0

Claim

$A = \{(x,y) \in \Bbb R^2 \mid 0\le x \lt 1, 0\le y \le 1\}$ is not compact.

I want to prove above claim. I might need to find out finite sub-cover of open cover of given set A. It requires me two step simultaneously, first think about open cover (which is a union of infinite open balls) second, then reduce the open cover but to be still infinite.

How could I construct like that example? Is there any easier or alternative way to show the claim not actually construct some specific examples?

Beverlie
  • 2,645

3 Answers3

2

For $c\in [0,1)$, let $U_c=\{\,(x,y)\in X\mid x<c\,\}$. Then $U_c$ is open, $\bigcup_{c\in[0,1)} U_c=A$, but no finite subcover $U_{c_1}\cup\ldots\cup U_{c_n}$ suffices as it does not contain the point $(\frac{1+\max_i c_i}{2},0)\in A$.

0

Heine-Borel theorem: the compact sets are precisely the closed and bounded sets. Your set is bounded; is it closed? (Hint: if it were closed, then you could use this lemma. Or "just do it".)

0

For $A=\{(x,y)|0<x\leq1,0\leq y\leq1\}$

Let $a_n=\left(\frac{1}{n},0\right)$.

Hence, $\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow+\infty}a_n\notin A$, but $a_n\in A$.

For $A=\{(x,y)|0\leq x<1,0\leq y\leq1\}$

Let $a_n=\left(\frac{n}{n+1},0\right)$.

Hence, $\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow+\infty}a_n\notin A$, but $a_n\in A$.

The given was changed some times.