1

Let $\mathcal{C}$ be the middle-third's Cantor set. For each integer $k \geq 0$, let $C_k \subset [0,1]$ denote the union of disjoint closed intervals obtained at the $k$th stage of the construction of $\mathcal{C}$. Let $\{I_{k,j}\}_{j=1}^{2^k}$ denote the collection of closed disjoint intervals that comprise $C_k$ (i.e. $C_k = \bigsqcup_{j=1}^{2^k} I_{k,j}$). Also, let

$$\tilde{\mathcal{C}} := \left\{x \in [0,1] : x \text{ is an endpoint of } I_{k,j} \text{ for some integer } k \geq 0 \text{ and some } 1 \leq j \leq 2^k \right\}.$$

I am trying to show that $\mathcal{C} = \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$, but I'm having some trouble. Here's is my attempt so far:

Proof that $\tilde{\mathcal{C}} \subseteq \mathcal{C}$:
Let $x \in \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$. Then $x$ is an endpoint of some $I_{k,j} \subset C_k$, so $x \in C_k$ for some $k \geq 0$. Since $C_0 \supset C_1 \supset C_2 \supset \cdots \supset C_k$, we have that $x \in C_m$ for all $0 \leq m \leq k$. We also know that if $x$ is an endpoint of some $I_{k,j} \subset C_k$ then $x$ is an endpoint of $I_{k+1,l} \subset C_{k+1}$ for some $1 \leq l \leq 2^{k+1}$; this is clear because in constructing $C_{k+1}$ from $C_k$, we only remove interior points of $C_k$. Thus, $x \in C_m$ for all integers $m \geq k$ as well, and so we have $x \in C_m$ for all $k \geq 0$. Thus $x \in \bigcap_{k=0}^{\infty} C_k = \mathcal{C}.$

Now this is the part I'm having trouble with:

Proof that $\mathcal{C} \subseteq \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$:
Let $x \in \mathcal{C}$. For a set $E \subseteq \mathbb{R}$ and a point $a \in \mathbb{R}$, let the distance between $a$ and $E$, denoted $d(a,E)$, be defined as $$d(a,E) := \inf\{|a-b| : b \in E \}.$$

My strategy is to first show that $d(x,\tilde{\mathcal{C}}) = 0$. It follows by the Triangle Inequality that \begin{align*} d(x,\tilde{\mathcal{C}}) & \leq d(x,C_k) + d(C_k, \tilde{\mathcal{C}}), \end{align*}

where $d(C_k, \tilde{\mathcal{C}}) := \inf\{|a-b|: a \in C_k, b \in \tilde{\mathcal{C}} \}$. We note that $C_k \supseteq \mathcal{C}$ for all $k$, and $\mathcal{C} \supseteq \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ which we just proved. Therefore, $C_k \supseteq \mathcal{C}$ for all $k$, which then implies $d(C_k, \tilde{\mathcal{C}}) = 0$. Thus, $$d(x,\tilde{\mathcal{C}}) \leq d(x,C_k).$$

Next, we note that for each integer $k \geq 0$ the $I_{k,j}$'s all have the same length, and the $I_{k+1,j}$'s are each $1/3$rd the length of the $I_{k,j}$'s. So by induction, $|I_{k,j}| = \frac{1}{3^k}$ for each integer $k \geq 0$. So if $x \in C_k$, the farthest that $x$ can be from the endpoint of the closed interval $I_{j,k}$ that contains it is $|I_{j,k}|/2 = 1/(2 \cdot 3^k)$. Whence, $d(x,C_k) \leq 1/(2 \cdot 3^k)$ for all integers $k \geq 0$. Therefore,

$$d(x,\tilde{\mathcal{C}}) \leq \frac{1}{2 \cdot 3^k} \quad \text{for all } k \in \mathbb{N}.$$

Also, we must have $d(x,\tilde{\mathcal{C}}) \geq 0$. And the only nonnegative number which is less than $1/(2 \cdot 3^k)$ for all $k \in \mathbb{N}$ is $0$, so $d(x,\tilde{\mathcal{C}}) = 0$.

This is my sticking point: How do I show that $d(x,\tilde{\mathcal{C}}) = 0 \implies x \in \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$?

From this post I learned that it's enough to show that $\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ is closed, which I haven't figured out how to show. I do see why $\mathcal{C}$ must be closed (since $\mathcal{C}^c$ is an intersection of open sets, and so it's open). But without knowing that $\mathcal{C} = \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ a priori, I'm not sure how to prove this. Any insights would be greatly appreciated.

Leonidas
  • 1,188
  • As you've written it, $\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ is not closed. In fact, $\mathcal{C}$ is the closure of $\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$. – Brian Moehring Sep 17 '21 at 22:25
  • @BrianMoehring: Well shucks, that might explain why I've been struggling with this for so many hours...Could you please provide an example of a point that is in $\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ but not in $\mathcal{C}$? – Leonidas Sep 17 '21 at 22:28
  • You've already shown $\tilde{\mathcal{C}} \subseteq \mathcal{C}$, so no point is in $\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ but not in $\mathcal{C}$. On the other hand, for instance, $1/4 \in \mathcal{C} \setminus \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$. – Brian Moehring Sep 17 '21 at 22:33
  • Oops, $\mathcal{C} \setminus \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ was what I meant :) And thanks. Would you happen to have a reference or other post that you could point me to on how to prove that $\mathcal{C}$ is the closure of $\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$? – Leonidas Sep 17 '21 at 22:38
  • 1
    You seem to have already proven that. You have $$x\in \mathcal{C} \implies d(x,\tilde{\mathcal{C}}) = 0.$$ This shows that $\mathcal{C}$ is a subset of the closure of $\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$. The only thing this misses is the proof that $\mathcal{C}$ is closed, which you say you see (though you have an error/typo in the proof sketch). – Brian Moehring Sep 17 '21 at 22:52
  • The end points form a countable set and $C$ is uncountable. You are trying to prove something that is blatantly false. – Kavi Rama Murthy Sep 17 '21 at 23:13
  • @BrianMoehring: Ok, thanks this is helpful! (And what's the error/typo in my proof sketch that $\mathcal{C}$ is closed? Should it be $\mathcal{C}^c \cap [0,1]$ is open?) – Leonidas Sep 17 '21 at 23:19
  • @KaviRamaMurthy: Good point :) It's always difficult to prove something that is blatantly false... – Leonidas Sep 17 '21 at 23:20
  • 1
    Your proof sketch was "since $\mathcal{C}^c$ is an intersection of open sets, and so it's open". It should have said "union" instead of "intersection". (note you want it this way, as the intersection of open sets is not necessarily open) – Brian Moehring Sep 17 '21 at 23:33
  • 1
    While @BrianMoehring's example of $1/4$ is a good one, we can even say something a bit stronger. The collection of endpoints is countable (at each step of the process, there are $2^n$ new endpoints, so the collection of all endpoints is a countable union of finite sets, therefore countable), but the Cantor set is uncountable (the slickest argument is that there is a bijection between the unit interval in base 2, and the set of numbers in $(0,1)$ lacking $1$'s in their ternary expansions, which is an alternative description of the Cantor set). – Xander Henderson Sep 17 '21 at 23:48

1 Answers1

4

First, the bad news: $\tilde{\mathcal{C}} \subsetneq \mathcal{C}$, so you cannot prove they're equal.

There is a useful characterization of both sets that should make this evident: $$\mathcal{C} = \left\{\sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k} \,\middle|\, \forall k, a_k \in \{0,2\}\right\} \\ \tilde{\mathcal{C}} = \left\{\sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{3^k}\,\middle|\,\forall k, a_k \in \{0,2\} \,\text{ and }\, \exists N, a_N = a_{N+1} = a_{N+2} = \cdots\right\}$$

This also gives a way to find, as I had given in the comments, a particular point in $\mathcal{C}\setminus \tilde{\mathcal{C}}$. For instance, $1/4$ corresponds to the sequence $$a_k = \begin{cases} 0, & k \text{ is odd} \\ 2, & k \text{ is even}\end{cases}$$


Now the good news: You've successfully shown $\tilde{\mathcal{C}} \subseteq \mathcal{C} \subseteq \operatorname{cl}\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ where $\operatorname{cl}$ is the closure operator.

If you additionally know that $\mathcal{C}$ is closed (since it is the intersection of sets each of which is a finite union of closed intervals and hence closed), then this suffices to show $$\mathcal{C} = \operatorname{cl}\tilde{\mathcal{C}}.$$

This looks to be the strongest result you can deduce from your proofs.

  • Thank you, this is quite helpful! That makes sense to think of $\tilde{\mathcal{C}}$ as the numbers in $[0,1]$ whose ternary expansion only contains $0$'s and $2$'s AND which eventually ends in $\overline{0}$ or $\overline{2}$. – Leonidas Sep 18 '21 at 00:03