Section 3.

3
Exercise 3.3.4: If K R is compact and F R is closed then F K is compact. We show this by proving that
K F is both closed and bounded, and then using Theorem 3.3.4. First, since K is compact, K is also closed.
The intersection of closed sets is closed (theorem 3.2.14) so K F is closed. We need only show that K F is
also bounded. However, since K is compact, it is bounded: there is an M > 0 such that |x| < M for all x K.
Since K F K we must have |x| < M for all x K F as well. Therefore, K F is both closed and bounded,
and thus compact.

Exercise 3.3.5: We will determine whether each set is compact using the closed and bounded criterion (i.e.
the Heine-Borel Theorem).
(a) Q is not bounded and hence not compact. A sequence with no convergent subsequence is (an ) where
an = n.
(b) Q [0, 1] is bounded, but is not closed. Giving an example of a sequence which does not have a
subseqeunce converging to a point in the set} is trickier. Consider = 12 . This is an irrational number
between 0 and 1. We know that there is a sequence of rationals converging to . Any subsequence of this
sequence will also converge to . But is not in Q [0, 1], hence this is an example of a sequence which
shows that Q [0, 1] is not compact.
(c) R is not compact since it is not bounded. The sequence used in part (a) works here as well.
(d) Z[0, 10] is compact. It is bounded since it consists of {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10} which all have absolute
value less than 10. It is closed since its complement is (, 0) (0, 1) (1, 2) (9, 10) (10, ),
which is an open set.
(e) {1, 21 , . . .}. I take this to be the set S = n1 n N . This set is bounded, as every term is between 0
 

and 1, but it is not compact. In fact, the sequence an = n1 has an S but any subsequence of (an ) must
converge to 0, which is not in S. 
(f ) I take this set to be S = {1} 1 n1 n 2, n N . S is bounded,

 1 2 as every1 term is in 1[0, 1]. 1It is also
closed. Here is a clever way to see that S is closed. Let Fn = 2 , 3 , . . . , 1 n1 [1 n , 1 + n ]. Fn is
closed since it is the finite union of closed sets, namely a closed interval and n 1 points. S Fn for each
n, and nN Fn = S (you should verify this). But the intersection of any collection of closed sets is closed.
The difference between (e) and (f) is that the obvious sequence in (f), namely an = 1 n1 , converges to 1 which is
in the set. However, we need to show that every sequence has a convergent subsequence, converging to something
in the set; thats why we checked that S is both closed and bounded.
Section 3.4
Exercise 3.4.7: (a) A disconnected set whose closure is connected is S = (, 0) (0, ). It is disconnected
since it is the union of A = (, 0) and B = (0, ) which are both non-empty. But A = (, 0] does not
intersect B and B = [0, ) does not intersect A. Thus A and B separate S, so S is not connected. However,
S = R since 0 is a limit point of S, and R is connected by Theorem 3.4.7.
(b) Let A be a connected set, then A is also connected. Suppose A = B C where B and C are non-empty and
separate A. Consider B 0 = B A and C 0 = C A. We will show that these sets are also non-empty and separate
A. Separation is easier: B 0 B so B 0 C 0 B C = . Likewise, C 0 B 0 = . Furthermore, C 0 and B 0 are
both non-empty. Suppose B 0 is empty. Since B A does not intersect A. On the other hand, A A means
A B C. Since B 0 = A B = , we must have A C. Thus A C. But B C = (B and C are separated),
whereas = 6 B A B C. This contradiction proves the result.

Although A A, it is not true that A connected and A B implies B is connected. Take A = (1, 1), a
connected set and B = A {2}. B is clearly disconnected. It is a property of the closure that allows us to prove
this result for A.
Exercise 3.4.8: (a) Let x, y Q. Pick an irrational number, c, with x < c < y. Then let A = (, c) and
B = (c, ). Then A and B are separated, x A and y B. Thus, Q is totally disconnected.
1
(b) The set of irrational numbers is also totally disconnected: pick x, y R\Q and let c be a rational number
between x and y. The sets A and B in part (a) for this value of c are separated and separate x from y.
Section 3.4
Exercise 4.2.1:
(a) Let  > 0 be a real number, and pick = 2 . Then 0 < |x 2| < = /2 implies 0 < 2|x 2| < . But
2|x 2| = |2x 4| = |(2x + 4) 8|. Thus if 0 < |x 2| < 2 we have |(2x + 4) 8| < , so lim (2x + 4) = 8.
x2
1 1
(b) Let  > 0. Pick =  3 , the cubed root of . Then 0 < |x 0| < implies |x| <  3 and thus |x|3 < 
(since a < b implies a3 < b3 ). But |x|3 = |x| |x| |x| = |x3 | so |x3 0| <  when 0 < |x 0| < . Hence
lim x3 = 0.
x0
(c) We will do some work first: we want |x3 8| < . |x3 8| = |x2||x2 +2x+4|, so we see where the |x2|
in 0 < x 2| < should arise. But what to do about |x2 + 2x + 4|? In taking this limit we only care about
values close to x = 2, and so may assume that 1 < x < 3. In this interval x2 + 2x + 4 = (x + 1)2 + 3 will
be increasing, so 7 < |x2 + 2x + 4| < 19. Thus if 0 < |x 2| < /19 then |x3 8| = |x 2||x2 + 2x + 4| < .
This is what we want, but we need to make sure that our proof incorporates both 0 < |x 2| <  and

1 < x < 3. To do this note that 1 < x < 3 is the same as |x 2| < 1. So if we take = min{1, 19 } we

will force both conditions to be true. Thus, our proof should run: Pick  > 0. Let = min{1, 19 }. Then
0 < |x 2| < implies |x 2| < 1 so 2 < x < 3. For such 2 < x < 3 we have 7 < x2 + 2x + 4 < 19 and
7|x 2| < |x3 8| < 19|x 2|. If  > 19 then since |x 2| < 1 we have |x3 8| < 19 < . If  < 19 then

= 19 so |x 2| < implies |x3 8| < 19 < . Consequently, lim x3 = 8.
x2
(d) Pick  > 0 and let = 0.1 (this strange choice will be explained presently). If 0 < |x | < 0.1 then
0.1 < x < 0.1 or 0.1 < x < + 0.1. The reason for choosing 0.1 is that + 0.1 = 3.24 . . . < 4
and 0.1 = 3.04 . . . > 3. Thus, when
 0 < |x | < we have 3 < x < 4 and bxc = 3. Therefore, when
0 < |x | < 0.1 we have  bxc 3 = 0 <  and lim bxc = 3.
x
Exercise 4.2.6: Let c be a limit point for A and pick a sequence cn c with cn A and cn 6= c. Since
lim g(x) = 0 we know that g(cn ) 0 for this sequence. On the other hand, since f (x) is bounded there is some
xc
M > 0 with |f (x)| < M for all x A. Thus, M g(cn ) g(cn )f (cn ) M g(cn ). As n , the sequences in
the left and right sides of the inequality converge to 0, hence lim g(cn )f (cn ) = 0 as well. Since this holds for any
n
sequence cn c with cn A and cn 6= c we also know that lim g(x)f (x) = 0
xc

If you chose to do this with s and s, you should choose, given , the for which 0 < |x c| < ensures that
|g(x)0| < /M . Since |f (x)g(x)| < M |g(x)| this same will then ensure that |f (x)g(x)| <  when 0 < |xc| < .

Exercise 4.2.8: Let c be a limit point for A. Let f (x) and g(x) be functions defined on A with lim f (x) = L1
xc
and lim g(x) = L2 . Suppose further that f (x) g(x) for all x A. Let cn c with cn A and cn 6= c. Then
xc
f (cn ) g(cn ) and f (cn ) L1 , g(cn ) L2 . We proved earlier (Order limit theorem, theorem 2.3.4) that in this
situation lim f (cn ) lim g(cn ) or L1 L2 .
n n

To prove this using s and s is trickier. If L1 = L2 then the conclusion holds and there is nothing to prove. So
assume that L1 6= L2 . Let  = 31 |L1 L2 |. Then there is a > 0 where 0 < |x c| implies both |f (x) L1 | < 
and |g(x) L2 | <  (let be the smaller of the s for f (x) and g(x) which must exist by the definition of a limit).
Since f (x) > g(x) for all 0 < |x c| < with x A. We have L2 L1 (g(x) + ) (f (x) ) 2. But this
means L2 L1 < 32 |L1 L2 |. Since L2 L1 = |L2 L1 | we must have that L2 L1 = |L1 L2 | < 0 and
L2 < L1 .