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

I have a couple questions regarding the following proof:

2.30 Theorem: Suppse $Y \subset X$. A subset $E$ of $Y$ is open relative to $Y$ if and only if $E = Y \cap G$ for some open subset $G$ of $X$.

Proof: Suppose $E$ is open relative to $Y$. To each $p \in E$ there is a positive number $r_p$ such that the conditions $d(p, q) < r_p, q \in Y$ imply that $q \in E$. Let $V_p$ be the set of all $q \in X$ such that $d(p, q) < r_p$, and define $G = \bigcup_{p \in E} V_p$. Then $G$ is an open subset of $X$.

Since $p \in V_p$ for all $p \in E$, it is clear that $E \subset G \cap Y$.

And the proof goes on...

My questions are the following:

  1. Is the statement "$p \in V_p$ for all $p \in E$" true because if I have a point $p$, there is a point nearby $p'$ such that $p \in V_{p'}$?

  2. I see why $E \subset G \cap Y$. But why is $E \neq G$?

share|cite|improve this question
I assume $X$ is here a metric space and $Y$ a subspace with iunduced metric? For otherwise the statement of the theorem looks like the definition of relative open set. – Hagen von Eitzen Sep 28 '12 at 18:41
up vote 2 down vote accepted
  1. The statement is true because $V_p$ is defined as the set of $q\in X$ such that $d(p,q)<r_p$, and if we let $q=p$ we get $d(p,q)=0$ which is certainly less than $r_p$.

  2. It is possible that $E=G$, but this is not a problem. For an example where $E\neq G$, consider $X=\mathbb R$ and $Y=E=\{0\}$, and take $r_0=1$ so $G=(-1,1)$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks for such a clear and quick response! – Student Sep 28 '12 at 18:45
  1. $p\in V_p$ is true because $V_p$ is the set of points at distance $<r_p$ from $p$, and this includes $p$.

  2. It is not claimed that $E\ne G$. (I assume $\subset$ is used as $\subseteq$, not as $\subset\atop\ne$)

share|cite|improve this answer

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.