Compactness is weakly hereditary: Difference between revisions

From Topospaces
m (2 revisions)
No edit summary
Line 15: Line 15:
===Proof in terms of open covers===
===Proof in terms of open covers===


Let <math>X</math> be a [[compact space]] and <math>A</math> be a [[closed subset]] (given the subspace topology). We need to prove that <math>A</math> is compact.
'''Given''': <math>X</math> a [[compact space]], <math>A</math> a [[closed subset]] (given the subspace topology)


Let's start with an open cover of <math>A</math> by open sets <math>U_i</math> with <math>i \in I</math>, an indexing set. Our goal is to exhibit a finite subcover.
'''To prove''': <math>A</math> is compact


By the definition of subspace topology, we can find open sets <math>V_i</math> of <math>X</math> such that <math>V_i \cap A = U_i</math>, thus the union of the <math>V_i</math>s contaiins <math>A</math>.
'''Proof''': Let's start with an open cover of <math>A</math> by open sets <math>U_i</math> with <math>i \in I</math>, an indexing set. Our goal is to exhibit a finite subcover.
 
By the definition of subspace topology, we can find open sets <math>V_i</math> of <math>X</math> such that <math>V_i \cap A = U_i</math>, thus the union of the <math>V_i</math>s contains <math>A</math>.


Since <math>A</math> is closed, we can ''throw in'' the open set <math>X \setminus A</math>, and get an open cover of the ''whole space''. But since the whole space is compact, this open cover has a finite subcover. In other words, there is a finite subcollection of the <math>V_i</math>s, that, possibly along with <math>X \setminus A</math>, covers the whole of <math>X</math>. By ''throwing out'' <math>X \setminus A</math>, we get a finite collection of <math>V_i</math>s whose union contains <math>A</math>. The corresponding <math>U_i</math> now form a finite subcover of the original cover of <math>A</math>.
Since <math>A</math> is closed, we can ''throw in'' the open set <math>X \setminus A</math>, and get an open cover of the ''whole space''. But since the whole space is compact, this open cover has a finite subcover. In other words, there is a finite subcollection of the <math>V_i</math>s, that, possibly along with <math>X \setminus A</math>, covers the whole of <math>X</math>. By ''throwing out'' <math>X \setminus A</math>, we get a finite collection of <math>V_i</math>s whose union contains <math>A</math>. The corresponding <math>U_i</math> now form a finite subcover of the original cover of <math>A</math>.


===Proof in terms of finite intersection property===
{{fillin}}
==References==
==References==



Revision as of 19:51, 20 July 2008

This article gives the statement, and possibly proof, of a topological space property satisfying a topological space metaproperty
View all topological space metaproperty satisfactions | View all topological space metaproperty dissatisfactions
|

Property "Page" (as page type) with input value "{{{property}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.Property "Page" (as page type) with input value "{{{metaproperty}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.

Statement

Property-theoretic statement

The property of topological spaces of being compact satisfies the metaproperty of being weakly hereditary: in other words, it is inherited by closed subsets.

Verbal statement

Any closed subset of a compact space is compact (when given the subspace topology).

Proof

Proof in terms of open covers

Given: X a compact space, A a closed subset (given the subspace topology)

To prove: A is compact

Proof: Let's start with an open cover of A by open sets Ui with iI, an indexing set. Our goal is to exhibit a finite subcover.

By the definition of subspace topology, we can find open sets Vi of X such that ViA=Ui, thus the union of the Vis contains A.

Since A is closed, we can throw in the open set XA, and get an open cover of the whole space. But since the whole space is compact, this open cover has a finite subcover. In other words, there is a finite subcollection of the Vis, that, possibly along with XA, covers the whole of X. By throwing out XA, we get a finite collection of Vis whose union contains A. The corresponding Ui now form a finite subcover of the original cover of A.

Proof in terms of finite intersection property

Fill this in later

References

Textbook references

  • Topology (2nd edition) by James R. MunkresMore info, Page 165 (Theorem 26.2)
  • Lecture Notes on Elementary Topology and Geometry (Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics) by I. M. Singer and J. A. ThorpeMore info, Page 12 (Theorem 4)