Clopen Sets

This scene is about sets both open and closed: clopen sets. The same set changes its fate with the space it lives in.

On the whole real line, only the empty set and the line itself qualify. A boundary always appears somewhere. But if the space splits into two separate pieces, one piece touches no boundary. That piece is both open and closed.

For example, take one of two far-apart 🏠 houses. In a world made of that house alone, it forms its own separate region. It is open, and it is closed.

A clopen in X  ⟺  A open in X and closed in XA \text{ clopen in } X \iff A \text{ open in } X \text{ and closed in } X
[0,1]=([0,1]∪[2,3])∩(−0.5,1.5)=([0,1]∪[2,3])∩[−0.5,1.5][0,1] = \bigl([0,1]\cup[2,3]\bigr) \cap (-0.5, 1.5) = \bigl([0,1]\cup[2,3]\bigr) \cap [-0.5, 1.5]

Examples & Exercises

Let A⊆RA \subseteq \mathbb{R} be both open and closed (clopen), with ∅≠A≠R\emptyset \ne A \ne \mathbb{R}.

Derive a contradiction, proving completely that the only clopen subsets of R\mathbb{R} are ∅\emptyset and R\mathbb{R} itself.

clopen in R  ⟹  A=∅ or A=R\text{clopen in } \mathbb{R} \implies A = \emptyset \text{ or } A = \mathbb{R}
X=RX = \mathbb{R}, A=(0,1)A = (0,1): open but not closed — no nontrivial clopen set exists in R\mathbb{R}.
Show proof
  1. If AA is clopen then so is its complement AcA^c: AA open makes AcA^c closed, and AA closed makes AcA^c open. Since A≠RA \ne \mathbb{R} we have Ac≠∅A^c \ne \emptyset, and since A≠∅A \ne \emptyset, AA itself is nonempty.

  2. Hence R=A∪Ac\mathbb{R} = A \cup A^c is a decomposition into two disjoint nonempty open sets — a separation of R\mathbb{R}.

    Now we show R\mathbb{R} is connected.

    Suppose R=U∪V\mathbb{R} = U \cup V with U,VU, V disjoint nonempty open; pick a∈Ua \in U, b∈Vb \in V (renaming so a<ba < b).

  3. Put c=sup⁡(U∩[a,b])c = \sup(U \cap [a,b]) (nonempty, containing aa; bounded above by bb).

    UU is not only open but also closed, since U=R∖VU = \mathbb{R} \setminus V.

    Now cc lies in the closure of U∩[a,b]U \cap [a,b], so c∈U‾=Uc \in \overline{U} = U.

    We have c≤bc \le b, and c≠bc \ne b (as b∈Vb \in V and the sets are disjoint), so c<bc < b.

    Since UU is open, (c−ε,c+ε)⊆U(c-\varepsilon, c+\varepsilon) \subseteq U for some ε>0\varepsilon > 0.

    Now shrink to δ=min⁡(ε/2,(b−c)/2)>0\delta = \min(\varepsilon/2, (b-c)/2) > 0 (positive since c<bc < b): then c+δ∈[a,b]c + \delta \in [a,b], exceeds cc, and lies in UU, so it belongs to U∩[a,b]U \cap [a,b] — contradicting c=sup⁡c = \sup.

    Hence no separation of R\mathbb{R} exists.

  4. This contradicts the separation from the second step, so the assumed nontrivial clopen set AA cannot exist: the only clopen subsets of R\mathbb{R} are ∅\emptyset and R\mathbb{R}. The scene's A=(0,1)A = (0,1) is open but not closed, dodging this theorem — closing it would require adding the missing limit points 0,10, 1, which would break openness.

For the subspace X=[0,1]∪[2,3]⊆RX = [0,1] \cup [2,3] \subseteq \mathbb{R} and A=[0,1]A = [0,1], prove completely that AA is clopen in XX but not open in R\mathbb{R}.

[0,1]=X∩(−1/2, 3/2)=X∩[−1/2, 3/2][0,1] = X \cap (-1/2,\, 3/2) = X \cap [-1/2,\, 3/2]
x=1x = 1, ε=0.5\varepsilon = 0.5: even at the boundary point 11, (1−0.5,1+0.5)∩X=(0.5,1]⊆A(1-0.5, 1+0.5) \cap X = (0.5, 1] \subseteq A, so the ball stays in AA relative to XX — openness in XX made visible.
Show proof
  1. Openness in XX: check [0,1]=X∩(−1/2, 3/2)[0,1] = X \cap (-1/2,\, 3/2).

    The inclusion ⊆\subseteq is clear; conversely a point of X∩(−1/2, 3/2)X \cap (-1/2,\, 3/2) lies in [0,1][0,1] or in [2,3]∩(−1/2, 3/2)[2,3] \cap (-1/2,\, 3/2), and the latter is empty, so it lies in [0,1][0,1].

    Since (−1/2, 3/2)(-1/2,\, 3/2) is open in R\mathbb{R}, [0,1][0,1] is open in XX.

  2. Closedness in XX: the same argument gives [0,1]=X∩[−1/2, 3/2][0,1] = X \cap [-1/2,\, 3/2] (since [2,3]∩[−1/2, 3/2]=∅[2,3] \cap [-1/2,\, 3/2] = \emptyset).

    As [−1/2, 3/2][-1/2,\, 3/2] is closed in R\mathbb{R}, [0,1][0,1] is closed in XX.

    Hence [0,1][0,1] is clopen in XX.

  3. Not open in R\mathbb{R}: 1∈[0,1]1 \in [0,1], yet every ball (1−ε,1+ε)(1-\varepsilon, 1+\varepsilon) contains 1+ε/2∉[0,1]1 + \varepsilon/2 \notin [0,1]. So the same set [0,1][0,1] is clopen in XX while in R\mathbb{R} it is merely closed, not open — clopenness is relative to the ambient space.

Let XX be a topological space and A⊆XA \subseteq X clopen.

Prove completely that if ∅≠A≠X\emptyset \ne A \ne X then XX is disconnected.

X=A∪Ac,A∩Ac=∅,A, Ac≠∅ open in XX = A \cup A^c, \qquad A \cap A^c = \emptyset, \qquad A,\, A^c \ne \emptyset \text{ open in } X
X=(0,1)∪(1,2)X = (0,1) \cup (1,2), A=(0,1)A = (0,1): X=A∪AcX = A \cup A^c is a separation into disjoint nonempty opens — showing XX is disconnected.
Show proof
  1. If AA is clopen then so is its complement Ac=X∖AA^c = X \setminus A: complementation swaps openness and closedness (AA open makes AcA^c closed; AA closed makes AcA^c open).

  2. Since ∅≠A≠X\emptyset \ne A \ne X, both AA and AcA^c are nonempty.

    Moreover X=A∪AcX = A \cup A^c, A∩Ac=∅A \cap A^c = \emptyset, and both are open in XX — a separation of XX.

    Hence XX is disconnected.

  3. The converse holds too: if X=U∪VX = U \cup V is a separation then U=X∖VU = X \setminus V is also closed, hence clopen.

    So "a nontrivial clopen set exists" is equivalent to "disconnected".

    Problem 1 above is the special case X=RX = \mathbb{R} — since R\mathbb{R} is connected, no nontrivial clopen set can exist there.

5. Topology