Countably Compact: Necessity & Sufficiency

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bashyboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Compact
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion establishes that a topological space ##X## is countably compact if and only if every nested sequence of closed nonempty sets ##C_1 \supset C_2 \supset ...## within ##X## has a nonempty intersection. It demonstrates that if ##X## is not countably compact, a countable open cover ##\{U_n\}## exists without a finite subcover, leading to a contradiction regarding the intersection of the closed sets ##C_n = X - (U_1 \cup ... \cup U_n)##. Conversely, if a nested sequence of closed sets has an empty intersection, it implies the existence of a finite subcover, which is also a contradiction.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of topological spaces and their properties
  • Familiarity with concepts of open and closed sets
  • Knowledge of nested sequences in topology
  • Basic proof techniques in mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of compact spaces in topology
  • Learn about the Heine-Borel theorem and its implications
  • Explore the concept of limit points and closure in topological spaces
  • Investigate the relationship between countable compactness and sequential compactness
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of topology, and anyone interested in advanced concepts of compactness and closed sets in topological spaces.

Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5

Homework Statement


Show that ##X## is countably compact if and only if every nested sequence ##C_1 \supset C_2 \supset ...## of closed nonempty sets of ##X## has a nonempty intersection.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Suppose that ##X## is not countably compact. Then there exists a countable open cover ##\{U_n\}## of ##X## that has no finite subcover. Consider the collection of closed sets ##C_n = X - (U_1 \cup ... \cup U_n)##; If ##x \in C_{n+1}##, then ##x \in X-U_i## for every ##i=1,...,n+1##, so in particular ##x \in X-U_i## for ##i=1,...,n##. Moreover, this collection consists entirely of nonempty sets, for if ##C_n =X - (U_1 \cup ... \cup U_n)## were empty, then we would have a finite subcover. Hence, ##\{C_n\}## is a nested sequence of closed nonempty sets. By way of contradiction, suppose that the intersection is nonempty. Then ##x \in X - (U_1 \cup ... \cup U_n)## for every ##n##. Since ##\{U_n\}## is a cover, ##x## must be in ##\bigcup U_i##, which implies there exists a ##k## such that ##x \in U_k \subseteq U_1 \cup ... \cup U_k##. This contradicts the fact that ##x \in X - (U_1 \cup ... \cup U_k)##. Hence, the intersection has to be empty.Now, suppose that there exists a nested sequence ##\{C_i\}## of nonempty closed sets whose intersection is empty. Then ##U_i = X-C_i## forms a collection of open sets, and since ##\bigcup U_i = \bigcup (X-C_i) = X - \cap C_i = X - \emptyset = X##, we see moreover that it is an open cover. Now, if there were to exist a finite subcover, say ##\{U_{k_1},...,U_{k_n} \}##, where ##k_1 \le ... \le k_n##, then ##X \subseteq \bigcup U_{k_i} = X - \bigcap C_{k_i} = X - \bigcap C_{k_i} = X - C_{k_n}##, implying that ##C_{k_n} = \emptyset##, which is a contradiction. Hence, there cannot be a finite subcover.How does this sound?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes that proof looks sound to me, and nicely intuitive too.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
12K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K