UoR Topology 2011 Wiki
Advertisement

Exercise 2.12: Let be the euclidean metric on . Find every clopen set in the Euclidean topology induced by that metric on .

Unconfirmed Solutions[]

Confirmed Solutions[]

Incomplete Solutions[]

Olomana[]

Clopen sets occur in pairs, because the complement of a clopen set is also clopen. and are one such pair.

Assume there is another pair, two nonempty clopen sets and such that is the complement of . Let be a point in and be a point in . Construct the midpoint by adding the coordinates of and and dividing by . Since and are complements, must be in or . If is in , set:

If is in , set:

Lather, rinse, repeat. Construct a sequence of smaller and smaller segments . Note that has limit . (Right idea, but I'm not sure what a segment means in this space. You could stand to define the pair by recursion to show explicitly what's going on here. --Steven.clontz 20:00, March 17, 2011 (UTC)) Now consider the two sequences and . Both sequences converge, and they have to converge to the same point, else doesn't converge to . (I agree, but I'm not sure it's clear why? --Steven.clontz 20:00, March 17, 2011 (UTC)) Let be the limit point.

By construction, every -neighborhood around contains points not in on one side, and points not in on the other side. (Could use clearer explanation why this is true. I wouldn't use the word "side" since there could be infinitely many points from U or V on either side of x. --Steven.clontz 20:00, March 17, 2011 (UTC)) Since and are both open, can't be in either set, since in an open set, sufficiently small -neighborhoods can't contain points not in the set. But and are complements, so has to be in one or the other. This contradiction means that our assumption is false, and and are the only clopen sets in our metric space.

Olomana 02:47, March 16, 2011 (UTC)

This is the solution, but there are a few technical issues I had with it. Great idea, though! --Steven.clontz 20:00, March 17, 2011 (UTC)

I've been looking this over, and I can clear up some of the technical problems. However, I'm still asserting that a sequence converges without specifying the limit. This is something that I know to be true about the reals, but it's not something that we've already established in this class. So far, all we have is a definition of convergence to a given limit.

Olomana 17:44, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

Invalid Solutions[]

Comments[]

Advertisement