MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Shishikura (1991) proved that the Hausdorff Dimension of the boundary of the Mandelbrot set equals 2, in this paper, but I can't figure out one thing : can we say all open subsets of this boundary has dimension 2 ? Are there any references ? Thanks.

share|cite|improve this question
After all, the answer may be in the paper itself. Shishikura says : "Theorem A. H-dim(∂M) = 2. Moreover for any open set U which intersects ∂M, we have H-dim(∂M ∩ U) = 2." The way it is written seems strange to me. Why use this open set intersecting the boundary ? Does this answer the question ? Thanks. – Alexis Monnerot-Dumaine Sep 8 '10 at 10:37
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Yes - and it is indeed in Shishikura's paper, as in your comment.

The "open subsets" of the boundary with respect to which topology? That of the ambient space, or the relative topology of the set itself? Since the latter topology is extremely wild, it is much clearer to use the ambient topology, as Shishikura does.

share|cite|improve this answer
If S is an open subset of topological space T, then aren't open subsets of S in the subspace topology precisely open subsets of T intersected with S? Is there another topology being considered here besides the subspace topology? – Darsh Ranjan Sep 10 '10 at 2:16
I think I had 'connected components' on the brain when I wrote that, rather than just considering the open subsets per se. – Jacques Carette Sep 10 '10 at 3:08

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.