0
$\begingroup$

If an open interval does not contain its endpoints, why does its length is the same as a closed interval with the same endpoints? For example, $d((3,6)) = d([3,6])$.

$\endgroup$

closed as off-topic by Shailesh, Saad, Xander Henderson, Ethan Bolker, timur May 29 '18 at 13:04

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Shailesh, Saad, Xander Henderson, Ethan Bolker, timur
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ the distance between any two points $a,b$ on the number line is $|b-a|$ this is very intrinsic to calculus. If you know that $b>a$ you can drop the absolute values $|b-a|=b-a$ $\endgroup$ – N8tron May 28 '18 at 23:07
  • $\begingroup$ It's by definition $\endgroup$ – Jeffery Opoku-Mensah May 28 '18 at 23:11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @N8tron I know what distance is. I didn't know that single points have no length as Eric Wofsey mentioned. So I did not understand why an open interval has the same length of a closed one. $\endgroup$ – Mor Haham May 28 '18 at 23:46
  • $\begingroup$ What's the area of a rectangle under $f(x)=1$ on the interval $[a,b]$ in terms of calculus? What's the area under the same $f$ on $(a,b)$ in terms of calculus? The whole idea is lines don't have area so they don't affect area. Points don't have length $\endgroup$ – N8tron May 28 '18 at 23:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ it is a convention that the distance from a point to itself is 0. But, there are generalization of distances (called partial metrics) where the distance from a point to itself may be positive. While you probably need not worry about that, here are a couple of links: nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/… and dcs.warwick.ac.uk/pmetric/monthly708-718.pdf $\endgroup$ – Mirko May 28 '18 at 23:59
2
$\begingroup$

The length of an interval $(a,b)$ (or $[a,b]$, or $(a,b]$, or $[a,b)$) is defined to be $b-a$. This is just a definition, so it requires no proof. Intuitively, it should make sense: if you think of the interval as being a "stick" cut out from the number line, then it would be $b-a$ units long. We don't care whether the interval contains its endpoints because a single point has no length.

The following intuition may help. Suppose you have a ruler, with lengths marked in centimeters along it. If you want to measure a length of $c$ centimeters, you would usually just measure from the start of the ruler to the point marked $c$. However, you could also measure from a point marked $a$ to a point marked $b$, as long as $b-a=c$. The reason is that you could just shift the ruler forwards by $a$ centimeters, so the point that was marked $a$ is now at the start of the ruler and the point that was marked $b$ is now marked $b-a$.

A vast generalization of this notion of "length of an interval" is Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb{R}$, which is a way of defining the "length" of much more complicated sets than just an interval. In the context of Lebesgue measure, depending on your definitions, it may be a theorem that the length of $(a,b)$ is $b-a$. But in calculus or basic analysis, this is usually just taken as a definition.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ it does not make sense because, for example if you have $(3,6)$ so $3,6\notin(3,6)$. $\endgroup$ – Mor Haham May 28 '18 at 23:16
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand your objection. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey May 28 '18 at 23:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It does make sense because, by definition, an open interval does not contain its endpoints. $\endgroup$ – marty cohen May 28 '18 at 23:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A single point (or two points) has no length. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey May 28 '18 at 23:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MorHaham: Well, what do you expect people to think when you don't tell them the reasoning behind your question? $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey May 28 '18 at 23:55
0
$\begingroup$

This question is more related to measure theory than topology. The most standard measure on the collection of sets generated by open intervals is Lebesgue measure where $\mu([a,b])=b-a$. You can associate a measure with any right continuous function F such that $\mu_F([a,b])=F(b)-F(a)$. There's no correct answer for the measure of an interval, there's lots of different ways to do it.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Here's an attempt of intuitively justifying it to you. Think about the distance between a point and the origin.

  • In $\mathbb{R}^3$ take $P(x,y,z)$ has distance $\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}$
  • In $\mathbb{R}^2$ (the $xy$--plane) take $P(x,y)$ has distance $\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$
  • In $\mathbb{R}^1$ (the number line ) take $P(x)$ has distance $\sqrt{x^2}=|x|$

So on the number line the distance between any point $P(x)$ and the origin is $|x|$. Now if you want to find the distnce between two points $P(x)$ and $Q(y)$ on the number line first consider their difference $R(x-y)$ it will have the same distance from $0$ as $P$ has from $Q$ so $|b-a|$ is the distance between $a$ and $b$ on the number line. When $b>a$ you can drop the absolute values $|b-a|=b-a$

$\endgroup$

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