One-point compactification problem

In summary, it has been shown that the one-point compactification of N, the set of natural numbers, is homeomorphic to the subspace {0} U {1/n : n is in N} of R. This is proven by showing that both spaces are locally compact Hausdorff, and that there exists a bijection between them that is also a homeomorphism. The space {0} U {1/n : n is in N} is the one-point compactification of {1/n : n is in N}, and this is shown by constructing the space Y = X U {∞} and defining the topology on Y as the one mentioned in the "main theorem" about compactification. It is also noted that
  • #1
radou
Homework Helper
3,149
8

Homework Statement



Show that the one-point compactification of N (the naturals) is homeomorphic with the subspace {0} U {1/n : n is in N} of R.

The Attempt at a Solution



If we show that N is homeomorphic with {1/n : n is in N}, then this homeomorphism extends to the one-point compactifications of these spaces.

First of all, I assume we have the discrete topology on N? And on {1/n : n is in N}, too, right? Since if {1/n : n is in N} is a subspace of R, then the open sets in the subspace topology are all the intersections of the open sets of R with {1/n : n is in N}, which form its power set.

Let f(n) = 1/n. Clearly this is a bijection from N to {1/n : n is in N}. Clearly it's a homeomorphism, since if U is open in N, f(U) is open in {1/n : n is in N}, and backwards.

Since {0} U {1/n : n is in N} is the one-point compactification of {0} U {1/n : n is in N}, it must be homeomorphic to the one-point compactification of N.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
By the way, this seems like a simple example, but I want to make sure if my reasoning is correct.

The set {1/n : n is in N} is locally compact and Hausdorff, so it has a one-point compactification.

Hausdorff: for any 1/n1 and 1/n2, the neighborhoods {1/n1} and {1/n2} are open and disjoint.

Locally compact: for any 1/n, the subspace {1/n} is compact and contains the neighborhood {1/n} of 1/n.
 
  • #3
Yes, it seems all fine.

But why is [tex]\{0\}\cup\{1/n~\vert~n\in \mathbb{N}\}[/tex] the one-point compactification of [tex]\{1/n~\vert~n\in \mathbb{N}\}[/tex]. It's not to hard to see, but you still have to show it...
 
  • #4
Yes, good point.

Well, first of all, {1/n : n is in N} is not compact - take, for example, the open cover by sets of type

U1 = R\{1/n : n is a positive integer}
U2 = R\{1/(n+1) : n is a positive integer}
U3 = R\{1/(n+2) : n is a positive integer}, etc.

The family {Un} covers {1/n : n is in N}, but has no finite subcover.

A space has a one-point compactification iff it is locally compact Hausdorff, and not compact.
 
  • #5
Yes, so you've proven that [tex]X=\{1/n~\vert~n\in \mathbb{N}\}[/tex] is noncompact, locally compact and Hausdorff. Thus the space has a one-point compactification. This is the space [tex]\{0\}\cup \{1/n~\vert~n\in \mathbb{N}\}[/tex] with the following topology

[tex]\mathcal{T}=\{A~\vert~X\cap A~\text{open and}~(0\in A~\Rightarrow~X\setminus A~\text{compact})\}[/tex]

This is, by definition, the topology of [tex]\{0\}\cup \{1/n~\vert~n\in \mathbb{N}\}[/tex]. But this space already carries a topology (the Euclidian topology). So you still need to show that these two topologies coincide...
 
  • #6
Hm, just a second.

Aren't the open sets in a one-point compactification Y of the space X the sets which are open in X, and the sets of the form Y\C, where C is a compact subspace of X?

The compact subspaces of {0} U {1/n : n is in N} are its finite subsets, right? Isn't it obvious that this topology coincides with the discrete topology?
 
  • #7
The space {0} U {1/n : n is in N} is not really discrete... the singleton {0} is not open...

But anyway, yes I know it's trivial that {0} U {1/n : n is in N} is the one-point compactification of {1/n : n is in N}. But since you didn't mention it, I thought you forgot it...
 
  • #8
Hmm, I'd like to make sure I fully understand this.

The "main theorem" about compactification states the following:

Let X be a space. Then X is locally compact Hausdorff iff there exists a space Y such that i) X is a subspace of Y, ii) Y\X consists of a single point, iii) Y is compact Hausdorff.

(Further on, if Y and Y' are two such spaces, then they are uniquely determined up to a homeomorphism)

Now, in the proof of this theorem, the space Y is constructed from the space X by adjoining some object ∞ that is not in X and forming the set Y = X U {∞} (by the way, is this "∞" an allusion to the compactification of the reals? why the infinity symbol? and why the term "object"? obviously this can be very general)

Now, the topology on Y is defined as I mentioned in post #6, and it is proved that this is in fact a topology on Y. Then it is showed that X is a subspace of Y, that Y is compact, and that Y is Hausdorff.

The thing I don't understand about this:

What is the object that we add to X in order to compactify it? Can we add any object to X? Since from that point on, in the proof of the theorem, everything seems to follow easily, no matter what this object is. Or what set this element belongs to.

This may seem like a stupid question, but could we compactify {1/n : n is in N} with some other point? So that this compactification is homeomorphic to {0} U {1/n : n is in N}?

Sorry if I wrote a bunch here, but I really want to straighten this out. :)
 
  • #9
Ow I see. Well if you just use that theorem, then you have proven everything already in your OP. Ignore my other posts.

About that [tex]\infty[/tex] you adjoin to X. Well, you can just take [tex]\infty[/tex] to be everything, as long as you don't take anything in X. It doesn't matter what you take, it ends up being homeomorphic anyway.

So for [tex]X=\{1/n~\vert~n\in \mathbb{N}\}[/tex], you could adjoin 0 to X. But you could as well adjoin -1 to X to obtain the one-point compactificiation. But note: if you adjoin -1, then the space [tex]X\cup \{-1\}[/tex] will carry two different topologies: the one-point compactification and the Euclidean topology. Only if you adjoin 0, these two topologies will coincide...
 
  • #10
micromass said:
So for [tex]X=\{1/n~\vert~n\in \mathbb{N}\}[/tex], you could adjoin 0 to X. But you could as well adjoin -1 to X to obtain the one-point compactificiation.

OK.

micromass said:
But note: if you adjoin -1, then the space [tex]X\cup \{-1\}[/tex] will carry two different topologies: the one-point compactification and the Euclidean topology. Only if you adjoin 0, these two topologies will coincide...

Hm, just a second, by the Euclidean topology you mean the topology induced by the Euclidean metric, i.e. in this case d(x, y) = |x - y|? I don't see how, aren't the open sets in our subspace sets from the power set family?
 
  • #11
Yes, the Euclidian topology on [tex]\{-1\}\cup\{1/n~\vert~n>0\}[/tex] is discrete, thus every set is open.
But this set with this topology is not compact, thus this topology can not be the one-point compactification.
You can however put a one-point compactification topology on [tex]\{-1\}\cup\{1/n~\vert~n>0\}[/tex], but this will be different from the subspace topology.
 
  • #12
OK.

So, basically, if we consider the one-point compactification topology, then the set is compact, right?
 
  • #13
Yes, the one-point compactification must always be compact!
 
  • #14
OK, micromass thanks a lot for your patience, as always! :)
 

What is the one-point compactification problem?

The one-point compactification problem is a mathematical problem in topology that asks whether every topological space can be extended to a compact space by adding a single point. In other words, it is a question about whether every space can be "filled in" to become a compact space.

Why is the one-point compactification problem important?

The one-point compactification problem is important because compact spaces have many useful properties, such as being closed and bounded. Therefore, being able to extend a space to a compact space has practical applications in various areas of mathematics and physics.

What is the significance of the one-point in the one-point compactification?

The one-point in the one-point compactification represents the "point at infinity" that is added to a space to make it compact. This point is necessary because compact spaces must be both closed and bounded, and adding a single point at infinity allows the space to be closed by "wrapping around" the added point.

Is the one-point compactification unique?

No, the one-point compactification is not unique. There are multiple ways to add a single point to a space to make it compact, and the resulting compact spaces may have different topological properties. However, all of these compactifications are homeomorphic, meaning they have the same underlying structure.

Has the one-point compactification problem been solved?

Yes, the one-point compactification problem has been solved. It has been proven that every topological space can be extended to a compact space by adding a single point. This was first proven by Felix Hausdorff in 1914 and has been further generalized and studied by many mathematicians since then.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
388
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
504
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
243
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
521
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
549
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
255
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
414
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
272
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
570
Back
Top