The set $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y=5 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R^2}$












6












$begingroup$


Kindly check if my proof is correct. Thanks for your time and efforts.



MY PROOF



For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $3x_n+2y_n=5,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$ 3x+2y=limlimits_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=limlimits_{ntoinfty}5=5 . $$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y=5 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R^2}$






linear-algebra analysis







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Looks good. Maybe cite the algebra of limits theorem?
    $endgroup$
    – Theo Bendit
    Jan 11 at 15:08










  • $begingroup$
    I mean, sure I guess. But since it's a straight line you could just say that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ben W
    Jan 11 at 15:08






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    This seems a bit odd, you start assuming that $3x_n + 2y_n = 5$ for all $n$ and that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y)$, of course $3 x + 2y = 5$ follows from that. But I don't think you proved anything, because you assumed everything
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 15:23






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Equivalent statement is: the sets $H_{+}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y>5 }$ and $H_{-}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y<5 }$ are open subsets of $ Bbb{R^2}$.
    $endgroup$
    – Aleksas Domarkas
    Jan 11 at 15:28








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The statement $lim(3x_n + 2x_n = 5)$ does not make sense and is meaningless. What I believe you mean is: $3x + 2x = lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = lim 5 = 5$. But you should state explicitly that $lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = 3lim x_n + 2lim x_n$
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    Jan 11 at 16:17
















6












$begingroup$


Kindly check if my proof is correct. Thanks for your time and efforts.



MY PROOF



For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $3x_n+2y_n=5,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$ 3x+2y=limlimits_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=limlimits_{ntoinfty}5=5 . $$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y=5 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R^2}$






linear-algebra analysis







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Looks good. Maybe cite the algebra of limits theorem?
    $endgroup$
    – Theo Bendit
    Jan 11 at 15:08










  • $begingroup$
    I mean, sure I guess. But since it's a straight line you could just say that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ben W
    Jan 11 at 15:08






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    This seems a bit odd, you start assuming that $3x_n + 2y_n = 5$ for all $n$ and that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y)$, of course $3 x + 2y = 5$ follows from that. But I don't think you proved anything, because you assumed everything
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 15:23






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Equivalent statement is: the sets $H_{+}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y>5 }$ and $H_{-}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y<5 }$ are open subsets of $ Bbb{R^2}$.
    $endgroup$
    – Aleksas Domarkas
    Jan 11 at 15:28








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The statement $lim(3x_n + 2x_n = 5)$ does not make sense and is meaningless. What I believe you mean is: $3x + 2x = lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = lim 5 = 5$. But you should state explicitly that $lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = 3lim x_n + 2lim x_n$
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    Jan 11 at 16:17














6












6








6


1



$begingroup$


Kindly check if my proof is correct. Thanks for your time and efforts.



MY PROOF



For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $3x_n+2y_n=5,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$ 3x+2y=limlimits_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=limlimits_{ntoinfty}5=5 . $$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y=5 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R^2}$






linear-algebra analysis







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Kindly check if my proof is correct. Thanks for your time and efforts.



MY PROOF



For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $3x_n+2y_n=5,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$ 3x+2y=limlimits_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=limlimits_{ntoinfty}5=5 . $$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y=5 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R^2}$






linear-algebra analysis




linear-algebra analysis






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 11 at 16:45







Omojola Micheal

















asked Jan 11 at 15:06









Omojola MichealOmojola Micheal

1,831324




1,831324








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Looks good. Maybe cite the algebra of limits theorem?
    $endgroup$
    – Theo Bendit
    Jan 11 at 15:08










  • $begingroup$
    I mean, sure I guess. But since it's a straight line you could just say that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ben W
    Jan 11 at 15:08






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    This seems a bit odd, you start assuming that $3x_n + 2y_n = 5$ for all $n$ and that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y)$, of course $3 x + 2y = 5$ follows from that. But I don't think you proved anything, because you assumed everything
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 15:23






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Equivalent statement is: the sets $H_{+}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y>5 }$ and $H_{-}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y<5 }$ are open subsets of $ Bbb{R^2}$.
    $endgroup$
    – Aleksas Domarkas
    Jan 11 at 15:28








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The statement $lim(3x_n + 2x_n = 5)$ does not make sense and is meaningless. What I believe you mean is: $3x + 2x = lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = lim 5 = 5$. But you should state explicitly that $lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = 3lim x_n + 2lim x_n$
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    Jan 11 at 16:17














  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Looks good. Maybe cite the algebra of limits theorem?
    $endgroup$
    – Theo Bendit
    Jan 11 at 15:08










  • $begingroup$
    I mean, sure I guess. But since it's a straight line you could just say that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ben W
    Jan 11 at 15:08






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    This seems a bit odd, you start assuming that $3x_n + 2y_n = 5$ for all $n$ and that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y)$, of course $3 x + 2y = 5$ follows from that. But I don't think you proved anything, because you assumed everything
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 15:23






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Equivalent statement is: the sets $H_{+}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y>5 }$ and $H_{-}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y<5 }$ are open subsets of $ Bbb{R^2}$.
    $endgroup$
    – Aleksas Domarkas
    Jan 11 at 15:28








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The statement $lim(3x_n + 2x_n = 5)$ does not make sense and is meaningless. What I believe you mean is: $3x + 2x = lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = lim 5 = 5$. But you should state explicitly that $lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = 3lim x_n + 2lim x_n$
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    Jan 11 at 16:17








2




2




$begingroup$
Looks good. Maybe cite the algebra of limits theorem?
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Jan 11 at 15:08




$begingroup$
Looks good. Maybe cite the algebra of limits theorem?
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Jan 11 at 15:08












$begingroup$
I mean, sure I guess. But since it's a straight line you could just say that.
$endgroup$
– Ben W
Jan 11 at 15:08




$begingroup$
I mean, sure I guess. But since it's a straight line you could just say that.
$endgroup$
– Ben W
Jan 11 at 15:08




2




2




$begingroup$
This seems a bit odd, you start assuming that $3x_n + 2y_n = 5$ for all $n$ and that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y)$, of course $3 x + 2y = 5$ follows from that. But I don't think you proved anything, because you assumed everything
$endgroup$
– caverac
Jan 11 at 15:23




$begingroup$
This seems a bit odd, you start assuming that $3x_n + 2y_n = 5$ for all $n$ and that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y)$, of course $3 x + 2y = 5$ follows from that. But I don't think you proved anything, because you assumed everything
$endgroup$
– caverac
Jan 11 at 15:23




2




2




$begingroup$
Equivalent statement is: the sets $H_{+}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y>5 }$ and $H_{-}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y<5 }$ are open subsets of $ Bbb{R^2}$.
$endgroup$
– Aleksas Domarkas
Jan 11 at 15:28






$begingroup$
Equivalent statement is: the sets $H_{+}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y>5 }$ and $H_{-}={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;3x+2y<5 }$ are open subsets of $ Bbb{R^2}$.
$endgroup$
– Aleksas Domarkas
Jan 11 at 15:28






3




3




$begingroup$
The statement $lim(3x_n + 2x_n = 5)$ does not make sense and is meaningless. What I believe you mean is: $3x + 2x = lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = lim 5 = 5$. But you should state explicitly that $lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = 3lim x_n + 2lim x_n$
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Jan 11 at 16:17




$begingroup$
The statement $lim(3x_n + 2x_n = 5)$ does not make sense and is meaningless. What I believe you mean is: $3x + 2x = lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = lim 5 = 5$. But you should state explicitly that $lim (3x_n + 2x_n) = 3lim x_n + 2lim x_n$
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Jan 11 at 16:17










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

Looks Good! Alternatively, take $alpha=(x,y) in Bbb R^2 setminus H$. Take $r=d(alpha,H)>0$, the distance from the point $alpha$ to the line $H$. Then $$B(alpha,r) subset Bbb R^2 setminus H$$ showing $Bbb R^2 setminus H$ is open.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I love this one! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:46



















1












$begingroup$

Maybe I'm overcomplicating this, but here's where I think your proof fails



Imagine that $H = {(x, y)in Bbb{R}^2: x^2 + y^2 < 1}$. And now I am going to apply your same argument




For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $x_n^2+y_n^2<1,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n^2 + y_n^2 = x^2 + y^2 < 1$$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;x^2+y^2<1 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R}^2$




Do you see the problem?






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Hmm... You are right because, $x^2+y^2leq 1$ which will imply that $(x,y)notin H.$ However, it's all about the approach used. In that scenerio, I believe mine is correct, right?
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:04










  • $begingroup$
    This has the same general form as the OP's proof, but the error stems from something not present there. The OP is tacitly using the theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}(u_n+v_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}u_n+lim_{ntoinfty}v_n$ (provided the limits on the right hand side both exist), while the "proof" here tacitly uses the incorrect (non-)theorem that $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nlt c$. The correct theorem is $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nle c$.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:10












  • $begingroup$
    @BarryCipra Oh yeah! That's the missing part here $u_n < c implies lim_{ntoinfty} color{red}{leq} c$. I'm going to delete this, don't want to contribute to the clutter. Thanks for the clarification
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 16:26












  • $begingroup$
    @caverac, you're welcome for the clarification. The flaw is somewhat subtle (it took me, at least, a bit of thought to see what was wrong in it) and possibly worth preserving on that basis.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:34





















1












$begingroup$

I would modify your proof to make one tacit step explicit in the display: If $(x_n,y_n)to(x,y)$, then



$$3x+2y=3lim_{ntoinfty}x_n+2lim_{ntoinfty}y_n=lim_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}5=5$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45












  • $begingroup$
    If your comment here was intended for dmtri, you can delete it (here) by hovering your cursor to the right of the timestamp until an X appears.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:56










  • $begingroup$
    It was meant for you as well. As you know, I made typos and you did well to make corrections. Thanks, once again!
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:57










  • $begingroup$
    OK. But I didn't even notice the typo!
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 17:00



















1












$begingroup$

I think you should have $3x+2y$ in the 3 line from the bottom....






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45













Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3069939%2fthe-set-h-x-y-in-bbbr2-3x2y-5-is-a-closed-subset-of-bbbr2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes








4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3












$begingroup$

Looks Good! Alternatively, take $alpha=(x,y) in Bbb R^2 setminus H$. Take $r=d(alpha,H)>0$, the distance from the point $alpha$ to the line $H$. Then $$B(alpha,r) subset Bbb R^2 setminus H$$ showing $Bbb R^2 setminus H$ is open.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I love this one! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:46
















3












$begingroup$

Looks Good! Alternatively, take $alpha=(x,y) in Bbb R^2 setminus H$. Take $r=d(alpha,H)>0$, the distance from the point $alpha$ to the line $H$. Then $$B(alpha,r) subset Bbb R^2 setminus H$$ showing $Bbb R^2 setminus H$ is open.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I love this one! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:46














3












3








3





$begingroup$

Looks Good! Alternatively, take $alpha=(x,y) in Bbb R^2 setminus H$. Take $r=d(alpha,H)>0$, the distance from the point $alpha$ to the line $H$. Then $$B(alpha,r) subset Bbb R^2 setminus H$$ showing $Bbb R^2 setminus H$ is open.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Looks Good! Alternatively, take $alpha=(x,y) in Bbb R^2 setminus H$. Take $r=d(alpha,H)>0$, the distance from the point $alpha$ to the line $H$. Then $$B(alpha,r) subset Bbb R^2 setminus H$$ showing $Bbb R^2 setminus H$ is open.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Jan 11 at 15:33









Chinnapparaj RChinnapparaj R

5,3641828




5,3641828












  • $begingroup$
    I love this one! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:46


















  • $begingroup$
    I love this one! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:46
















$begingroup$
I love this one! (+1)
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:46




$begingroup$
I love this one! (+1)
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:46











1












$begingroup$

Maybe I'm overcomplicating this, but here's where I think your proof fails



Imagine that $H = {(x, y)in Bbb{R}^2: x^2 + y^2 < 1}$. And now I am going to apply your same argument




For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $x_n^2+y_n^2<1,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n^2 + y_n^2 = x^2 + y^2 < 1$$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;x^2+y^2<1 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R}^2$




Do you see the problem?






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Hmm... You are right because, $x^2+y^2leq 1$ which will imply that $(x,y)notin H.$ However, it's all about the approach used. In that scenerio, I believe mine is correct, right?
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:04










  • $begingroup$
    This has the same general form as the OP's proof, but the error stems from something not present there. The OP is tacitly using the theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}(u_n+v_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}u_n+lim_{ntoinfty}v_n$ (provided the limits on the right hand side both exist), while the "proof" here tacitly uses the incorrect (non-)theorem that $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nlt c$. The correct theorem is $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nle c$.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:10












  • $begingroup$
    @BarryCipra Oh yeah! That's the missing part here $u_n < c implies lim_{ntoinfty} color{red}{leq} c$. I'm going to delete this, don't want to contribute to the clutter. Thanks for the clarification
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 16:26












  • $begingroup$
    @caverac, you're welcome for the clarification. The flaw is somewhat subtle (it took me, at least, a bit of thought to see what was wrong in it) and possibly worth preserving on that basis.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:34


















1












$begingroup$

Maybe I'm overcomplicating this, but here's where I think your proof fails



Imagine that $H = {(x, y)in Bbb{R}^2: x^2 + y^2 < 1}$. And now I am going to apply your same argument




For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $x_n^2+y_n^2<1,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n^2 + y_n^2 = x^2 + y^2 < 1$$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;x^2+y^2<1 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R}^2$




Do you see the problem?






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Hmm... You are right because, $x^2+y^2leq 1$ which will imply that $(x,y)notin H.$ However, it's all about the approach used. In that scenerio, I believe mine is correct, right?
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:04










  • $begingroup$
    This has the same general form as the OP's proof, but the error stems from something not present there. The OP is tacitly using the theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}(u_n+v_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}u_n+lim_{ntoinfty}v_n$ (provided the limits on the right hand side both exist), while the "proof" here tacitly uses the incorrect (non-)theorem that $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nlt c$. The correct theorem is $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nle c$.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:10












  • $begingroup$
    @BarryCipra Oh yeah! That's the missing part here $u_n < c implies lim_{ntoinfty} color{red}{leq} c$. I'm going to delete this, don't want to contribute to the clutter. Thanks for the clarification
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 16:26












  • $begingroup$
    @caverac, you're welcome for the clarification. The flaw is somewhat subtle (it took me, at least, a bit of thought to see what was wrong in it) and possibly worth preserving on that basis.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:34
















1












1








1





$begingroup$

Maybe I'm overcomplicating this, but here's where I think your proof fails



Imagine that $H = {(x, y)in Bbb{R}^2: x^2 + y^2 < 1}$. And now I am going to apply your same argument




For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $x_n^2+y_n^2<1,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n^2 + y_n^2 = x^2 + y^2 < 1$$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;x^2+y^2<1 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R}^2$




Do you see the problem?






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Maybe I'm overcomplicating this, but here's where I think your proof fails



Imagine that $H = {(x, y)in Bbb{R}^2: x^2 + y^2 < 1}$. And now I am going to apply your same argument




For all $nin Bbb{N},$ let $(x_n,y_n)in H$ such that $(x_n,y_n)to (x,y),$ as $nto infty.$ We show that $(x,y)in H.$



However, $(x_n,y_n)in H$ implies $x_n^2+y_n^2<1,$ for all $nin Bbb{N}.$ As $nto infty, $



$$limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n^2 + y_n^2 = x^2 + y^2 < 1$$
Hence, $(x,y)in H$ which implies that the set, $H={(x,y)in Bbb{R^2}:;x^2+y^2<1 },$ is a closed subset of $Bbb{R}^2$




Do you see the problem?







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Jan 11 at 15:37









caveraccaverac

14.5k31130




14.5k31130












  • $begingroup$
    Hmm... You are right because, $x^2+y^2leq 1$ which will imply that $(x,y)notin H.$ However, it's all about the approach used. In that scenerio, I believe mine is correct, right?
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:04










  • $begingroup$
    This has the same general form as the OP's proof, but the error stems from something not present there. The OP is tacitly using the theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}(u_n+v_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}u_n+lim_{ntoinfty}v_n$ (provided the limits on the right hand side both exist), while the "proof" here tacitly uses the incorrect (non-)theorem that $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nlt c$. The correct theorem is $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nle c$.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:10












  • $begingroup$
    @BarryCipra Oh yeah! That's the missing part here $u_n < c implies lim_{ntoinfty} color{red}{leq} c$. I'm going to delete this, don't want to contribute to the clutter. Thanks for the clarification
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 16:26












  • $begingroup$
    @caverac, you're welcome for the clarification. The flaw is somewhat subtle (it took me, at least, a bit of thought to see what was wrong in it) and possibly worth preserving on that basis.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:34




















  • $begingroup$
    Hmm... You are right because, $x^2+y^2leq 1$ which will imply that $(x,y)notin H.$ However, it's all about the approach used. In that scenerio, I believe mine is correct, right?
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:04










  • $begingroup$
    This has the same general form as the OP's proof, but the error stems from something not present there. The OP is tacitly using the theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}(u_n+v_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}u_n+lim_{ntoinfty}v_n$ (provided the limits on the right hand side both exist), while the "proof" here tacitly uses the incorrect (non-)theorem that $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nlt c$. The correct theorem is $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nle c$.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:10












  • $begingroup$
    @BarryCipra Oh yeah! That's the missing part here $u_n < c implies lim_{ntoinfty} color{red}{leq} c$. I'm going to delete this, don't want to contribute to the clutter. Thanks for the clarification
    $endgroup$
    – caverac
    Jan 11 at 16:26












  • $begingroup$
    @caverac, you're welcome for the clarification. The flaw is somewhat subtle (it took me, at least, a bit of thought to see what was wrong in it) and possibly worth preserving on that basis.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:34


















$begingroup$
Hmm... You are right because, $x^2+y^2leq 1$ which will imply that $(x,y)notin H.$ However, it's all about the approach used. In that scenerio, I believe mine is correct, right?
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:04




$begingroup$
Hmm... You are right because, $x^2+y^2leq 1$ which will imply that $(x,y)notin H.$ However, it's all about the approach used. In that scenerio, I believe mine is correct, right?
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:04












$begingroup$
This has the same general form as the OP's proof, but the error stems from something not present there. The OP is tacitly using the theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}(u_n+v_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}u_n+lim_{ntoinfty}v_n$ (provided the limits on the right hand side both exist), while the "proof" here tacitly uses the incorrect (non-)theorem that $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nlt c$. The correct theorem is $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nle c$.
$endgroup$
– Barry Cipra
Jan 11 at 16:10






$begingroup$
This has the same general form as the OP's proof, but the error stems from something not present there. The OP is tacitly using the theorem that $lim_{ntoinfty}(u_n+v_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}u_n+lim_{ntoinfty}v_n$ (provided the limits on the right hand side both exist), while the "proof" here tacitly uses the incorrect (non-)theorem that $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nlt c$. The correct theorem is $u_nlt cimplieslim_{ntoinfty}u_nle c$.
$endgroup$
– Barry Cipra
Jan 11 at 16:10














$begingroup$
@BarryCipra Oh yeah! That's the missing part here $u_n < c implies lim_{ntoinfty} color{red}{leq} c$. I'm going to delete this, don't want to contribute to the clutter. Thanks for the clarification
$endgroup$
– caverac
Jan 11 at 16:26






$begingroup$
@BarryCipra Oh yeah! That's the missing part here $u_n < c implies lim_{ntoinfty} color{red}{leq} c$. I'm going to delete this, don't want to contribute to the clutter. Thanks for the clarification
$endgroup$
– caverac
Jan 11 at 16:26














$begingroup$
@caverac, you're welcome for the clarification. The flaw is somewhat subtle (it took me, at least, a bit of thought to see what was wrong in it) and possibly worth preserving on that basis.
$endgroup$
– Barry Cipra
Jan 11 at 16:34






$begingroup$
@caverac, you're welcome for the clarification. The flaw is somewhat subtle (it took me, at least, a bit of thought to see what was wrong in it) and possibly worth preserving on that basis.
$endgroup$
– Barry Cipra
Jan 11 at 16:34













1












$begingroup$

I would modify your proof to make one tacit step explicit in the display: If $(x_n,y_n)to(x,y)$, then



$$3x+2y=3lim_{ntoinfty}x_n+2lim_{ntoinfty}y_n=lim_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}5=5$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45












  • $begingroup$
    If your comment here was intended for dmtri, you can delete it (here) by hovering your cursor to the right of the timestamp until an X appears.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:56










  • $begingroup$
    It was meant for you as well. As you know, I made typos and you did well to make corrections. Thanks, once again!
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:57










  • $begingroup$
    OK. But I didn't even notice the typo!
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 17:00
















1












$begingroup$

I would modify your proof to make one tacit step explicit in the display: If $(x_n,y_n)to(x,y)$, then



$$3x+2y=3lim_{ntoinfty}x_n+2lim_{ntoinfty}y_n=lim_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}5=5$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45












  • $begingroup$
    If your comment here was intended for dmtri, you can delete it (here) by hovering your cursor to the right of the timestamp until an X appears.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:56










  • $begingroup$
    It was meant for you as well. As you know, I made typos and you did well to make corrections. Thanks, once again!
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:57










  • $begingroup$
    OK. But I didn't even notice the typo!
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 17:00














1












1








1





$begingroup$

I would modify your proof to make one tacit step explicit in the display: If $(x_n,y_n)to(x,y)$, then



$$3x+2y=3lim_{ntoinfty}x_n+2lim_{ntoinfty}y_n=lim_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}5=5$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



I would modify your proof to make one tacit step explicit in the display: If $(x_n,y_n)to(x,y)$, then



$$3x+2y=3lim_{ntoinfty}x_n+2lim_{ntoinfty}y_n=lim_{ntoinfty}(3x_n+2y_n)=lim_{ntoinfty}5=5$$







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Jan 11 at 16:27









Barry CipraBarry Cipra

59.4k653126




59.4k653126












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45












  • $begingroup$
    If your comment here was intended for dmtri, you can delete it (here) by hovering your cursor to the right of the timestamp until an X appears.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:56










  • $begingroup$
    It was meant for you as well. As you know, I made typos and you did well to make corrections. Thanks, once again!
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:57










  • $begingroup$
    OK. But I didn't even notice the typo!
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 17:00


















  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45












  • $begingroup$
    If your comment here was intended for dmtri, you can delete it (here) by hovering your cursor to the right of the timestamp until an X appears.
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 16:56










  • $begingroup$
    It was meant for you as well. As you know, I made typos and you did well to make corrections. Thanks, once again!
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:57










  • $begingroup$
    OK. But I didn't even notice the typo!
    $endgroup$
    – Barry Cipra
    Jan 11 at 17:00
















$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:45






$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:45














$begingroup$
If your comment here was intended for dmtri, you can delete it (here) by hovering your cursor to the right of the timestamp until an X appears.
$endgroup$
– Barry Cipra
Jan 11 at 16:56




$begingroup$
If your comment here was intended for dmtri, you can delete it (here) by hovering your cursor to the right of the timestamp until an X appears.
$endgroup$
– Barry Cipra
Jan 11 at 16:56












$begingroup$
It was meant for you as well. As you know, I made typos and you did well to make corrections. Thanks, once again!
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:57




$begingroup$
It was meant for you as well. As you know, I made typos and you did well to make corrections. Thanks, once again!
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:57












$begingroup$
OK. But I didn't even notice the typo!
$endgroup$
– Barry Cipra
Jan 11 at 17:00




$begingroup$
OK. But I didn't even notice the typo!
$endgroup$
– Barry Cipra
Jan 11 at 17:00











1












$begingroup$

I think you should have $3x+2y$ in the 3 line from the bottom....






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45


















1












$begingroup$

I think you should have $3x+2y$ in the 3 line from the bottom....






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45
















1












1








1





$begingroup$

I think you should have $3x+2y$ in the 3 line from the bottom....






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



I think you should have $3x+2y$ in the 3 line from the bottom....







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Jan 11 at 16:31









dmtridmtri

1,4612521




1,4612521












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45




















  • $begingroup$
    Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
    $endgroup$
    – Omojola Micheal
    Jan 11 at 16:45


















$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:45






$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! It was a typo! (+1)
$endgroup$
– Omojola Micheal
Jan 11 at 16:45




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3069939%2fthe-set-h-x-y-in-bbbr2-3x2y-5-is-a-closed-subset-of-bbbr2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Mario Kart Wii

Image
Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! Mario Kart Wii From The Cutting Room Floor Jump to: navigation, search Mario Kart Wii Developer : Nintendo Publisher : Nintendo Platform : Wii Released in JP : April 10, 2008 Released in US : April 27, 2008 Released in EU : April 11, 2008 Released in AU : April 24, 2008 Released in KR : April 30, 2009 This game has unused animations. This game has unused areas. This game has unused code. This game has unused objects. This game has unused modes / minigames. This game has unused graphics. This game has unused models. This game has unused items. This game has unused music. This game has regional differences. This game has a notes page This game has a prerelease article Mario Kart Wii is the sixth game in the series (not counting Arcade editions), which intro
Read more

What does “Dominus providebit” mean?

Image
5 Does "Dominus providebit" mean "The Lord will provide" or "The Lord provides"? I once had a bit of an argument with a guy who studied Latin over that. It's an inscription that appears on the rim of some old Swiss coins that I have. meaning latin-to-english-translation grammar-identification share | improve this question edited Jan 18 at 15:27 V2Blast 105 4 asked Jan 17 at 22:49 Donald K. Donald K. 26 1
Read more

Antonio Litta Visconti Arese

Image
Antonio Litta Visconti Arese I duca Litta, VII marchese di Gambolò In carica 1797 – 1820 Predecessore Pompeo Litta Visconti Arese Successore Alfonso Litta Visconti Arese Trattamento Sua grazia Altri titoli Duca Litta Conte del Regno napoleonico d'Italia Patrizio milanese Don Nascita Milano, 2 maggio 1748 Morte Milano, 14 agosto 1820 Dinastia Litta Visconti Arese Padre Pompeo Litta Visconti Arese Madre Maria Elisabetta Visconti Borromeo Consorte Barbara Barbiano di Belgioioso Religione cattolicesimo Antonio Litta Visconti Arese , I duca Litta, VII marchese di Gambolò (Milano, 2 maggio 1748 – Milano, 14 agosto 1820), è stato un nobile e politico italiano. Composizione "Il pastore svizzero" di Pietro Morlacchi, con dedica Indice 1 Biografia 2 Onorificenze 3 Araldica 4 Albero genealogico 5 Note 6 Altri progetti Biografia | Antonio Litta Visco
Read more