Timeline for (Preference Relation/Set) Continuous $\succsim$ imply closedness of upper and lower contour sets
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2016 at 7:29 | comment | added | Frank Swanton | Kitsune, please take a look at my new attempt.. Thanks! | |
| Jun 18, 2016 at 5:31 | comment | added | Kitsune Cavalry♦ | Glad I could be of assistance. | |
| Jun 18, 2016 at 5:27 | vote | accept | Frank Swanton | ||
| Jun 18, 2016 at 5:26 | comment | added | Frank Swanton | Kitsune, thank you for the answer plus the picture; I am thoroughly appreciating the latter one as well :) While I re-read your answer to let it sink in, I at first didn't fully understood their definition of the contour set. Strictly set notation-wise speaking, for example lower contour set, denoted as $L(x)=\{y\in X:x\succsim y\}$. It got me confused, b/c we have $x$ in $L(x)$ but are talking about all other bundles $y$ such that condition. So pictorially, I understand this is basically the LHS lower half of the indifference curve in the case of $\mathbb{R}^2$. | |
| Jun 18, 2016 at 2:15 | history | answered | Kitsune Cavalry♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |