If $A$ is dense in $Bbb Q$, then it must be dense in $Bbb R$.












9












$begingroup$


I have $A$ is a subset of $mathbb{R}$. If $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$, then it must be dense in $mathbb{R}$. I am confused because $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$. Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number? I understand for anything to be dense in $Bbb R$, there must exist something that lies between any two real numbers. However, how does knowing something is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ prove that it must be dense in the reals? Any help is appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Not a proof, but it may help you to understand what's going on. For any pair of distinct real numbers, and any $a$ in-between, there is always a pair of rational numbers that also straddles $a$ and is also in-between the pair of real numbers. In fact there are infinitely many.
    $endgroup$
    – user334732
    Mar 20 at 15:47










  • $begingroup$
    And yes, there is always an irrational real number between any pair of rational numbers. In fact there is an uncountable infinity of them.
    $endgroup$
    – user334732
    Mar 20 at 15:48


















9












$begingroup$


I have $A$ is a subset of $mathbb{R}$. If $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$, then it must be dense in $mathbb{R}$. I am confused because $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$. Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number? I understand for anything to be dense in $Bbb R$, there must exist something that lies between any two real numbers. However, how does knowing something is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ prove that it must be dense in the reals? Any help is appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Not a proof, but it may help you to understand what's going on. For any pair of distinct real numbers, and any $a$ in-between, there is always a pair of rational numbers that also straddles $a$ and is also in-between the pair of real numbers. In fact there are infinitely many.
    $endgroup$
    – user334732
    Mar 20 at 15:47










  • $begingroup$
    And yes, there is always an irrational real number between any pair of rational numbers. In fact there is an uncountable infinity of them.
    $endgroup$
    – user334732
    Mar 20 at 15:48
















9












9








9


1



$begingroup$


I have $A$ is a subset of $mathbb{R}$. If $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$, then it must be dense in $mathbb{R}$. I am confused because $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$. Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number? I understand for anything to be dense in $Bbb R$, there must exist something that lies between any two real numbers. However, how does knowing something is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ prove that it must be dense in the reals? Any help is appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I have $A$ is a subset of $mathbb{R}$. If $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$, then it must be dense in $mathbb{R}$. I am confused because $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$. Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number? I understand for anything to be dense in $Bbb R$, there must exist something that lies between any two real numbers. However, how does knowing something is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ prove that it must be dense in the reals? Any help is appreciated.







real-analysis real-numbers






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 21 at 1:10









Parcly Taxel

44.7k1376110




44.7k1376110






New contributor




Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked Mar 20 at 15:26









Priti DPriti D

462




462




New contributor




Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Priti D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • $begingroup$
    Not a proof, but it may help you to understand what's going on. For any pair of distinct real numbers, and any $a$ in-between, there is always a pair of rational numbers that also straddles $a$ and is also in-between the pair of real numbers. In fact there are infinitely many.
    $endgroup$
    – user334732
    Mar 20 at 15:47










  • $begingroup$
    And yes, there is always an irrational real number between any pair of rational numbers. In fact there is an uncountable infinity of them.
    $endgroup$
    – user334732
    Mar 20 at 15:48




















  • $begingroup$
    Not a proof, but it may help you to understand what's going on. For any pair of distinct real numbers, and any $a$ in-between, there is always a pair of rational numbers that also straddles $a$ and is also in-between the pair of real numbers. In fact there are infinitely many.
    $endgroup$
    – user334732
    Mar 20 at 15:47










  • $begingroup$
    And yes, there is always an irrational real number between any pair of rational numbers. In fact there is an uncountable infinity of them.
    $endgroup$
    – user334732
    Mar 20 at 15:48


















$begingroup$
Not a proof, but it may help you to understand what's going on. For any pair of distinct real numbers, and any $a$ in-between, there is always a pair of rational numbers that also straddles $a$ and is also in-between the pair of real numbers. In fact there are infinitely many.
$endgroup$
– user334732
Mar 20 at 15:47




$begingroup$
Not a proof, but it may help you to understand what's going on. For any pair of distinct real numbers, and any $a$ in-between, there is always a pair of rational numbers that also straddles $a$ and is also in-between the pair of real numbers. In fact there are infinitely many.
$endgroup$
– user334732
Mar 20 at 15:47












$begingroup$
And yes, there is always an irrational real number between any pair of rational numbers. In fact there is an uncountable infinity of them.
$endgroup$
– user334732
Mar 20 at 15:48






$begingroup$
And yes, there is always an irrational real number between any pair of rational numbers. In fact there is an uncountable infinity of them.
$endgroup$
– user334732
Mar 20 at 15:48












6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















7












$begingroup$

$A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ if for any two rationals $q_1 < q_2$ there is some $ain A cap mathbb{Q}$ such that $q_1<a<q_2$. The dyadic rationals would be an example. Here is the way to think about the puzzle of nested dense sets. If you give me two reals $r_1$ and $r_2$ can I find a $q_1$ in between them? Yes. Why? because $mathbb{Q}$ is dense is $mathbb{R}$. Can I find two values? $q_1$ and $q_2$ in between $r_1$ and $r_2$? Because if I could find two... then I could exploit the density of $mathbb{Q}$ to finish the job.



We are given two reals and then we find $q_1,q_2$ inbetween the reals and then we find some $ain A$ inbetween these rationals. All told we have the following inequality: $$r_1<q_1<a<q_2<r_2$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Isn't it 'for any two $q_1, q_2 in mathbb Q$ there exists $ain Acolor{red}{capmathbb Q}$ such that $q_1 < a < q_2$' ...? (Plus, of course, an assumption of $q_1<q_2.$)
    $endgroup$
    – CiaPan
    Mar 20 at 15:49










  • $begingroup$
    @CiaPan. I think you are right. This was written hastily.
    $endgroup$
    – Mason
    Mar 20 at 15:51










  • $begingroup$
    :) I'm not familiar with the definition, but I thought about irrationals – they are certainly dense in reals, but I would hesitate to accept they are dense in rationals, which would fit your former formulation. Hence the red part.
    $endgroup$
    – CiaPan
    Mar 20 at 15:59










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that it would have fit because I defined it as a subset. So it would read "the irrational reals are dense in the rationals if (1) they are a subset of the rationals and (2) there is an irrational between any two rationals." So it wouldn't meet the (1)st criteria. So we might be dancing around equivalent or similar variations on the same concept.
    $endgroup$
    – Mason
    Mar 20 at 16:01





















6












$begingroup$

Since $A$ is dense in $Bbb Q$ so $overline A cap Bbb Q = Bbb Q subseteq overline A.$ So $Bbb R = overline {Bbb Q} subseteq overline A subseteq Bbb R.$ Therefore $overline A = Bbb R.$ This shows that $A$ is dense in $Bbb R.$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Looks good to me. I would add the line: Where $A$ overbar refers to the closure of a set. It's unclear to me whether the OP is familiar with this expression so maybe a link to? mathworld.wolfram.com/SetClosure.html. +1
    $endgroup$
    – Mason
    Mar 20 at 15:45












  • $begingroup$
    This is true for any arbitrary metric space @Mason. Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. Let $Y$ be metric subspace of $X.$ Let $A subseteq X.$ Then the closure of $A$ in $Y$ say $overline {A}^Y = overline A cap Y,$ where $overline A$ is the closure of $A$ in $X.$
    $endgroup$
    – Dbchatto67
    Mar 20 at 15:49





















1












$begingroup$


Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number?




Well, if $a$ and $b$ are distinct rationals, then $(a+b)/2$ is a real number that's between them. It's also rational. And, if you want an irrational number that's between them, take something like $a+(b-a)/sqrt{2}$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    @RingØ Or $a=b=mathrm{anything}$. Edited to add the necessary "distinct". Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    Mar 20 at 23:18



















0












$begingroup$

Another proof. $A$ being dense in $mathbb{Q}$ means that for any $qinmathbb{Q}$ there is a sequence in $A$ converging to $q$.



Let $rinmathbb{R}$. Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, there is a sequence ${q_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converging to $r$. For each $n$, pick a sequence ${a_{n,i}}_{i=1}^infty$ in $A$ converging to $q_n$. For each $n$, choose $k_n$ such that for all $ige k_n$ we have
$$|a_{n,i}-q_n|<2^{-n}.$$




Claim: The sequence ${a_{n,k_n}}_{n=1}^infty$ converges to $r$.




Proof: Let $epsilon>0$. Choose $N$ such that for each $nge N$ we have
$$|r-q_n|<frac{epsilon}{2}qquadtext{and}qquad2^{-N}<frac{epsilon}{2} .$$
Then for each $nge N$ we have
$$|r-a_{n,k_n}|le|r-q_n|+|q_n-a_{n,k_n}|<epsilon ,$$
consluding the proof.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    Another definition of "dense" is that every open neighborhood of $mathbb Q$ has a member of $A$. And using that definition, we want to prove that every open neighborhood of $mathbb R$ has a member of $A$. So suppose we take a neighborhood $N_1$ of $r$ in $mathbb R$. Since $mathbb Q$ is dense in $mathbb R$, there is rational $q$ in $N_1$. We can take a neighborhood $N_2$ of $q$ that is a subset of $N_1$, and there will be $a$ in that neighborhood, and thus $a$ will be in $N_1$ as well.



    Basically, $A$ being dense in $mathbb Q$ means that for every $q$, there is $a$ "close" to $q$, and $mathbb Q$ being dense in $mathbb R$ means that for every $r$, there is $q$ "close" to $r$. So given any $r$, we take $q$ "close" to $r$, then we take $a$ "close" to $q$, and $a$ is "close" to $r$.



    It's analogous to "If everyone lives close to a school, and every school is close to library, then everyone lives close to a library.", although there's some additional rigor regarding the term "close" that has to be introduced.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      0












      $begingroup$

      There is a more general statement of this theorem. Let $X$ be a topological space and suppose $Z subset Y subset X$. If $Y$ is dense in $X$ and $Z$ is dense in $Y$ (w.r.t. the subset topology) then $Z$ is dense in $X$.



      To prove this, suppose $Z$ is not dense in $X$. Then there exists $A$ open and non-empty in $X$ such that $Z cap A = emptyset$. Then we have two cases depending on if $A' = Y cap A$ is non-empty. If $A'$ is empty then $A cap Y = emptyset$ therefore $Y$ is not dense in $X$. Else $A'$ is non-empty and open in $Y$ w.r.t. the subset topology, and $A' cap Z = emptyset$. Hence $Z$ is not dense in $Y$. Either way we have a contradiction.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        });
        });
        }, "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "69"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: true,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: 10,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });






        Priti D is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3155595%2fif-a-is-dense-in-bbb-q-then-it-must-be-dense-in-bbb-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        6 Answers
        6






        active

        oldest

        votes








        6 Answers
        6






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        7












        $begingroup$

        $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ if for any two rationals $q_1 < q_2$ there is some $ain A cap mathbb{Q}$ such that $q_1<a<q_2$. The dyadic rationals would be an example. Here is the way to think about the puzzle of nested dense sets. If you give me two reals $r_1$ and $r_2$ can I find a $q_1$ in between them? Yes. Why? because $mathbb{Q}$ is dense is $mathbb{R}$. Can I find two values? $q_1$ and $q_2$ in between $r_1$ and $r_2$? Because if I could find two... then I could exploit the density of $mathbb{Q}$ to finish the job.



        We are given two reals and then we find $q_1,q_2$ inbetween the reals and then we find some $ain A$ inbetween these rationals. All told we have the following inequality: $$r_1<q_1<a<q_2<r_2$$






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$









        • 1




          $begingroup$
          Isn't it 'for any two $q_1, q_2 in mathbb Q$ there exists $ain Acolor{red}{capmathbb Q}$ such that $q_1 < a < q_2$' ...? (Plus, of course, an assumption of $q_1<q_2.$)
          $endgroup$
          – CiaPan
          Mar 20 at 15:49










        • $begingroup$
          @CiaPan. I think you are right. This was written hastily.
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 15:51










        • $begingroup$
          :) I'm not familiar with the definition, but I thought about irrationals – they are certainly dense in reals, but I would hesitate to accept they are dense in rationals, which would fit your former formulation. Hence the red part.
          $endgroup$
          – CiaPan
          Mar 20 at 15:59










        • $begingroup$
          I don't think that it would have fit because I defined it as a subset. So it would read "the irrational reals are dense in the rationals if (1) they are a subset of the rationals and (2) there is an irrational between any two rationals." So it wouldn't meet the (1)st criteria. So we might be dancing around equivalent or similar variations on the same concept.
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 16:01


















        7












        $begingroup$

        $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ if for any two rationals $q_1 < q_2$ there is some $ain A cap mathbb{Q}$ such that $q_1<a<q_2$. The dyadic rationals would be an example. Here is the way to think about the puzzle of nested dense sets. If you give me two reals $r_1$ and $r_2$ can I find a $q_1$ in between them? Yes. Why? because $mathbb{Q}$ is dense is $mathbb{R}$. Can I find two values? $q_1$ and $q_2$ in between $r_1$ and $r_2$? Because if I could find two... then I could exploit the density of $mathbb{Q}$ to finish the job.



        We are given two reals and then we find $q_1,q_2$ inbetween the reals and then we find some $ain A$ inbetween these rationals. All told we have the following inequality: $$r_1<q_1<a<q_2<r_2$$






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$









        • 1




          $begingroup$
          Isn't it 'for any two $q_1, q_2 in mathbb Q$ there exists $ain Acolor{red}{capmathbb Q}$ such that $q_1 < a < q_2$' ...? (Plus, of course, an assumption of $q_1<q_2.$)
          $endgroup$
          – CiaPan
          Mar 20 at 15:49










        • $begingroup$
          @CiaPan. I think you are right. This was written hastily.
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 15:51










        • $begingroup$
          :) I'm not familiar with the definition, but I thought about irrationals – they are certainly dense in reals, but I would hesitate to accept they are dense in rationals, which would fit your former formulation. Hence the red part.
          $endgroup$
          – CiaPan
          Mar 20 at 15:59










        • $begingroup$
          I don't think that it would have fit because I defined it as a subset. So it would read "the irrational reals are dense in the rationals if (1) they are a subset of the rationals and (2) there is an irrational between any two rationals." So it wouldn't meet the (1)st criteria. So we might be dancing around equivalent or similar variations on the same concept.
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 16:01
















        7












        7








        7





        $begingroup$

        $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ if for any two rationals $q_1 < q_2$ there is some $ain A cap mathbb{Q}$ such that $q_1<a<q_2$. The dyadic rationals would be an example. Here is the way to think about the puzzle of nested dense sets. If you give me two reals $r_1$ and $r_2$ can I find a $q_1$ in between them? Yes. Why? because $mathbb{Q}$ is dense is $mathbb{R}$. Can I find two values? $q_1$ and $q_2$ in between $r_1$ and $r_2$? Because if I could find two... then I could exploit the density of $mathbb{Q}$ to finish the job.



        We are given two reals and then we find $q_1,q_2$ inbetween the reals and then we find some $ain A$ inbetween these rationals. All told we have the following inequality: $$r_1<q_1<a<q_2<r_2$$






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        $A$ is dense in $mathbb{Q}$ if for any two rationals $q_1 < q_2$ there is some $ain A cap mathbb{Q}$ such that $q_1<a<q_2$. The dyadic rationals would be an example. Here is the way to think about the puzzle of nested dense sets. If you give me two reals $r_1$ and $r_2$ can I find a $q_1$ in between them? Yes. Why? because $mathbb{Q}$ is dense is $mathbb{R}$. Can I find two values? $q_1$ and $q_2$ in between $r_1$ and $r_2$? Because if I could find two... then I could exploit the density of $mathbb{Q}$ to finish the job.



        We are given two reals and then we find $q_1,q_2$ inbetween the reals and then we find some $ain A$ inbetween these rationals. All told we have the following inequality: $$r_1<q_1<a<q_2<r_2$$







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Mar 20 at 15:52

























        answered Mar 20 at 15:41









        MasonMason

        1,7951630




        1,7951630








        • 1




          $begingroup$
          Isn't it 'for any two $q_1, q_2 in mathbb Q$ there exists $ain Acolor{red}{capmathbb Q}$ such that $q_1 < a < q_2$' ...? (Plus, of course, an assumption of $q_1<q_2.$)
          $endgroup$
          – CiaPan
          Mar 20 at 15:49










        • $begingroup$
          @CiaPan. I think you are right. This was written hastily.
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 15:51










        • $begingroup$
          :) I'm not familiar with the definition, but I thought about irrationals – they are certainly dense in reals, but I would hesitate to accept they are dense in rationals, which would fit your former formulation. Hence the red part.
          $endgroup$
          – CiaPan
          Mar 20 at 15:59










        • $begingroup$
          I don't think that it would have fit because I defined it as a subset. So it would read "the irrational reals are dense in the rationals if (1) they are a subset of the rationals and (2) there is an irrational between any two rationals." So it wouldn't meet the (1)st criteria. So we might be dancing around equivalent or similar variations on the same concept.
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 16:01
















        • 1




          $begingroup$
          Isn't it 'for any two $q_1, q_2 in mathbb Q$ there exists $ain Acolor{red}{capmathbb Q}$ such that $q_1 < a < q_2$' ...? (Plus, of course, an assumption of $q_1<q_2.$)
          $endgroup$
          – CiaPan
          Mar 20 at 15:49










        • $begingroup$
          @CiaPan. I think you are right. This was written hastily.
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 15:51










        • $begingroup$
          :) I'm not familiar with the definition, but I thought about irrationals – they are certainly dense in reals, but I would hesitate to accept they are dense in rationals, which would fit your former formulation. Hence the red part.
          $endgroup$
          – CiaPan
          Mar 20 at 15:59










        • $begingroup$
          I don't think that it would have fit because I defined it as a subset. So it would read "the irrational reals are dense in the rationals if (1) they are a subset of the rationals and (2) there is an irrational between any two rationals." So it wouldn't meet the (1)st criteria. So we might be dancing around equivalent or similar variations on the same concept.
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 16:01










        1




        1




        $begingroup$
        Isn't it 'for any two $q_1, q_2 in mathbb Q$ there exists $ain Acolor{red}{capmathbb Q}$ such that $q_1 < a < q_2$' ...? (Plus, of course, an assumption of $q_1<q_2.$)
        $endgroup$
        – CiaPan
        Mar 20 at 15:49




        $begingroup$
        Isn't it 'for any two $q_1, q_2 in mathbb Q$ there exists $ain Acolor{red}{capmathbb Q}$ such that $q_1 < a < q_2$' ...? (Plus, of course, an assumption of $q_1<q_2.$)
        $endgroup$
        – CiaPan
        Mar 20 at 15:49












        $begingroup$
        @CiaPan. I think you are right. This was written hastily.
        $endgroup$
        – Mason
        Mar 20 at 15:51




        $begingroup$
        @CiaPan. I think you are right. This was written hastily.
        $endgroup$
        – Mason
        Mar 20 at 15:51












        $begingroup$
        :) I'm not familiar with the definition, but I thought about irrationals – they are certainly dense in reals, but I would hesitate to accept they are dense in rationals, which would fit your former formulation. Hence the red part.
        $endgroup$
        – CiaPan
        Mar 20 at 15:59




        $begingroup$
        :) I'm not familiar with the definition, but I thought about irrationals – they are certainly dense in reals, but I would hesitate to accept they are dense in rationals, which would fit your former formulation. Hence the red part.
        $endgroup$
        – CiaPan
        Mar 20 at 15:59












        $begingroup$
        I don't think that it would have fit because I defined it as a subset. So it would read "the irrational reals are dense in the rationals if (1) they are a subset of the rationals and (2) there is an irrational between any two rationals." So it wouldn't meet the (1)st criteria. So we might be dancing around equivalent or similar variations on the same concept.
        $endgroup$
        – Mason
        Mar 20 at 16:01






        $begingroup$
        I don't think that it would have fit because I defined it as a subset. So it would read "the irrational reals are dense in the rationals if (1) they are a subset of the rationals and (2) there is an irrational between any two rationals." So it wouldn't meet the (1)st criteria. So we might be dancing around equivalent or similar variations on the same concept.
        $endgroup$
        – Mason
        Mar 20 at 16:01













        6












        $begingroup$

        Since $A$ is dense in $Bbb Q$ so $overline A cap Bbb Q = Bbb Q subseteq overline A.$ So $Bbb R = overline {Bbb Q} subseteq overline A subseteq Bbb R.$ Therefore $overline A = Bbb R.$ This shows that $A$ is dense in $Bbb R.$






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$









        • 2




          $begingroup$
          Looks good to me. I would add the line: Where $A$ overbar refers to the closure of a set. It's unclear to me whether the OP is familiar with this expression so maybe a link to? mathworld.wolfram.com/SetClosure.html. +1
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 15:45












        • $begingroup$
          This is true for any arbitrary metric space @Mason. Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. Let $Y$ be metric subspace of $X.$ Let $A subseteq X.$ Then the closure of $A$ in $Y$ say $overline {A}^Y = overline A cap Y,$ where $overline A$ is the closure of $A$ in $X.$
          $endgroup$
          – Dbchatto67
          Mar 20 at 15:49


















        6












        $begingroup$

        Since $A$ is dense in $Bbb Q$ so $overline A cap Bbb Q = Bbb Q subseteq overline A.$ So $Bbb R = overline {Bbb Q} subseteq overline A subseteq Bbb R.$ Therefore $overline A = Bbb R.$ This shows that $A$ is dense in $Bbb R.$






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$









        • 2




          $begingroup$
          Looks good to me. I would add the line: Where $A$ overbar refers to the closure of a set. It's unclear to me whether the OP is familiar with this expression so maybe a link to? mathworld.wolfram.com/SetClosure.html. +1
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 15:45












        • $begingroup$
          This is true for any arbitrary metric space @Mason. Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. Let $Y$ be metric subspace of $X.$ Let $A subseteq X.$ Then the closure of $A$ in $Y$ say $overline {A}^Y = overline A cap Y,$ where $overline A$ is the closure of $A$ in $X.$
          $endgroup$
          – Dbchatto67
          Mar 20 at 15:49
















        6












        6








        6





        $begingroup$

        Since $A$ is dense in $Bbb Q$ so $overline A cap Bbb Q = Bbb Q subseteq overline A.$ So $Bbb R = overline {Bbb Q} subseteq overline A subseteq Bbb R.$ Therefore $overline A = Bbb R.$ This shows that $A$ is dense in $Bbb R.$






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Since $A$ is dense in $Bbb Q$ so $overline A cap Bbb Q = Bbb Q subseteq overline A.$ So $Bbb R = overline {Bbb Q} subseteq overline A subseteq Bbb R.$ Therefore $overline A = Bbb R.$ This shows that $A$ is dense in $Bbb R.$







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Mar 20 at 15:40









        Dbchatto67Dbchatto67

        2,166320




        2,166320








        • 2




          $begingroup$
          Looks good to me. I would add the line: Where $A$ overbar refers to the closure of a set. It's unclear to me whether the OP is familiar with this expression so maybe a link to? mathworld.wolfram.com/SetClosure.html. +1
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 15:45












        • $begingroup$
          This is true for any arbitrary metric space @Mason. Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. Let $Y$ be metric subspace of $X.$ Let $A subseteq X.$ Then the closure of $A$ in $Y$ say $overline {A}^Y = overline A cap Y,$ where $overline A$ is the closure of $A$ in $X.$
          $endgroup$
          – Dbchatto67
          Mar 20 at 15:49
















        • 2




          $begingroup$
          Looks good to me. I would add the line: Where $A$ overbar refers to the closure of a set. It's unclear to me whether the OP is familiar with this expression so maybe a link to? mathworld.wolfram.com/SetClosure.html. +1
          $endgroup$
          – Mason
          Mar 20 at 15:45












        • $begingroup$
          This is true for any arbitrary metric space @Mason. Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. Let $Y$ be metric subspace of $X.$ Let $A subseteq X.$ Then the closure of $A$ in $Y$ say $overline {A}^Y = overline A cap Y,$ where $overline A$ is the closure of $A$ in $X.$
          $endgroup$
          – Dbchatto67
          Mar 20 at 15:49










        2




        2




        $begingroup$
        Looks good to me. I would add the line: Where $A$ overbar refers to the closure of a set. It's unclear to me whether the OP is familiar with this expression so maybe a link to? mathworld.wolfram.com/SetClosure.html. +1
        $endgroup$
        – Mason
        Mar 20 at 15:45






        $begingroup$
        Looks good to me. I would add the line: Where $A$ overbar refers to the closure of a set. It's unclear to me whether the OP is familiar with this expression so maybe a link to? mathworld.wolfram.com/SetClosure.html. +1
        $endgroup$
        – Mason
        Mar 20 at 15:45














        $begingroup$
        This is true for any arbitrary metric space @Mason. Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. Let $Y$ be metric subspace of $X.$ Let $A subseteq X.$ Then the closure of $A$ in $Y$ say $overline {A}^Y = overline A cap Y,$ where $overline A$ is the closure of $A$ in $X.$
        $endgroup$
        – Dbchatto67
        Mar 20 at 15:49






        $begingroup$
        This is true for any arbitrary metric space @Mason. Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. Let $Y$ be metric subspace of $X.$ Let $A subseteq X.$ Then the closure of $A$ in $Y$ say $overline {A}^Y = overline A cap Y,$ where $overline A$ is the closure of $A$ in $X.$
        $endgroup$
        – Dbchatto67
        Mar 20 at 15:49













        1












        $begingroup$


        Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number?




        Well, if $a$ and $b$ are distinct rationals, then $(a+b)/2$ is a real number that's between them. It's also rational. And, if you want an irrational number that's between them, take something like $a+(b-a)/sqrt{2}$.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$













        • $begingroup$
          @RingØ Or $a=b=mathrm{anything}$. Edited to add the necessary "distinct". Thanks!
          $endgroup$
          – David Richerby
          Mar 20 at 23:18
















        1












        $begingroup$


        Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number?




        Well, if $a$ and $b$ are distinct rationals, then $(a+b)/2$ is a real number that's between them. It's also rational. And, if you want an irrational number that's between them, take something like $a+(b-a)/sqrt{2}$.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$













        • $begingroup$
          @RingØ Or $a=b=mathrm{anything}$. Edited to add the necessary "distinct". Thanks!
          $endgroup$
          – David Richerby
          Mar 20 at 23:18














        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$


        Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number?




        Well, if $a$ and $b$ are distinct rationals, then $(a+b)/2$ is a real number that's between them. It's also rational. And, if you want an irrational number that's between them, take something like $a+(b-a)/sqrt{2}$.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$




        Does that imply that between any two rational numbers, there exists a real number?




        Well, if $a$ and $b$ are distinct rationals, then $(a+b)/2$ is a real number that's between them. It's also rational. And, if you want an irrational number that's between them, take something like $a+(b-a)/sqrt{2}$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Mar 20 at 23:17

























        answered Mar 20 at 22:14









        David RicherbyDavid Richerby

        2,25511324




        2,25511324












        • $begingroup$
          @RingØ Or $a=b=mathrm{anything}$. Edited to add the necessary "distinct". Thanks!
          $endgroup$
          – David Richerby
          Mar 20 at 23:18


















        • $begingroup$
          @RingØ Or $a=b=mathrm{anything}$. Edited to add the necessary "distinct". Thanks!
          $endgroup$
          – David Richerby
          Mar 20 at 23:18
















        $begingroup$
        @RingØ Or $a=b=mathrm{anything}$. Edited to add the necessary "distinct". Thanks!
        $endgroup$
        – David Richerby
        Mar 20 at 23:18




        $begingroup$
        @RingØ Or $a=b=mathrm{anything}$. Edited to add the necessary "distinct". Thanks!
        $endgroup$
        – David Richerby
        Mar 20 at 23:18











        0












        $begingroup$

        Another proof. $A$ being dense in $mathbb{Q}$ means that for any $qinmathbb{Q}$ there is a sequence in $A$ converging to $q$.



        Let $rinmathbb{R}$. Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, there is a sequence ${q_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converging to $r$. For each $n$, pick a sequence ${a_{n,i}}_{i=1}^infty$ in $A$ converging to $q_n$. For each $n$, choose $k_n$ such that for all $ige k_n$ we have
        $$|a_{n,i}-q_n|<2^{-n}.$$




        Claim: The sequence ${a_{n,k_n}}_{n=1}^infty$ converges to $r$.




        Proof: Let $epsilon>0$. Choose $N$ such that for each $nge N$ we have
        $$|r-q_n|<frac{epsilon}{2}qquadtext{and}qquad2^{-N}<frac{epsilon}{2} .$$
        Then for each $nge N$ we have
        $$|r-a_{n,k_n}|le|r-q_n|+|q_n-a_{n,k_n}|<epsilon ,$$
        consluding the proof.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$


















          0












          $begingroup$

          Another proof. $A$ being dense in $mathbb{Q}$ means that for any $qinmathbb{Q}$ there is a sequence in $A$ converging to $q$.



          Let $rinmathbb{R}$. Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, there is a sequence ${q_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converging to $r$. For each $n$, pick a sequence ${a_{n,i}}_{i=1}^infty$ in $A$ converging to $q_n$. For each $n$, choose $k_n$ such that for all $ige k_n$ we have
          $$|a_{n,i}-q_n|<2^{-n}.$$




          Claim: The sequence ${a_{n,k_n}}_{n=1}^infty$ converges to $r$.




          Proof: Let $epsilon>0$. Choose $N$ such that for each $nge N$ we have
          $$|r-q_n|<frac{epsilon}{2}qquadtext{and}qquad2^{-N}<frac{epsilon}{2} .$$
          Then for each $nge N$ we have
          $$|r-a_{n,k_n}|le|r-q_n|+|q_n-a_{n,k_n}|<epsilon ,$$
          consluding the proof.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$
















            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            Another proof. $A$ being dense in $mathbb{Q}$ means that for any $qinmathbb{Q}$ there is a sequence in $A$ converging to $q$.



            Let $rinmathbb{R}$. Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, there is a sequence ${q_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converging to $r$. For each $n$, pick a sequence ${a_{n,i}}_{i=1}^infty$ in $A$ converging to $q_n$. For each $n$, choose $k_n$ such that for all $ige k_n$ we have
            $$|a_{n,i}-q_n|<2^{-n}.$$




            Claim: The sequence ${a_{n,k_n}}_{n=1}^infty$ converges to $r$.




            Proof: Let $epsilon>0$. Choose $N$ such that for each $nge N$ we have
            $$|r-q_n|<frac{epsilon}{2}qquadtext{and}qquad2^{-N}<frac{epsilon}{2} .$$
            Then for each $nge N$ we have
            $$|r-a_{n,k_n}|le|r-q_n|+|q_n-a_{n,k_n}|<epsilon ,$$
            consluding the proof.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            Another proof. $A$ being dense in $mathbb{Q}$ means that for any $qinmathbb{Q}$ there is a sequence in $A$ converging to $q$.



            Let $rinmathbb{R}$. Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, there is a sequence ${q_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converging to $r$. For each $n$, pick a sequence ${a_{n,i}}_{i=1}^infty$ in $A$ converging to $q_n$. For each $n$, choose $k_n$ such that for all $ige k_n$ we have
            $$|a_{n,i}-q_n|<2^{-n}.$$




            Claim: The sequence ${a_{n,k_n}}_{n=1}^infty$ converges to $r$.




            Proof: Let $epsilon>0$. Choose $N$ such that for each $nge N$ we have
            $$|r-q_n|<frac{epsilon}{2}qquadtext{and}qquad2^{-N}<frac{epsilon}{2} .$$
            Then for each $nge N$ we have
            $$|r-a_{n,k_n}|le|r-q_n|+|q_n-a_{n,k_n}|<epsilon ,$$
            consluding the proof.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Mar 20 at 22:33









            Daniel Robert-NicoudDaniel Robert-Nicoud

            20.5k33797




            20.5k33797























                0












                $begingroup$

                Another definition of "dense" is that every open neighborhood of $mathbb Q$ has a member of $A$. And using that definition, we want to prove that every open neighborhood of $mathbb R$ has a member of $A$. So suppose we take a neighborhood $N_1$ of $r$ in $mathbb R$. Since $mathbb Q$ is dense in $mathbb R$, there is rational $q$ in $N_1$. We can take a neighborhood $N_2$ of $q$ that is a subset of $N_1$, and there will be $a$ in that neighborhood, and thus $a$ will be in $N_1$ as well.



                Basically, $A$ being dense in $mathbb Q$ means that for every $q$, there is $a$ "close" to $q$, and $mathbb Q$ being dense in $mathbb R$ means that for every $r$, there is $q$ "close" to $r$. So given any $r$, we take $q$ "close" to $r$, then we take $a$ "close" to $q$, and $a$ is "close" to $r$.



                It's analogous to "If everyone lives close to a school, and every school is close to library, then everyone lives close to a library.", although there's some additional rigor regarding the term "close" that has to be introduced.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$


















                  0












                  $begingroup$

                  Another definition of "dense" is that every open neighborhood of $mathbb Q$ has a member of $A$. And using that definition, we want to prove that every open neighborhood of $mathbb R$ has a member of $A$. So suppose we take a neighborhood $N_1$ of $r$ in $mathbb R$. Since $mathbb Q$ is dense in $mathbb R$, there is rational $q$ in $N_1$. We can take a neighborhood $N_2$ of $q$ that is a subset of $N_1$, and there will be $a$ in that neighborhood, and thus $a$ will be in $N_1$ as well.



                  Basically, $A$ being dense in $mathbb Q$ means that for every $q$, there is $a$ "close" to $q$, and $mathbb Q$ being dense in $mathbb R$ means that for every $r$, there is $q$ "close" to $r$. So given any $r$, we take $q$ "close" to $r$, then we take $a$ "close" to $q$, and $a$ is "close" to $r$.



                  It's analogous to "If everyone lives close to a school, and every school is close to library, then everyone lives close to a library.", although there's some additional rigor regarding the term "close" that has to be introduced.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$
















                    0












                    0








                    0





                    $begingroup$

                    Another definition of "dense" is that every open neighborhood of $mathbb Q$ has a member of $A$. And using that definition, we want to prove that every open neighborhood of $mathbb R$ has a member of $A$. So suppose we take a neighborhood $N_1$ of $r$ in $mathbb R$. Since $mathbb Q$ is dense in $mathbb R$, there is rational $q$ in $N_1$. We can take a neighborhood $N_2$ of $q$ that is a subset of $N_1$, and there will be $a$ in that neighborhood, and thus $a$ will be in $N_1$ as well.



                    Basically, $A$ being dense in $mathbb Q$ means that for every $q$, there is $a$ "close" to $q$, and $mathbb Q$ being dense in $mathbb R$ means that for every $r$, there is $q$ "close" to $r$. So given any $r$, we take $q$ "close" to $r$, then we take $a$ "close" to $q$, and $a$ is "close" to $r$.



                    It's analogous to "If everyone lives close to a school, and every school is close to library, then everyone lives close to a library.", although there's some additional rigor regarding the term "close" that has to be introduced.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$



                    Another definition of "dense" is that every open neighborhood of $mathbb Q$ has a member of $A$. And using that definition, we want to prove that every open neighborhood of $mathbb R$ has a member of $A$. So suppose we take a neighborhood $N_1$ of $r$ in $mathbb R$. Since $mathbb Q$ is dense in $mathbb R$, there is rational $q$ in $N_1$. We can take a neighborhood $N_2$ of $q$ that is a subset of $N_1$, and there will be $a$ in that neighborhood, and thus $a$ will be in $N_1$ as well.



                    Basically, $A$ being dense in $mathbb Q$ means that for every $q$, there is $a$ "close" to $q$, and $mathbb Q$ being dense in $mathbb R$ means that for every $r$, there is $q$ "close" to $r$. So given any $r$, we take $q$ "close" to $r$, then we take $a$ "close" to $q$, and $a$ is "close" to $r$.



                    It's analogous to "If everyone lives close to a school, and every school is close to library, then everyone lives close to a library.", although there's some additional rigor regarding the term "close" that has to be introduced.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Mar 20 at 22:42









                    AcccumulationAcccumulation

                    7,1352619




                    7,1352619























                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        There is a more general statement of this theorem. Let $X$ be a topological space and suppose $Z subset Y subset X$. If $Y$ is dense in $X$ and $Z$ is dense in $Y$ (w.r.t. the subset topology) then $Z$ is dense in $X$.



                        To prove this, suppose $Z$ is not dense in $X$. Then there exists $A$ open and non-empty in $X$ such that $Z cap A = emptyset$. Then we have two cases depending on if $A' = Y cap A$ is non-empty. If $A'$ is empty then $A cap Y = emptyset$ therefore $Y$ is not dense in $X$. Else $A'$ is non-empty and open in $Y$ w.r.t. the subset topology, and $A' cap Z = emptyset$. Hence $Z$ is not dense in $Y$. Either way we have a contradiction.






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$


















                          0












                          $begingroup$

                          There is a more general statement of this theorem. Let $X$ be a topological space and suppose $Z subset Y subset X$. If $Y$ is dense in $X$ and $Z$ is dense in $Y$ (w.r.t. the subset topology) then $Z$ is dense in $X$.



                          To prove this, suppose $Z$ is not dense in $X$. Then there exists $A$ open and non-empty in $X$ such that $Z cap A = emptyset$. Then we have two cases depending on if $A' = Y cap A$ is non-empty. If $A'$ is empty then $A cap Y = emptyset$ therefore $Y$ is not dense in $X$. Else $A'$ is non-empty and open in $Y$ w.r.t. the subset topology, and $A' cap Z = emptyset$. Hence $Z$ is not dense in $Y$. Either way we have a contradiction.






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$
















                            0












                            0








                            0





                            $begingroup$

                            There is a more general statement of this theorem. Let $X$ be a topological space and suppose $Z subset Y subset X$. If $Y$ is dense in $X$ and $Z$ is dense in $Y$ (w.r.t. the subset topology) then $Z$ is dense in $X$.



                            To prove this, suppose $Z$ is not dense in $X$. Then there exists $A$ open and non-empty in $X$ such that $Z cap A = emptyset$. Then we have two cases depending on if $A' = Y cap A$ is non-empty. If $A'$ is empty then $A cap Y = emptyset$ therefore $Y$ is not dense in $X$. Else $A'$ is non-empty and open in $Y$ w.r.t. the subset topology, and $A' cap Z = emptyset$. Hence $Z$ is not dense in $Y$. Either way we have a contradiction.






                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$



                            There is a more general statement of this theorem. Let $X$ be a topological space and suppose $Z subset Y subset X$. If $Y$ is dense in $X$ and $Z$ is dense in $Y$ (w.r.t. the subset topology) then $Z$ is dense in $X$.



                            To prove this, suppose $Z$ is not dense in $X$. Then there exists $A$ open and non-empty in $X$ such that $Z cap A = emptyset$. Then we have two cases depending on if $A' = Y cap A$ is non-empty. If $A'$ is empty then $A cap Y = emptyset$ therefore $Y$ is not dense in $X$. Else $A'$ is non-empty and open in $Y$ w.r.t. the subset topology, and $A' cap Z = emptyset$. Hence $Z$ is not dense in $Y$. Either way we have a contradiction.







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered Mar 20 at 23:34









                            bitesizebobitesizebo

                            1,59618




                            1,59618






















                                Priti D is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                                draft saved

                                draft discarded


















                                Priti D is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                                Priti D is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                                Priti D is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3155595%2fif-a-is-dense-in-bbb-q-then-it-must-be-dense-in-bbb-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Plaza Victoria

                                In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

                                How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...