The study of topological spaces.
I was reading this book and thought it would be a good idea to provide answers to it. I added a few questions myself. These were either based on proofs shown in the text, proofs left to the reader, or proofs I used myself to clarify things.
My proof style will probably change as you read through the text. This is inevitable because I should have became more advanced in skill as I practiced more and progressed through the text. And in anycase, my proof style tends to change with my mood.
The nature of the questions are that it is generally clear to the proponent if he is correct or not, since the arguments which are the substance of a proof speak for themselves, in which case the need for a set of answers seems lacking. Nethertheless, perhaps the answers can serve a struggling student who needs extra clarification (and instead will end up with their mind boggled by my convoluted proofs), or perhaps the student desires a different perspective. In any case, reading and checking proofs is always a good exercise.
If you spot that I have made a mistake, please let me know and I will endeavor to correct it. In the case of you spotting a typo, your name will be listed in an appended section entitled "Typo Spotters". In the case of you spotting an error, I expect you to provide an alternative, correct proof. I will then attempt to excise my stupidity with my own alternative correct proof. Both your proof and my alternative proof will occur in the text, my proof will follow yours, and your name will occur in the text at the point of your proof (unless you wish to remain anonymous) accompanied by an acknowledgement that I made a mistake (this should incite me to double check my proofs the first time round).
Enjoy yourself doing the questions.
.
.
be an indexed family of subsets of a set
. Prove that
,
be two indexed families of subsets of a set
. Prove the following:
,
,
,
then
,
. Then
,
,
,
. Then
,
,
be an indexed family of subsets of a set
. Let
. Prove that
.
.
be an indexed family of subsets of a set
. Let
. Prove that
if and only if for each
,
.
if and only if for each
,
.
be the set of real numbers that are greater than 0. For each
, let
be the open interval
. Prove that
.
.
, let
be the closed interval
. Prove that
.
.
then
" and ``if
then
" in order to prove ``
if and only if
".
,
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
.
and
be sets. If
, then
.
,
,
be sets. Prove that if
and
then
.
be sets. Prove that if
and
, then
.
,
. Prove the following:
if and only if
.
if and only if
.
if and only if
.
if and only if
.
if and only if
.
if and only if
.
. Prove the following:
.
.
.
then
" and ``if
then
" in order to prove ``
if and only if
".
In order to prove ``
if and only if
" (aka ``
iff
") one must prove both ``if
then
" and ``if
then
". But why both? The necessity of ``if
then
" is obvious from the statement of the question and corresponds to the ``if" part. The ``only if" part refers to the notion that
is true only when
is true, i.e that
is not true when
is false, this is proven by showing that whenever
is true,
is also true and hence that
is never false when
is true, hence the expression ``only if".
,
Assume
then
, but this is impossible because
is empty, hence our assumption is false and it is true that
.
Assume
then
and
. Now
but
because
contains nothing, therefore
so the assumption is false and it is true that
.
,
.
Clearly
so that
.
is called an improper subset of
.
,
.
True. By definition
is the power set of
and contains all subsets of
. Since
it follows that
.
,
.
%False. For
to be true it must hold that if
then
. But if
is any non-empty set it contains elements and an element of
is not a subset of
, it is therefore not in
and hence
.
False. Assume
, then
. Consider any such
,
but
. Therefore the assumption, namely that
, is false.
,
.
True.
contains only the element
and
so
. Everything in
is thus in
so it follows from the definition of subset that
.
,
.
True. It was proven above that for any set
,
.
contains all subsets of
by definition,
, therefore
.
%Since
contains all subsets of
it clearly contains
.
,
.
True.
is a subset of any set
therefore
irrespective of
.
.
False. The set
contains the element
.
and
be sets. If
, then
.
%True. Assume that it is not true that if
, then
. It follows that there exists a subset
of
which is not a subset of
, but since any element in
is also in
, this is impossible. By the same construction steps that we apply to the elements of
to construct
we can construct
from the elements of
as they occur in
. Therefore the assumption is false and it is true that if
, then
.
True. Let
and assume
. By the assumption,
. Consider this
, by definition of
,
and therefore
but
which means
, therefore
which by definition means that
.
Now if
then by definition of
,
but this is a contradiction since it was claimed that
. Therefore the assumption, namely that
given
, is false, and it is therefore true that if
, then
.
.
True since
and
are distinct objects and they belong to the set.
,
,
be sets. Prove that if
and
then
.
If
, then
, and if
, then
. It follows from the former, given the latter, that
, and hence
.
Alternative proof: If
then
, and if
then
. Thus
and hence
thus
.
Alternative proof (by contradiction): Assume that
and
but
, this means that
. Taking this
since
,
, and since
,
which is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false, namely that
, and hence it is true that if
and
, then
.
be sets. Prove that if
and
, then
.
Proof by induction on
.
The base case,
is trivially true since
. %For the base case
,
and
, therefore by definition of set equality
.
Now it is required to show that for any
, if the claim holds for
then it holds for
. For
we have
![]() |
and
. Now
and
which means that
, therefore
and
both hold. Given that the claim holds for
it follows that
![]() |
and therefore because
that
because
. Given that it is also true that
, this means that
and since
it follows that
![]() |
and the induction step holds.
If
then
so
and
, which means that
and
so that
, therefore
![]() |
If
then
and
so
, hence
, therefore
![]() |
it follows that
![]() |
It is easy to prove this from the previous proof (as noted by Bert himself), namely that
, taking the complements of
and 
![]() |
taking complements of the first and last terms
![]() |
so that
![]() |
Alternatively, it can be proved from scratch:
If
then
, so at least one of
or
must be true, thus
and
![]() |
If
then at least one of
or
must be true, therefore it is never true that
and hence it is always true that
and
![]() |
so that
![]() |
Using the same technique as before, this relation can be used to prove that
. Taking the complements of
and
in
gives
![]() |
and taking complements of the first and last terms gives
![]() |
and it follows that
.
,
. Prove the following:
if and only if
.
First, the if part. Let
and assume
. From the assumption it follows that
and consequently
. This means
and it follows that
which is a contradiction. Thus the assumption is false and in fact
.
Second, the only if part. Let
and assume
. From the assumption, since
, to prevent equality it follows that
which means
. Consider such an
,
but
, therefore
and
which means
which is a contradiction. Thus the assumption is false and in fact
.
if and only if
.
Let
and assume
. From the assumption it follows that
, but this means that
which means
which is a contradiction. Hence the assumption is false and in fact
.
If
, then
. Let
and assume that
. From the assumption it follows, since
, that
. Thus
, and since
,
. Hence
which is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
.
if and only if
.
If
then
therefore
and
.
If
then
and therefore
.
if and only if
(
is the universe).
If
then
and therefore
.
If
then
so for any
either
or
, or in other words
.
Alternative proof:
Let
, and assume
, then
, and so
.
Let
, and assume
.
is the universe so
and thus it follows from the assumption that
, therefore
, taking this
, since
, by
, it follows that
, but this is a contradiction since
. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
.
if and only if
.
Let
and assume that
then
, but this means that
, or in other words
and thus
which is a contradiction, therefore the assumption is false and in fact
.
Let
and assume
. From the assumption,
and thus
, or in other words
and hence
which is a contradiction. Hence the assumption is false and in fact
.
Alternative proof:
Let
. Assume
, then
, consider this
, since
, by
,
, which is a contradiction. Therefore, the assumption is false and in fact
.
Let
. Assume
then
, consider this
, since
, by
,
, which is a contradiction. Therefore, the assumption is false and in fact
.
if and only if
.
Let
. Assume
. From the assumption
or in other words
which in other words says
and hence
which is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
.
Let
. Assume
. From the assumption
or in other words
which in other words says
and hence
which is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
.
Alternative proof:
Let
. Assume
, then
. Consider this
, since
,
which is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
.
Let
. Assume
, then
. Consider this
, since
,
, which is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
.
. Prove the following:
.
If
then
and
, but since
then
, and given
it follows that
and hence
.
I was humbled when a former colleague Michael Pfeiffer showed me a trivial proof for this, after I had written a one page proof. So here it is:
Let
and let 
, so
, and
![]() |
and (the first step is by Demorgan's laws):
![]() |
since
and
, it follows that
![]() |
Now here is the drawn out proof I began with:
Preliminaries: generally
and thus
. Generally
and thus
which means that generally
\begin{equation} \label{distributivesetsubtraction} (A \cup B) - C = (A - C) \cup (B - C) \end{equation}
It is required to prove that
.
Let
, then
and
. Another way to write
is to write
since
(when
as is the case here). Therefore
and
, which is alternatively written
. Now, since generally
, it follows that
. Now since
it follows that
, and since
,
, hence
and hence
![]() |
Now let
, then either
or
.
First case, let
, then since
,
and therefore
. Now assume
, since
for
to be true it must follow that
, but this leads to a contradiction because if
, then
but it was stated that
. So the assumption is false and in fact
and
![]() |
Second case, let
. It is true that
since
. Assume that
, then since
it must be true that
, but
and so
, but this is a contradiction since
means that
. Hence the assumption is false and in fact
. Thus
![]() |
so putting the cases together, if
, then
, and if
then
, it follows that if
then
and hence
![]() |
and so
![]() |
be an indexed family of subsets of a set
. Prove that
If
then
, which means
, therefore
and thus
meaning
![]() |
If
then
and hence
therefore
and in fact
meaning
![]() |
so
![]() |
If
then
which means that
which means that
and hence
, therefore
![]() |
If
then
therefore
which means
, and thus
and
![]() |
so it follows that
![]() |
,
be two indexed families of subsets of a set
. Prove the following:
,
Clearly if
then
because
.
,
If
then
therefore
since
and so
.
If
then
. If
then
, and if
then
therefore
. Therefore
![]() |
If
then
or
therefore
or
, in either case the implication is that
and it follows that
therefore
![]() |
so that
![]() |
If
then
but this means that
and
for any
and hence
and
, therefore
and
![]() |
If
then
and
but this means that
and
, therefore for any
,
and
so that
and thus
, hence
so that
![]() |
it follows then that
![]() |
,
then
,
If
then
and since for each
,
it follows that
and in fact
.
If
then
and since
this means
and thus
.
. Then
Direct proof:
Let
, then
, now since
and
![]() |
Let
, then
and
. From the latter it follows that
and thus, given
,
from which it follows that
and
![]() |
leading to the conclusion
![]() |
Alternative proof, proof by contradiction:
Let
, it follows that
and
. Assume that
, then either
or
.
so the former is impossible, thus the latter must be true which means that
but this is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
.
Let
. Then
and
. Assume that
then
. Since
, it follows that
, which is a constradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact 
Let
. Assume
then
and
, the latter means
, and it follows from
that
, therefore
but this is a contradiction. Therefore it is not true that
and it follows that
![]() |
Let
. Assume
, then
, considering this
,
which means that
and
. Since
, it follows from
that
but
so this is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
so that
![]() |
leading to the conclusion that
![]() |
,
,
. Then
,
If
then
and
, therefore
and
or
, if
then
hence
, and if
then
and
so in either case
so
![]() |
If
then either
or
. If
then
and
, from the latter it follows that
and hence
. And if
then
and
, and from the latter
and thus
. So
![]() |
and
![]() |
If
then
or
. If
then
and
so
, if
then
so
and
so
, therefore
and
![]() |
If
then
and
, it is clear that if
then
and
so that
satisfies the relation. If
then
must be in
in the first clause and
must be in
in the second clause so that
is in both clauses. Therefore either
or
hence
and
Let
and assume
. It follows from the assumption that
and
.
, yet from the premise
, therefore
, similarly
and hence
. Therefore
and
and thus
which is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
so
![]() |
and
![]() |
be an indexed family of subsets of a set
. Let
. Prove that
.
If
then
and since
,
, hence
. Therefore
, or in other words
.
.
Let
, then
but since
,
, hence
and
.
be an indexed family of subsets of a set
. Let
. Prove that
if and only if for each
,
.
Let
and assume
. From the assumption it follows that
, consider this
, since
,
, thus considering this
it follows that
and
which means
which contradicts the premise. Therefore the assumption is false and
![]() |
Now let
and assume
is not true. From the assumption it follows that
, considering this
,
, and hence
which means
but this contradicts the premise, hence the assumption is false and
![]() |
and therefore
![]() |
if and only if for each
,
.
Let
,
and assume
. From the assumption it follows that
. Consider this
, since
, it follows that
, yet
and hence
, but this is a contradiction. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
![]() |
Now let
and assume that
is false. From the assumption it follows that
. Considering this
it follows that
, but this means
and hence
which contradicts the premise. Therefore the assumption is false and in fact
![]() |
which means
![]() |
be the set of real numbers that are greater than 0. For each
, let
be the open interval
. Prove that
.
hence if
, since
and
, it follows that
. Assume that
, then
. Consider this
. Clearly
, yet
which means
, but this is a contradiction. Therefore, the assumption is false and infact
.
.
Let
, then
and hence
since
, thus
.
Let
, clearly
and since
it follows that
and so
.
Therefore
.
be the set of real numbers that are greater than
. For each
, let
be the closed interval
. Prove that
.
because
. Thus, since
is the only element of
,
and thus
![]() |
I say that if
, then
. Proof, assume that
and consider this
.
yet
and hence
, but this is a contradiction. Therefore, the assumption is false and in fact
and hence if
then
, consequently
and so
![]() |
which leads to the conclusion
![]() |
.
Let
then
and hence
for some
.
is therefore either
, in which case
or
is a real number which is greater than
and less than or equal to
, in which case
and thus
, therefore
![]() |
Let
then either
, in which case
(
is an element of any
, where
), or
in which case
and thus
, therefore
![]() |
so that
![]() |