Scribd
Upload
375 views2 pages

Statement:: 1. State and Proof Heine-Borel Theorem

The Heine-Borel theorem states that in Euclidean space, a set is compact if and only if it is closed and bounded. The proof first shows that if every open cover has a finite subcover, the set must be bounded and closed, making it compact. It then shows that if a set is compact, every open cover has a finite subcover, completing the biconditional proof of the theorem.

Uploaded by

Toufik Hossain
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
375 views2 pages

Statement:: 1. State and Proof Heine-Borel Theorem

The Heine-Borel theorem states that in Euclidean space, a set is compact if and only if it is closed and bounded. The proof first shows that if every open cover has a finite subcover, the set must be bounded and closed, making it compact. It then shows that if a set is compact, every open cover has a finite subcover, completing the biconditional proof of the theorem.

Uploaded by

Toufik Hossain
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

1.

State and proof Heine–Borel theorem

Statement: A set S of real numbers is compact if and only if every open cover C of S can be
reduced to a finite subcovering.
Proof: First, assume that every open cover C of S can be reduced to a finite subcovering. We
will show that S must then be closed and bounded, which means by the previous result
that S is compact.

S must be bounded: Take the collection C = {  :    S}, where   = (  - 1,   + 1). Then
this collection is an open cover of S, and by assumption can be reduced to a finite
subcovering of S. But if aj1 is the smallest of the centers of the sets  , and aj2 is the largest
one, then S is contained in the set ( aj1 - 1, aj2 + 1) and is therefore bounded.
S must be closed: Suppose S was not closed. Then there exists an accumulation
point s of S that is not contained in S. Since s is an accumulation point of S we know:
any n > 1 there exists an   S with | s - an | < 1 / n
because every neighborhood of s must contain elements from S. The sequence { an } clearly
converges to s. Define the collection of sets
C = { comp([s - 1/n, s + 1/n]), n > 0 }
Then each set in C is open, being the complement of closed sets. They also cover S, because
the only point that this collection is missing is the point s, which is not part of S. By
assumption, a finite subcover already covers S. If N is the largest index of that finite
subcovering, then aN+1 is not part of that subcovering. However, aN+1 is an element of S, so
that this subcovering can not cover S. That is a contradiction, showing that if S was not
closed, not every covering of S can be reduced to a finite subcovering. Hence, S must be
closed.
Now we have to prove the other direction. Assume therefore that S compact. Let C be any
open cover of S. We need to reduce C to a finite subcover. Since S is compact, we know it is
closed and bounded. Then a = inf(S) and b = sup(S) are both part of S. Define the set A as
A = { x: x   [a, b] and a finite subcollection of C covers [a, x]   S }
Then the set A is not empty (because a   A). Define
c = sup(A)
Since A is a subset of [a, b], we know that a < c   b. Suppose c < b. Since S is closed, comp(S)
is open. Therefore, if c   comp(S) then there exists an open neighborhood U of c that is
contained in [a, b] (because c < b) and disjoint from S. But then c can not be the supremum
of the set A. Therefore, if c < b then c  S. Then c must be contained in some set   from
the open cover C of S. Choose two points y and z in   with y < c < z. As before, there exists
a finite subcollection of C whose members cover [a, y]   S. Then these sets, together
with   cover [a, z]   S. But then z   A, which means again that c can not be the upper
bound for A. This means that assuming c < b leads to a contradiction, so that c = b. But that
will be exactly what we need. If sup(A) = c = b, then let   be that member of the open
cover C that contains b. There exists some open neighborhood (b -  , b +  ) contained
in  . But b -   is not an upper bound for A, so there exists x with x > b -   and x   A.
Then [a, x]   S is covered by a finite number of members of C. Together with the set   
these sets form a finite open cover for S.
We have indeed reduced the open cover of S to a finite subcovering of S, finishing the proof.

2. What is a measurable function? what is measure theory?

Ans- Measurable function is an well-behaved function of real numbers between measurable spaces.
If a function's codomain is a topological space and the function's domain is a measurable space, then
the function is measurable if the inverse image of every open set in its codomain is a measurable set
in its domain.

Measure theory is the study of measures. It generalizes the intuitive notions


of length, area, and volume. The earliest and most important examples are Jordan
measure and Lebesgue measure, but other examples are Borel measure, probability
measure, complex measure, and Haar measure.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy