Skip to main content
added 189 characters in body
Source Link
Daniel Moskovich
  • 22.1k
  • 15
  • 139
  • 216

On page 33 of Stable Mappings and Their Singularities by Golubitsky and Guillemin (GTM 014; 1974), the following proposition is characterized as an "obvious, but surprisingly complicated result":

Proposition 1.10: Let S be a nonempty open subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$. Then S is not of measure zero.
Edit: As pointed out in the comments, Gowers already mentioned an equivalent result whose difficulty is more clear. Please vote this answer down (I can't vote down my own answers).

On page 33 of Stable Mappings and Their Singularities by Golubitsky and Guillemin (GTM 014; 1974), the following proposition is characterized as an "obvious, but surprisingly complicated result":

Proposition 1.10: Let S be a nonempty open subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$. Then S is not of measure zero.

On page 33 of Stable Mappings and Their Singularities by Golubitsky and Guillemin (GTM 014; 1974), the following proposition is characterized as an "obvious, but surprisingly complicated result":

Proposition 1.10: Let S be a nonempty open subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$. Then S is not of measure zero.
Edit: As pointed out in the comments, Gowers already mentioned an equivalent result whose difficulty is more clear. Please vote this answer down (I can't vote down my own answers).
Post Made Community Wiki
Source Link
Daniel Moskovich
  • 22.1k
  • 15
  • 139
  • 216

On page 33 of Stable Mappings and Their Singularities by Golubitsky and Guillemin (GTM 014; 1974), the following proposition is characterized as an "obvious, but surprisingly complicated result":

Proposition 1.10: Let S be a nonempty open subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$. Then S is not of measure zero.