Confused by proof in Hocking and Young

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yossell
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a lemma from Hocking and Young concerning closed sets in a compact Hausdorff space. Participants explore the implications of the lemma, particularly the proof's assertion that certain closed sets remain closed under specific conditions. The conversation includes clarifications on the definitions and properties of closed sets within the context of topology.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding why closed sets ##A## and ##B## in the intersection ##H## are also closed in the larger space ##S##.
  • Another participant asserts that ##A## and ##B## are closed regardless of their context, citing the Axiom C1 as justification.
  • A further reply elaborates on the reasoning for ##A## and ##B## being closed in ##S##, discussing the relationship between boundaries of sets and their containment within closed sets.
  • One participant shifts focus to other theorems in the book, noting interesting characterizations of compact connected metric spaces.
  • A question is raised about the meaning of "simply ordered by inclusion," seeking clarification on the nature of the ordering of closed sets.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit differing views on the proof's clarity and the implications of the lemma. There is no consensus on the understanding of the proof or the definitions involved, indicating ongoing uncertainty and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential ambiguities in the definitions of closed sets and the implications of their properties in different topological spaces. Some assumptions about the nature of the ordering of sets and their boundaries remain unresolved.

yossell
Gold Member
Messages
367
Reaction score
16
Am trying to learn topology (again) and failing.

Lemma 2.8, p43 of Hocking and Young states: Let ##a## and ##b## be distinct points of a compact Hausdorff space ##S## and let ##\{H_\alpha \}## be a collection of closed sets simply ordered by inclusion. If each ##H_\alpha## is contains both ##a## and ##b## but is not the union of two separated sets,one containing ##a## and the other containing ##b##,then the intersection ##\cap_\alpha H_\alpha## also has this property.

Proof: Let ##H = \cap_\alpha H_\alpha## and suppose that ##H## is the union of two separated sets ##A## and ##B##, with ##a## in ##A## and ##b## in ##B##. Since H is closed and ##A## and ##B## are closed in ##H##, it follows that ##A## and ##B## are closed in the space ##S## and...'

It's that last 'it follows' that is losing me -- I can't see why it follows that they're closed in ##S##. I'm missing something trivial, but I don't know what. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

MENTOR note: replaced all $ with double # to render properly under mathjax
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
This is trivial. There are two closed sets ## A ## and ## B ## and they will always be closed, no matter where they are placed, in ## H ## or in ## S ##. The only important thing is that the sets ## A ## and ## B ## are closed because of the Axiom C1.
 
Why are ##A,B## closed in ##H##?

If so, then they are closed in ##S,## too:

The boundary of ##A## in ##S## is contained in ##H## and the boundary of ##H## in ##S##. But ##H\subseteq S## is closed, so its boundary in ##S## is fully contained in ##H##. Therefore, the boundary of ##A## in ##S## is fully contained in ##H## and since ##A\subseteq H## is closed, fully contained in ##A.## This means that ##A## is closed in ##S.## For short: you cannot gain additional boundary points of ##A## from searching in ##S## since all those points are already in ##H## and its boundary in ##S,## and thus in ##A.##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: roam
I took a quick look at that book and wondered why you were interested in such a tedious approach to topology. Then I noticed some very nice theorems on pages 54-55 with simple characterizations of a circle and an interval. E.g. apparently any compact connected metric space which is disconnected by the removal of any point, except for two of them, is homeomorphic to a closed interval. And such a c.c. metric space that is disconnected by the removal of any two points, is apparently homeomorphic to a circle. nice.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: roam
By " Simply ordered by inclusion", you mean a total order , i.e., for ## O, O'## closed, either ## O \subset O' ## or ##O' \subset O##?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K