So does this imply that is countably infinite? Consider instead asking how much length of the interval is there. We have has a length of 1:
The first step removes 1/3 of the length.
The second step removes 2/9 of the length
The next removes 4/27 of the length
...
We remove:
This is a geometric series:
So this implies that should have no length. Maybe it is indeed countably infinite?
Another Perspective
Let . Construct a sequence of 's and 's as follows (the example uses the case where ):
Where the first digit says:
1 if it is in the right sub-interval after the first cut
0 if it is in the left sub-interval after the first cut
We repeat this process for each cut, adding digits. As another example:
Now consider an arbitrary sequence of these digits. We want to do Cantor's Diagonalization Method to try to construct some new digit that isn't in the list:
We can change the first digit of , the second of , the third of , and so on to make a new digit .
Another way of thinking of this is that each . This implies that we can use the 's with the Nested Interval Property to show that:
But in both cases, there are uncountable many such sequences! So then must not be countable.
Dimensions of A Set
To set the stage, consider a 0-dimensional object, 1-dimensional object, ...
The idea from geometry is if you multiply an -dimensional object by , then the area/volume/... of that object is scaled by . In this case so it magnifies by .
For the case of Cantor's set is if we scale each line by 3:
So somehow we had some -dimensional object, scaled by , where the area/volume/length here got scaled by 2! Not 3 as we expected. Here:
So somehow we have fractional dimension. This is where the word fractal comes from (fracttional dimension). This brings us into talking about the start of the new section:
Let and . Then is a limit point of if every Epsilon-Neighborhood of intersects at a point other than . Namely:
For example, if , then what are the limit points of ? The limit points of are:
Alternative Definition of Limit Point
Alternative Definition of Limit Point
Let and . Then is a limit point of iff :
for all and .
Proof
(): Suppose is a limit point of . Let's apply a sequence of neighborhoods such that we can construct . To do this, let . Then choose:
we claim that . To prove this via the definition let . Choose such that . Then suppose then:
(): Suppose where for all and that . Let so that is an epsilon-neighborhood of . We want to show that . We can choose a such that:
by the definition and that . Then definitely , so then . Furthermore clearly while so then is not empty as desired.
☐
To illustrate this, consider:
Then the set of all limit points of is just . Notice other points like are not in this set since there's no sequence of numbers constructing from the set cannot approach .
Another example is when . The set of limit points of are now .