29
$\begingroup$

Give an example of a perfect set in $\mathbb R^n$ that does not contain any of the rationals.

(Or prove that it does not exist).

  • 0
    Hint: It exists, and you can even construct such a set of specified Lebesgue measure.2010-07-28
  • 5
    What is a perfect set? Also, this looks like a homework problem.2010-07-28
  • 4
    Why are you asking if you apparently know the answer?2010-07-28
  • 3
    @Kevin: Line Bundle is not asking homework questions - no-one would have homework on so many different areas at once2010-07-28
  • 1
    @Kevin, a perfect set is one which is equal to its derived set, as in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_set2010-07-28
  • 2
    Mariano has started a discussion at meta: http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/313/asking-questions-whose-answers-are-clearly-known-to-the-op2010-07-28
  • 1
    @Casebash: It may not be a homework question assigned to the asker, but I agree that it looks like one.2010-07-28
  • 1
    See also: http://math.stackexchange.com/q/381690/462 If $C$ is the standard Cantor set, then for comeager many $x$, we have that $C+x$ consists only of irrationals.2013-05-05

6 Answers 6

39

An easy example comes from the fact that a number with an infinite continued fraction expansion is irrational (and conversely). The set of all irrationals with continued fractions consisting only of 1's and 2's in any arrangement is a perfect set of irrational numbers.

  • 5
    This is a really nice answer!2010-07-29
  • 3
    Beautiful answer!2010-07-30
23

Consider the set of reals x whose binary expansion, if you look only at the even digit places, is some fixed non-eventually-repeating pattern z. This is perfect, since we have branching at the odd digits, but they are all irrational, since z is not eventually repeating.

You can draw a picture of this set, and it looks something like the Cantor middle third set, except that you divide into four pieces, and take either first+third or second+fourth, depending on the digits of z.

Another solution: Begin with an interval having irrational endpoints, and perform the usual Cantor middle-third construction, except that at stage n, be sure to exclude the n-th rational number (with respect to some fixed enumeration), using a subinterval having irrational endpoints. By systematically excluding all rational numbers, you have the desired perfect set of irrationals.

(Hi François!)

  • 2
    Hi Joel! Nice answer!2010-07-30
19

It is well-known that $C$ is homeomorphic to $C \times C$, where $C$ is the Cantor set, as both are zero-dimensional compact metric spaces without isolated points. So $C$ contains uncountably many disjoint homeomorphic copies of $C$ and at most countably many of them can contain rationals...

  • 2
    This is now my favorite example of a nonconstructive proof.2014-09-09
  • 0
    @Bryan Thx. It shows the power of the characterisation theorem nicely, I think. It's a folklore argument, don't know whose it is originally.2014-09-09
5

Just consider a translation of Cantor set $C$, denote as $E=C+\{x_0\}$. The perfectness of $E$ is trivial due to the perfectness of $C$. To make $E\cap\mathbb{Q}=\varnothing$, we need to choose an $x_0\notin \mathbb{Q}-C$. The only thing left is to show $\mathbb{Q}-C\neq\mathbb{R}$, i.e. $\mathbb{Q}+C\neq\mathbb{R}$. By Baire Category theorem $$\mathbb{Q}+C=\bigcup_{r\in\mathbb{Q}}\{r\}+C$$ can't have any interior point, since $\{r\}+C$ don't have any interior point, for any $r\in\mathbb{Q}$. The conclusion follows.

2

It can be proven that the Cantor set is perfect. Certainly, this contains infinitely many rationals. How about modifying the construction of the Cantor set by defining: $I_1 = [\sqrt{2},\sqrt{2}+1/3] \cup [\sqrt{2}+2/3,\sqrt{2}+1]$, $I_2 = [\sqrt{2},\sqrt{2}+1/9] \cup [\sqrt{2}+2/9,\sqrt{2}+1/3]\cup[\sqrt{2}+2/3,\sqrt{2}+7/9]\cup[\sqrt{2}+8/9,\sqrt{2}+1]$, etc and setting $P = \cap_{i=1}^\infty I_i$? Each of end points of any interval that appears in the construction is a member of $P$ and is irrational. However, is it true that all the members of $P$ must be an end point of a certain interval? I am tempted to think so because we can prove that $P$ does not contain any interval.

  • 2
    There are only countably many endpoints, but a nontrivial perfect set is uncountable.2010-07-30
  • 1
    Is this correct, then?2017-06-10
  • 0
    @Lelouch: JDH's comment is a sufficient reason for why the last two sentences in the post are false. There are uncountably many points in $P$ but only countably many end-points. However JDH's comment does not address whether the rest of the post is a correct answer to the question. Even if the construction works, this answer does nothing to justify it. One would have to prove that the ternary expansion of $\sqrt{2}$ has infinitely many of each digit, otherwise $P$ would have a rational member.2017-10-16
  • 1
    Indeed, 6 upvoters might want to explain how this addresses the question at all.2017-10-16
0

Let $A$ be an open subset of $R$ of finite measure and containing $Q$. This is possible because $Q$ is countable. Let $B=R$ \ $A$. Now $B$ is closed, and uncountable (because it has infinite measure). Let $ C$ be the family of open real intervals that, each, have countable intersection with $B$. Then $\cup C$ is equal to $\cup D$ where $ D $ is a countable subset of $ C$, so $B$ has countable intersection with $\cup C$. The uncountable closed set $E= B$ \ $\cup C$ is perfect. Indeed, if $p \in E$ and $V$ is an open interval containing $p$, then $E \cap V$ is uncountable.