2
$\begingroup$

Theorem $\hspace{5 pt}$ Let $P$ be a nonempty perfect set in $\mathbb{R}^k$. Then $P$ is uncountable.

Proof $\hspace{5 pt}$ Since $P$ has limit points, $P$ must be infinite. Suppose $P$ is countable, and denote the points of $P$ by $\mathbf{x_1}, \mathbf{x_2}, \mathbf{x_3}, \ldots$. We shall construct a sequence $\{V_n\}$ of neighborhoods as follows. Let $V_1$ be any neighborhood of $\mathbf{x_1}$. If $V_1$ consists of all $\mathbf{y} \in \mathbb{R}^k$ such that $|\mathbf{y} - \mathbf{x_1}| < r$, the closure $\overline{V_1}$ of $V_1$ is the set of all $\mathbf{y} \in \mathbb{R}^k$ such that $|\mathbf{y} - \mathbf{x_1}| \leq r$. Suppose $V_n$ has been constructed, so that $V_n \cap P$ is not empty. Since every point of $P$ is a limit point of $P$, there is a neighborhood $V_{n+1}$ such that (i) $\overline{V_{n+1}} \subset V_n$, (ii) $\mathbf{x_n} \notin \overline{V_{n+1}}$, (iii) $V_{n+1} \cap P$ is not empty. By (iii), $V_{n+1}$ satisfies our induction hypothesis, and the construction can proceed. Put $K_n = \overline{V_n} \cap P$. Since $\overline{V_n}$ is closed and bounded, $\overline{V_n}$ is compact.

I've understood things up until this point.

Since $\mathbf{x_n} \notin K_{n+1}$, no point of $P$ lies in $\bigcap_1^\infty K_n$.

1) I understand that $\{\mathbf{x_n}\}$ is a subset of $P = \{\mathbf{x_1}, \mathbf{x_2}, \mathbf{x_3}, \ldots\}$. If this subset was equal to $P$ then I can see how no point of $P$ would lie in the intersection. But I don't think this is true (since $P$ would have to be bounded in order for $V_1 \supset P$ so that $\mathbf{x_n}\in V_n \subset V_{n-1} \ldots \subset V_1$).

What's the actual reason why $\mathbf{x_n} \notin K_{n+1}\implies\forall p \in P, p \notin \bigcap_1^\infty K_n$ ?

Update I've been Trying to understand Quang Hoang's answer for 1)

"Every element of $P$ is of the form $x_n$ for some $n$, hence doesn't lie in $K_n$."

But doesn't $\{\mathbf{x_n}\}$ only includes elements within the first neighborhood? (Since each $\mathbf{x_n}\in V_n$ for a particular $V_{n}\subset V_{n-1}$, surely $\{\mathbf{x_n}\}$ can't contain every point in $P$?)

What am I missing?

Since $K_n \subset P$, this implies that $\bigcap_1^\infty K_n$ is empty. But each $K_n$ is nonempty, by (iii), and $K_n \supset K_{n+1}$, by (i); this contradicts the Corollary to Theorem 2.36.

Resolved 2) In order to apply Theorem 2.36, $K_n$ must be compact. How do we know that $K_n$ is compact? EDIT: For 2) I understand the answer given by Quang Hoang, thanks!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I had the same exact confusion as you, now this makes so much sense! Now just how to imitate this proof for Exercise 2.30... $\endgroup$ – MCT Feb 20 '15 at 4:06
1
$\begingroup$
  1. Every element of $P$ is of the form $x_n$ for some $n$, hence doesn't lie in $K_n$.
  2. $K_n$ is a closed subset (intersection of two closed sets) of a compact set.
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ 1.But doesn't $\{\mathbf{X_n}\}$ only includes elements within the first neighborhood? 2. Ah I see, thanks! $\endgroup$ – ignoramus Sep 12 '14 at 6:18
  • $\begingroup$ (Since each $\mathbf{X_n}$ corresponds to a particular $V_{n} \subset V_{n-1}$, surely $\{\mathbf{x_n}\}$ can't contain every point in $P$?) $\endgroup$ – ignoramus Sep 12 '14 at 6:26
  • $\begingroup$ Note that $P=\{x_1,x_2,\dots\}$ and that for every $n$, $x_n\not\in K_n$. It follows that for every $n$, $x_n\not\in \cap K_j$. Thus $P\cap (\cap K_j)=\varnothing$. $\endgroup$ – Quang Hoang Sep 12 '14 at 13:48
0
$\begingroup$

Ok, I've figured out the cause of my confusion:

1) I understand that $\{\mathbf{x_n}\}$ is a subset of $P = \{\mathbf{x_1}, \mathbf{x_2}, \mathbf{x_3}, \ldots\}$. If this subset was equal to $P$ then I can see how no point of $P$ would lie in the intersection. But I don't think this is true (since $P$ would have to be bounded in order for $V_1 \supset P$ so that $\mathbf{x_n}\in V_n \subset V_{n-1} \ldots \subset V_1$).

Let $V_n$ be the neighborhood of $\mathbf{y_n}$. Then $\mathbf{x_1} = \mathbf{y_1}$. I realise now that even if $\mathbf{x_n} \neq \mathbf{y_n}$, we can still construct $V_{n+1}$ so that (ii) is satisfied:

Since $\mathbf{x_n}$ is an arbitrary point, and there are infinitely many limit points of $P$ in $V_n$, we can choose $\mathbf{y_{n+1}}\in P, V_n$ such that $\mathbf{y_{n+1}} \neq \mathbf{y_{n}}$ and $\mathbf{y_{n+1}}\neq \mathbf{x_{n}}$.

Now since every point of $P$ is a limit point, we can pick a small enough $r>0$ such that $V_{n+1}$ satisfies (i)-(iii).

$\endgroup$

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.