What happens to inequalities when $epsilon$ $to$ $0$?












1












$begingroup$


I recently came across a proof in topology. There was an inequality in which
$A$$<$$B$ + $epsilon$ (strictly less than),But when $epsilon$ $to$ $0$ , then it was inferred that $A$<=$B$.



Here $B$ is the infimum of a sequence and we are using the basic definition of infimum.(There is always a number between infimum and infimum + $epsilon$)



How is this possible?






real-analysis general-topology measure-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I think we will need a bit more context. What are $A$ and $B$, exactly? The infimum of what sequence?
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Jan 15 at 10:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For future reference, please refrain from using ALL CAPS in a single sentence. There's a high chance your question would be viewed as low quality by some.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:28










  • $begingroup$
    @BigbearZzz thanks, will make sure.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:39
















1












$begingroup$


I recently came across a proof in topology. There was an inequality in which
$A$$<$$B$ + $epsilon$ (strictly less than),But when $epsilon$ $to$ $0$ , then it was inferred that $A$<=$B$.



Here $B$ is the infimum of a sequence and we are using the basic definition of infimum.(There is always a number between infimum and infimum + $epsilon$)



How is this possible?






real-analysis general-topology measure-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I think we will need a bit more context. What are $A$ and $B$, exactly? The infimum of what sequence?
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Jan 15 at 10:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For future reference, please refrain from using ALL CAPS in a single sentence. There's a high chance your question would be viewed as low quality by some.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:28










  • $begingroup$
    @BigbearZzz thanks, will make sure.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:39














1












1








1


1



$begingroup$


I recently came across a proof in topology. There was an inequality in which
$A$$<$$B$ + $epsilon$ (strictly less than),But when $epsilon$ $to$ $0$ , then it was inferred that $A$<=$B$.



Here $B$ is the infimum of a sequence and we are using the basic definition of infimum.(There is always a number between infimum and infimum + $epsilon$)



How is this possible?






real-analysis general-topology measure-theory







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I recently came across a proof in topology. There was an inequality in which
$A$$<$$B$ + $epsilon$ (strictly less than),But when $epsilon$ $to$ $0$ , then it was inferred that $A$<=$B$.



Here $B$ is the infimum of a sequence and we are using the basic definition of infimum.(There is always a number between infimum and infimum + $epsilon$)



How is this possible?






real-analysis general-topology measure-theory




real-analysis general-topology measure-theory






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 15 at 11:21







Cosmic

















asked Jan 15 at 10:15









CosmicCosmic

8810




8810












  • $begingroup$
    I think we will need a bit more context. What are $A$ and $B$, exactly? The infimum of what sequence?
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Jan 15 at 10:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For future reference, please refrain from using ALL CAPS in a single sentence. There's a high chance your question would be viewed as low quality by some.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:28










  • $begingroup$
    @BigbearZzz thanks, will make sure.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:39


















  • $begingroup$
    I think we will need a bit more context. What are $A$ and $B$, exactly? The infimum of what sequence?
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    Jan 15 at 10:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For future reference, please refrain from using ALL CAPS in a single sentence. There's a high chance your question would be viewed as low quality by some.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:28










  • $begingroup$
    @BigbearZzz thanks, will make sure.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:39
















$begingroup$
I think we will need a bit more context. What are $A$ and $B$, exactly? The infimum of what sequence?
$endgroup$
– Arthur
Jan 15 at 10:17




$begingroup$
I think we will need a bit more context. What are $A$ and $B$, exactly? The infimum of what sequence?
$endgroup$
– Arthur
Jan 15 at 10:17




1




1




$begingroup$
For future reference, please refrain from using ALL CAPS in a single sentence. There's a high chance your question would be viewed as low quality by some.
$endgroup$
– BigbearZzz
Jan 15 at 10:28




$begingroup$
For future reference, please refrain from using ALL CAPS in a single sentence. There's a high chance your question would be viewed as low quality by some.
$endgroup$
– BigbearZzz
Jan 15 at 10:28












$begingroup$
@BigbearZzz thanks, will make sure.
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:39




$begingroup$
@BigbearZzz thanks, will make sure.
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:39










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

If $A<B+epsilon$ for all $epsilon > 0$, then we can conclude that $Aleq B$. In fact, this is the most you can conclude. It is in fact rather easy to prove the following statement:




$A$ is less than or equal to $B$ if and only if, for all $epsilon>0$, $A$ is less than $B+epsilon$. In symbols, this is:
$$(Aleq B) iff (forall epsilon > 0: A<B+epsilon)$$




We cannot conclude that $A<B$, and we cannot conclude $A=B$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, will make the edit, I found out that indeed the statement you provided was the actual doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    Can you give the proof for the statement you provided.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    @Cosmic I think it's good practice if you try to prove it yourself!
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:49










  • $begingroup$
    Will try doing that
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Cosmic The proof to the right is fairly straightforward. Proving to the left is best done through a proof by contradiction (or more simply, contrapositive)
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:54



















2












$begingroup$

I think you're misguided.



In general, for any $a,binBbb R$ such that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$, we can deduce only that $ale b$. Indeed, to prove the claim we can assume that $a>b$ and take $varepsilon=frac {a-b}2$ to get a contradiction.



Since I've seen you used the tag measure theory I'll assume further about how the proof you've seen conclude $a=b$ . Normally, when you want to prove that $a=b$ you'd need to show that $age b$ and $ale b$. In measure theory, it is often the case that the $age b$ direction is obvious or easy to show, hence you only need to do the other half. Proving $ale b$ directly could still be difficult, hence we instead prove that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$ and then deduce that $ale b$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, I found out that it was the case in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:42










  • $begingroup$
    @GitGud Right, thank you I'll make the edit.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:46












Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3074283%2fwhat-happens-to-inequalities-when-epsilon-to-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4












$begingroup$

If $A<B+epsilon$ for all $epsilon > 0$, then we can conclude that $Aleq B$. In fact, this is the most you can conclude. It is in fact rather easy to prove the following statement:




$A$ is less than or equal to $B$ if and only if, for all $epsilon>0$, $A$ is less than $B+epsilon$. In symbols, this is:
$$(Aleq B) iff (forall epsilon > 0: A<B+epsilon)$$




We cannot conclude that $A<B$, and we cannot conclude $A=B$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, will make the edit, I found out that indeed the statement you provided was the actual doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    Can you give the proof for the statement you provided.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    @Cosmic I think it's good practice if you try to prove it yourself!
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:49










  • $begingroup$
    Will try doing that
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Cosmic The proof to the right is fairly straightforward. Proving to the left is best done through a proof by contradiction (or more simply, contrapositive)
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:54
















4












$begingroup$

If $A<B+epsilon$ for all $epsilon > 0$, then we can conclude that $Aleq B$. In fact, this is the most you can conclude. It is in fact rather easy to prove the following statement:




$A$ is less than or equal to $B$ if and only if, for all $epsilon>0$, $A$ is less than $B+epsilon$. In symbols, this is:
$$(Aleq B) iff (forall epsilon > 0: A<B+epsilon)$$




We cannot conclude that $A<B$, and we cannot conclude $A=B$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, will make the edit, I found out that indeed the statement you provided was the actual doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    Can you give the proof for the statement you provided.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    @Cosmic I think it's good practice if you try to prove it yourself!
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:49










  • $begingroup$
    Will try doing that
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Cosmic The proof to the right is fairly straightforward. Proving to the left is best done through a proof by contradiction (or more simply, contrapositive)
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:54














4












4








4





$begingroup$

If $A<B+epsilon$ for all $epsilon > 0$, then we can conclude that $Aleq B$. In fact, this is the most you can conclude. It is in fact rather easy to prove the following statement:




$A$ is less than or equal to $B$ if and only if, for all $epsilon>0$, $A$ is less than $B+epsilon$. In symbols, this is:
$$(Aleq B) iff (forall epsilon > 0: A<B+epsilon)$$




We cannot conclude that $A<B$, and we cannot conclude $A=B$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



If $A<B+epsilon$ for all $epsilon > 0$, then we can conclude that $Aleq B$. In fact, this is the most you can conclude. It is in fact rather easy to prove the following statement:




$A$ is less than or equal to $B$ if and only if, for all $epsilon>0$, $A$ is less than $B+epsilon$. In symbols, this is:
$$(Aleq B) iff (forall epsilon > 0: A<B+epsilon)$$




We cannot conclude that $A<B$, and we cannot conclude $A=B$.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Jan 15 at 10:18









5xum5xum

91.8k394161




91.8k394161












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, will make the edit, I found out that indeed the statement you provided was the actual doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    Can you give the proof for the statement you provided.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    @Cosmic I think it's good practice if you try to prove it yourself!
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:49










  • $begingroup$
    Will try doing that
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Cosmic The proof to the right is fairly straightforward. Proving to the left is best done through a proof by contradiction (or more simply, contrapositive)
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:54


















  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, will make the edit, I found out that indeed the statement you provided was the actual doubt.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    Can you give the proof for the statement you provided.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:46










  • $begingroup$
    @Cosmic I think it's good practice if you try to prove it yourself!
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:49










  • $begingroup$
    Will try doing that
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:50






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Cosmic The proof to the right is fairly straightforward. Proving to the left is best done through a proof by contradiction (or more simply, contrapositive)
    $endgroup$
    – 5xum
    Jan 15 at 10:54
















$begingroup$
Thanks, will make the edit, I found out that indeed the statement you provided was the actual doubt.
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:46




$begingroup$
Thanks, will make the edit, I found out that indeed the statement you provided was the actual doubt.
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:46












$begingroup$
Can you give the proof for the statement you provided.
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:46




$begingroup$
Can you give the proof for the statement you provided.
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:46












$begingroup$
@Cosmic I think it's good practice if you try to prove it yourself!
$endgroup$
– 5xum
Jan 15 at 10:49




$begingroup$
@Cosmic I think it's good practice if you try to prove it yourself!
$endgroup$
– 5xum
Jan 15 at 10:49












$begingroup$
Will try doing that
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:50




$begingroup$
Will try doing that
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:50




1




1




$begingroup$
@Cosmic The proof to the right is fairly straightforward. Proving to the left is best done through a proof by contradiction (or more simply, contrapositive)
$endgroup$
– 5xum
Jan 15 at 10:54




$begingroup$
@Cosmic The proof to the right is fairly straightforward. Proving to the left is best done through a proof by contradiction (or more simply, contrapositive)
$endgroup$
– 5xum
Jan 15 at 10:54











2












$begingroup$

I think you're misguided.



In general, for any $a,binBbb R$ such that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$, we can deduce only that $ale b$. Indeed, to prove the claim we can assume that $a>b$ and take $varepsilon=frac {a-b}2$ to get a contradiction.



Since I've seen you used the tag measure theory I'll assume further about how the proof you've seen conclude $a=b$ . Normally, when you want to prove that $a=b$ you'd need to show that $age b$ and $ale b$. In measure theory, it is often the case that the $age b$ direction is obvious or easy to show, hence you only need to do the other half. Proving $ale b$ directly could still be difficult, hence we instead prove that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$ and then deduce that $ale b$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, I found out that it was the case in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:42










  • $begingroup$
    @GitGud Right, thank you I'll make the edit.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:46
















2












$begingroup$

I think you're misguided.



In general, for any $a,binBbb R$ such that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$, we can deduce only that $ale b$. Indeed, to prove the claim we can assume that $a>b$ and take $varepsilon=frac {a-b}2$ to get a contradiction.



Since I've seen you used the tag measure theory I'll assume further about how the proof you've seen conclude $a=b$ . Normally, when you want to prove that $a=b$ you'd need to show that $age b$ and $ale b$. In measure theory, it is often the case that the $age b$ direction is obvious or easy to show, hence you only need to do the other half. Proving $ale b$ directly could still be difficult, hence we instead prove that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$ and then deduce that $ale b$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, I found out that it was the case in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:42










  • $begingroup$
    @GitGud Right, thank you I'll make the edit.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:46














2












2








2





$begingroup$

I think you're misguided.



In general, for any $a,binBbb R$ such that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$, we can deduce only that $ale b$. Indeed, to prove the claim we can assume that $a>b$ and take $varepsilon=frac {a-b}2$ to get a contradiction.



Since I've seen you used the tag measure theory I'll assume further about how the proof you've seen conclude $a=b$ . Normally, when you want to prove that $a=b$ you'd need to show that $age b$ and $ale b$. In measure theory, it is often the case that the $age b$ direction is obvious or easy to show, hence you only need to do the other half. Proving $ale b$ directly could still be difficult, hence we instead prove that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$ and then deduce that $ale b$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



I think you're misguided.



In general, for any $a,binBbb R$ such that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$, we can deduce only that $ale b$. Indeed, to prove the claim we can assume that $a>b$ and take $varepsilon=frac {a-b}2$ to get a contradiction.



Since I've seen you used the tag measure theory I'll assume further about how the proof you've seen conclude $a=b$ . Normally, when you want to prove that $a=b$ you'd need to show that $age b$ and $ale b$. In measure theory, it is often the case that the $age b$ direction is obvious or easy to show, hence you only need to do the other half. Proving $ale b$ directly could still be difficult, hence we instead prove that $a<b+varepsilon$ for all $varepsilon>0$ and then deduce that $ale b$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Jan 15 at 10:47

























answered Jan 15 at 10:23









BigbearZzzBigbearZzz

8,94521652




8,94521652












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, I found out that it was the case in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:42










  • $begingroup$
    @GitGud Right, thank you I'll make the edit.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:46


















  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, I found out that it was the case in the question.
    $endgroup$
    – Cosmic
    Jan 15 at 10:42










  • $begingroup$
    @GitGud Right, thank you I'll make the edit.
    $endgroup$
    – BigbearZzz
    Jan 15 at 10:46
















$begingroup$
Thanks, I found out that it was the case in the question.
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:42




$begingroup$
Thanks, I found out that it was the case in the question.
$endgroup$
– Cosmic
Jan 15 at 10:42












$begingroup$
@GitGud Right, thank you I'll make the edit.
$endgroup$
– BigbearZzz
Jan 15 at 10:46




$begingroup$
@GitGud Right, thank you I'll make the edit.
$endgroup$
– BigbearZzz
Jan 15 at 10:46


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3074283%2fwhat-happens-to-inequalities-when-epsilon-to-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Human spaceflight

Image
Human spaceflight From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search "Space traveler" redirects here. For other uses, see Space traveler (disambiguation). @media all and (max-width:720px){.mw-parser-output .tmulti>.thumbinner{width:100%!important;max-width:none!important}.mw-parser-output .tmulti .tsingle{float:none!important;max-width:none!important;width:100%!important;text-align:center}} Apollo 11 crewmember Buzz Aldrin on the Moon, 1969 International Space Station crewmember Tracy Caldwell Dyson views the Earth, 2010 Space Shuttle Discovery heads into space with a crew aboard, STS-121 in 2006 Inside a space suit on the Canadarm, 1993 Human spaceflight (also referred to as crewed spaceflight or manned spaceflight ) is space travel with a crew or passengers aboard the spacecraft. Spacecraft carrying people may be operated directly, by human crew, or it may be e...
Read more

Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?

Image
0 1 What exactly does the error message beginning with E: mean? I assume it has to do with the file structure on Ubuntu-on-Windows, but what exactly? The following package was automatically installed and is no longer required: os-prober Use 'apt-get autoremove' to remove it. The following extra packages will be installed: libxslt1.1 The following NEW packages will be installed: libxslt1.1 xmlstarlet 0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 435 kB of archives. After this operation, 1023 kB of additional disk space will be used. Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ trusty/main libxslt1.1 amd64 1.1.28-2build1 [145 kB] Get:2 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ trusty/universe xmlstarlet amd64 1.5.0-1 [290 kB] ...
Read more

張江高科駅

Image
張江高科駅 ちょうこうこうか Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park 所在地 中国上海市浦東新区 所属事業者 上海地鉄運営有限公司（上海軌道交通・駅詳細） 上海浦東現代有軌交通有限公司（駅詳細） テンプレートを表示 張江高科駅 各種表記 繁体字： 張江高科站 簡体字： 张江高科站 拼音 ： Zhàngjiāng Gāokē Zhàn 発音： ヂャンジャン ガオクー ヂャン 英文： Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park Station テンプレートを表示 張江高科駅 （ちょうこうこうか-えき）は中華人民共和国上海市浦東新区に位置する、上海軌道交通2号線の駅である。 なお、張江高科駅前にある張江軌道電車の 張江地鉄駅駅 についてもここで述べる。 目次 1 利用可能な鉄道路線 2 沿革 3 駅構造 3.1 上海軌道交通 3.2 張江軌道電車 4 駅周辺 5 隣の駅 6 注釈 7 関連項目 利用可能な鉄道路線 上海軌道交通 ■ 2号線 上海浦東現代有軌交通有限公司 ■ 張江軌道電車 沿革 高架駅時代の姿 2000年12月27日 - 2号線の駅が高架駅として開業。 2010年 1月1日 - 張江軌道電車の開業に伴い、張江地鉄駅駅（停留所）を設置。 2月13日 - 駅地下化に伴い高架駅の運用停止。 2月24日 - 10日間の閉鎖を経て地下新駅の開業。 2017年2月9日 - リニューアル工事を経て再開業。乗降客の増加に対応し、ホームへのエレベーター、エスカレーターを増設、券売機エリアを拡張した [1] 。 駅構造 上海軌道交通 上海軌道交通 張江高科駅 5号口 ちょうこうこうか Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park ◄ 竜陽路 (2.60km) (1.61km) 金科路 ► 所在地 中国上海市浦東新区松涛路 祖冲之路 （中国語版） 北緯31度12分11秒 東経121度34分50秒  /  北緯31.2...
Read more