3
$\begingroup$

I am trying to prove that if $X$ is a connected subset of a metric space $M$, then $\bar{X}$ is connected as well, that is, the closure of $X$ is connected.

My proof:

I will do a proof by contradiction. Suppose that $\bar{X}$ is disconnected. Then, there exist open set $U,V \subset \bar{X}$ which are relatively open in $X$, non empty and disjoint. Now, $U' = U \cap X$ and $V' = V \cap X$ are relatively open in $X$. Now, I was told by my book that to obtain the contradiction, we would like to show that $U', V'$ are both non-empty. I do not understand why showing $U', V'$ are both non-empty will lead to a contradiction. Anyone know? Thank you!

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

If $U',V'$ are both non-empty, then this would imply that $X$ is not connected, which contradicts the hypotheses.

The relevant result is that if an open set intersects the closure of a set, then it intersects the set itself. This is straightforward to establish.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

So suppose $X$ is connected and $\overline{X}$ is disconnected, so there are relatively open subsets $U,V$ of $\overline{X}$ that are both non-empty, disjoint and $U \cup V = \overline{X}$. So there are open sets $U',V'$ in $M$ such that $U = U' \cap \overline{X}$ and $V = V' \cap \overline{X}$, by the definition of relative (or subspace) topology.

Claim: $U' \cap X \neq \emptyset$. This follows as otherwise every point of $U'$ is not in $\overline{X}$, but we know that all points of $\emptyset \neq U \subset U'$ are in $\overline{X}$... Symmetrically, $V' \cap X \neq \emptyset$ as well.

But then $U' \cap X$ and $V' \cap X$ are disjoint, non-empty (see above) and cover $X$ (as $X = U \cup V \subset U' \cup V'$). This contradicts that $X$ is connected.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

The first line of the proof by contradiction should be "suppose $\bar{X}$ is disconnected and $X$ is connected. Then when you show $U^\prime$ and $V^\prime$ are non-empty, you have a connected set containing two disjoint non-empty open sets, which is a contradiction (per the definition of connected).

The harder part, or course, is showing that $U^\prime$ and $V^\prime$ are indeed non-empty.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I see, so basically the contradiction comes from $U',V'$ being disjoint, open, nonempty subset of $X$? So is it fair to say that we first "get" $U',V'$ from $\bar{X}$, then show that $U',V'$ actually are subsets of $X$ that imply $X$ is disconnected? Thanks! $\endgroup$ – user123276 Jun 10 '14 at 5:33

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.