Generalizations and Properties of the Ternary

Cantor Set and Explorations in Similar Sets

by

Rebecca Stettin

A capstone project submitted in partial fulfillment

of graduating from the Academic Honors Program
at Ashland University
May 2017

Faculty Mentor: Dr. Darren D. Wick, Professor of Mathematics

Additional Reader: Dr. Gordon Swain, Professor of Mathematics
Abstract

Georg Cantor was made famous by introducing the Cantor set in his works of mathemat-
ics. This project focuses on different Cantor sets and their properties. The ternary Cantor
set is the most well known of the Cantor sets, and can be best described by its construction.
This set starts with the closed interval zero to one, and is constructed in iterations. The
first iteration requires removing the middle third of this interval. The second iteration will
remove the middle third of each of these two remaining intervals. These iterations continue
in this fashion infinitely. Finally, the ternary Cantor set is described as the intersection of
all of these intervals. This set is particularly interesting due to its unique properties being
uncountable, closed, length of zero, and more. A more general Cantor set is created by tak-
ing the intersection of iterations that remove any middle portion during each iteration. This
project explores the ternary Cantor set, as well as variations in Cantor sets such as looking
at different middle portions removed to create the sets. The project focuses on attempting
to generalize the properties of these Cantor sets.

i
Contents

Page

1 The Ternary Cantor Set 1

1
2 The n
-ary Cantor Set 9

n−1
3 The n
-ary Cantor Set 24

4 Conclusion 35

Bibliography 40

Biography 41

ii
Chapter 1

The Ternary Cantor Set

Georg Cantor, born in 1845, was best known for his discovery of the Cantor set. After
writing a thesis in number theory, Cantor became interested in topology and wrote a series
of papers on point set topology. He coined the term everywhere dense, which is currently
used today. In this same series of papers, Cantor later introduced the idea of perfect sets. He
made the ternary Cantor set famous in this same paper when attempting to prove that it was
possible to have a set that is closed and nowhere dense. He noted that this was a perfect,
infinite set that is nowhere dense in any interval, regardless of the size. (Fleron [3]) The
Cantor set is created by starting with the closed interval [0,1]. The next step is to remove
a middle portion of the interval. This initial removal will then leave two intervals, namely
[0, 13 ] and [ 32 , 1]. This process is continued an infinite number of times, with the final set of
numbers, after the infinite iteration, being the Cantor set itself. This set is the intersection
of all iterations, denoted as T = ∩∞
i=1 Ti , where Ti represents the i
th
iteration. There are
different proportions that can be removed with this set, the most well known being 31 . This
set, referred to as the ternary Cantor set, can also be referred to as the classic set. This
particular version of the Cantor set was the one Georg Cantor used to make his arguments
about the nature of certain sets. (Aczel [1])

We will describe the construction of the ternary Cantor set, T , in a similar manner as it is

1
described in Thomson [7]. Begin with the closed interval [0, 1] and remove a dense open set,
G. The remaining set, T = [0, 1] \G will also be closed and nowhere dense in [0, 1]. Based
on our construction of G, T will have no isolated points. It is easiest to understand the set
G if we construct it in stages. Let G1 = ( 31 , 23 ) and let T1 be what is remaining in [0, 1] after
removing G1 . Thus T1 = [0, 13 ] ∪ [ 23 , 1] is what remains when the middle third of the interval
[0,1] is removed. This is referred to as the first iteration of the ternary Cantor set. We repeat
this construction for each of the two intervals of T1 . Let G2 = ( 19 , 92 ) ∪ ( 79 , 89 ). These intervals
are the middle third of the previous 2 intervals. Then T2 = [0, 91 ] ∪ [ 29 , 13 ] ∪ [ 23 , 79 ] ∪ [ 98 , 1]. This
completes the second iteration. We continue inductively, and ultimately take the intersection
of each iteration of Ti to create the ternary Cantor set with the following properties: For
each i ∈ N

1. Ti is a union of 2i pairwise disjoint closed intervals.

2. Each component of the set of open intervals removed is the ”middle third” of some
component of Ti .

1
3. The length of each component of Ti is 3i
.

Some proofs of the properties of the ternary Cantor set will be explored in later chapters
in regards to more generalized Cantor sets. The following is a list of characteristics of the
ternary Cantor set with some proofs to follow:

1. The Cantor set is nonempty.

2. The Cantor set is closed.

3. The Cantor set has length 0.

4. The Cantor set contains all numbers that can be written in base-3 without 1’s.

5. The Cantor set is uncountable.

6. The Cantor set is nowhere dense.

2
 7. The Cantor set has no isolated points.

8. The Cantor set is a perfect set.

Theorem 1. The ternary Cantor set is nonempty.

Proof. Using similar methods as Nelson [5], we must show that the ternary Cantor set
contains at least one element. We can see that during each iteration, the endpoints remain
in the set. For example, during T1 , everything between ( 13 , 2
3
) is removed. Note that it
is everything between the two endpoints, which implies the two endpoints remain. Once
removed, T1 is [0, 31 ] ∪ [ 32 , 1]. As seen in here, the intervals are closed, thus including the
endpoints. This trend continues throughout each iteration. For T2 , the middle thirds of
those two previously mentioned intervals are removed. To clarify, everything between ( 91 ,
2
9
) as well as ( 97 , 89 ) is removed. This leaves [0, 19 ] ∪ [ 29 , 13 ] ∪ [ 23 , 79 ] ∪ [ 89 , 1], which is once
again a union of closed intervals, which include endpoints. Notice that 0, 13 , 23 , and 1 are
again included in this iteration. These iterations continue infinitely. Since each iteration of
T contains the endpoints of each iteration before it, it becomes clear that the endpoints of
each iteration are included. Since the previous endpoints are consistently included, there
will clearly be elements in the intersection of each iteration, proving the ternary Cantor set
is nonempty.

Theorem 2. The ternary Cantor set is closed.

Proof. As shown earlier when looking at the length of T, it is an intersection of closed sets.
For example, T1 is [0, 31 ] ∪ [ 23 , 1]. This trend continues with each Ti also consisting of a
finite union of closed intervals. Each Ti is closed since it is a finite union of closed intervals.
Since T = ∩∞
i=1 Ti it is a countable intersection of closed sets and is therefore closed.

Theorem 3. The ternary Cantor set has length of 0.

Proof. This proof is also based off of similar methods used in Nelson [5]. This proof can be
demonstrated by noting everything that is taken out of the starting interval has the same

3
length as the initial interval. Looking at what is taken out during each iteration, a sequence
1
emerges. During the first iteration, an interval of length 3
is removed from the set. During
the second iteration, there are 2 different intervals, namely [0, 31 ] and [ 23 ,1], to remove the
1
middle third from. In this case, however, the length of what is removed is 3
of 13 , or 19 . This
must occur twice because there are 2 intervals that ( 19 )th is being removed from. Therefore,
2 2
a length of 32
= 9
will be removed during the second iteration of T. This trend continues
throughout each iteration resulting in the length removed at each iteration as 31 , 92 , 4
27
, 8
81

,· · · The total length removed can also be represented as

∞
X 2i
i=0
3i+1

 
1 1
This sum can be determined through the sum as a geometric series, or 3 1− 23
= 1. This
means that everything removed has length 1. As mentioned previously, the starting interval,
T0 , has length 1 as well. A simple subtraction of the removed portion from the initial length
will give the final length of T as 0. Therefore, T has length 0.

The following theorem will be explored through examples, but will not be proven. A
similar proof can be found in Chapter 3.

Theorem 4. The ternary Cantor set only contains numbers that have a base-3 representation
excluding the digit 1.

A brief review of base-3 representation is necessary to proceed with this example. Base-3,
or ternary, representation consists of 3 digits, 0, 1, and 2. A number of the form (.a1 a2 a3 · · · )3
can be thought of in terms of sums of fractions with numerators an and denominators 3n .
a1 a2 a3
That is, (.a1 a2 a3 · · · )3 = 3
+ 32
+ 33
+ · · · where an must be either 0, 1, or 2.

The claim is every number that is in the ternary Cantor set can be written in base-3
representation with only 2’s and 0’s. That is, ∀ x ∈ T, x = (.a1 a2 a3 · · · )3 such that ai ∈ {0,
2}. It is helpful to look at endpoints, starting with T1 = [0, 31 ] ∪ [ 23 , 1]. This means that it

4
 1 2
contains everything between 0 and 3
and then everything between 3
and 1. The endpoints
0, 13 , 23 , and 1 are included as well. Looking at the endpoints in base-3 representation is
1 2 1
useful. 0 = (.0)3 , 3
= (.1)3 = (.02)3 , 3
= (.2)3 , and 1 = (.2)3 . The endpoints 3
and 1 are
particularly interesting. 1 = (.2)3 since 2 is the largest digit in base-3. This is the same idea
1
that is used in base-10 where 1 = (.9)10 . 3
= (.1)3 because it is simply 1 * 13 . This can be
rewritten using repeating digits just like the number 1. Any number in base-3 with a 1 as
a terminating digit can actually be rewritten by replacing the 1 with 02. We can see this
when converting (.02)3 into base-10:

1 1 1
(.02)3 = 0 ∗ 1
+ 2 ∗ 2 + 2 ∗ 3 + ···
3 3 3

which is a geometric series written as

∞ ∞
X 2 X 1
j
=2∗
j=2
3 j=2
3j

 1  1
9 9
=2∗ 1 =2∗ 2
1− 3 3

1 3 3 1
=2∗ ∗ = =
9 2 9 3
1
This conversion shows that 3
= (.1)3 = (.02)3 . The first interval, [0, 31 ] in base-3 can be
written as any number x where x = (.0a2 · · · )3 , where a2 represents any of the base-3 digits.
Similarly, the second interval, [ 32 , 1] in base-3 can be written as any number x where x =
(.2a2 · · · )3 , again where a2 is any base-3 digit.

1
The same procedure can be repeated for T2 . T2 = [0, 9
] ∪ [ 29 , 1
3
] ∪ [ 23 , 7
9
] ∪ [ 98 , 1].
In addition to the previous endpoints, 0, 13 , 23 , and 1, there are 4 more endpoints. These
1 2 7 8
endpoints can be written in base-3 as follows: 9
= (.002)3 , 9
= (.02)3 , 9
= (.202)3 , and 9
=
(.22)3 . These endpoints can again create restrictions with what digits in base-3 representation
are included. For example, the interval [0, 19 ] in base-3 can be written as any number x where

5
x = (.00a3 · · · )3 , where a3 represents any of the base-3 digits. The next new interval, [ 29 , 13 ]
in base-3 can be written as any number x where x = (.02a3 · · · )3 , where a3 represents any of
the base-3 digits. Using this notation, [ 23 , 79 ] would have x = (.20a3 · · · )3 , and [ 98 , 1] would
have x = (.22· · · )3 . This shows that as each iteration continues, the digits of the base-3
representations become more specific. Each iteration adds a new digit restriction for this
ternary representation.
A proof in one of the following chapters will give a similar proof of base representations
in a generalized Cantor set.
A set is considered uncountable when the number of elements cannot be written as some
subset of the natural numbers.

Theorem 5. The Cantor set is uncountable.

Proof. This will be a proof by contradiction using similar methods as Shaver [6]. First assume
that the ternary set is countable. This means that there exists an onto function that maps
all elements from the natural numbers to the set. Recall from Theorem 4 that the ternary
Cantor set consists of all numbers ∈ [0,1] that can be written in base-3 representation using
only 0’s and 2’s. These numbers are of the form (.a1 a2 a3 · · · )3 such that each ai is either 0
or 2. This set will be denoted as T = {x ∈ [0,1] : x has base-3 representation of only 0’s and
2’s }. Assume that this set is countable, f: N → T, where f is one to one and onto. Let

f (1) = 0.a11 a12 a13 · · ·

f (2) = 0.a21 a22 a23 · · ·

f (3) = 0.a31 a32 a33 · · ·

..
.

Each of aij must be 0’s or 2’s, based on the base-3 representation theorem that was previously
discussed. Define a number b as b = .b1 b2 · · · where

6
 

2 if ajj = 0

bj =

0 if ajj = 2


It is clear by this piecewise function that b ∈ T since its base-3 representation only
contains 0’s and 2’s. However b 6= f(n) ∀ n because they differ in the nth ternary position.
Therefore this function is not onto, which creates a contradiction that there exists an onto
function that maps all elements of N into the set.

A set is nowhere dense when every open interval contains a subinterval such that the
intersection of the subinterval and the original set is equal to the empty set. Alternatively,
a set is nowhere dense if it contains no open intervals.

Theorem 6. The ternary Cantor set is nowhere dense.

Proof. To prove that the ternary Cantor set is nowhere dense, we must show that T has no
open intervals, similar to the methods used in Dimartino [3]. Let J be an open interval in
1
[0,1] with length λ. Choose i such that 3i
< λ. Ti is a union of 2i pairwise disjoint closed
1
intervals, known as the components of Ti . Each component of Ti has length 3i
. Now let L
be a component of Ti . Define ` as the length of a component. Then `(L) = 31i < λ = `(J).
Therefore, J * L ⊆ Ti . Since the Cantor set, T = ∞
T
i=1 Ti , then J * T, otherwise J would

be a subset of all Ti , but we have shown that J * Ti . Therefore the Cantor set contains no
open intervals and is nowhere dense.

Isolated points are defined as any point that is some positive distance away from every
other point in the set.

Theorem 7. The ternary Cantor set has no isolated points.

Proof. To prove this we must show that every point in T is a limit point. Suppose x ∈ T.
We must show that ∀ ε > 0 ∃ y ∈ T with |x - y| < ε and y does not equal x. Let x ∈ T
1
and ε > 0. Choose i such that 3i
< ε. Since x ∈ T and T = ∩Ti , then x ∈ Ti . This means

7
 1
that there is a component, L of Ti such that x ∈ L and `(L) = 3i
. Now, L ∩Ti+1 has 2
components, L0 and L1 , and x must be in one of these. Say x ∈ L0 . L0 also contains a point
1
in T called y. In particular, y is an endpoint of L0 . Then | x - y | ≤ 3i
< ε.

A perfect set is a closed set with no isolated points.

Theorem 8. The ternary Cantor set is a perfect set.

Theorem 2 and Theorem 7 show that the Cantor set is closed and has no isolated points,
so this theorem has already been proved.
The ternary Cantor set is easily the most studied version of the Cantor set due to its
unique properties. The next chapters will explore more general Cantor sets, where a different
proportion is removed during each iteration and determine which properties hold in those
particular sets.

8
Chapter 2

The n1 -ary Cantor Set

The previous chapter described numerous characteristics and properties of the ternary
1
Cantor set. The word ternary meant that the middle 3
was being removed during each
iteration. It is interesting to look at variations on this typical Cantor set to see what can be
discovered. We will look at variations of this construction in the next two chapters. These
sets can again be described by what is being removed during in each iteration. We first will
1
look at removing the middle n
during each iteration. These sets can be denoted as Ci k ,
where i denotes the ith iteration and k describes the portion of the interval being removed
1
at each iteration. Using this notation, the ternary Cantor set would be written as C 3 and
1
the 2nd iteration of the ternary Cantor set would be written as C2 3 . This chapter will begin
by exploring the endpoints of the first iteration of C and eventually attempting to create a
1
base representation of all numbers that are in C, where C represents C n .

Lemma 9. The endpoints of C can be represented as

n−1 n+1
a= and b =
2n 2n

where C1 = [0, a] ∪ [b, 1].

1 1
Proof. Let k = n
where n
is the middle portion of the interval that is being removed. Then

9
after the first iteration, [0, a] ∪ [b, 1] is remaining. Since k is being removed from the initial
interval, then b − a = k. The combined lengths of [0, a] and [b, 1] must equal 1 − k. That is,
(a − 0) + (1 − b) = 1 − k.

The lengths of [0, a] and [b, 1] must be equal since the interval removed is in the middle
of the initial interval. Since the two intervals are equal, then they each must be half the
length of what is remaining after removing the middle interval. That is

1 1
a − 0 = a = (1 − k) and 1 − b = (1 − k)
2 2

These can finally be simplified to

1−k 1+k
a= and b =
2 2

1
Substituting n
for k yields
1 1
1− n
1+ n
a= and b =
2 2

which simplifies to
n−1 n+1
a= and b =
2n 2n

The following proofs relate back to the initial list of properties of the ternary Cantor
1
set listed in chapter 1 that were not proved. Since 3
is in the form of n1 , where n = 3, the
ternary set falls under these particular Cantor sets. Therefore, the following collection of
proofs also prove results for the ternary Cantor set. We start by looking at the number of
intervals remaining and removed after each iteration of C.

Lemma 10. Ci consists of 2i pairwise disjoint subintervals, [s, t].

Proof. We give a proof by induction. Case i = 1: based on the previous theorem, C1 consists
n−1
of disjoint intervals of the form [0, 2n
] ∪ [ n+1
2n
, 1]. It is clear that C1 consists of 2 = 21

10
intervals, so this holds for i = 1.

Assume true for Ci . Consider case Ci+1 . By construction, after removing the middle
1
n
of any interval, 2 will remain. Therefore, each component [s, t] of Ci creates 2 pairwise
disjoint intervals to Ci+1 . Therefore, the number of subintervals in Ci+1 = 2 * the number
of subintervals in Ci . With the inductive hypothesis, this is equal to 2(2i ) = 2i+1 .

Lemma 11. 2i intervals are removed from Ci when constructing Ci+1 .

Proof. Based on the previous theorem, we know that Ci consists of 2i pairwise disjoint
intervals. Therefore, to construct Ci+1 , we will remove a middle portion of each interval in
Ci . Since there are 2i intervals in Ci , then that means we will remove a middle portion from
each of these intervals, so we will remove 2i intervals from Ci to construct Ci+1 .

The next property to explore in the n1 -ary Cantor set is the length of these intervals that
remain after each iteration, as well as the length of the intervals that are removed during
each iteration of C.

Lemma 12. The length of each interval remaining in a component of Ci is

 i
n−1
2n

n−1
Proof. We give a proof by induction. For the i = 1 case, C1 is defined as [0, 2n
] ∪ [ n+1
2n
, 1].
The lengths of each component of C1 are equal since the middle interval is removed. This
n−1 n−1
means that each interval in C1 has length 2n
−0 = 2n
. Therefore, this holds for the i = 1
case.

Assume true for Ci . Consider Ci+1 . Each interval of this iteration will have equal length
due to the construction of removing the middle interval. If the portion of the interval being
removed is n1 , then that means that n−1
n
is remaining. This n−1
n
must be split between the
two remaining intervals. Since the middle portion is being removed, this will be an even split,
so any interval remaining in Ci+1 will be n−1 n−1 i

th

2n
of the previous interval’s length, 2n
,

11
which can be written as
 i
n−1 n−1
2n 2n
 i+1
n−1
=
2n

Lemma 13. The length of each interval that is removed during iteration Ci to create Ci+1
is equal to n1 n−1

i
2n

Proof. Let [s, t] be a component of Ci and [s0 , t0 ] be the interval that is removed from Ci to
construct Ci+1 . The length of [s0 , t0 ] is equal to t0 − s0 . This interval can be thought of as
1 th
one n
of [s, t]. This expression can be written as n1 ∗ (t − s). From the previous lemma, the
0 0 1 n−1 i
length of (t − s) is equal to n−1

i

2n
. Therefore, the length of [s , t ] = n 2n
.

Using the previous four lemmas in conjunction, we can now explore the total length
removed and the total length remaining in each iteration of C.

(n−1)i
Lemma 14. The total length removed in each iteration of Ci to create Ci+1 is ni+1
.

Proof. Based on Lemma 11, there are 2i intervals removed during each iteration of C. Based

i
on Lemma 13, each of these intervals have length n1 ∗ n−1 2n
. Then, the total length removed

i
would be 2i intervals of this length n1 ∗ n−1
2n
, which can be written as

1 (n − 1)i (n − 1)i
2i ∗ ∗ =
n 2i ni ni+1

n−1 i


Lemma 15. The total length remaining in each iteration of Ci is equal to n
.

n−1
Proof. We give a proof by induction. Consider i = 1 case. C1 consists of [0, 2n
] ∪ [ n+1
2n
, 1].
The length of each of these intervals are equal since the middle interval is removed. The first

12
 n−1 n−1
interval has length 2n
-0= 2n
. Since C1 consists of two such intervals, the total length
of C1 is
 1
n−1 n−1 n−1
2∗ = =
2n n n

Therefore, this holds for the i = 1 case.

Assume true for Ci . Consider the i + 1 case. To construct Ci+1 , we will remove n1 of Ci .
Based on the inductive hypothesis, Ci has length of n−1

i
n
. Then Ci+1 will have length

 i  i
n−1 1 n−1
− ∗
n n n

(n − 1)i 1 (n − 1)i
= − ∗
ni n ni
(n − 1)i (n − 1)i
= −
ni ni+1
n(n − 1)i − (n − 1)i
=
ni+1
(n − 1)i (n − 1)
=
ni+1
i+1
(n − 1)i+1

n−1
= =
ni+1 n

Therefore, each iteration of Ci has length n−1

i
n
.

The previous six lemmas are useful in looking at the total length of the n1 -ary Cantor set,
much like we did with the ternary Cantor set.

Theorem 16. The n1 -ary Cantor set has length 0.

Proof. This can be proven by looking at everything that is being removed from C. Recall by
(n−1)i
Lemma 14 that ni+1
is removed during each iteration of Ci . This means that during C0 ,
1 (n−1) (n−1)2
n1
is removed, during C1 , n2
is removed, and during C2 , n3
is removed. This pattern

13
continues and total length removed can be written as

∞
X (n − 1)j
j=0
nj+1

1
n
=
1 − n−1
n

1 1
n n
= n n−1 = 1 =1
n
− n n

This means that the total length of 1 is removed. The length of C0 is the length of the
initial interval, [0, 1] which is 1. Therefore, the length of C is 1 − 1 = 0.

The next few proofs utilize the notation of the endpoints in C1 and attempt to generalize
what numbers remain in C by giving a base representation, much like the ternary Cantor
set has. These theorems must be given in cases based on parity of the endpoints as follows.

1 n−1 n+1
Theorem 17. When the n in n
being removed is even, a = 2n
and b = 2n
are both
irreducible fractions.

Proof. When n is even, then the endpoints a and b are fractions with numerators n − 1 and
n−1 n+1
n + 1 respectively. Since n is even, n + 1 and n − 1 must both be odd. Then 2n
or 2n
will
reduce if and only if GCD(n − 1, 2n) > 1 or GCD(n + 1, 2n) > 1 respectively.

Suppose r | n − 1 and also r | 2n. There exists 2 integers, x and y, such that

n − 1 = rx and 2n = ry

Then
2n
n = rx + 1 and y =
r

Using substitution,
2n = 2(rx + 1) = 2rx + 2

14
Therefore,
2rx + 2 2
y= = 2x +
r r
2
is an integer. Since y and 2x are integers, r
must also be an integer. Therefore, r = 1 or
r = 2. Since n is even, n − 1 is odd. So 2 - n − 1. Therefore, r = 1 and GCD(n − 1, 2n) = 1
n−1
so a = 2n
is irreducible.
For endpoint b, suppose r | n + 1 and also r | 2n. There exists 2 integers, x and y, such
that
n + 1 = rx and 2n = ry

Then
2n
n = rx − 1 and y =
r

Using substitution,
2n = 2(rx − 1) = 2rx − 2

Therefore,
2rx − 2 2
y= = 2x −
r r
2
is an integer. Since y and 2x are integers, r
must also be an integer. Therefore, r = 1 or
r = 2. Since n is even, n + 1 is odd so 2 - n + 1. Therefore, r = 1 and GCD(n + 1, 2n) = 1
n+1
so b = 2n
is irreducible.

1 n−1 n+1
Theorem 18. When the n in n
being removed is odd, a = 2n
and b = 2n
can be reduced
k k+1
to the irreducible form a = 2k+1
and b = 2k+1
where n = 2k + 1.

Proof. Let n = 2k + 1 where k is an integer. The endpoints a and b can then be rewritten as

n−1 2k + 1 − 1 2k k
a= = = =
2n 2(2k + 1) 2(2k + 1) 2k + 1

and
n+1 2k + 1 + 1 2k + 2 k+1
b= = = =
2n 2(2k + 1) 2(2k + 1) 2k + 1

15
 Suppose r | k and also r | 2k + 1. There exist 2 integers, x and y, such that

k = rx and 2k + 1 = ry

Then
2k + 1
y=
r

Therefore,
2rx + 1 2rx 1 1
y= = + = 2x +
r r r r
1
is an integer. Since y is an integer, then r
must also be an integer. Therefore, r = 1 and
k
GCD(k, 2k + 1) = 1 and endpoint a = 2k+1
is irreducible.

Suppose r | k + 1 and r | 2k + 1. There exists 2 integers, x and y, such that

k + 1 = rx and 2k + 1 = ry

Then
2k + 1
k = rx − 1 and y =
r

and
2(rx − 1) + 1
y=
r
2rx − 1
y=
r
1
y = 2x −
r
1
is an integer. Since y is an integer, then r
must also be an integer. Therefore, r = 1 and
k+1
GCD(k + 1, 2k + 1) = 1 and endpoint b = 2k+1
is irreducible.

1
Theorem 19. When the n in n
being removed is even, the endpoints after the first iteration
n−1
can be represented in base 2n as a = 2n
= (.(n - 1)0000· · · )2n = (.(n - 2)2n − 1)2n and b
n+1
= 2n
= (.(n + 1)000· · · )2n .

16
Proof. The proof follows by converting base 2n representations to base 10 representations
as follows:
n − 2 2n − 1 2n − 1
(.(n − 2)(2n − 1))2n = + + + ···
2n (2n)2 (2n)3
∞
n − 2 X 2n − 1
= +
2n j=2
(2n)j
∞
n−2 X 1
= + (2n − 1) ∗
2n j=2
(2n)j
1
n−2 (2n)2
= + (2n − 1) ∗ 1
2n 1 − 2n
1
!
n−2 (2n)2
= + (2n − 1) ∗ 2n−1
2n 2n
 
n−2 1 2n
= + (2n − 1) ∗ 2 ∗
2n (2n) 2n − 1
n−2 1 n−1
= + =
2n 2n 2n

Therefore,
n−1
a= = ((n − 2)(2n − 1))2n
2n

Converting b base 2n to b base 10 requires looking at each digit and dividing by 2n to

1
the nth power. The first digit in base 2n is simply equal to 2n
multiplied by the first digit.
This means that
n+1 n+1
(.(n + 1)0000 · · · )2n = = =b
2n 2n

1
Example. We consider the case of removing the middle n
where n = 4 is even. Thus, the
n−1 n+1
endpoints are a = 2n
and b = 2n
:

17
 1
The endpoints a and b in the 4
case would be

4−1 3 4+1 5
a= = and b = =
2(4) 8 2(4) 8

Endpoint a can be represented in base 2(4) = 8 as

3
= (.(4 − 2)(2(4) − 1))8 = (.27)8
8

which can be seen by converting this to base 10 representation:

2 7 7
(.27)8 = + 2 + 3 + ···
8 8 8

∞
2 X 7
= +
8 j=2 8j

∞
!
2 X 1
= +7∗
8 j=2
8j
!
1
2 64
= +7∗ 1
8 1− 8
!
1
2 64
= +7∗ 7
8 8
!
2 1 8
= +7∗ ∗
8 64 7

2 1
2 7 3
= +7∗ = + = =a
8 56 8 56 8
3
Therefore, a = 8
= (.27)8 .

Endpoint b can be represented in base 2(4) = 8 as

5
= (.(4 + 1)0000 · · · )8 = (.5)8
8
18
which can be seen by converting this to base 10 representation:

5 5
(.5)8 = = =b
81 8

5
T heref ore, b = 8
= (.5)8 .

1
Theorem 20. When the n in n
being removed is odd, the endpoints after the first iteration
k
can be represented in base 2k + 1 as a = 2k+1
= (.k0000· · · )2k+1 = (.(k - 1)2k)2k+1 and b =
k+1
2k+1
= (.(k + 1)000· · · )2k+1 where n = 2k + 1.

Proof. Let n = 2k + 1. The endpoints, a and b, can determine which digits will be included
in the base representation.

n−1 k
a= = can be represented in base 2k + 1 as (.k0000 · · · )2k+1 = (.(k − 1)2k)2k+1
2n 2k + 1

The proof follows by converting a in base 2k + 1 to a in base 10:

k−1 2k 2k
+ 2 + + ···
2k + 1 (2k + 1) (2k + 1)3

∞
k−1 X 2k
= +
2k + 1 j=2 (2k + 1)j

∞
k−1 X 1
= + (2k) ∗
2k + 1 j=2
(2k + 1)j
 1 
k−1 (2k+1)2
= + 2k ∗ 1
2k + 1 1 − 2k+1
1
!
k−1 (2k+1)2
= + 2k ∗ 2k
2k + 1 2k+1
 
k−1 1 2k + 1
= + 2k ∗ 2 ∗
2k + 1 (2k + 1) 2k

k−1 1 k
= + = =a
2k + 1 2k + 1 2k + 1

19
 n−1 k
Therefore, a = 2n
= 2k+1
= (.(k - 1)2k)2k+1

n+1 k+1
b= = can be represented in base 2k + 1 as (.(k + 1)0000 · · · )2k+1
2n 2k + 1

We will convert b in base 2k + 1 to b in base 10. The first digit in base 2k + 1 is simply equal
1
to 2k+1
multiplied by the first digit. This means that

k+1 0 0
(.(k + 1)0000 · · · )2k+1 = + 2 + + ···
2k + 1 (2k + 1) (2k + 1)3

k+1
(.(k + 1)0000 · · · )2k+1 = =b
2k + 1

1
Example. We consider the case of removing the middle n
where n = 5 is odd. Thus, the
n−1 k n+1 k+1
endpoints are a = 2n
= 2k+1
and b = 2n
= 2k+1
where n = 2k + 1:
n−1 1 5−1
Solving n = 2k + 1 for k = 2
. In the 5
case, k = 2
= 2 and the endpoints a and b
would be
2 2 2+1 3
a= = and b = =
2(2) + 1 5 2(2) + 1 5

Endpoint a can be represented in base 2(2) + 1 = 5 as

(.(2 − 1)(2(2)))5 = (.14)5

which can be seen by converting this to base 10 representation:

1 4 4
(.14)5 = + 2 + 3 + ···
5 5 5

∞
1 X 4
= +
5 j=2 5j

20
 ∞
!
1 X 1
= +4∗
5 j=2
5j
!
1
1 25
= +4∗ 1
5 1− 5
!
1
1 25
= +4∗ 4
5 5
!
1 1 5
= +4∗ ∗
5 25 4

1 1
1 4 2
= +4∗ = + = =a
5 20 5 20 5
2
Therefore, a = 5
= (.14)5 .

Endpoint b can be represented in base 2(2) + 1 = 5 as

(.(2 + 1)0000 · · · )5 = (.3)5

which can be seen by converting this to base 10 representation:

3 3
(.3)5 = 1
= =b
5 5

3
Therefore, b = 5
= (.3)5 .

The previous two theorems will only hold true for the first iteration of C. These will not
help determine if a number is in C. They are only used to determine the base representations
of the endpoints of the first iteration of C. The purpose of these two theorems was an attempt
to generalize the base representations of numbers that are in the n1 -ary Cantor set. However,
the base representations of numbers in the n1 -ary Cantor set are more complicated than those
of the ternary Cantor set. This will lead us into the next Cantor set.

To demonstrate how an attempt to restrict the digits used in base representations in the
1
n
-ary Cantor set fails, we will look at 2 previous examples, one where n is even and one

21
where n is odd.

Recall the 14 -ary Cantor set. Since n = 4 is even, we will be working in base 2(4) = 8
without using the middle digits, which are 3 and 4. We previously showed that C1 =
[0, 38 ], ∪[ 85 , 1] and that 0 = (.0)8 , 38 = (.27)8 , 85 = (.5)8 , and1 = (.7)8 . These endpoints all can
be written in base 8 without using the middle 2 digits. To elaborate, the base-8 digits are
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Therefore, the middle 2 digits are 3 and 4, which are not used in
the base-8 representations of these endpoints. Although the Theorem 19 was only referring
to the endpoints, we will see that we cannot easily define the base representations of what
remains like we can in the ternary Cantor set. Since there are no issues regarding these
middle digits in the first iteration, we will look at the second iteration.

9 15 3 5 49 55
C2 = [0, ] ∪ [ , ] ∪ [ , ] ∪ [ , 1]
64 64 8 8 64 64

9 15 49 55
We must now convert the new endpoints , , ,
64 64 64
and 64
to base 8 to see if there are any 3’s
9
or 4’s in their representations. 64
= (.11)8 , 15
64
49
= (.17)8 , 64 = (.61)8 , and 55
64
= (.67)8 . None
of these endpoints use the digits 3 or 4, so in theory, a theorem restricting the n1 -ary Cantor
set when n is even to base 2n without the middle 2 digits is still plausible.

However, when looking at the third iteration, numerous counterexamples surface.

27 45 9 15 147 165 3 5 347 365 49 55 467 485

C3 = [0, ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , 1]
512 512 64 64 512 512 8 8 512 512 64 64 512 512

27 45 147 165 347 365 467 485

We will now convert the new endpoints, , , , , , , ,
512 512 512 512 512 512 512
and 512
to base 8. The
27 45
conversions are as follows: 512
= (.033)8 , 512 = (.055)8 , 147
512
= (.223)8 , 165
512
347
= (.245)8 , 512 =
(.533)8 , 365
512
467
= (.555)8 , 512 = (.723)8 , and 485
512
= (.745)8 . This shows that there are some end-
points in C3 that use the digits 3 or 4 in their base 8 representation. We cannot manipulate
the base representation to eliminate all of the 3’s and 4’s since they are not all terminating
digits. Since some endpoints cannot be written without those two digits, this shows that we
cannot restrict the base representations of elements in the n1 -ary Cantor set when n is even.

22
 1 1
We will now look at an example of the n
-ary Cantor set where n is odd. Recall the 5

example. Since n = 5, we will be working in base 5 without using the middle digit, 2. We
previously showed that C1 = [0, 52 ] ∪ [ 53 , 1] and that 0 = (.0)5 , 52 = (.14)5 , 35 = (.3)5 , and
1 = (.4)5 . None of these endpoints use the digit 2 in their base 5 representation. Since there
are no issues in the first iteration, we will look at the second iteration.

4 6 2 3 19 21
C2 = [0, ] ∪ [ , ] ∪ [ , ] ∪ [ , 1]
25 25 5 5 25 25

4 6 19 21
We must now convert the new endpoints, , , ,
25 25 25
and 25
to base 5 to see if there are any
4 6
2’s in their representations. 25
= (.04)5 , 25 = (.11)5 , 19
25
= (.34)5 , and 21
25
= (.41)5 . None of
these endpoints use the digit 2, so in theory, a theorem restricting the n1 -ary Cantor set when
n is odd to base n without the middle digit is still plausible.
However, when looking at the third iteration, numerous counterexamples surface.

8 12 4 6 38 42 2 3 83 87 19 21 113 117
C3 = [0, ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , 1]
125 125 25 25 125 125 5 5 125 125 25 25 125 125

8
We will now convert the new endpoints, , 12 , 38 , 42 , 83 , 87 , 113 ,
125 125 125 125 125 125 125
and 117
125
to base 5. The
8 12 38 42 83
conversions are as follows: 125
= (.013)5 , 125 = (.022)5 , 125 = (.123)5 , 125 = (.132)5 , 125 =
87
(.313)5 , 125 = (.322)5 , 113
125
= (.423)5 , and 117
125
= (.432)5 . This shows that there are some
endpoints in C3 that use the digit 2 in the base 5 representation. We cannot manipulate the
base representation to eliminate all of the 2’s since they are not all terminating digits. Since
some endpoints cannot be written without this digit, this shows that we cannot restrict the
base representations of elements in the n1 -ary Cantor set when n is odd.

23
Chapter 3

The n−1
n -ary Cantor Set

The next variation of the Cantor set can be constructed by removing a proportion of
n−1
n
during each iteration. Some examples of middle intervals that satisfy this requirement
include 12 , 32 , 34 , and 54 . Like the ternary Cantor set, the actual set can be described by the
intersection of the iterations. That is, C = ∩Ci . This set will be explored in an attempt
to determine a generalized base representation of all elements of C. Much like the previous
chapter, we will start by looking at the representation of the endpoints of the first iteration
of C, and eventually determine the base representation of elements of this set where C is
n−1
C n .
 th
n−1
Lemma 21. The endpoints after removing the middle n
from the interval [0, 1] can
be represented as
1 2n − 1
a= and b =
2n 2n

where C1 = [0, a] ∪ [b, 1].

n−1 n−1
Proof. Let k = n
where n
is the middle portion of the interval that is being removed.
Then after the first iteration, [0, a] ∪ [b, 1] is remaining. Since k is being removed from the
initial interval, then b − a = k. The combined lengths of [0, a] and [b, 1] must equal 1 − k.
That is, (a − 0) + (1 − b) = 1 − k. The lengths of [0, a] and [b, 1] must be equal since the
interval removed is the middle of the initial interval. Since the two intervals are equal, then

24
they each must be half the length of what is remaining after removing the middle interval.
That is
1 1
a − 0 = a = (1 − k) and 1 − b = (1 − k)
2 2

These can finally be simplified to

1−k 1+k
a= and b =
2 2

n−1
Substituting n
for k yields

1 − n−1
n
1 + n−1
n
a= and =
2 2

which eventually simplifies to

1 2n − 1
a= and b =
2n 2n

The following proofs are similar to the initial properties of the ternary Cantor set listed
1
in Chapter 1 and proved in chapter 2 for C n . In this case, however, they are strictly for the
n−1
n
-ary Cantor set. The first two lemmas will explore how many intervals remain and are
removed during each iteration of C.

Lemma 22. Ci consists of 2i pairwise disjoint subintervals.

This proof follows the same structure as the proof for Lemma 10 in Chapter 2.

Lemma 23. 2i intervals are removed from Ci when constructing Ci+1 .

This proof follows the same structure as the proof for Lemma 11 in Chapter 2.

The next two lemmas will look at the lengths of the intervals remaining in each iteration
of C as well as the length of each interval that is removed from C.

25
 1 i


Lemma 24. The length of each interval remaining in a component of Ci is 2n
.

1
Proof. Let [s, t] be a component of Ci . For i = 1, C1 is defined as [0, 2n
] ∪ [ 2n−1
2n
, 1]. The
lengths of each component of C1 are equal since the middle interval is removed. This means
1 1 1 1


that each interval in C1 has length 2n - 0 = 2n . This is also equal to 2n . Therefore, this
holds for the i = 1 case.

Assume true for Ci . Consider Ci+1 . Each interval of this iteration will have equal length
n−1
due to the construction of removing the middle interval. If n
is being removed, then that
1 1
means that n
is remaining. This n
must be split between the two remaining intervals. Since
the middle portion is being removed, this will be an even split, so any interval remaining in
1 th 1 i



Ci+1 will be 2n of the previous interval’s length, 2n , which can be written as

 i  i+1
1 1 1
=
2n 2n 2n

Lemma 25. The length of each interval that is removed during iteration Ci to Ci+1 is equal
n−1
to 2i ni+1

Proof. Let [s, t] be a component of Ci with interval [s0 , t0 ] removed when constructing Ci+1 .
Then the length of [s0 , t0 ] is equal to t0 − s0 . This interval can be thought of as one of n−1 th
n

[s, t]. This expression can be written as n−1 1 i

n
∗ (t − s). The length of (t − s) is equal to 2n .
Therefore, the length of [s0 , t0 ] is

 i
n−1 1 n−1
= .
n 2n 2i ni+1

The next two lemmas will use the previous four lemmas to determine the total length
removed and remaining of each iteration of C.

26
 n−1
Lemma 26. The total length removed in each iteration of Ci to make Ci+1 is ni+1
.

Proof. Based on Lemma 23, there are 2i intervals removed during each iteration of C. Based
n−1
on Lemma 25, each of these intervals have length 2i ni+1
. Then, the total length removed
n−1
would be 2i intervals of this length 2i ni+1
, which can be written as

n−1 n−1
2i ∗ i i+1
= i+1
2n n

1 i


Lemma 27. The total length remaining in each iteration of Ci is equal to n
.

1
Proof. We give a proof by induction. Consider i = 1 case. C1 consists of [0, 2n ] ∪ [ 2n−1
2n
, 1].
The length of each of these intervals are equal since the middle interval is removed. The first
1 1
interval has length 2n
−0 = 2n
. Since C1 consists of two such intervals, the total length of
C1 is
1 2
2∗ =
2n 2n
1
=
n

Therefore, this holds for the i = 1 case.

Assume true for Ci . Consider the i + 1 case. To construct Ci+1 , we will remove n−1
n
of
i
Ci . Based on the inductive hypothesis, Ci has length of n1 . Then Ci+1 will have length

 i  i
i 1 n−1 i 1
2 − 2
2n n 2n

 
1 i n−1 1
=2 ∗ i i − ∗ 2i ∗ i i
2n n 2n
 
1 n−1 1
= i− ∗ i
n n n
1 n−1
= i
− i+1
n n
27
 n n−1
= −
ni+1 ni+1
 i+1
1 1
= i+1 =
n n

i
Therefore, each iteration of Ci has length n1 .

n−1
The previous six lemmas will now be used to determine the total length of the n
-ary
Cantor set.

n−1
Theorem 28. The n
-ary Cantor set has length 0.

Proof. This can be proven by looking at everything that is being removed from C. Recall by
n−1 n−1
Lemma 26 that ni+1
is removed during each iteration of Ci . This means that during C0 n1
n−1 n−1
is removed, during C1 n2
is removed, and during C2 n3
is removed. This pattern continues
and the total length removed can be written as

∞
X n−1
j=0
nj+1

∞
X 1
= (n − 1)
j=0
nj+1
!
1
n
= (n − 1) 1
1− n
 1 
n
= (n − 1) n−1
n

1 n
= (n − 1) ∗ ∗ =1
n n−1

This means that a length of 1 is removed. The starting length of C is the length of the initial
interval, [0, 1] = 1. Therefore, the length of C = 1 − 1 = 0.

It is important to note that the ternary, n1 -ary, and the n−1

n
-ary Cantor sets all had total
length 0. In the conclusion, we will consider if there are any variations in the Cantor set that

28
allow any length. The next few theorems are necessary to finalize the base representation of
n−1
all numbers in the n
-ary Cantor set.

n−1 1
Theorem 29. When n
is being removed from the interval [0, 1], the endpoints a = 2n
2n−1
and b = 2n
are both irreducible fractions.

1 2n−1
Proof. These endpoints, 2n
and 2n
will reduce if and only if GCD(1, 2n) > 1 or GCD(2n−
1, 2n) > 1.
For endpoint a, we attempt to show that the GCD(1, 2n) = 1. The GCD of any number
1
and 1 will always be 1, therefore GCD(1, 2n) = 1 so endpoint a = 2n
is irreducible.
For endpoint b, suppose r | 2n − 1 and r | 2n. There exists 2 integers, x and y, such that

2n − 1 = rx and 2n = ry

Then
rx + 1 2n
n= and y =
2 r

Using substitution,
 rx + 1 
2n = 2 = rx + 1
2

Therefore,
rx + 1 1
y= =x+
r r
1
is an integer. Since y is an integer, r
must also be an integer. Therefore r = 1 and
2n−1
GCD(2n − 1, 2n) = 1 so b = 2n
is irreducible.

Theorem 30. The left endpoints of the components in each Ci can be expressed in base 2n
using only the digits 0 and 2n - 1. If s is a left endpoint of a component of Ci , then s =
(.a1 a2 · · · ai 0)2n with all ak ∈ {0, (2n - 1) }.

Proof. Let [s, t] be a component of Ci . s can be written in the form of (.a1 a2 a3 · · · ai · · · )2n .
1
Consider case i = 1. C1 = [0, 2n ] ∪ [ 2n−1
2n
, 1]. The two left endpoints in this case are 0 and

29
2n−1
2n
. Looking at 0, this can be represented in base 2n as (.00)2n . This can easily be seen
because this would be
1 1 1
0∗ +0∗ + 0 ∗ + ···
2n (2n)2 (2n)3

= 0 + 0 + 0 + ··· = 0

Therefore, this holds for the first endpoint in the i = 1 case. The other left endpoint in this
2n−1
case is 2n
. This endpoint can be written as (.(2n - 1)0)2n . This can also be seen by looking
at the conversion from base 2n to base 10 as follows

1 1 1
(2n − 1) ∗ +0∗ 2
+0∗ + ···
2n (2n) (2n)3

1 2n − 1
= (2n − 1) ∗ +0=
2n 2n

Therefore, this holds for the second endpoint in the i = 1 case and will hold for both
endpoints in this case. Assume true for Ci and look at the Ci+1 case. If [s, t] is a component
of Ci then [s, s0 ] ∪ [t0 , t] ⊂ [s, t] with s = (.a1 a2 · · · ai 0)2n , where all ak ∈ {0, (2n − 1)}. The
two left endpoints are s and t0 . s will be written in base 2n using only 0 and (2n - 1) by the
inductive hypothesis since s is a left endpoint in Ci . Endpoint t0 = s + the length of Ci+1 +
the length removed in Ci . Based on the previous theorems, this will be written as

 i+1  i
0 1 n−1 1
t =s+ + ∗
2n n 2n

1 i+1 n−1


Let 2n
+ 2i ni+1
= x. We can see that x is written following the base 2n rules as follows

   i  i
1 1 n−1 1
x= ∗ + ∗
2n 2n n 2n

 i  
1 n−1 1
= ∗ +
2n n 2n

30
  i  
1 2n − 1
= ∗
2n 2n
 i  
1 1
= ∗ ∗ (2n − 1)
2n 2n
 i+1
1
= ∗ (2n − 1)
2n

This (2n − 1) is in the (i + 1)th position in the base representation since it is multiplied by
1 i+1
. Recall t0 = s + x, where s = (.a1 a2 · · · ai 0)2n . Therefore, t0 = (.a1 a2 · · · ai (2n − 1)0)2n


2n

and is of the form (.a1 a2 · · · ai+1 0)2n where ak ∈ {0, (2n − 1)}.

Theorem 31. The right endpoint t of a component in Ci can be written in base 2n using
only the digits 0 and (2n - 1) in the form t = (.a1 a2 · · · ai (2n − 1))2n with all ak ∈ {0, (2n -
1)}.

Proof. Let [s, t] be a component of Ci . Then t is the right endpoint in this case. Endpoint
t = s+ the length remaining. By Lemma 24, this can be expressed as

 i
1
t=s+
2n

Which by Theorem 30 can be written as

 i
1
t = (.a1 a2 · · · ai 0) +
2n

with all ai ∈ {0, 2n − 1} Clearly, the first part of t follows the requirements for the theorem.
1 i


We must show that 2n = (.0 · · · 0(2n − 1))2n with (2n−1) repeating starting in the (i+1)th
position.
∞
X (2n − 1)
=
j=i+1
(2n)j

∞
X 1
= (2n − 1) ∗
j=i+1
(2n)j

31
 1 i+1

!
2n
= (2n − 1) ∗ 1
1 − 2n

1 2n
= (2n − 1) ∗ ∗
(2n)i+1 2n − 1
 i
1 1
= i
=
(2n) 2n

Therefore, t = (.a1 a2 · · · ai 0)2n + (.0 · · · 0(2n − 1))2n where there are i 00 s in the second com-
ponent of t and all ak ∈ {0, (2n−1)}. This can finally be simplified to (.a1 a2 · · · ai (2n − 1))2n .

Theorem 32. x ∈ C if and only if

∞  j
X 1
x= aj ∗
j=1
2n

with aj ∈ {0, (2n - 1)}.

Proof. We first show that if x ∈ C then it can be written in base 2n using only 0 and (2n−1).
Since x ∈ C then there exists components [si , ti ] ⊆ Ci with x ∈ [si , ti ]. This is true for all i
because C = ∩Ci and if an element is in C, then by definition of intersections, it must be in
1 i


all Ci . Thus ∀ i |x − si | ≤ ti − si and by Lemma 24, |ti − si | = 2n . Then,

 i
1
lim |x − si | ≤ lim =0
i→∞ i→∞ 2n

Therefore the sequence {si } converges to x. We also know from Theorem 30 that si+1 =
ai+1
si + (2n) i+1 where ai+1 is either 0 or 2n − 1. Applying Theorem 30 to the left endpoints of si ,

i  j
X 1
x = lim si = lim aj ∗
i→∞ i→∞
j=1
2n

∞  j
X 1
= aj ∗
j=1
2n

32
where all aj ∈ {0, (2n − 1)}.

We next show that if x can be written in base 2n using only 0 and (2n − 1) then x ∈ C.
Recall that every left endpoint s of any component in Ci is of the form (.a1 a2 · · · ai 0)2n where
aj ∈ {0, (2n − 1)}. Since there are 2 choices for each aj , namely 0 or (2n − 1), then there are
exactly 2i numbers of this form. By Lemma 22, there are also 2i components of Ci . Therefore,
s is a left endpoint in Ci if and only if s = (.a1 a2 · · · ai 0)2n with all aj ∈ {0, (2n − 1)}. Let

∞  j
X 1
x= aj with all aj in {0, (2n − 1)}
j=1
2n

For all i ≥ 1

i  j ∞  j ∞  j
X 1 X 1 X 1
si = aj ≤ aj ≤ si + (2n − 1) = ti
j=1
2n j=1
2n j=i+1
2n

where [si , ti ] is a component of Ci . Therefore, x ∈ [si , ti ] ⊆ Ci ∀ i ≥ 1. Therefore, x ∈ C.

This final proof is useful since it can be used to determine if a given number is in the
n−1 n−1
n
-ary Cantor set, or what numbers the n
-ary Cantor set contains. If a number can be
written in base 2n using only the digits 0 and (2n - 1), it is in C. Furthermore, if a number
is in C, its base 2n representation uses only the digits 0 and (2n - 1). This is the sort of
conclusion that was attempted in Chapter 2. However, the n1 -ary Cantor set does not have
n−1
this property, where the n
-ary Cantor set does.
n−1
Example. We consider the case of removing the middle n
where n = 4 . Therefore, we
3
will be removing 4
during each iteration of C. The claim is that every endpoint in Ci can
be represented as s = (.a1 a2 · · · ai 0)2n with all ai in {0, (2n - 1)} if s is a left endpoint and
as t = (.a1 a2 · · · ai (2n − 1))2n with all ai in {0, (2n - 1)} if t is a right endpoint. In this case,
we will be working in base 2(4) = 8, using only the digits 0 and 2(4) − 1 = 7.

The first iteration of C is [0, 81 ] ∪ [ 78 , 1]. We must now convert each of these endpoints to
base-8. 0 = (.0)8 , 81 = (.1)8 , 78 = (.7)8 , and 1 = (.7)8 . Although the base-8 representation of

33
1
8
contains a 1, it can be rewritten as (.07)8 . In fact, any number terminating in 1 can be
rewritten with a 0 followed by a repeating 7. Since all of these endpoints can be written in
base-8 using only 0 and 7, this holds for C1 .
We will now look at the next iteration.

1 7 1 7 57 63
C2 = [0, ] ∪ [ , ] ∪ [ , ] ∪ [ , 1]
64 64 8 8 64 64

1 7
We must convert each new endpoint into base-8 as follows: 64
= (.01)8 = (.007)8 , 64 =
(.07)8 , 57
64
= (.71)8 = (.707)8 , and 63
64
= (.77)8 . All of these endpoints can be represented in
base-8 using only the digits 0 and 7, so the theorem still holds. We will look at one more
iteration, since the n1 -ary Cantor set failed in the third iteration, we will end by looking at
that one.

1 7 1 7 57 63 1 7 449 455 57 63 505 511

C3 = [0, ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , 1]
512 512 64 64 512 512 8 8 512 512 64 64 512 512

1 7
Again, we must convert the new endpoints to base-8 as follows: 512
= (.001)8 = (.0007)8 , 512 =
57 63 449 455
(.007)8 , 512 = (.071)8 = (.0707)8 , 512 = (.077)8 , 512 = (.701)8 = (.7007)8 , 512 = (.707)8 , 505
512
=
511
(.771)8 = (.7707)8 , and 512
= (.777)8 . As the theorem states, each of these endpoints are
represented in the proper form using the digits 0 and 7, so this example helps illustrate the
usefulness of this theorem.

34
Chapter 4

Conclusion

After studying a variety of Cantor sets, some questions arise. The first question would
1
be regarding the n
-ary Cantor set. One might wonder why there is a base representation
n−1
for elements in the n
-ary Cantor set but not the n1 -ary Cantor set. In fact, the only thing
1
that has the desired base representation in the n
-ary Cantor set are the endpoints during
the first iteration. These endpoints could be written in base 2n or base n, depending on the
parity of n, without using the middle digits of that particular base. On the other hand, the
n−1
n
-ary Cantor set has elements that only contain the digits 0 or (2n - 1) in base 2n. It
is easy to wonder why the n1 -ary Cantor set does not have a defined representation like the
n−1 1 1
n
-ary Cantor set, especially since 3
is of the form n
with n = 3.

1
Looking at n > 3, all n
-ary Cantor sets will involve either base n, when odd, or base
2n, when even. The smallest even number greater than 3 is 4, meaning base 2(4) = 8 will
be used. This base has digits 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Although the endpoints after the
first iteration of C can be written without using the digits 3 and 4, which was shown in an
example in a previous chapter, it becomes clear that more endpoints in later iterations will
contain some of these numbers since not every conflicting digit is the terminating digit. The
same is true for odd numbers. 5 is the smallest odd number greater than 3. This would
require base 5, which uses digits 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4. Based on Theorem 20, the endpoints can

35
be written without using digit 2, which happens to be the middle digit. However, by the
third iteration, some endpoints will only be able to be written using the digit 2, showing
that we cannot restrict the base representation of elements in the n1 -ary Cantor set.

It is then easy to wonder why we can, in fact, restrict digits in the ternary Cantor set. It
is of the form n1 . n = 3 is a very special case of the n1 -ary Cantor set. Recall the construction
1
of the ternary Cantor set. T1 is constructed by removing 3
from the interval [0, 1]. This
leaves the intervals [0, 31 ] ∪ [ 32 , 1]. The length of the first interval is 1
3
− 0 = 31 . The middle
portion removed also has length 13 . Finally, the length of the second interval is equal to
2
1− 3
= 31 . This shows that the length of the intervals remaining at the first iteration are
also equal to the length removed at the first iteration. In any other n1 -ary Cantor set, this
is not true. For example, in the 14 -ary Cantor set, the first iteration contains two intervals
3
with length 8
and the interval removed has length 14 , which are not all equal. This is also
true for when n is odd. For example, in the 51 -ary Cantor set, the first iteration contains
2
two intervals of length 5
and the length of the interval removed is length 15 . Therefore, the
ternary Cantor set is the only n1 -ary Cantor set where all three intervals have equal length.

It is also important to look at the digits in base 3. Since the ternary Cantor set has
n = 3, and n is odd, then we will be working in base n. The digits in base 3 are 0, 1,
and 2. When manipulating numbers in base 3, terminating digits can be written with a
repeating digit instead. For example, (.1)3 = (.02)3 . This is comparable to how 1 = (.9)10 .
In base 3, the only number we are restricting from our representation in the ternary Cantor
set is 1. This digit also falls in the middle of the digits. Since it is the only one being
restricted, we can easily write any terminating number with 1 as the final digit in the form
of 02. Any terminating number with 0 or 2 as the final digit is allowed, so we can manipulate
problematic decimals to remove the digit 1.

This idea relies primarily on the fact that 1 is the middle digit and there is only 1 digit
on either side of 1 when ordered numerically. For example, the 15 -ary Cantor set cannot use
this. The digits 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 are used in base 5. There will be instances where we cannot

36
write an element of this Cantor set in base 5 without the digit 2, so we cannot create a base
representation requirement of the general n1 -ary Cantor sets.

n−1
In an attempt to define the elements of some general Cantor set, the n
-ary Cantor set
was explored. This set is special because it is quite opposite of the n1 -ary Cantor set. Instead
1 1
of removing n
of the previous interval, we created a set that leaves n
of the previous interval
n−1 1
after the iteration is complete. That is, after n
is removed, exactly n
is left remaining.
Each interval is half of this length as previously explored, which can explain why two digits
n−1
are used for the base representation of the n
-ary Cantor set and why it is in base 2n.
Although these sets are slight variations of each other, both the n1 -ary Cantor set as well as
n−1
the n
-ary Cantor set have length 0.

This then causes one to wonder what has to be done for a Cantor set to have some sort
of length. An example of these can be seen in Lamb [4]. Smith-Volterra-Cantor sets, or
fat Cantor sets, are notable because they actually have some length. They start with the
traditional interval [0, 1]. Instead of removing a set portion during each iteration, this will
change.

There is a particular way to change the length removed during each iteration to properly
1
construct a fat Cantor set. For example, start with C0 = [0, 1]. Remove the middle 4
for the
1
first iteration of C. Then, for the second iteration, remove the middle 16
. This pattern will
1
continue, removing the middle 4i
each time.

In the previous example, the first few iterations of this fat Cantor set will look like

3 5 1
C1 = [0, ] ∪ [ , 1] with removed
8 8 4

45 51 3 5 205 211 1
C2 = [0, ]∪[ , ]∪[ , ]∪[ , 1] with removed
256 256 8 8 256 256 16

1
The total length removed during each iteration is 2i+1
. We will determine the length of
this fat Cantor set like we did in previous examples by determining the total length removed,

37
which can be written as
∞
X 1
j=1
2j+1
!
1 1
22 4 1
= 1 = 1 =
1− 2 2
2

1
Therefore, this particular fat Cantor set has length 1 − 2
= 12 , which is not equal to 0.
These Cantor sets are particularly interesting due to the fact that they have a length at the
end.

Finally, below are some tables summarizing the results from this paper.

1
n
-ary Cantor Set

Remaining Removed

Number of Intervals 2i 2i
n−1 i 1 n−1 i



Length of Intervals 2n n 2n
n−1 i

(n−1)i
Total Length at Iteration n ni+1

Endpoints of the First Iteration in n1 -ary Cantor Set, Even

a b
n−1 n+1
Endpoints 2n 2n

Irreducible Yes Yes

Base Notation (.(n - 2)(2n − 1))2n (.(n + 1)000· · · )2n

Endpoints of the First Iteration in n1 -ary Cantor Set, Odd

a b
k k+1
Endpoints 2k+1 2k+1

Irreducible Yes Yes

Base Notation (.(k - 1)(2k))2k+1 (.(k + 1)000· · · )2k+1

38
 n−1
n
-ary Cantor Set

Remaining Removed

Number of Intervals 2i 2i
1 i n−1


Length of Intervals 2n 2i ni+1
1 i n−1


Total Length at Iteration n ni+1

n−1
n
-ary Cantor Set

a b
1 2n−1
Endpoints of First Iteration 2n 2n

Irreducible Yes Yes

Base Notation of Endpoints Right: Left: (.a1 a2 · · · ai 0)2n
(.a1 a2 · · · ai (2n − 1))2n

39
Bibliography

[1] Amir D. Aczel, A Strange Wilderness the Lives of the Great Mathematicians, Sterling
Publishing Co. 2011.

[2] Robert Dimartino and Wilfredo O. Urbina, Excursions on Cantor-Like Sets,

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.7110.pdf

[3] Julian F. Fleron, A Note on the History of the Cantor Set and Cantor Function, Math-
ematics Magazine, Vol. 67, No. 2 (Apr., 1994), pp. 136 - 140.

[4] Evelyn Lamb, A Few of My Favorite Spaces: Fat Cantor Sets, Scientific Amer-
ican, https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/roots-of-unity/a-few-of-my-favorite-spaces-
fat-cantor-sets/.

[5] Dylan R. Nelson, A Cantor Set - A Brief Introduction, http://wwwmpa.mpa-

garching.mpg.de/ dnelson/storage/dnelson.cantor-set.pdf.

[6] Christopher Shaver, An Exploration of the Cantor Set,

https://www.missouriwestern.edu/orgs/momaa/ChrisShaver-CantorSetPaper4.pdf.

[7] Brian S. .Thomson, Judith B. Bruckner, Andrew M. Bruckner, Real Analysis, Second
Edition, Prentice Hall. 1997.

40
Biography

Rebecca Stettin was born in North Royalton, Ohio on August 4, 1995. She graduated
from North Royalton High School in 2013. At Ashland University, Rebecca is majoring in
mathematics and actuarial science. She served as an executive board member in Delta Zeta
sorority and as a member of Mathematics Association of America for the past four years.
Rebecca is a member of the mathematics honorary Pi Mu Epsilon, the Greek honorary Order
of Omega, the leadership honorary Omicron Delta Kappa, the women’s Greek honorary Rho
Lambda, as well as the freshman honorary Alpha Lambda Delta. She was on the Dean’s list
four semesters and is a recipient of Who’s Who Among College Students.
After graduation in May 2017, Rebecca plans to study for and pass actuary exams so she
can begin her career as an actuary.

41