If every basic open cover has a countable subcover

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Rasalhague
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of open covers in topology, specifically examining the implications of the existence of a basis where every basic open cover has a countable subcover. Participants explore whether this assumption leads to the conclusion that every open cover must also have a countable subcover.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Dan Ma proposes that if every basic open cover has a countable subcover, then every open cover is countable, presenting a proof to support this claim.
  • micromass challenges Dan Ma's proof, pointing out a flaw regarding the well-definedness of the mapping from chosen basic open sets to the open cover.
  • Dan Ma revises the proof to argue that if every basic open cover has a countable subcover, then every open cover has a countable subcover, outlining a new argument based on unions of basic open sets.
  • A later reply expresses approval of Dan Ma's revised proof, indicating it seems correct.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is disagreement regarding the initial claim that every open cover is countable based on the assumption about basic open covers. However, Dan Ma's revised proof suggesting that every open cover has a countable subcover appears to gain some approval, though it is not explicitly stated that there is consensus.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the nature of open covers and basic open sets, as well as the implications of the axiom of choice. The validity of the proofs presented relies on these foundational concepts, which may not be universally accepted without further clarification.

Rasalhague
Messages
1,383
Reaction score
2
Dan Ma's proof that the Sorgenfrey line is Lindelöf (part A) seems to rely on the assumption that if every basic open cover has a countable subcover, then every open cover has a countable subcover. In trying to prove this, I got a stronger result, namely that if every basic open cover has a countable subcover, then every open cover is countable. If this correct? Here is my proof:

Every element C_{\lambda} of an arbitrary open cover \cal{C}=\left \{ C_\lambda | \lambda\in \Lambda \right \} is a union of basic open sets, so we can choose a countable cover \cal{B}, each of whose elements is a subset of some C_{\lambda}\in\cal{C}. By the axiom of choice, for each C_\lambda\in\cal{C} we can choose one B_{C_\lambda} \in \cal{B}. The set \beta = \left \{ B_{C_\lambda} | C_\lambda\in\cal{C} \right \} of these so-chosen B_{C_\lambda} is a subset of \cal{B}, and \cal{B} is countable, therefore \beta is countable. There is a natural bijection f:\beta\rightarrow\cal{C}, specified by f(B_{C_\lambda})=C_\lambda. Therefore the arbitrary open cover \cal{C} is countable. \blacksquare
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, this is not correct. The mistake lies in the fact that for two different C_\lambda, I might choose the same B_{C_\lambda}. So your map f is not necessarily well-defined.
 
Ah, I see. Thanks, micromass. Here's my revised proof of "If there exists a basis such that every basic open cover has a countable subcover, then every open cover has a countable subcover."

Suppose every basic open cover has a countable subcover and that we have an open cover \frak{C}. Each C\in\frak{C} is a union of basic open sets,

\bigcup_{\lambda\in S_C}B_\lambda,

so we have a cover

\bigcup_{C\in\frak{C}}\bigcup_{\lambda\in S_C}B_\lambda,

whence we can select a countable subcover \frak{B}=\left \{ B_n | n\in\mathbb{N} \right \}. That is to say,

(\forall x\in X)(\exists C\in\frak{C})(\exists B_n\in\frak{B})[ x \in B_n\subseteq C].

So we can choose a C_n, not necessarily unique, from \frak{C} for each B_n\in\frak{B} such that B_n\subseteq C_n. Then \left \{ C_n | n\in\mathbb{N} \right \} is a countable subcover of \frak{C}. \blacksquare
 
That seems fine!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K