Infinite Venn diagram

n = 1 m A n \Large \bigcap_{n=1}^{m}A_{n} \neq \varnothing

If the above equation is true for all natural numbers m m , then must the following expression also be true? n = 1 A n \Large \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty}A_{n}\neq \varnothing

Details: A 1 , A 2 , A 3 , A_1,A_2,A_3,\ldots are sets and \varnothing denotes the empty set.

Yes No Undecidable

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

1 solution

Isaac Buckley
Jan 17, 2016

Counter example hint: Consider the open intervals ( 0 , 1 n ) (0,\frac{1}{n}) .


Feel free to write a proof below.

I think I had seen exactly this particular example in one of my real analysis books a few months ago, although I'm not sure about it. Anyway, here's a try at a proof:

Denote by { A n } n 1 \{A_n\}_{n\geq 1} the class of open intervals where A n A_n is defined as A n : = ( 0 , 1 n ) n Z + A_n:=\left(0,\dfrac 1n\right)~\forall~n\in\Bbb{Z^+} .

Lemma: m , n Z + , m < n A n A m \forall~m,n\in\Bbb{Z^+}~,~m\lt n\iff A_n\subset A_m

Proof. m , n Z + , 0 < m < n 1 m > 1 n > 0 \forall~m,n\in\Bbb{Z^+}~,~0\lt m\lt n\iff \frac 1m\gt \frac1n\gt 0

Hence, we can write A m = A n [ 1 n , 1 m ) A n A n A m A_m=A_n\cup\left[\dfrac 1n,\dfrac 1m\right)\supset A_n\iff A_n\subset A_m .

Using the above lemma, we have,

A 1 A 2 A m m Z + n = 1 m A n = A m m Z + n = 1 A n = lim m n = 1 m A n = lim m A m n = 1 A n = lim m ( 0 , 1 m ) = ( 0 , 0 ) = \begin{aligned}A_1\supset A_2\supset\cdots\supset A_m~\forall~m\in\Bbb{Z^+}&\implies \bigcap_{n=1}^m A_n = A_m\neq\emptyset~\forall~m\in\Bbb{Z^+}\\&\implies \bigcap_{n=1}^\infty A_n=\lim_{m\to\infty}\bigcap_{n=1}^m A_n=\lim_{m\to\infty} A_m\\&\implies \bigcap_{n=1}^\infty A_n=\lim_{m\to\infty}\left(0,\frac 1m\right)=(0,0)=\emptyset\end{aligned}


Does this count as a rigorous proof?

Prasun Biswas - 5 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

I can't see a single flaw in it, nicely done Prasun, great proof!

Isaac Buckley - 5 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

I may be completely wrong... But I don't see how (0,0)=∅ as (0,0) is still an element, where as the empty set is defined as {} - the set which does not contain any elements. I'm quite happy to accept that I'm wrong, I would just like to know why

Thanks

Andrew Darlington - 5 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

@Andrew Darlington ( a , b ) (a,b) here doesn't denote the ordered pair but denotes the open interval from a a to b b .

Clarification:

( a , b ) = { x R a < x < b } (a,b)=\{x\in\Bbb R\mid a\lt x\lt b\}

A better notation might be ] a , b [ ]a,b[

Prasun Biswas - 5 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

@Prasun Biswas Exactly, and there exists no real number x x that satisfies 0 < x < 0 0<x<0 .

Isaac Buckley - 5 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

@Isaac Buckley Ahh yes! I miss read "open-intervals" in the proof

Thanks!

Andrew Darlington - 5 years, 4 months ago

Splendid work!!!

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 4 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...