Show that $(0,1)$ is connected and not compact.

Answer

In Rudin's book, the definition of "connected" is

A set $E \subset X$ is said to be connected if $E$ is not a union of two nonempty separated sets.

Two subsets $A$ and $B$ of a metric space $X$ are said to be separated if both $A \cap \overline{B}$ and $\overline{A} \cap B$ are empty

(1) Connected

Suppose $(0,1)$ is not connected. Then there are separated sets $A$ and $B$ such that $(0,1)=A \cup B$. Let $a \in A, b \in B$ and assume $a<b$ without loss of generality. Since $C:=[a,b] \cap \overline{A}$ is closed, $x:=\sup C \in C \subset \overline{A}$. Note that $x \neq b$ because $\overline{A} \cap B = \emptyset$. Then, $(x,b] \subset B$  $\Rightarrow$  $[x,b] \subset \overline{B}$  $\Rightarrow$  $x \in \overline{B}$. This implies $x \notin A,B$, but $a \leq x \leq b$  $\Rightarrow$  $x \in (0,1)=A \cup B$, which is contradiction.

(2) Not compact

Consider the open cover $\{(0,1-1/n)\}_{n=2}^\infty$. For any finite subcover $(0,1-1/n_1),\cdots,(0,1-1/n_N)$, $1-1/n_\ast \notin \bigcup_{k=1}^N(0,1-1/n_k)$ for $n_\ast>\max(n_1,\cdots,n_N)$.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elementary Classical Analysis, Marsden, 2nd ed, Chapter 2, Problem 1

Problem Discuss whether the following sets are open or closed: (a) (1,2) in $\mathbb{R}$ (b) [2,3] in $\mathbb{R}$ (c) $\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty [-1,1/n)$ in $\mathbb{R}$ (d) $\mathbb{R}^n$ in $\mathbb{R}^n$ (e) A hyperplane in $\mathbb{R}^n$ (f) $\{r \in (0,1) \;|\; \text{$r$ is rational} \}$ in $\mathbb{R}$ (g) $\{(x,y) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \;|\; 0<x \leq 1\}$ in $\mathbb{R}^2$ (h) $\{x \in \mathbb{R}^n \;|\; \|x\|=1\}$ in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Answer (a) Open: For $x \in (1,2)$, we can choose $\epsilon = \min(x-1,2-x)$ so that $D(x,\epsilon) \subset (1,2)$. (b) Closed: For $x \in [2,3]^c$, we can choose $\epsilon = \min(2-x,x-3)$ so that $D(x,\epsilon) \subset [2,3]^c$. (c) Closed: We first prove that $[-1,0] = A:=\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty [-1,1/n)$. Since $[-1,0] \subset [-1,1/n)$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$, $[-1,0] \subset A$. To prove $A \subset [-1,0]$, we assume that $x \in A$. Then obviously, $x \geq -1$. If $x > 0$, then there exists $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $x > 1/n$, which means
Read more

Principles of Mathematical Analysis, Rudin, 3th ed, Chapter 5, Problem 15

Problem Suppose $a \in \mathbb{R}^1$, $f$ is a twice-differentiable real function on $(a,\infty)$, and $M_0,M_1,M_2$ are the least upper bounds of $|f(x)|,|f'(x)|,|f''(x)|$, respectively, on $(a,\infty)$. Prove that $$ M_1^2 \leq 4M_0M_2.$$ Does $M_1^2 \leq 4M_0M_2$ hold for vector-valued functions too? Answer For $x \in (a,\infty)$ and $h>0$, $f(x+2h)=f(x)+2f'(x)h + \frac{1}{2}f''(\xi)(2h)^2$ for some $\xi$ between $x$ and $x+2h$ by Theorem 5.15. Then $|f'(x)| \leq \frac{|f(x+2h) - f(x)|}{2h} + |f''(\xi)h| \leq \frac{M_0}{h} + M_2h$. This holds for all $x$ and $h$ and $$ \inf_h(\frac{M_0}{h} + M_2h) = 2\sqrt{M_0M_2}$$ Hence, we have $M_1 \leq 2\sqrt{M_0M_2}$  $\Rightarrow$  $M_1^2 \leq 4M_0M_2.$ This inequality also holds for vector-valued functions $f=(f_1,\cdots,f_k)$. We may assume that $M_1 \neq 0$. For a fixed point $y \in (a,\infty)$, define a function $$ g(x):=f_1'(y)f_1(x) + \cdots + f_k'(y)f_k(x). $$ Then we have $$|g'(x)|^2
Read more