compactness of a set where am I going wrongIn a metric space, compactness implies completnessClosure and...

How could a scammer know the apps on my phone / iTunes account?

Instead of Universal Basic Income, why not Universal Basic NEEDS?

How to terminate ping <dest> &

Employee lack of ownership

A link redirect to http instead of https: how critical is it?

How do anti-virus programs start at Windows boot?

Time travel from stationary position?

How difficult is it to simply disable/disengage the MCAS on Boeing 737 Max 8 & 9 Aircraft?

Unexpected result from ArcLength

What did Alexander Pope mean by "Expletives their feeble Aid do join"?

Opacity of an object in 2.8

A Cautionary Suggestion

A sequence that has integer values for prime indexes only:

Can a druid choose the size of its wild shape beast?

Interplanetary conflict, some disease destroys the ability to understand or appreciate music

If curse and magic is two sides of the same coin, why the former is forbidden?

How to make healing in an exploration game interesting

How to deal with taxi scam when on vacation?

What's the meaning of “spike” in the context of “adrenaline spike”?

Why one should not leave fingerprints on bulbs and plugs?

how to write formula in word in latex

How to simplify this time periods definition interface?

My Graph Theory Students

If I can solve Sudoku can I solve Travelling Salesman Problem(TSP)? If yes, how?



compactness of a set where am I going wrong


In a metric space, compactness implies completnessClosure and compactness of the set of real eigenvalues ​​of a real matrix.Proving the compactness of a subset of a compact setThe union of finitely many compact subsets of $mathbb{R}^n$ must be compact.A question about local compactness and $sigma$-compactnessWeakly compactness of a set of finitely additive measuresIf $Y$ is closed subspace of $(X,|cdot|)$, then subspace $<Ycup {x_0}>$ is closed in $X$.“Decreasing” sequence of nonempty compact sets has a nonempty intersection.Show that $F = {lambda x|lambdain mathbb{R}_+, xin K}$ is closed where $K$ is a compact set.Closed & boundedness, sequentially compactness and Completeness













6












$begingroup$


I have a proof of the following false fact :




Let $E$ be normed vector space. Let $K subset E$ be a compact set. Then the set $B = {lambda x mid lambda in mathbb{R}^+, x in K }$ is closed (where $mathbb{R}^+$ are the positive real numbers including $0$).




This fact is true when $0 not in K$ yet it can be false when $0 in K$. For example by taking the semi-circle in the plane centered at $(1,0)$ of radius $1$.



So I made a proof a of this fact. My proof is thus obviously false yet I don't see where the mistake is :



Let $(lambda_n k_n)$ be a sequence in $B$ which converges to a vector $x in E$. We want to prove that $x in B$.



Since $K$ is compact there is $phi : mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ strictly increasing such that $(k_{phi(n)})$ converges to a vector $k in K$. If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done. So we can suppose $k ne 0$.



Since the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $x$ we must have $k in span { x }$. So there is $mu in mathbb{R}^*$ such that $k = mu x$. From here we can deduce that the sequence $(lambda_n)$ necessarily converges to $frac{1}{mu}$. Yet since $mathbb{R}^+$ is closed the sequence $(lambda_n)$ converges to a positive real number, so $frac{1}{mu} geq 0$ so $mu geq 0$.
So the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to the vector $frac{1}{mu} k in B$ since $k in K$ and $frac{1}{mu} geq 0$. Hence $B$ is closed.



So where am I going wrong here ?



Thank you !










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I guess you mean $B$ to be the union of the $lambda K$ rather than the set of them?
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Wofsey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @EricWofsey By this notation I mean the set of $lambda x$ for all $x in K$ and $lambda geq 0$, so my notation is wrong ?
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, your notation meant that $B$ is the set whose elements are the sets $lambda K$ (so an element of $B$ is a subset of $E$, not a point of $E$).
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Wofsey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @EricWofsey You are right thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago
















6












$begingroup$


I have a proof of the following false fact :




Let $E$ be normed vector space. Let $K subset E$ be a compact set. Then the set $B = {lambda x mid lambda in mathbb{R}^+, x in K }$ is closed (where $mathbb{R}^+$ are the positive real numbers including $0$).




This fact is true when $0 not in K$ yet it can be false when $0 in K$. For example by taking the semi-circle in the plane centered at $(1,0)$ of radius $1$.



So I made a proof a of this fact. My proof is thus obviously false yet I don't see where the mistake is :



Let $(lambda_n k_n)$ be a sequence in $B$ which converges to a vector $x in E$. We want to prove that $x in B$.



Since $K$ is compact there is $phi : mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ strictly increasing such that $(k_{phi(n)})$ converges to a vector $k in K$. If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done. So we can suppose $k ne 0$.



Since the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $x$ we must have $k in span { x }$. So there is $mu in mathbb{R}^*$ such that $k = mu x$. From here we can deduce that the sequence $(lambda_n)$ necessarily converges to $frac{1}{mu}$. Yet since $mathbb{R}^+$ is closed the sequence $(lambda_n)$ converges to a positive real number, so $frac{1}{mu} geq 0$ so $mu geq 0$.
So the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to the vector $frac{1}{mu} k in B$ since $k in K$ and $frac{1}{mu} geq 0$. Hence $B$ is closed.



So where am I going wrong here ?



Thank you !










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I guess you mean $B$ to be the union of the $lambda K$ rather than the set of them?
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Wofsey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @EricWofsey By this notation I mean the set of $lambda x$ for all $x in K$ and $lambda geq 0$, so my notation is wrong ?
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, your notation meant that $B$ is the set whose elements are the sets $lambda K$ (so an element of $B$ is a subset of $E$, not a point of $E$).
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Wofsey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @EricWofsey You are right thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago














6












6








6


1



$begingroup$


I have a proof of the following false fact :




Let $E$ be normed vector space. Let $K subset E$ be a compact set. Then the set $B = {lambda x mid lambda in mathbb{R}^+, x in K }$ is closed (where $mathbb{R}^+$ are the positive real numbers including $0$).




This fact is true when $0 not in K$ yet it can be false when $0 in K$. For example by taking the semi-circle in the plane centered at $(1,0)$ of radius $1$.



So I made a proof a of this fact. My proof is thus obviously false yet I don't see where the mistake is :



Let $(lambda_n k_n)$ be a sequence in $B$ which converges to a vector $x in E$. We want to prove that $x in B$.



Since $K$ is compact there is $phi : mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ strictly increasing such that $(k_{phi(n)})$ converges to a vector $k in K$. If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done. So we can suppose $k ne 0$.



Since the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $x$ we must have $k in span { x }$. So there is $mu in mathbb{R}^*$ such that $k = mu x$. From here we can deduce that the sequence $(lambda_n)$ necessarily converges to $frac{1}{mu}$. Yet since $mathbb{R}^+$ is closed the sequence $(lambda_n)$ converges to a positive real number, so $frac{1}{mu} geq 0$ so $mu geq 0$.
So the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to the vector $frac{1}{mu} k in B$ since $k in K$ and $frac{1}{mu} geq 0$. Hence $B$ is closed.



So where am I going wrong here ?



Thank you !










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I have a proof of the following false fact :




Let $E$ be normed vector space. Let $K subset E$ be a compact set. Then the set $B = {lambda x mid lambda in mathbb{R}^+, x in K }$ is closed (where $mathbb{R}^+$ are the positive real numbers including $0$).




This fact is true when $0 not in K$ yet it can be false when $0 in K$. For example by taking the semi-circle in the plane centered at $(1,0)$ of radius $1$.



So I made a proof a of this fact. My proof is thus obviously false yet I don't see where the mistake is :



Let $(lambda_n k_n)$ be a sequence in $B$ which converges to a vector $x in E$. We want to prove that $x in B$.



Since $K$ is compact there is $phi : mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ strictly increasing such that $(k_{phi(n)})$ converges to a vector $k in K$. If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done. So we can suppose $k ne 0$.



Since the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $x$ we must have $k in span { x }$. So there is $mu in mathbb{R}^*$ such that $k = mu x$. From here we can deduce that the sequence $(lambda_n)$ necessarily converges to $frac{1}{mu}$. Yet since $mathbb{R}^+$ is closed the sequence $(lambda_n)$ converges to a positive real number, so $frac{1}{mu} geq 0$ so $mu geq 0$.
So the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to the vector $frac{1}{mu} k in B$ since $k in K$ and $frac{1}{mu} geq 0$. Hence $B$ is closed.



So where am I going wrong here ?



Thank you !







real-analysis general-topology proof-verification compactness






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 3 hours ago







mouargmouarg













New contributor




mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 3 hours ago









mouargmouargmouargmouarg

433




433




New contributor




mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






mouargmouarg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • $begingroup$
    I guess you mean $B$ to be the union of the $lambda K$ rather than the set of them?
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Wofsey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @EricWofsey By this notation I mean the set of $lambda x$ for all $x in K$ and $lambda geq 0$, so my notation is wrong ?
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, your notation meant that $B$ is the set whose elements are the sets $lambda K$ (so an element of $B$ is a subset of $E$, not a point of $E$).
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Wofsey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @EricWofsey You are right thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago


















  • $begingroup$
    I guess you mean $B$ to be the union of the $lambda K$ rather than the set of them?
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Wofsey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @EricWofsey By this notation I mean the set of $lambda x$ for all $x in K$ and $lambda geq 0$, so my notation is wrong ?
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, your notation meant that $B$ is the set whose elements are the sets $lambda K$ (so an element of $B$ is a subset of $E$, not a point of $E$).
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Wofsey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @EricWofsey You are right thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago
















$begingroup$
I guess you mean $B$ to be the union of the $lambda K$ rather than the set of them?
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
I guess you mean $B$ to be the union of the $lambda K$ rather than the set of them?
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
@EricWofsey By this notation I mean the set of $lambda x$ for all $x in K$ and $lambda geq 0$, so my notation is wrong ?
$endgroup$
– mouargmouarg
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
@EricWofsey By this notation I mean the set of $lambda x$ for all $x in K$ and $lambda geq 0$, so my notation is wrong ?
$endgroup$
– mouargmouarg
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
Yes, your notation meant that $B$ is the set whose elements are the sets $lambda K$ (so an element of $B$ is a subset of $E$, not a point of $E$).
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
Yes, your notation meant that $B$ is the set whose elements are the sets $lambda K$ (so an element of $B$ is a subset of $E$, not a point of $E$).
$endgroup$
– Eric Wofsey
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
@EricWofsey You are right thank you.
$endgroup$
– mouargmouarg
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
@EricWofsey You are right thank you.
$endgroup$
– mouargmouarg
3 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

In this situation, try to apply your argument to the counter-example you found, to see where it goes wrong.



Let us take for $K$ the circle of center $(1,0)$ and radius $1$. Then $S := bigcup_{lambda geq 0} lambda K = {(0,0)} cup (mathbb{R}_+^* times mathbb{R})$. It is not closed because one can take the family $f(t) = (t,1)$, which belongs to $S$ for $t>0$, and converges to $(0,1) notin S$ as $t$ goes to $0$.



The corresponding family of parameters $lambda (t)$ and $k(t)$ are:



$$lambda(t) = frac{1+t^2}{2t}, quad k(t) = frac{2t}{1+t^2} (t,1).$$



As $t$ goes to $0$, we have that $k(t)$ converges to $0$. But $lambda (t) k(t)$ does not converge to $0$, because $lambda(t)$ increases fast enough to compensate for the decay of $k(t)$.



hence your mistake is there: the fact that $(k_n)$ converges to $0$ does not imply that $(lambda_n k_n)$ also converges to $0$, because $lambda_n$ has no reason to be bounded.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You are right, it's more clear to me what's happening now. Thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago



















1












$begingroup$


If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done.




This is wrong. We know $k_{phi(n)}to 0$, but $lambda_n$ may be getting large so $lambda_nk_n$ can converge to a nonzero value.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Oh, thank you. I should have spotted that... For example by taking : $k_n = frac{1}{n}$ and $lambda_n = n$
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago











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
});


}
});






mouargmouarg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3149871%2fcompactness-of-a-set-where-am-i-going-wrong%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2












$begingroup$

In this situation, try to apply your argument to the counter-example you found, to see where it goes wrong.



Let us take for $K$ the circle of center $(1,0)$ and radius $1$. Then $S := bigcup_{lambda geq 0} lambda K = {(0,0)} cup (mathbb{R}_+^* times mathbb{R})$. It is not closed because one can take the family $f(t) = (t,1)$, which belongs to $S$ for $t>0$, and converges to $(0,1) notin S$ as $t$ goes to $0$.



The corresponding family of parameters $lambda (t)$ and $k(t)$ are:



$$lambda(t) = frac{1+t^2}{2t}, quad k(t) = frac{2t}{1+t^2} (t,1).$$



As $t$ goes to $0$, we have that $k(t)$ converges to $0$. But $lambda (t) k(t)$ does not converge to $0$, because $lambda(t)$ increases fast enough to compensate for the decay of $k(t)$.



hence your mistake is there: the fact that $(k_n)$ converges to $0$ does not imply that $(lambda_n k_n)$ also converges to $0$, because $lambda_n$ has no reason to be bounded.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You are right, it's more clear to me what's happening now. Thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago
















2












$begingroup$

In this situation, try to apply your argument to the counter-example you found, to see where it goes wrong.



Let us take for $K$ the circle of center $(1,0)$ and radius $1$. Then $S := bigcup_{lambda geq 0} lambda K = {(0,0)} cup (mathbb{R}_+^* times mathbb{R})$. It is not closed because one can take the family $f(t) = (t,1)$, which belongs to $S$ for $t>0$, and converges to $(0,1) notin S$ as $t$ goes to $0$.



The corresponding family of parameters $lambda (t)$ and $k(t)$ are:



$$lambda(t) = frac{1+t^2}{2t}, quad k(t) = frac{2t}{1+t^2} (t,1).$$



As $t$ goes to $0$, we have that $k(t)$ converges to $0$. But $lambda (t) k(t)$ does not converge to $0$, because $lambda(t)$ increases fast enough to compensate for the decay of $k(t)$.



hence your mistake is there: the fact that $(k_n)$ converges to $0$ does not imply that $(lambda_n k_n)$ also converges to $0$, because $lambda_n$ has no reason to be bounded.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You are right, it's more clear to me what's happening now. Thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago














2












2








2





$begingroup$

In this situation, try to apply your argument to the counter-example you found, to see where it goes wrong.



Let us take for $K$ the circle of center $(1,0)$ and radius $1$. Then $S := bigcup_{lambda geq 0} lambda K = {(0,0)} cup (mathbb{R}_+^* times mathbb{R})$. It is not closed because one can take the family $f(t) = (t,1)$, which belongs to $S$ for $t>0$, and converges to $(0,1) notin S$ as $t$ goes to $0$.



The corresponding family of parameters $lambda (t)$ and $k(t)$ are:



$$lambda(t) = frac{1+t^2}{2t}, quad k(t) = frac{2t}{1+t^2} (t,1).$$



As $t$ goes to $0$, we have that $k(t)$ converges to $0$. But $lambda (t) k(t)$ does not converge to $0$, because $lambda(t)$ increases fast enough to compensate for the decay of $k(t)$.



hence your mistake is there: the fact that $(k_n)$ converges to $0$ does not imply that $(lambda_n k_n)$ also converges to $0$, because $lambda_n$ has no reason to be bounded.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



In this situation, try to apply your argument to the counter-example you found, to see where it goes wrong.



Let us take for $K$ the circle of center $(1,0)$ and radius $1$. Then $S := bigcup_{lambda geq 0} lambda K = {(0,0)} cup (mathbb{R}_+^* times mathbb{R})$. It is not closed because one can take the family $f(t) = (t,1)$, which belongs to $S$ for $t>0$, and converges to $(0,1) notin S$ as $t$ goes to $0$.



The corresponding family of parameters $lambda (t)$ and $k(t)$ are:



$$lambda(t) = frac{1+t^2}{2t}, quad k(t) = frac{2t}{1+t^2} (t,1).$$



As $t$ goes to $0$, we have that $k(t)$ converges to $0$. But $lambda (t) k(t)$ does not converge to $0$, because $lambda(t)$ increases fast enough to compensate for the decay of $k(t)$.



hence your mistake is there: the fact that $(k_n)$ converges to $0$ does not imply that $(lambda_n k_n)$ also converges to $0$, because $lambda_n$ has no reason to be bounded.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 3 hours ago









D. ThomineD. Thomine

7,7291538




7,7291538












  • $begingroup$
    You are right, it's more clear to me what's happening now. Thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago


















  • $begingroup$
    You are right, it's more clear to me what's happening now. Thank you.
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago
















$begingroup$
You are right, it's more clear to me what's happening now. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– mouargmouarg
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
You are right, it's more clear to me what's happening now. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– mouargmouarg
3 hours ago











1












$begingroup$


If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done.




This is wrong. We know $k_{phi(n)}to 0$, but $lambda_n$ may be getting large so $lambda_nk_n$ can converge to a nonzero value.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Oh, thank you. I should have spotted that... For example by taking : $k_n = frac{1}{n}$ and $lambda_n = n$
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago
















1












$begingroup$


If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done.




This is wrong. We know $k_{phi(n)}to 0$, but $lambda_n$ may be getting large so $lambda_nk_n$ can converge to a nonzero value.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Oh, thank you. I should have spotted that... For example by taking : $k_n = frac{1}{n}$ and $lambda_n = n$
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago














1












1








1





$begingroup$


If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done.




This is wrong. We know $k_{phi(n)}to 0$, but $lambda_n$ may be getting large so $lambda_nk_n$ can converge to a nonzero value.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$




If $ k = 0$ then the sequence $(lambda_n k_n)$ converges to $0 in B$ and we are done.




This is wrong. We know $k_{phi(n)}to 0$, but $lambda_n$ may be getting large so $lambda_nk_n$ can converge to a nonzero value.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 3 hours ago









Eric WofseyEric Wofsey

189k14216347




189k14216347












  • $begingroup$
    Oh, thank you. I should have spotted that... For example by taking : $k_n = frac{1}{n}$ and $lambda_n = n$
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago


















  • $begingroup$
    Oh, thank you. I should have spotted that... For example by taking : $k_n = frac{1}{n}$ and $lambda_n = n$
    $endgroup$
    – mouargmouarg
    3 hours ago
















$begingroup$
Oh, thank you. I should have spotted that... For example by taking : $k_n = frac{1}{n}$ and $lambda_n = n$
$endgroup$
– mouargmouarg
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
Oh, thank you. I should have spotted that... For example by taking : $k_n = frac{1}{n}$ and $lambda_n = n$
$endgroup$
– mouargmouarg
3 hours ago










mouargmouarg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















mouargmouarg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













mouargmouarg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












mouargmouarg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















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%2f3149871%2fcompactness-of-a-set-where-am-i-going-wrong%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

Can't compile dgruyter and caption packagesLaTeX templates/packages for writing a patent specificationLatex...

Schneeberg (Smreczany) Bibliografia | Menu...

Hans Bellmer Spis treści Życiorys | Upamiętnienie | Przypisy | Bibliografia | Linki zewnętrzne |...