Compactness of point and compact set product

In summary, if B is a subset of R^m and x is in B, then \{x\}\times B is compact. This is easily seen by looking at the inverse functions.
  • #1
SrEstroncio
62
0
I was reading Spivak's Calculus on Manifolds and in chapter 1, section 2, dealing with compactness of sets he mentions that it is "easy to see" that if [itex] B \subset R^m [/itex] and [itex] x \in R^n [/itex] then [itex]\{x\}\times B \subset R^{n+M}[/itex] is compact. While it is certainly plausible, I can't quite get how to handle set products when dealing with covers.
I was wonering if anyone could sketch a proof of this for me, I've been stuck on that page for days now.

note: this is not homework, just doing some self study.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi SrEstroncio! :smile:

Just use that

[tex]\varphi:B\rightarrow \{x\}\times B:b\rightarrow (x,b)[/tex]

is a homeomorphism. Thus B is compact if and only if [itex]\{x\}\times B[/itex] is.
 
  • #3
micromass said:
Hi SrEstroncio! :smile:

Just use that

[tex]\varphi:B\rightarrow \{x\}\times B:b\rightarrow (x,b)[/tex]

is a homeomorphism. Thus B is compact if and only if [itex]\{x\}\times B[/itex] is.

While I don't doubt there's nothing wrong with your argument, I am not familiar with homeomorphisms and your proof seems a little out of my grasp right now. I am trying to prove it by means of covers, I suppose A is a cover of [itex] \{x\}\times B [/itex], and I want to prove there is a finite subcollection of sets in A such that said subcollection covers [itex] \{x\}\times B [/itex].
 
Last edited:
  • #4
SrEstroncio said:
While I don't doubt there's nothing wrong with your argument, I am not familiar with homeomorphisms and your proof seems a little out of my grasp right now. I am trying to prove it by means of covers, I suppose A is a cover of [itex] \{x\}\times B [/itex], and I want to prove there is a finite subcollection of sets in A such that said subcollection covers [itex] \{x\}\times B [/itex].

OK, let me translate it for you then. We have the following continuous functions:

[tex]\varphi:B\rightarrow \{x\}\times B:b\rightarrow (x,b)[/tex]

and

[tex]\psi:\{x\}\times B\rightarrow B:(x,b)\rightarrow b[/tex]

These functions are each others inverse.

Now, take [itex]\{G_i~\vert~i\in I\}[/itex] an open cover of [itex]\{x\}\times B[/itex]. Then

[tex]\{\varphi^{-1}(G_i)~\vert~i\in I\}[/tex]

forms an open cover of B. Because B is compact, it has a finite subcover

[tex]\{\varphi^{-1}(G_i)~\vert~i\in F\}[/tex]

Thus

[tex]\{\psi^{-1}(\varphi^{-1}(G_i))~\vert~i\in F\}[/tex]

is a finite cover of [itex]\{x\}\times B[/itex]. The proof follows since

[tex]\psi^{-1}(\varphi^{-1}(G_i))=G_i[/tex]

Is that more clear?
 
  • #5
I get it now, thanks.

Now, at the risk of seeming kind of stubborn, imagine you've just been given the definition of compact sets and you were immediately asked to prove this (which is the case with Spivak's book), how would you do it without constructing the functions [itex] \phi [/itex] and [itex] \psi [/itex], which is to say, how would you do it "by foot"?

sorry for the hassle, thanks in advance
 
  • #6
Every point in {x} X B is of the form (x, b) where b is in B.

Let F:{x} X B-> B be defined by F(x, b)= b.

Further, it has the obvious inverse F^{-1}(b)= (x, b).

If {U} is an open cover for {x}X B then {F(U)} is an open cover for B.

Since B is compact, there is a finite subcover, {U_n}. Then F^{-1}({U_n}) is finite subcover of the original cover.

(Of course, you need to show all of those statements.)
 

1. What is compactness of a point?

The compactness of a point refers to the property of a single point in a topological space to be contained within a finite open cover of that space. This means that the point can be surrounded by a finite number of open sets that cover it completely.

2. What is the difference between compactness of a point and compactness of a set?

The compactness of a point refers to the property of a single point in a topological space, while the compactness of a set refers to the property of a collection of points in a topological space. A set is compact if every open cover of that set has a finite subcover, meaning that a finite number of open sets can cover the entire set.

3. How does compactness of a point relate to the compactness of a set?

The compactness of a point is a special case of the compactness of a set. A set is compact if every open cover has a finite subcover, but a single point can be considered a set with just one element, and therefore the compactness of a point is a special case of the compactness of a set.

4. What is the significance of compactness in mathematics?

Compactness is an important concept in mathematics, particularly in topology and analysis. It allows us to define and study limits and continuity, as well as to prove important theorems such as the Heine-Borel theorem and the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem. Compactness is also useful in simplifying proofs and providing a more intuitive understanding of mathematical concepts.

5. How is compactness of a point and compactness of a set used in real-world applications?

Compactness is used in a variety of real-world applications, such as in computer science and physics. In computer science, compactness is used in data compression algorithms to reduce the size of large data sets. In physics, compactness is used to describe the behavior of particles in space and time, as well as in the study of black holes.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
843
Replies
1
Views
144
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
3
Views
173
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
926
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top