Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In any metrical space $(M,d_M)$, consider $n$ bounded subsets $S_i\subset M$. Then, is $\cup_i^nS_i$ bounded? If so, why?

share|improve this question
What have you tried? –  lhf Mar 13 '12 at 20:57
My idea is to show that $diam(M)<\infty$ this is easy if the distance between two subsets is finite. The problem is that I am not sure if this distance is finite. –  Godisemo Mar 13 '12 at 20:59
What is your definition of bounded? –  azarel Mar 13 '12 at 21:00
my definition of bounded is that $diam(M)<\infty$, that is $diam(S)=sup\{d(x,y); x,y\in S\}$. –  Godisemo Mar 13 '12 at 21:02

3 Answers 3

up vote 7 down vote accepted

Since each $S_j$ is bounded, there exists a point $p_j$ such that $S_j\subset B(p_j,r_j)$. Now take $p=p_1$, $r=\max\{r_1,\ldots,r_n\}+\max_j\{d(p_1,p_j)\}$. If $x\in S_j$, then $$ d(x,p)\leq d(x,p_j)+d(p_j,p_1)\leq r_j+d(p_j,p_1)\leq r. $$ So $x\in B(p,r)$, and this shows that $S_j\subset B(p,r)$ for all $j$. Thus $$ \bigcup_j S_j\subset B(p,r). $$

share|improve this answer
Do you mean to say 'there exists a point $p_j$ and there exists $r_j$ such that...'? I didn't see how you introduced the $r_j$'s. –  Robert Feb 2 '13 at 6:06
Also, does $p_j$ have to be in $S_j$? –  Robert Feb 2 '13 at 6:51
To your first question, yes; to your second question, no. –  Martin Argerami Feb 2 '13 at 16:37

In the comments you say that your definition of bounded $S$ is $$ \mathrm{diam}(S) < +\infty. $$

You want to prove that if $S$ is bounded and $x\in M$ is any point, then $$ \sup_{y\in S} d(x,y) < +\infty $$ (use triangular inequality) and then you can easily prove this last inequality for the finite union of bounded sets.

share|improve this answer

Of course. A set is $S$ bounded iff for every $p$ in the space there is some $r_S$ such that $S \subset B(p,r_S)$. For finite unions we take the maximum of the $r_S$ in the union.

share|improve this answer
So if I understand this correct, the distance between two bounded subsets cannot be infinitely large? –  Godisemo Mar 13 '12 at 21:07
That's not really the definition of bounded, but a provable property about boundedness (that there is an $r$ for every $p$.) –  Thomas Andrews Mar 13 '12 at 21:16
I know, that's why I wrote iff –  Henno Brandsma Mar 13 '12 at 21:48
@Godisemo indeed. –  Henno Brandsma Mar 13 '12 at 21:49

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.