A collection $\mathcal{F}$ has finite intersection property if for every finite collection of sets from $\mathcal{F}$, namely $\{F_1,...,F_n\}\subset \mathcal{F}$, we have $$\bigcap_{i=0}^{n}F_i\neq\emptyset.$$

Also, we have a theorem: Let $X$ be a topological space. The space $X$ is compact iff for every collection of closed sets $\mathcal{F}$ having a finite intersection property, we have $$\bigcap_{F\in \mathcal{F}}F\neq\emptyset.$$

Is it true, if we consider a closed ball instead, for example, of a normed space $X$? For instance, consider $B(\theta,1)$. From Banach - Alaoglu theorem, it is weakly compact. Suppose that $\mathcal{F}\subset B(\theta, 1)$ is a family of weakly closed subsets which has finite intersection property. Then, can we have $$\bigcap_{F\in \mathcal{F}}\overline{F}^w\neq\emptyset\,?$$

  • $\begingroup$ Banach-Alaoglu tells you that unit ball of $X^*$ is compact for the weak$^*$ topology. You probably want to consider the unit ball of $X^*$ for the weak$^*$ topology or assume $X$ to be reflexive (the unit ball of $X$ is weakly compact iff $X$ is reflexive). $\endgroup$ – Rhys Steele Jun 4 '18 at 13:04
  • $\begingroup$ You're right, we shall use Kakutani theorem instead $\endgroup$ – zorro47 Jun 4 '18 at 13:11

Yes. Assume that you don't have $\bigcap\limits_{F\in\mathcal{F}}\bar{F}^w \neq\emptyset$. Let $U = (\bar{F}^w)^c$ be the complement of $\bar{F}^w$ in $B(\theta,1)$ and $\mathcal{U} = \{U=(\bar{F}^w)^c:F\in\mathcal{F}\}$, then $\bigcup\limits_{U\in\mathcal{U}}U$ is a weak open cover for $B(\theta,1)$, which is compact, and thus $\exists \{U_1,\ldots,U_n\}$ a finite weak open subcover. But then $\bigcap\limits_{i=1}^n \bar{F_i}^w=\emptyset$ which contradicts that $\mathcal{F}$ has the FIP.


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.