Return to Question

My question is that whether the following statement is true or not.

In a complete metric space $(X, d)$, if a sequence of open balls $\{B(x_i, r_i)\}_{i=1}^\infty$ satisfies $$ \exists \epsilon > 0 ~~s.t.~ B(x_{i+1}, (1+\epsilon)r_{i+1}) \subset B(x_i, r_i), \forall i \ge 1 \tag{1} $$ then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) \neq \emptyset$.

Here are several related facts:

1. If we further require that $r_i \rightarrow 0$ as $i\rightarrow \infty$, then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) \neq \emptyset$ holds.

2. There is a example shows that $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) = \emptyset$ if we replace $(1)$ by $\overline{B(x_{i+1}, r_{i+1})} \subset B(x_i, r_i)$ for all $i\ge 1$ where $\overline{B}$ is the closure of $B$

3. In a complete metric space, $B(x, r) \subset B(x', r')$ may hold for $r > r'$.

As Choi pointed it out, the above statement is similar to Cantor's intersection lemma. Recall that Cantor's intersection lemma in a complete metric space is given as follows:

In a complete metric space $(X, d)$, if a sequence of closed set $\{C_i\}_{i=1}^\infty$ satisfies $$ C_{i+1} \subset C_i, \forall i\ge 1 ~~\&~~ diameter(C_i) \rightarrow 0~ as~ i\rightarrow \infty $$ then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty C_i \neq \emptyset$

However, we don't require $diameter(B(x_i, r_i)) \rightarrow 0$ as $i\rightarrow \infty$. And there is indeed a example shows Cantor's inetersection lemma fails if we drop the diameter restriction. Please refer to Nested closed balls with empty intersection

My question is that whether the following statement is true or not.

In a complete metric space $(X, d)$, if a sequence of open balls $\{B(x_i, r_i)\}_{i=1}^\infty$ satisfies $$ \exists \epsilon > 0 ~~s.t.~ B(x_{i+1}, (1+\epsilon)r_{i+1}) \subset B(x_i, r_i), \forall i \ge 1 \tag{1} $$ then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) \neq \emptyset$.

Here are several related facts:

1. If we further require that $r_i \rightarrow 0$ as $i\rightarrow \infty$, then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) \neq \emptyset$ holds.

2. There is a example shows that $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) = \emptyset$ if we replace $(1)$ by $\overline{B(x_{i+1}, r_{i+1})} \subset B(x_i, r_i)$ for all $i\ge 1$ where $\overline{B}$ is the closure of $B$

3. In a complete metric space, $B(x, r) \subset B(x', r')$ may hold for $r > r'$.

As Choi pointed it out, the above statement is similar to Cantor's intersection lemma. Recall that Cantor's intersection lemma in a complete metric space is given as follows:

In a complete metric space $(X, d)$, if a sequence of closed set $\{C_i\}_{i=1}^\infty$ satisfies $$ C_{i+1} \subset C_i, \forall i\ge 1 ~~\&~~ diameter(C_i) \rightarrow 0~ as~ i\rightarrow \infty $$ then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty C_i \neq \emptyset$

However, we don't require $diameter(B(x_i, r_i)) \rightarrow 0$ as $i\rightarrow \infty$. And there is indeed a example shows Cantor's inetersection lemma fails if we drop the diameter restriction. Please refer to Nested closed balls with empty intersection

My question is that whether the following statement is true or not.

In a complete metric space $(X, d)$, if a sequence of open balls $\{B(x_i, r_i)\}_{i=1}^\infty$ satisfies $$ \exists \epsilon > 0 ~~s.t.~ B(x_{i+1}, (1+\epsilon)r_{i+1}) \subset B(x_i, r_i), \forall i \ge 1 \tag{1} $$ then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) \neq \emptyset$.

Here are several related facts:

1. If we further require that $r_i \rightarrow 0$ as $i\rightarrow \infty$, then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) \neq \emptyset$ holds.

2. There is a example shows that $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) = \emptyset$ if we replace $(1)$ by $\overline{B(x_{i+1}, r_{i+1})} \subset B(x_i, r_i)$ for all $i\ge 1$ where $\overline{B}$ is the closure of $B$

3. In a complete metric space, $B(x, r) \subset B(x', r')$ may hold for $r > r'$.

My question is that whether the following statement is true or not.

In a complete metric space $(X, d)$, if a sequence of open balls $\{B(x_i, r_i)\}_{i=1}^\infty$ satisfies $$ \exists \epsilon > 0 ~~s.t.~ B(x_{i+1}, (1+\epsilon)r_{i+1}) \subset B(x_i, r_i), \forall i \ge 1 \tag{1} $$ then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) \neq \emptyset$.

Here are several related facts:

1. If we further require that $r_i \rightarrow 0$ as $i\rightarrow \infty$, then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) \neq \emptyset$ holds.

2. There is a example shows that $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty B(x_i, r_i) = \emptyset$ if we replace $(1)$ by $\overline{B(x_{i+1}, r_{i+1})} \subset B(x_i, r_i)$ for all $i\ge 1$ where $\overline{B}$ is the closure of $B$

3. In a complete metric space, $B(x, r) \subset B(x', r')$ may hold for $r > r'$.

As Choi pointed it out, the above statement is similar to Cantor's intersection lemma. Recall that Cantor's intersection lemma in a complete metric space is given as follows:

In a complete metric space $(X, d)$, if a sequence of closed set $\{C_i\}_{i=1}^\infty$ satisfies $$ C_{i+1} \subset C_i, \forall i\ge 1 ~~\&~~ diameter(C_i) \rightarrow 0~ as~ i\rightarrow \infty $$ then $\bigcap_{i=1}^\infty C_i \neq \emptyset$

However, we don't require $diameter(B(x_i, r_i)) \rightarrow 0$ as $i\rightarrow \infty$. And there is indeed a example shows Cantor's inetersection lemma fails if we drop the diameter restriction. Please refer to Nested closed balls with empty intersection