Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Suppose $B_{\epsilon}$ are closed subsets of a compact space and $B_{\epsilon} \supset B_{\epsilon'} \quad \forall \epsilon > \epsilon'$. Furthermore, $B_0 = \bigcap_{\epsilon>0} B_{\epsilon}$. For a continuous function $f$ can we conclude that $$f(B_0) = \bigcap_{\epsilon>0} f(B_{\epsilon})?$$

I believe the answer to be yes. It seems this should be a well-known property---I'm having trouble finding a reference.

share|improve this question
    
You definitely need more strength. Take $X =[0,1], f: X \rightarrow X, x\mapsto \frac{1}{2}, B_{\epsilon } = (0, \epsilon ).$ –  user17794 Jun 27 '12 at 21:36
    
Hmm. I'm wondering whether to state that $B_0 \neq \emptyset$ or that $B_{\epsilon}$ are closed. Either is true in the case I am considering. Probably the closed condition will get the job done. –  Paul Cuff Jun 27 '12 at 22:02
    
On second thought, I see that $B_0 \neq \emptyset$ is not good enough. We could easily extend your example so that some island vanishes in the intersection even though the intersection is non-empty. (Makes me wonder whether connected could remedy that, but that's beside the point) –  Paul Cuff Jun 27 '12 at 22:05
    
@Asaf The original post did not mention closed in the statement of the problem, only as a possible remedy. –  user17794 Jun 27 '12 at 22:12
    
Paul, I posted an answer under the assumption that $f\colon X\to Y$ and $X$ is a compact Hausdorff space; and $Y$ is $T_1$. If your assumptions on $X$ and $Y$ are different please add this to the question. –  Asaf Karagila Jun 27 '12 at 22:30

1 Answer 1

Suppose that $f\colon X\to Y$, then we assume that $X$ is compact and $f$ is continuous, however we need to assume that $Y$ is $T_1$ or that $X$ is Hausdorff.

First observe that since $B_\epsilon$ is closed it is compact too. Second we observe that the continuous image of a compact set is compact. (These two facts are true for all compact spaces, not only to Hausdorff spaces)

Since we also took the $B_\epsilon$ descending if the intersection is empty then there is $\epsilon$ such that $B_\epsilon=\varnothing$, and so $f(B_\epsilon)=\varnothing$ and the conclusion follows.

If the intersection is non-empty then we are in a situation where $f(B_\epsilon)$ form a decreasing chain of compact non-empty sets. The intersection cannot be empty, since by compactness we would have to have an empty set within the intersected family, which means $f(B_\epsilon)=\varnothing$, in contradiction to our assumption that we are in the case that $B_\epsilon\neq\varnothing$.

Furthermore, it is trivial that $f(B_0)\subseteq\bigcap f(B_\epsilon)$. So we only have to show the other direction. Suppose $y\in\bigcap f(B_\epsilon)$, then $y\in f(B_\epsilon)$ for all $\epsilon$, let $A=f^{-1}(y)$, this is a closed set, let $A_\epsilon=A\cap B_\epsilon$, this is a decreasing family of closed sets in a compact space, so by a similar argument as above we have that the intersection cannot be empty and must be a subset of $B_0$, therefore $y\in f(B_0)$ as wanted.


To see that we have to have $T_1$ in our assumptions, consider $\{0,1\}$ with the topology $\{\varnothing,\{1\},\{0,1\}\}$. Note that $1$ is dense and that $0$ is an accumulation point of $\{1\}$.

Consider the space $X=\mathbb N\cup\{\infty\}$ and the topology generated by initial segments of $\mathbb N$. So $U$ is open in $X$ if and only if $U=\varnothing$ or $U\cap\mathbb N=\{k\in\mathbb N\mid k<n\}$ for some $n\in\mathbb N$, and if $U\neq X$ then $\infty\notin U$.

Observe that $X$ is compact since if we cover $X$ by open sets we had to include $X$ itself in the covering, since the only open set which contains $\infty$ is $X$.

Now let $f\colon X\to\{0,1\}$ be defined as $f(n)=1$ for $n\in\mathbb N$ and $f(\infty)=0$. This is continuous since the preimage of $\{1\}$ is open, and the preimage of $\{0,1\}$ is open.

Let for $B_{\frac1n}=\{\infty\}\cup\{k\geq n\mid k\in\mathbb N\}$. Those are closed sets since their complement is an initial segment of $\mathbb N$. whose intersection is not empty either. Observe that $f(B_n)=\{0,1\}$ for all $n$, however $\bigcap B_{\frac1n}=\{\infty\}$ and $f(\{\infty\})=\{0\}\neq\bigcap f(B_{\frac1n})$.

share|improve this answer
    
For the newbs (me), can you explain why this fails if the space is $T_1$ or the range is $T_0$? I've only learned topology as generalizing from metric spaces, so at lower separations I don't understand as well. –  Eric Stucky Jun 27 '12 at 22:36
    
@Eric: I'm not sure it fails at all. I wanted to give an initial answer, since these assumptions may be what the OP is dealing with anyway. It's late and I don't know if I can come up with the proof for the general case tonight, though. –  Asaf Karagila Jun 27 '12 at 22:39
    
@Eric: I tried to give a counterexample. It wasn't easy, but it was fun! :-) –  Asaf Karagila Jun 27 '12 at 23:27

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.