4

Given $ r> 0 $, let $ C_r $ be the circumference in the plane that has center at $ (0,0) $ and radius $ r $. Let $ X $ be a subset of $ \Bbb R ^ 2 $ that has the following properties,

  1. For all $r\in\Bbb Q$, $C_r\subseteq X$ and,
  2. for all $r\in\Bbb R\setminus \Bbb Q$, $X\cap C_r\neq \varnothing$.

Is $X$ connected?

I affirm that it is connected. And to demonstrate, I do it by contradiction and I assume that $ X $ is not connected, so there are two separate sets $ A $ and $ B $, such that $ X = A \cup B $.

I have a minimal idea, and that is that for example, $ C_1 $ being a connected set, being contained in $ X $, it must be completely contained in $ A $ or completely contained in $ B $, since it is $ 1 \in \Bbb Q $. Without loss of generality let's say that it is completely contained in $ A $.

So somehow show that all other $ C_r $ is contained in $ A $. And then use some density argument to show that the points that are in $ X \cap C_r $ with $ r \in \Bbb R \setminus \Bbb Q $, cannot be in $ B $. So $ B $ has to be empty and I would have my absurdity. Any help for the exercise or how I can develop my idea. Thanks a lot.

  • It might be worth exploring the idea that as mutually disjoint closed subsets of $\mathbb{R}^2$, you have a minimum distance between sets $A$ and $B$ that is positive. That should get you all the rational circles have to be in one component, because you can make the rational circles be as close as you want to each other.Actually expanding this to a full answer now – Alan Aug 08 '21 at 04:21

1 Answers1

2

Suppose that $X$ is not connected. Then there exist disjoint open subsets $U$, $V$ of $\mathbb{R}^2$ that separate $X$.

Let $R_U = \{\|x\| : x \in U \cap X \}$ and $R_V = \{\|y\| : y\in V \cap X\}$. We verify the properties of $R_U$ and $R_V$.

  • It is clear that $R_U \cup R_V = [0, \infty)$.

  • Lemma 1. $R_U \cap R_V \cap \mathbb{Q}^+ = \varnothing$.

    Let $r \in \mathbb{Q}^+ = \mathbb{Q} \cap (0, \infty)$. Then $C_r \subseteq X \subseteq U \cup V$. Since $C_r$ is connected, $U$ and $V$ cannot separate $C_r$. This implies that either $C_r \subseteq U$ or $C_r \subseteq V$, but not both.

  • Lemma 2. If $r \in R_U$, then there exists $\varepsilon > 0$ such that $B_{\mathbb{Q}^+}(r, \varepsilon) = \mathbb{Q}^+ \cap (r-\varepsilon, r+\varepsilon)$ lies in $R_U$, and a similar statement holds for $R_V$.

    Indeed, choose $x \in U \cap X$ such that $\|x\| = r$. Then there exists an open ball $B_{\mathbb{R}^2}(x, \varepsilon) $ contained in $U$. Then for each $s \in B_{\mathbb{Q}^+}(r, \varepsilon)$, we have $\varnothing \neq C_s \cap B_{\mathbb{R}^2}(x, \varepsilon) \subseteq C_s \cap U $ and hence $s \in R_U$.

  • Lemma 3. Both $R_U$ and $R_V$ are closed.

    Suppose $r_n \in R_U$ and $r_n \to r$ in $\mathbb{R}$. If $r \notin R_U$, then $r \in R_V$, Then by the previous step, there exists $\varepsilon > 0$ such that $B_{\mathbb{Q}^+}(r, \varepsilon) \subseteq R_V$. However, $r_n \in (r-\varepsilon, r+\varepsilon)$ for any sufficiently large $n$, and so, by Lemma 2 there exists $\delta > 0$ such that $(r_n-\delta, r_n+\delta) \subseteq (r-\varepsilon, r+\varepsilon)$ and $B_{\mathbb{Q}^+}(r_n, \delta) \subseteq R_U$, a contradiction. Therefore $r \in R_U$.

  • Lemma 4. Both $R_U$ and $R_V$ are open.

    Let $r \in R_U$. Then $B_{\mathbb{R}^+}(r, \varepsilon) \subseteq R_U$ for some $\varepsilon > 0$, hence by Lemma 3, $\overline{B_{\mathbb{Q}^+}(r, \varepsilon)}$ also lies in $R_U$. However, since $[0, \infty) \cap (r-\varepsilon, r+\varepsilon) \subseteq \overline{Q_{\mathbb{Q}^+}(r, \varepsilon)}$, the $\varepsilon$-neighborhood of $r$ lies in $R_U$ and hence $r$ is an interior point of $R_U$.

Now we are ready for the conclusion. Since $[0, \infty)$ is connected, the only non-empty clopen (both closed and open) subset of $[0, \infty)$ is $[0, \infty)$ itself. Then Lemma 3 and 4 together imply that $R_U = [0, \infty) = R_V$, a contradiction.

Sangchul Lee
  • 167,468