Proof: We shall prove something stronger—namely, that every open set in ℝk is the union of an at most countable collection of disjoint open connected spaces, which by Theorem 2.47 implies the proposition for k=1. This case could in fact be strengthened to path-connected spaces but is beyond the development of current theory.
Lemma 1 (Subspace Nonconnnectedness): Let E=A∪B for disjoint, nonempty, separated A,B. Every subset of E containing a point of A and a point of B is nonconnected. Proof: Let F⊆E be such that C=F∩A and D=F∩B are nonempty. Now, note that for spaces X,Y that¯X∩Y=(X∩Y)∪(X∩Y)′⊆(X∩Y)∪(X′∩Y′)=(X∪X′)∩(Y∪Y′)∩(X∪Y′)∩(Y∪X′)⊆¯X∩¯YSo observe C∪D=(A∪B)∩F=F and ¯C∩D=¯A∩F∩D⊆¯A∩¯F∩D⊆¯A∩B is empty, and similarly C∩¯D is empty.
Lemma 2 (Upper Bounds of Chains of Connected Spaces): Let {Ei} be a collection of connected spaces totally ordered by inclusion. Then E=∪Ei is connected. Proof: Assume E=A∪B for disjoint, nonempty, separated A,B. Then some indexed summand Eα must contain a point of A, and similarly Eβ for B. Then by hypothesis either Eα⊆Eβ or Eβ⊆Eα, in either case one of them being nonconnected by Lemma 1, a contradiction.
Lemma 3 (Union of Nondisjoint Connected Spaces): Let E and F be connected spaces with nonempty intersection. Then E∪F is connected. Proof: Assume E∪F=A∪B for disjoint, nonempty, separated A,B. We may assume some x∈E∩F is contained in A. As well, not all of E and all of F can be contained in A since B is nonempty, hence either E or F must not be connected by Lemma 1.
Now, let E⊆ℝk be an open set. Define a relation ~ on E by a~b if there exists a connected subspace of E containing both a and b. This is reflexive since E is an open set admitting a neighborhood of any point, and neighborhoods are convex hence connected (cf. Exercise 2.21 and the example below Definition 2.17); clearly symmetrical; and transitive by Lemma 3.
Choose a set of representatives in E inherited from this equivalence relation, and for any representative observe the collection C of connected subspaces of E containing the representative; by Lemma 2 and Zorn's Lemma there exists a maximal connected subspace under inclusion. This maximal subspace must in fact contain every point in the equivalence class, since we might otherwise construct a larger connected subspace by Lemma 3. Hence E is a union of disjoint open connected spaces, and it remains only to prove that there are a countable number of them. Generally, we will prove that there cannot be a disjoint collection of uncountably many nonempty open sets in ℝk.
Observe any collection of disjoint nonempty open sets in Euclidean space. Take a point from each set, and choose a neighborhood of each so that they are disjoint. However, as we've seen, within each of these neighborhoods we may find a member of the countable base for ℝk (cf. Exercises 2.22-23), implying the collection is at most countable. ◻
No comments:
Post a Comment