3
$\begingroup$

I know that in $\mathbb{R}$ you can have at most $2$ disjoint open sets that share a boundary(I believe my answer to Open Sets Boundary question proves that). My question is is there a way to extend this to $\mathbb{R}^n$ so that we can say there is some function $f(n): \mathbb{N} \to \mathbb{N}$ that tells us how many disjoint open sets can have the same boundary in $\mathbb{R}^n$. I know for $\mathbb{R}^2$ the answer is at least 3(The lakes of wada are an example of 3 disjoint open sets that share a boundary). I also know that $n < m \implies f(n) \leq f(m)$ since if $U$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^n$ then $U\times\mathbb{R}^{m-n}$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^m$ and they'll still share a boundary.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ By the last sentence you for sure mean that if $U$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^n$ then $U × \mathbb{R}^{m - n}$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^m$. $\endgroup$ – user87690 Mar 23 '14 at 19:08
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that is what I meant. I edited the question to correct that. $\endgroup$ – ruler501 Mar 23 '14 at 19:10
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ See math.stackexchange.com/questions/122119/… for the plane case. $\endgroup$ – lhf Mar 23 '14 at 19:29
  • $\begingroup$ So it is a countable infinite in $\mathbb{R}^2$ and higher. Do any of the higher have a larger infinity of sets that could share a boundary? $\endgroup$ – ruler501 Mar 23 '14 at 19:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You can do the Lakes of Wada construction for any finite $n$, and even for a countably infinite family of lakes. $\endgroup$ – MJD Mar 24 '14 at 13:48
3
$\begingroup$

First, for every $n\ge 2$, lake Wada construction gives (infinitely) countably many open subsets of $R^n$ with common frontier. You also cannot have uncountably many disjoint (nonempty) open sets in $R^n$. Indeed every such set will contain a point with rational coordinates and $Q^n$ is countable. Therefore, you cannot have uncountably many open subsets with common frontier.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Can you just add in that for $n>1$ the answer is countably infinite many because of the Lakes of Wada construction? $\endgroup$ – ruler501 Mar 24 '14 at 13:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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