2
$\begingroup$

I need to know what does "standard compactness argument" means, I google it but But I did not find any satisfactory results.

Any help: Thanks.

$\endgroup$
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ In what context? $\endgroup$ – Nigel Overmars May 22 '17 at 13:32
  • $\begingroup$ It means the following: a space $X$ is compact if from every open cover of $X$ we can find a finite subcover. So basically, the definition. $\endgroup$ – user 1987 May 22 '17 at 13:34
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This might refer to an argument that we can do things globally if we can do them locally on a compact space. $\endgroup$ – MooS May 22 '17 at 13:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It would help if you explained where you encountered the phrase. $\endgroup$ – Omnomnomnom May 22 '17 at 13:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ you may pick a convergent subsequence of a given sequence, thereby proving the existence of a certain object which happens to be the limit of the convergence subsequence. As the first context suggests, you need to know the context: There are many standard arguments, each standard in a respective context. If you encounter this expression in a particular proof or construction, which is it? $\endgroup$ – Mirko May 22 '17 at 15:54
1
$\begingroup$

For me the canonical compactness argument is the argument that shows that a compact Hausdorff space is regular, in fact showing a common maxim: "compact sets behave like points (often)"

Suppose $x\in X$, $C \subseteq X$ compact and $x \notin C$, all in a Hausdorff space $X$. Then $x$ and $C$ have disjoint open neighbourhoods (just as two distinct points already have).

For every $p \in C$ pick $U_p$ and $V_p$ open in $X$ such that $x \in U_p, p \in V_p , U_p \cap V_p = \emptyset$, which can be done as $x \neq p$ and $X$ is Hausdorff. The $V_p$ cover the compact set $C$, so finitely many cover them, say $C \subseteq V:=V_{p_1} \cup \ldots \cup V_{p_n}$, for finitely many $p_1,\ldots, p_n \in C$. But then $U = \cap_{i=1}^n U_{p_i}$ is also open (a finite intersection!) and contains $x$ and

$$U \cap V = \cup_{i=1}^n (V_{p_i} \cap U) \subseteq \cup_{i=1}^n (V_{p_i} \cap U_{p_i}) = \emptyset$$ showing that $U$ and $V$ are the required open neighbourhoods of $x$ and $C$.

A totally similar argument, using the above as a lemma, shows that $C$ and $D$ compact disjoint subsets of a Hausdorff space $X$ have disjoint open neighbourhoods as well.

The compactness allows one to fix things for points, and then using a finite subcover, to fix them for the whole compact set. Many compactness arguments use this idea.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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