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.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Lets use Wikipedia's definition of a limit point and let $\lim(A)$ denote the set of limit points of $A$. $a\in \lim (A) \leftrightarrow a\in\operatorname{cl}(A\setminus\{a\})$, $\lim (A)\cup A = \operatorname{cl}(A)$. Is there a situation where lim suits us and cl does not? lim is not a generalization of a limit of sequence, because a constant sequence has the limit in any topological space and no limit points in any $T_1$-space. It seems that $a\in\operatorname{cl}(A)$ is an appropriate formalization of the intuitions “$A$ converges to $a$” and “$a$ is infinitely close to $A$”.

Maybe lim is helpful to define a closed set via open balls, like in Rudin's “Principles of Mathematical Analysis” in Definition 2.18.d? Here it is:

A point $p$ is a limit point of the set $E$ if every neighborhood of $p$ contains a point $q\neq p$ such that $q\in E$.

(Author's “neighborhood of $p$” is my “open ball of $p$”, check Definition 2.18.a.) But a slightly modified and simpler definition “every open ball of $a$ meets $A$” is equivalent to $a\in\operatorname{cl}(A)$. No limit points are needed.

(There is a similar question “Limit points and interior points”. On the contrary, I'm not asking for understanding.)

share|cite|improve this question
I changed \operatorname{lim} to \lim. It's already a standard operator name. When used in "display" format as opposed to "inline" format, this operatorname puts subscripts directly below "lim", thus: $\displaystyle\lim_{n\to\infty}$. – Michael Hardy Jul 9 '12 at 17:29

Both of the sets $\operatorname{cl}A$ and $\lim A$ are useful, but for different purposes. Cameron Buie has already given a nice example of a setting in which $\lim A$ is important and $\operatorname{cl}A$ is not, and the reverse situation is very common, so I’ll try to address the question of motivation in more general terms.

The points of $A\setminus\lim A$ are in $\operatorname{cl}A$ almost by accident, simply by virtue of being in $A$; they aren’t structurally tied to the rest of $A$. Points of $\lim A$, on the other hand, whether they’re in $A$ itself or not, are structurally tied to $A$: you can’t surround one of them with an open nbhd without picking up another point of $A$. In fact, if $X$ is $T_1$, a weak property that amounts to saying that finite subsets of $X$ are closed, you can’t surround a point of $\lim A$ with an open nbhd without picking up infinitely many points of $A$. Thus, $\lim A$ is likely to be the set of interest when you’re dealing with questions of convergence, continuity (as in Cameron’s answer), or anything else that depends as much on what happens near a point as it does on what happens at the point.

share|cite|improve this answer

Let me give you an instance when $\lim(A)$ can come in handy and we don't care about $\mathrm{cl}(A).$ First, a few definitions.

We say a topological space $Y$ is Hausdorff if and only if for every $x,y\in Y$ we have either (i) $x=y$ or (ii) there exist neighborhoods--I'll abbreviate by "nbhds"--$U,V$ of $x,y$ (respectively) such that $U\cap V=\emptyset$. (Put another way, distinct points of Hausdorff spaces can be "separated by" open sets.)

A punctured neighborhood--I'll abbreviate by pnbhd--of a point $x$ in a topological space $X$ is a set $U\smallsetminus\{x\}$, where $U$ is a nbhd of $x$ in $X$.

Suppose $X,Y$ topological spaces, $Y$ Hausdorff, $f:A\to Y$ with $A\subseteq X$, $y\in Y$, and $a\in\lim(A)$. Then we say that $$y=\lim_{x\to a}f(x)$$ if and only if for every nbhd $V$ of $y$ in $Y$, there is a pnbhd $P$ of $a$ in $X$ such that $f(x)\in V$ whenever $x\in A\cap P$.

Now, suppose $X,Y$ are topological spaces, $Y$ Hausdorff, $f:A\to Y$ with $A\subseteq X$, and $a\in A$. Then (one can prove that) $f$ is continuous if and only if either (i) $a$ is isolated in $A$ or (ii) $a\in\lim(A)$ and $f(a)=\lim_{x\to a}f(x).$ Note that this generalizes the "limit definition" of continuity that one generally encounters in real analysis to an arbitrary Hausdorff space $Y$ and an arbitrary subset $A$ of an arbitrary topological space $X$. Note that we do not need to know everything about $\mathrm{cl}(A)=A\cup\lim(A)$. In case (i), we're looking at $A\smallsetminus\lim(A)$, and in case (ii), we're looking at $A\cap\lim(A)$. Unless $A$ is closed, there will be limit points of $A$ not lying in $A$, so in general, we're using less information, here.

share|cite|improve this answer
"$\mathrm{cl}(A)=A\cap\lim(A)$" Is this a mistake? – beroal Jul 9 '12 at 21:50
Yes, it is! '\cap' should be '\cup'.... Thank you, beroal! – Cameron Buie Jul 10 '12 at 0:05
Now I think that requirement $a\in\lim(A)$ implies that $\lim_{x\to a}f(x)$ is unique. If $a\not\in\lim(A)$, then there is a punctured neighborhood $P$ of $a$ such that $P\cap A\subseteq \varnothing$, therefore $Y\subseteq \lim_{x\to a}f(x)$, these limits are not interesting. – beroal Jul 10 '12 at 3:39

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.