This is homework 3, due Monday, October 17, at the beginning of lecture.

Recall the Baire category theorem: The intersection of countably many dense open sets in a complete metric space is dense. Recall that a set is one that can be written as the intersection of countably many open sets.

Show that in a complete metric space, the intersection of countably many dense sets is again a dense set. Is the union of two sets again a set?

Show that is not a subset of .

Since is countable, we can enumerate it as . For let

Note that each is open, that for each , that , and that (for each ) the sum of the lengths of the intervals that make up is at most .

Does this mean that ? If yes, please provide a proof. If not, describe as concretely as possible an irrational number that belongs to this intersection.

Recall that a nowhere dense set is a set whose closure has empty interior: . A set is meager (or of the first category) iff it is the union of countably many nowhere dense sets. Given sets and in , we say that iff their symmetric difference is meager. For example, the Cantor set is nowhere dense.

Show that is an equivalence relation.

Show that if is meager, then any subset of is also meager. Show that the union of countably many meager sets is again meager.

Show that the Baire category theorem implies that any nonempty open subset of is non-meager.

Show that if is open, or closed, or a set, or a set (a countable union of closed sets), then there is an open set such that .

The Cantor-Bendixson derivative of a closed set is defined by

Since is closed, . We can iterate this operation, and form , Note we have

We can go even further, by letting and then continuing, by setting , etc.

Give examples of closed subsets of such that but , or but , or or but . Can be the first empty “derivative”? How about ?

Check that if and are compact, then so is as a subset of .

Show that if is a subset of that is both open and closed, and , then it must be the case that .

43.614000-116.202000

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

This entry was posted on Friday, October 7th, 2011 at 4:18 pm and is filed under 414/514: Analysis I. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

The technique of almost disjoint forcing was introduced in MR0289291 (44 #6482). Jensen, R. B.; Solovay, R. M. Some applications of almost disjoint sets. In Mathematical Logic and Foundations of Set Theory (Proc. Internat. Colloq., Jerusalem, 1968), pp. 84–104, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1970. Fix an almost disjoint family $X=(x_\alpha:\alpha

At the moment most of those decisions come from me, at least for computer science papers (those with a 68 class as primary). The practice of having proceedings and final versions of papers is not exclusive to computer science, but this is where it is most common. I've found more often than not that the journal version is significantly different from the […]

The answer is no in general. For instance, by what is essentially an argument of Sierpiński, if $(X,\Sigma,\nu)$ is a $\sigma$-finite continuous measure space, then no non-null subset of $X$ admits a $\nu\times\nu$-measurable well-ordering. The proof is almost verbatim the one here. It is consistent (assuming large cardinals) that there is an extension of Le […]

I assume by $\aleph$ you mean $\mathfrak c$, the cardinality of the continuum. You can build $D$ by transfinite recursion: Well-order the continuum in type $\mathfrak c$. At stage $\alpha$ you add a point of $A_\alpha$ to your set, and one to its complement. You can always do this because at each stage fewer than $\mathfrak c$ many points have been selected. […]

Stefan, "low" cardinalities do not change by passing from $L({\mathbb R})$ to $L({\mathbb R})[{\mathcal U}]$, so the answer to the second question is negative. More precisely: Assume determinacy in $L({\mathbb R})$. Then $2^\omega/E_0$ is a successor cardinal to ${\mathfrak c}$ (This doesn't matter, all we need is that it is strictly larger. T […]

The power of a set is its cardinality. (As opposed to its power set, which is something else.) As you noticed in the comments, Kurepa trees are supposed to have countable levels, although just saying that a tree has size and height $\omega_1$ is not enough to conclude this, so the definition you quoted is incomplete as stated. Usually the convention is that […]

The key problem in the absence of the axiom of replacement is that there may be well-ordered sets $S$ that are too large in the sense that they are longer than any ordinal. In that case, the collection of ordinals isomorphic to an initial segment of $S$ would be the class of all ordinals, which is not a set. For example, with $\omega$ denoting as usual the f […]

R. Solovay proved that the provably $\mathbf\Delta^1_2$ sets are Lebesgue measurable (and have the property of Baire). A set $A$ is provably $\mathbf\Delta^1_2$ iff there is a real $a$, a $\Sigma^1_2$ formula $\phi(x,y)$ and a $\Pi^1_2$ formula $\psi(x,y)$ such that $A=\{t\mid \phi(t,a)\}=\{t\mid\psi(t,a)\}$, and $\mathsf{ZFC}$ proves that $\phi$ and $\psi$ […]

Yes, the suggested rearrangement converges to 0. This is a particular case of a result of Martin Ohm: For $p$ and $q$ positive integers rearrange the sequence $$\left(\frac{(−1)^{n-1}} n\right)_{n\ge 1} $$ by taking the ﬁrst $p$ positive terms, then the ﬁrst $q$ negative terms, then the next $p$ positive terms, then the next $q$ negative terms, and so on. Th […]

Yes, by the incompleteness theorem. An easy argument is to enumerate the sentences in the language of arithmetic. Assign to each node $\sigma $ of the tree $2^{