Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

A topological space is separable if it has a countable dense subset. A space is first countable if it has a countable basis at each point. It is second countable if there is a countable basis for the whole space. A collection of subsets of a space is locally finite if each point has a neighborhood which intersects only finitely many sets in the collection. A collection of subsets of a space is sigma-locally finite (AKA countably locally finite) if it is the union of countably many locally finite collections.

My question is, if a space is separable, first countable, and has a sigma-locally finite basis, must it also be second countable? I think the answer is yes, because I haven't found any counterexample here.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You in Advance.

EDIT: I fixed my question. I meant that the space should have a locally finite basis, not be locally finite itself, which doesn't really mean much.

share|cite|improve this question
Your title is clear, but your wording of the question in the body of the post is flawed. A space can’t be $\sigma$-locally finite: that’s a property of families of sets, not of spaces. I assume that you meant to repeat the question in the title: if a space is separable and first countable and has a $\sigma$-locally finite base, must it be second countable? – Brian M. Scott Apr 10 '13 at 2:27
Thanks for catching that Brian! – Keshav Srinivasan Apr 10 '13 at 3:35
Having a $\sigma$-locally finite base already implies being first countable: for any $x$ in $X$, for such a base, $x$ is at most countably many base members (finitely many for each of the locally finite subfamilies, of which we have countably many), and these members form a local base at $x$ by definition. – Henno Brandsma Apr 28 '13 at 11:49
up vote 3 down vote accepted

Let $\mathcal{B} = \cup_n \mathcal{B}_n$ be a $\sigma$-locally finite base (all non-empty sets), and let $D = \{d_n: n \in \mathbb{N} \}$ be a dense subset of $X$ (as said in my comment, $X$ is automatically first countable from having such a base, so I won't use that assumption).

For every $n$, $d_n$ is in at most countably many members of $\mathcal{B}$, as in is at most finitely many members of $\mathcal{B}_k$ for every $k$, note that we only need that each of these is point-finite, not locally finite; the same holds for the first countability. Call these members that contain $d_n$: $\mathcal{B}^n$, this is a countable set.

Then, as $D$ is dense, so every member of $\mathcal{B}$ contains some $d_k$, so $\mathcal{B} = \cup_n \mathcal{B}^n$, so $\mathcal{B}$ is already a countable base for $X$.

So in short: yes, this holds, even: every space $X$ with a $\sigma$-point-finite base that is separable has a countable base. Or, a point-countable family of non-empty open subsets in a separable space is (at most) countable...

share|cite|improve this answer
@user14111 Indeed. It almost becomes a semi-tautology if one thinks about it: if stuff is at most countable, countably many stuff is also at most countable.... – Henno Brandsma May 18 '13 at 12:02

The Nagata-Smirnov metrization theorem says that a $T_3$ space with a $\sigma$-locally finite base is metrizable (and conversely). A separable metrizable space is second countable. Thus, if your space is $T_3$, the answer to your question is yes.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks Brian, but I knew that already. The whole reason I asked the question is that I was curious about whether there's a condition stronger than first countable, but weaker than metrizable, which is sufficient to ensure that separable implies second countable. The Nagata=Smirnov theorem is what inspired my guess that having a sigma-locally finite basis is relevant. – Keshav Srinivasan Apr 10 '13 at 3:41
+1) for the Nagata-Smirnov metrization theorem – Paul Apr 10 '13 at 5:42

For example:

Helly Space; Right Half-Open Interval Topology; Weak Parallel Line Topology.

These space are all separable, first countable and paracompact, but not second countable. Note that a paracompact is the union of one locall finite collection.

share|cite|improve this answer
I don’t know the other two by name, but the Sorgenfrey line, your second example, does not have a $\sigma$-locally finite base. – Brian M. Scott Apr 10 '13 at 2:11
The space needn't $\sigma$-locally finite base. It is just sigma-locally finite. – Paul Apr 10 '13 at 2:16
Look at the title: it must have a $\sigma$-locally finite base. Saying that the space itself is $\sigma$-locally finite is meaningless: the term applies to collections of sets, not to spaces. Keshav was simply a bit careless in the body of the post. – Brian M. Scott Apr 10 '13 at 2:17
What is meaning of "OP"? Do you let it mean open problem? – Paul Apr 10 '13 at 2:19
I meant Original Poster; it’s sometimes also used for Original Post. (You’ll see it used quite often here, in both senses.) – Brian M. Scott Apr 10 '13 at 2:20

Your Answer


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.