Selected Problems from Chapter 9.

2
Vinh-Kha Le
Problem 13. In a metric space X, is it possible for r > 0 and two distinct
points u and v in X to have B(u, r) = B(v, r)? Is this possible in Euclidean
space Rn ? Is it possible in a normed linear space?
Let us answer the first question. For X a general metric space, it is possible for
B(u, r) = B(v, r). Consider the following example.
Example. Let (X, ) be a discrete metric space of cardinality at least two. Any
two distinct points u and v in X have B(u, r) = B(v, r).
Proof. By definition of the discrete metric, any two points u and u0 in X have
(u, u0 ) = 0 or 1 < 2. This means that B(u, 2) = X for any arbitrary u in X.
Let v be any other member of X. For the same reason, B(v, 2) = X.
Let us answer the second and third questions. It is not possible for two distinct
points u and v in X to have B(u, r) = B(v, r). More generally, this is not
possible in a normed linear space.
Proof. Let X be a linear space under the k k norm. For any u, v, and r, it is
possible to find an x X that belongs to B(u, r) but not B(v, r). Because u 6= v,
we know by the identity of indiscernibles that ku vk > 0. The Archimedian
Property guarantees the existence of an  > 0 for which
0 <  < ku vk so r ku vk < r  < r.
For simplicity, let = r . Now let x be defined as follows.
x=u+

uv
ku vk

Elementary algebra reveals that kx uk < r but kx vk > r.

uv

=<r
kx uk =
ku vk
Similarly,



uv

= ku vk + > r.
kx vk = u v +
ku vk
This completes the proof.
1

Problem 14. Let (X, ) be a metric space in which {un } u and {vn } v.
Show that {(un , vn )} (u, v).
Proof. By the definition of convergence, we know that
lim (un , u) = 0 and lim (vn , v) = 0.

From the Triangle Inequality, we also know that

(u, v) (un , u) (vn , v) (un , vn ) (u, v) + (un , u) + (vn , v).
Taking the limits of every above expression as n gives us
(u, v) lim (un , vn ) (u, v)
n

by monotonicity of the limit. By the squeeze theorem, we can conclude that

lim (un , vn ) = (u, v).

This was what was to be proven.

Problem 17. Prove Proposition 7.
Proposition 7. Let and be equivalent metrics on a nonempty set X. Then
a subset of X is open in the metric space (X, ) if and only if it is open in the
metric space (X, ).
Proof. It is sufficient to prove the condition going forwards. Suppose that O is
open in (X, ). For every x O, there exists an r > 0 such that B (x, r) X.
The equivalence of and guarantees the existence of positive numbers c1 and
c2 such that
c1 c2 everywhere on X, so B (x, r/c2 ) B (x, r) X.
We have a B (x, r/c2 ) X for all x O. Therefore, O is open in (X, ).
Problem 24. Show that for a subset E of a metric space X, the closure of E
is the intersection of all closed subsets of X that contain E.
Proof. We can show that an element x X is in the closure of E if and only
if it belongs to all closed subsets of X that contain E. Let us first prove the
condition going forwards. Suppose that x is in the closure of E. Let F be
some closed subset of X that completely contains E. Every open neighborhood
around x contains an element e of E. Because F completely contains E, e is
an element of F . Therefore, every open neighborhood around x contains an
element belonging to F , so x is a point of closure of F . Because F is closed,
it contains all its points of closure, meaning that x belongs to any closed set F
that completely contains E.
Now let us prove the condition going backwards. Suppose that x is not in
the closure of E. Then x has an open neighborhood O that does not intersect
with E. Notice that Oc is a closed subset of X that completely contains E and
does not contain x. Therefore, x does not belong to all closed subsets fo X that
contain E.