Hausdorffness is closure-local: Difference between revisions
(→Proof) |
(→Proof) |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| 2 || If <math>y \notin \overline{U}</math>, then we can take <math>V = U</math> and <math>W = X \setminus \overline{U}</math>. || || || Step (1) || | | 2 || If <math>y \notin \overline{U}</math>, then we can take <math>V = U</math> and <math>W = X \setminus \overline{U}</math>. || || || Step (1) || | ||
|- | |- | ||
| 3 || If <math>y \in \overline{U}</math>, | | 3 || If <math>y \in \overline{U}</math>, there exist open subsets <math>A,B</math> of <math>\overline{U}</math> such that <math>x \in A, y \in B</math> and <math>A \cap B</math> is empty. || || || || | ||
|- | |- | ||
| 4 || Continuing with the assumption and notation from Step (3), then there exists <math>W</math> open in <math>X</math> such that <math>B = W \cap \overline{U}</math>. In particular, <math>y \in W</math>. || definition of subspace topology || || Step (3) || | | 4 || Continuing with the assumption and notation from Step (3), then there exists <math>W</math> open in <math>X</math> such that <math>B = W \cap \overline{U}</math>. In particular, <math>y \in W</math>. || definition of subspace topology || || Step (3) || | ||
Latest revision as of 19:52, 29 January 2014
This article gives the statement, and possibly proof, of a topological space property (i.e., Hausdorff space) satisfying a topological space metaproperty (i.e., closure-local property of topological spaces)
View all topological space metaproperty satisfactions | View all topological space metaproperty dissatisfactions
Get more facts about Hausdorff space |Get facts that use property satisfaction of Hausdorff space | Get facts that use property satisfaction of Hausdorff space|Get more facts about closure-local property of topological spaces
Statement
Suppose is a topological space such that for any point , there exists an open subset such that the closure is a Hausdorff space. Then, is also a Hausdorff space.
Related facts
Facts used
Proof
Given: A topological space such that for any point , there exists an open subset such that the closure is a Hausdorff space. We are given two distinct points .
To prove: We can find disjoint open subsets of such that .
Proof:
| Step no. | Assertion/construction | Facts used | Given data used | Previous steps used | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | There exists an open subset such that the closure is a Hausdorff space. | given data directly used | direct | ||
| 2 | If , then we can take and . | Step (1) | |||
| 3 | If , there exist open subsets of such that and is empty. | ||||
| 4 | Continuing with the assumption and notation from Step (3), then there exists open in such that . In particular, . | definition of subspace topology | Step (3) | ||
| 5 | Continuing with the assumption and notation from Step (3), the set is open in and contains . | Fact (1) | Steps (1), (3) | By definition of subspace topology going from to , is open in . Thus, by Fact (1), is open in . Also, because (Step (3)) and (Step (1)). | |
| 6 | Continuing with the assumption and notation from Steps (3)-(5), the sets and are disjoint. | Steps (3), (4) ,(5) | is contained in by Step (5) and hence in . So, . and are disjoint by Step (3), hence the intersection is trivial. | ||
| 7 | are the desired disjoint open subsets. | Steps (4), (5), (6) | Step-combination direct |