs in Analysis & Topology. Topic moved.

_________________
(\ /)
(O.o)
(> <)
This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 17:11:16 UTC
 S.O.S. Oldtimer

Joined: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:16:28 UTC
Posts: 228
How would I argue that the intersection of the finitely many complement neighborhoods does not intersect K?

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 17:14:23 UTC
 Moderator

Joined: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 04:25:14 UTC
Posts: 12098
Location: Austin, TX
glebovg wrote:
How would I argue that the intersection of the finitely many complement neighborhoods does not intersect K?

You must have a Hausdorff space for this.

Actually, your questions all seem to have to do with , so far. . . is your ambient space supposed to be ? (i.e. are you assuming ? If so, then you REALLY should have stated that at the beginning, because there is a lot of extra information in that that one could be using. If not, then you need the space to be assumed Hausdorff so you can separate points like that.

_________________
(\ /)
(O.o)
(> <)
This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 17:34:51 UTC
 Moderator

Joined: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 17:49:32 UTC
Posts: 6007
Location: 127.0.0.1, ::1 (avatar courtesy of UDN)
glebovg wrote:
How would I argue that the intersection of the finitely many complement neighborhoods does not intersect K?

You must have a Hausdorff space for this.

Actually, your questions all seem to have to do with , so far. . . is your ambient space supposed to be ? (i.e. are you assuming ? If so, then you REALLY should have stated that at the beginning, because there is a lot of extra information in that that one could be using. If not, then you need the space to be assumed Hausdorff so you can separate points like that.

Hausdorff is sufficient, but not necessary. In fact, the property "compact=>closed" lies strictly between (singletons are closed) and (Hausdorff) --- the cofinite topology on an infinite set is a space where compact does not imply closed (since every subset is compact), and cocountable topology on an uncountable set is an example of "compact=>closed" (since the only compact sets are the finite sets) which is not .

_________________

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 19:53:13 UTC
 S.O.S. Oldtimer

Joined: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:16:28 UTC
Posts: 228
This is Intro Analysis proof. Yes, K subset R. I am trying to prove it using basic Intro Analysis techniques. I presume that theorems like this one were proven before Topology became a major area of mathematics. Does it not seem like cheating (proving Analysis theorems using techniques from Topology given that these theorems were proven without using techniques from Topology)?

Top

 Post subject: Re: Compact SetsPosted: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 20:59:14 UTC
 Moderator

Joined: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 04:25:14 UTC
Posts: 12098
Location: Austin, TX
glebovg wrote:
This is Intro Analysis proof. Yes, K subset R. I am trying to prove it using basic Intro Analysis techniques. I presume that theorems like this one were proven before Topology became a major area of mathematics. Does it not seem like cheating (proving Analysis theorems using techniques from Topology given that these theorems were proven without using techniques from Topology)?

Not really, Hausdorff is just a property that spaces have, it's not really cheating. Someone proves something in like then notices that they didn't really CARE that they were inside the real numbers, all they cared about was that they were able to separate two points by open sets, and defined Hausdorff spaces to be the places where you can do that.

In other news: PLEASE include ALL assumptions in the future, this could have been vastly simplified if we had known that from the start rather than just an abstract compact set in some ambient space.

My post which starts with "Well, you'll at least need that your ambient space is Hausdorff[. . .]" has what you need, you'll need to show that you can always separate two points in by neighborhoods, but that is easy, just choose and let and then the -neighborhood of doesn't intersect the neighborhood of , then proceed with the rest of the proof that the complement is open.

_________________
(\ /)
(O.o)
(> <)
This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 1 [ 10 posts ]

 All times are UTC [ DST ]

#### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ High School and College Mathematics    Algebra    Geometry and Trigonometry    Calculus    Matrix Algebra    Differential Equations    Probability and Statistics    Proposed Problems Applications    Physics, Chemistry, Engineering, etc.    Computer Science    Math for Business and Economics Advanced Mathematics    Foundations    Algebra and Number Theory    Analysis and Topology    Applied Mathematics    Other Topics in Advanced Mathematics Other Topics    Administrator Announcements    Comments and Suggestions for S.O.S. Math    Posting Math Formulas with LaTeX    Miscellaneous