A proof of the Heine-Borel Theorem

A proof of the Heine-Borel Theorem
Theorem (Heine-Borel Theorem). A subset S of Ris compact if and only if S is closed and bounded.
Proof. First we suppose that S is compact. To see that S is bounded is fairly simple: Let In = (−n, n).
Then
1
[
n=1
In = R.
Therefore S is covered by the collection of {In}. Hence, since S is compact, finitely many will suffice.
S  (In1 [ · · · [ Ink ) = Im,
where m = max{n1, . . . , nk}. Therefore |x|  m for all x 2 S, and S is bounded.
Now we will show that S is closed. Suppose not. Then there is some point p 2 (cl S) \ S. For each n,
define the neighborhood around p of radius 1/n, Nn = N(p, 1/n). Take the complement of the closure of
Nn, Un = R\ clNn. Then Un is open (since its complement is closed), and we have
1
[
n=1
Un = R\
1
\
n=1
clNn = R\ {p}  S.
Therefore, {Un} is an open cover for S. Since S is compact, there is a finite subcover {Un1 , · · · ,Unk}
for S. Furthermore, by the way they are constructed, Ui  Uj if i  j. It follows that S  Um where
m = max{n1, . . . , nk}. But then S \ N(p, 1/m) = ?, which contradicts our choice of p 2 (cl S) \ S.
Conversely, we want to show that if S is closed and bounded, then S is compact. Let Fbe an open
cover for S. For each x 2 R, define the set
Sx = S \ (−1, x],
and let
B = {x : Sx is covered by a finite subcover of F}.
Since S is closed and bounded, our lemma tells us that S has both a maximum and a minimum. Let
d = min S. Then Sd = {d} and this is certainly covered by a finite subcover of F. Therefore, d 2 B and B is
nonempty. If we can show that B is not bounded above, then it will contain a number p greater than max S.
But then, Sp = S so we can conclude that S is covered by a finite subcover, and is therefore compact.
Toward this end, suppose that B is bounded above and let m = supB. We shall show that m 2 S and
m /2 S both lead to contradictions.
If m 2 S, then since Fis an open cover of S, there exists F0 in Fsuch that m 2 F0. Since F0 is open,
there exists an interval [x1, x2] in F0 such that
x1 < m < x2.
Since x1 < m and m = supB, there exists F1, . . . , Fk in Fthat cover Sx1 . But then F0, F1, . . . , Fk cover
Sx2 , so that x2 2 B. But this contradicts m = supB.
If m /2 S, then since S is closed there exists ε > 0 such that N(m, ε) \ S = ?. But then
Sm−" = Sm+".
Since m− ε 2 B we have m+ ǫ 2 B, which again contradicts m = supB.
Therefore, either way, if B is bounded above, we get a contradiction. We conclude that B is not bounded
above, and S must be compact.

http://math.utah.edu/~bobby/3210/heine-borel.pdf
 « Next Oldest | Next Newest »

## Important Note..!

If you are not satisfied with above reply ,..Please

So that we will collect data for you and will made reply to the request....OR try below "QUICK REPLY" box to add a reply to this page
 Popular Searches: prove the basic propotionality theorem class 10 project, maths seminar on basic proportionality theorem, basic proportionality theorem project, verification of sampling theorem in scilab, viva question and answers on superposition theorem, proof eminem, sampling theorem verification,  (case insensitive) 