Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passverified 2026-08-04 (gpt-5.6-sol-codex-subscription)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

If AA is connected and ABAA \subseteq B \subseteq \overline{A} then BB is connected; in particular the closure of a connected set is connected

Statement

Let XX be a topological space, let AXA \subseteq X be a connected subset (Separation of a topological space, connected and disconnected spaces, clopen sets, and connected subsets) and let BB satisfy

A    B    A,A \;\subseteq\; B \;\subseteq\; \overline{A},

the closure being taken in XX (Interior, closure, boundary, exterior, derived set and isolated point in a topological space). Then BB is a connected subset of XX, subsets carrying the subspace topology (Subspace topology: the traces of the open sets, its closed sets and its bases, the continuity of the inclusion, and the characteristic property of a map into a subspace).

Taking B=AB = \overline{A}: the closure of a connected set is connected. Taking B=AB = A recovers the hypothesis, so the statement is a genuine interpolation between a connected set and its closure: every set squeezed between the two is connected, and one may stop anywhere.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A space XX, a connected subset AXA \subseteq X, and a set BB with ABAA \subseteq B \subseteq \overline{A}.

[A1]

A subset SXS \subseteq X is disconnected exactly when S=S1S2S = S_1 \cup S_2 with S1,S2S_1, S_2 nonempty and separated in XX, that is S1S2==S1S2\overline{S_1} \cap S_2 = \varnothing = S_1 \cap \overline{S_2}; equivalently SS is connected exactly when no such decomposition exists (A subspace AXA \subseteq X is disconnected exactly when A=A1A2A = A_1 \cup A_2 with A1,A2A_1, A_2 nonempty and separated in XX, which is the criterion this library already uses on the real line, Separation of a topological space, connected and disconnected spaces, clopen sets, and connected subsets, Subspace topology: the traces of the open sets, its closed sets and its bases, the continuity of the inclusion, and the characteristic property of a map into a subspace).

[A2]

Closure is monotone: if PQP \subseteq Q then PQ\overline{P} \subseteq \overline{Q}, since Q\overline{Q} is a closed set containing PP and P\overline{P} is the smallest such (A point lies in the closure of AA iff every basic neighbourhood of it meets AA; the closure is the smallest closed superset and equals AA together with its derived set, claim 2, Interior, closure, boundary, exterior, derived set and isolated point in a topological space).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Suppose B=B1B2B = B_1 \cup B_2 with B1B_1 and B2B_2 nonempty and separated in XX, so that B1B2=\overline{B_1} \cap B_2 = \varnothing and B1B2=B_1 \cap \overline{B_2} = \varnothing.

A1
1.2

Put A1:=AB1A_1 := A \cap B_1 and A2:=AB2A_2 := A \cap B_2; then A=A1A2A = A_1 \cup A_2, because AB=B1B2A \subseteq B = B_1 \cup B_2.

given
2.1

A1A_1 and A2A_2 are separated in XX: A1A2B1B2=\overline{A_1} \cap A_2 \subseteq \overline{B_1} \cap B_2 = \varnothing by [A2] and step 1.1, and symmetrically A1A2B1B2=A_1 \cap \overline{A_2} \subseteq B_1 \cap \overline{B_2} = \varnothing.

step 1.1step 1.2A2
3.1

Since AA is connected, [A1] and steps 1.2 and 2.1 forbid both A1A_1 and A2A_2 from being nonempty, so at least one is empty; the hypothesis of step 1.1 is symmetric in B1B_1 and B2B_2, so after relabelling we may assume A2=AB2=A_2 = A \cap B_2 = \varnothing.

step 1.2step 2.1A1given
4.1

Then AB1A \subseteq B_1, since AB1B2A \subseteq B_1 \cup B_2 and AA meets B2B_2 in nothing by step 3.1; hence AB1\overline{A} \subseteq \overline{B_1} by [A2].

step 3.1A2given
5.1

Therefore B2BAB1B_2 \subseteq B \subseteq \overline{A} \subseteq \overline{B_1}, so B2B1B2=B_2 \subseteq \overline{B_1} \cap B_2 = \varnothing by step 1.1; that is B2=B_2 = \varnothing, contradicting its nonemptiness in step 1.1.

step 1.1step 4.1given
6.1

So no decomposition as in step 1.1 exists, and BB is a connected subset of XX by [A1].

step 1.1step 5.1A1

Remarks

  • What fails without the upper bound BAB \subseteq \overline{A}. The conclusion is false for an arbitrary superset of a connected set. In R\mathbb{R} take A=(0,1)A = (0,1), which is connected, and B=(0,1){2}B = (0,1) \cup \{2\}: the ambient open sets (1,1)(-1,1) and (1,3)(1,3) meet BB in (0,1)(0,1) and {2}\{2\}, two nonempty disjoint relatively open pieces covering BB, which is exactly the decomposition the proof rules out. The point 22 lies outside A=[0,1]\overline{A} = [0,1], and that is what makes the separation available; in a general space lying outside the closure supplies only one half of a separation, so the hypothesis is stated as the inclusion BAB \subseteq \overline{A} rather than as a condition on individual added points. The hypothesis is used only at step 5.1, and that is where it is needed: it forces B2B_2 to lie inside A\overline{A}, hence inside B1\overline{B_1}, hence to be empty.

  • The interior of a connected set need not be connected. Nothing here transfers to interiors, and the two operations behave differently: closure adds points that cling to the set and cannot split it, whereas the interior may remove the very points holding two lumps together.

  • Where this is used. It is the second half of the standard method for building a connected set that is not path-connected: take a path-connected set, which is connected, and close it up. The closure is connected by this theorem regardless of how badly the added points behave, and that is what The graph of the piecewise-linear map oscillating between 00 and 11 on the intervals [1/(n+2),1/(n+1)][1/(n+2), 1/(n+1)] is path-connected, its closure adds the segment {0}×[0,1]\{0\} \times [0,1], and that closure is connected, is not path-connected because no path joins the segment to the graph, and is not locally connected exploits.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 30 results over 10 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources