Limit point

Let S be the non- empty set . A point p is said to be the limit

point of s if every neighbourhood of p contains infinitely
many points of S other than p.
Limit point is also known as cluster point, condensation point
or an accumulation point.
While it is not necessary for a set to have a limit point . A set
may not have a limit point, a unique limit point , finite
number of limit points on an infinite number of limit points.
Also it is clear that a finite set does not have any limit point.
Also it does not make surety that an infinite set always
possess a limit point . its only depend on the infinite set with
whom we are talking about whether it has limit point or not.
Assume A is the subset of ℝ then c ∈ A is a limit point of A
when for every c ∈ ℝ there exist 𝛿 > 0 such that 0 < Ix-c l
<𝛿

Set of all the limit points is known as the derived set.

Examples: -
1) A = {1,2,3}
Let the p( limit point) of the set is 2. And the
neighbourhood interval around it is (1.5,2.4) .only 2 is
the number which is in both the set and in the
neighbourhood interval .which produces a contradiction
 to the definition . Hence 2 is not the limit point of the
given set.
Let choose p=3 . And the neighbourhood interval
around it is (2.5,3.4) .only 3 is the number which is in
both the set and in the neighbourhood interval .which
produces a contradiction to the definition . Hence 3 is
also not the limit point of the given set.
Similarly in the case when we take p as 1 .
Hence this set does not have any limit point.

Remark: - This shows that the finite set does not possess
any limit point.

2) A = (0,1)
Let p=1
Neighbourhood interval for it be (0.5,1.5) This inveval
has points 0.6 ,0.7,…….1.3,1.4 which are also in the given
interval. Therefore it supports the definition of the limit
point .hence 1 is the limit point of the given interval.
Same thing happen when we take p=0
Hence all the points of the given set is the limit point of
A.
3) A= [0,1]
Let p=1
Neighbourhood interval for it be (0.5,1.5) This inveval
has points 0.6 ,0.7,…….1.3,1.4 which are also in the given
interval. Therefore it supports the definition of the limit
point .hence 1 is the limit point of the given interval.
Same thing happen when we take p=0
 Hence all the points of the given set is the limit point of
A.
4) A= [4,5)
Let p=4
Neighbourhood interval for it be (3.8,4.5) This interval
has points 3.9,4,4.1…….4.3,4.4 which are also in the
given interval. Therefore it supports the definition of the
limit point .hence 4 is the limit point of the given
interval.
Same thing happen when we take p as any number from
the given set.

REMARK: - Above examples shows that the interval

possess the limit point.

5) Let S = set of the integers

P=1
Neighbourhood interval for it be is (0.5,1.5). This interval
contain only 1 as the integer in the given set from the
neighbourhood interval not every number like (0.9,1.3)
etc. Therefore , 1 is not the limit point. Similarly for all
the integers.
So , has no limit point.
Hence , derived set for this would be = ɸ
6) Let S = set of the natural numbers ℕ
P=2
Neighbourhood interval for it be is (1.5,2.5). This interval
contain only 1 as the natural number in the given set
from the neighbourhood interval not every number like
 (1.9,2.3) etc. Therefore , 2 is not the limit point. Similarly
for all the integers.
So , has no limit point.
Hence , derived set for this would be the = ɸ
7) Let S = set of the real numbers ℝ
P=1
Neighbourhood interval for it be is (0.5,1.5). This interval
contain many real number in the given set from the
neighbourhood interval . Therefore , 1 is the limit point.
Similarly for all the integers.
So , has infinitely many limit points.
Hence , derived set of this would be ℝ
1
8) Let S = { 𝑛 , n𝜖 ℕ }
This contains points (1,0.5,0.3,0.25,0,2………..0} .
Hence this has the 0 as the limit point .
2
9) Let S = { 1+𝑛 : n𝜖 ℕ }

If we assume 2 as the limit point then the

neighbourhood interval around it is (1.5,2.5)
S contain points (3,2,1.6,1.5,1.4………..1)
As we see that when we choose 2 as the limit point then
it contains only 2 in the set not any other
point.Therefore as per definition it is not the limit point .
And when we assume 1 as the limit point then we see
that every neighbourhood of 1 contains many other
points of S other than p.
Hence 1 is the limit point of the given set.
 1 1
10) Let S = {𝑛 + 𝑚 : n, m 𝜖 Z+}

Points it contain are (2,1.5,1.3,1.2,…….0.6,0.5,…0.1…0)

𝑛2 +1
11) Let S = {sin( )𝜋 ∶n𝜖ℕ}
2𝑛

This contain points i.e. ( 0,

A sufficient condition for the existence of the limit

point is provided by the BOLZANO WEIRSTRASS
THEORM.

BOLZANO WEIRSTRASS
THEORM

Statement - Every infinite bounded set has a limit

point.
Condition of the Bolzano Weirstrass theorem can
not be dropped.
Case 1) Let S be the finite set S = {a1,a2,a3………..an}
 If a1 is the limit point then the neighbourhood
interval around it be (a1 - 𝜀, 𝑎1 + 𝜀) for every 𝜀 > 0 . as
the given set is finite set so it does not have any other
number in common both in the interval and the set.
That’s why a1 is not the limit point.
Same in all other cases hence it does not have
any limit point .
Case2) let S be the infinite unbounded set .
Take the case of the Natural numbers and the integers
.both does not have any limit point .
We do not consider case of real numbers here
except the fact that it is infinitely unbounded set
because it has a limit point.

PROOF OF THE DEFINATION OF THE LIMIT POINT: -

Defination 1) A point p is a limit point of S if every

neighbourhood of p contains a point of S other than p.
Defination 2) A point p is a limit point of S if every
neighbourhood of p contains infinitely many points of S .

Proof :- Suppose definition 2) holds

Suppose p is a limit point according to definition 2 .
Therefore every neighbourhood of p contains infinitely
many points . hence definition 1) holds .
∴ definition 2 implies definition 1
Suppose definition 1) holds
So every neighbourhood o f p contains a point of S other than
p.
Let N be a neighbourhood of p contains finite points.
Let N∩ S ~ {p} = {p1,p2…………pn}
Let 𝜖 = min{|p1-p|,|p2-p|…………..|pn-p|}
And M = N∩ (p-𝜀,p+𝜖)
 M∩ S ~ {p} =N∩ (p-𝜀,p+𝜖) ∩ S~ {p}
= ɸ
M is a neighbourhood of p contains only p.
So, p is not a limit point of S
Our supposition is wrong.
Therefore, there are infinitely many points of S
other than p.
Defination1) implies definition 2)