Timeline for Is this stronger Knaster-Kuratowski-Mazurkiewicz Lemma true?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 27, 2012 at 9:33 | vote | accept | domotorp | ||
| Aug 26, 2012 at 7:09 | comment | added | domotorp | Okay, the Edit part answers my original question. In this construction the uncovered part is a high dim manifold stretching to every face. So can we guarantee the existence of something like this? I know this is a vague question... | |
| Aug 26, 2012 at 6:48 | comment | added | domotorp | I still think that we have a misunderstanding, probably I should not have called it affine subspace of S but rather subspace of S. I have tried to make the def in the original post more clear. Do you see the problem now or is it my bad and am I missing something? | |
| Aug 25, 2012 at 21:55 | history | edited | Ilya Bogdanov | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
some counterexamples added
|
| Aug 25, 2012 at 21:43 | comment | added | Ilya Bogdanov | Where is a misunderstanding? The intersection of $V$ with $S$ is exactly a small piece contained in $U(s)$. You may consider also the linear hull of $V$ --- it changes nothing since $S$ lies in $\mathop{\rm aff}\{e_i\colon i\in [n+1]\}$. . | |
| Aug 25, 2012 at 20:58 | comment | added | domotorp | I think there is a misunderstanding in the definition of my definition of k-dim affine subspace of S. It must the whole intersection of S and a linear subspace. | |
| Aug 25, 2012 at 20:10 | history | answered | Ilya Bogdanov | CC BY-SA 3.0 |