Can we prove that a point is either in the interior, exterior or boundary of a set?
$begingroup$
So, I am reading Michael Spivak’s book Calculus on Manifolds and when he starts speaking of sets, he states something like this:
If we take an arbitrary set $A$ and an arbitrary point $x$, then either one of three has to be true:
- There exists an open set $B$ such that $xin Bsubset A$
- There exists an open set $B$ such that $xin B subset overline A$
- For all open sets $B$ such that $xin B$, $B$ contains elements of $A$ and $overline A$
My question is: Can we prove this?
Thank you in advance.
real-analysis elementary-set-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So, I am reading Michael Spivak’s book Calculus on Manifolds and when he starts speaking of sets, he states something like this:
If we take an arbitrary set $A$ and an arbitrary point $x$, then either one of three has to be true:
- There exists an open set $B$ such that $xin Bsubset A$
- There exists an open set $B$ such that $xin B subset overline A$
- For all open sets $B$ such that $xin B$, $B$ contains elements of $A$ and $overline A$
My question is: Can we prove this?
Thank you in advance.
real-analysis elementary-set-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
So, I am reading Michael Spivak’s book Calculus on Manifolds and when he starts speaking of sets, he states something like this:
If we take an arbitrary set $A$ and an arbitrary point $x$, then either one of three has to be true:
- There exists an open set $B$ such that $xin Bsubset A$
- There exists an open set $B$ such that $xin B subset overline A$
- For all open sets $B$ such that $xin B$, $B$ contains elements of $A$ and $overline A$
My question is: Can we prove this?
Thank you in advance.
real-analysis elementary-set-theory
$endgroup$
So, I am reading Michael Spivak’s book Calculus on Manifolds and when he starts speaking of sets, he states something like this:
If we take an arbitrary set $A$ and an arbitrary point $x$, then either one of three has to be true:
- There exists an open set $B$ such that $xin Bsubset A$
- There exists an open set $B$ such that $xin B subset overline A$
- For all open sets $B$ such that $xin B$, $B$ contains elements of $A$ and $overline A$
My question is: Can we prove this?
Thank you in advance.
real-analysis elementary-set-theory
real-analysis elementary-set-theory
asked Jan 26 at 13:07


DaàvidDaàvid
505
505
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Call the three conditions a, b, c.
For any set $A$, either c holds, and we're done, or c does not hold.
In the latter case (c does not hold), there's some open set $B$ containing $x$ that either contains only elements of $A$ (which is "a") or contains only elements of $bar{A}$ (which is case "b").
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you for the answer. But how do we even know that there are points satisfying c?
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 13:20
$begingroup$
We don't know that, and Spivak doesn't claim that, which is a good thing, because it's false. If, for instance, we're working in $Bbb R$, and $A = Bbb R$, then there are no points satisfying either b or c, but the statement that every point satisfies exactly one of the three is still true: they all satisfy the first one!
$endgroup$
– John Hughes
Jan 26 at 13:22
$begingroup$
Hmm ok, I got it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 14:18
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3088223%2fcan-we-prove-that-a-point-is-either-in-the-interior-exterior-or-boundary-of-a-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Call the three conditions a, b, c.
For any set $A$, either c holds, and we're done, or c does not hold.
In the latter case (c does not hold), there's some open set $B$ containing $x$ that either contains only elements of $A$ (which is "a") or contains only elements of $bar{A}$ (which is case "b").
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you for the answer. But how do we even know that there are points satisfying c?
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 13:20
$begingroup$
We don't know that, and Spivak doesn't claim that, which is a good thing, because it's false. If, for instance, we're working in $Bbb R$, and $A = Bbb R$, then there are no points satisfying either b or c, but the statement that every point satisfies exactly one of the three is still true: they all satisfy the first one!
$endgroup$
– John Hughes
Jan 26 at 13:22
$begingroup$
Hmm ok, I got it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 14:18
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Call the three conditions a, b, c.
For any set $A$, either c holds, and we're done, or c does not hold.
In the latter case (c does not hold), there's some open set $B$ containing $x$ that either contains only elements of $A$ (which is "a") or contains only elements of $bar{A}$ (which is case "b").
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you for the answer. But how do we even know that there are points satisfying c?
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 13:20
$begingroup$
We don't know that, and Spivak doesn't claim that, which is a good thing, because it's false. If, for instance, we're working in $Bbb R$, and $A = Bbb R$, then there are no points satisfying either b or c, but the statement that every point satisfies exactly one of the three is still true: they all satisfy the first one!
$endgroup$
– John Hughes
Jan 26 at 13:22
$begingroup$
Hmm ok, I got it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 14:18
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Call the three conditions a, b, c.
For any set $A$, either c holds, and we're done, or c does not hold.
In the latter case (c does not hold), there's some open set $B$ containing $x$ that either contains only elements of $A$ (which is "a") or contains only elements of $bar{A}$ (which is case "b").
$endgroup$
Call the three conditions a, b, c.
For any set $A$, either c holds, and we're done, or c does not hold.
In the latter case (c does not hold), there's some open set $B$ containing $x$ that either contains only elements of $A$ (which is "a") or contains only elements of $bar{A}$ (which is case "b").
answered Jan 26 at 13:14
John HughesJohn Hughes
64.8k24191
64.8k24191
$begingroup$
Thank you for the answer. But how do we even know that there are points satisfying c?
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 13:20
$begingroup$
We don't know that, and Spivak doesn't claim that, which is a good thing, because it's false. If, for instance, we're working in $Bbb R$, and $A = Bbb R$, then there are no points satisfying either b or c, but the statement that every point satisfies exactly one of the three is still true: they all satisfy the first one!
$endgroup$
– John Hughes
Jan 26 at 13:22
$begingroup$
Hmm ok, I got it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 14:18
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thank you for the answer. But how do we even know that there are points satisfying c?
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 13:20
$begingroup$
We don't know that, and Spivak doesn't claim that, which is a good thing, because it's false. If, for instance, we're working in $Bbb R$, and $A = Bbb R$, then there are no points satisfying either b or c, but the statement that every point satisfies exactly one of the three is still true: they all satisfy the first one!
$endgroup$
– John Hughes
Jan 26 at 13:22
$begingroup$
Hmm ok, I got it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Thank you for the answer. But how do we even know that there are points satisfying c?
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 13:20
$begingroup$
Thank you for the answer. But how do we even know that there are points satisfying c?
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 13:20
$begingroup$
We don't know that, and Spivak doesn't claim that, which is a good thing, because it's false. If, for instance, we're working in $Bbb R$, and $A = Bbb R$, then there are no points satisfying either b or c, but the statement that every point satisfies exactly one of the three is still true: they all satisfy the first one!
$endgroup$
– John Hughes
Jan 26 at 13:22
$begingroup$
We don't know that, and Spivak doesn't claim that, which is a good thing, because it's false. If, for instance, we're working in $Bbb R$, and $A = Bbb R$, then there are no points satisfying either b or c, but the statement that every point satisfies exactly one of the three is still true: they all satisfy the first one!
$endgroup$
– John Hughes
Jan 26 at 13:22
$begingroup$
Hmm ok, I got it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Hmm ok, I got it. Thank you
$endgroup$
– Daàvid
Jan 26 at 14:18
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3088223%2fcan-we-prove-that-a-point-is-either-in-the-interior-exterior-or-boundary-of-a-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown