0
$\begingroup$

Statement of the theorem:

If $S$ is either

a) a complete metric space, or

b) a locally compact Hausdorff space,

Then the intersection of every countable collection of dense open subsets of $S$ is dense in $S$.

The idea of the proof is to show that every open set $B$ intersects the countable union of given dense open subsets. Specifically if $\left\{ V_i \right\}_{i \in \mathbb{N}}$ is such a collection and $B$ is an arbitrary open set the following recursion is then defined

$$ \begin{array}{l} B_0 = B \\ \bar{B}_{n} \subset V_n \cap B_{n-1} \end{array} $$

Later we define

$$ K = \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty} \bar{B}_n $$

The author at this point states that $K$ isn't empty by compactness. I cannot really understand why.

From wikipedia:

Let $X$ be a topological space. Most commonly $X$ is called locally compact, if every point $x$ of $X$ has a compact neighbourhood, i.e., there exists an open set $U$ and a compact set $K$, such that ${\displaystyle x\in U\subseteq K}$

I guess this is the definition that we're trying to apply, but I can't figure how exactly we apply it.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ There are some crucial facts missing here. With what you have quoted it is not possible to show that $K$ is not empty. Please look at the entire proof. $\endgroup$ – Kavi Rama Murthy Jul 14 '20 at 12:36
  • $\begingroup$ The only bit I missed is that, according to the Rudin, $\bar{B}_n$ can be chosen to be compact is this what I'm missing? $\endgroup$ – user8469759 Jul 14 '20 at 12:45
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, you missed the most important assumption. $\endgroup$ – Kavi Rama Murthy Jul 14 '20 at 13:02
  • $\begingroup$ Another case that works for Baire category theorem: locally countably compact regular space. $\endgroup$ – GEdgar Jul 14 '20 at 13:15
0
$\begingroup$

$(\overline {B_n})$ is decreasing sequence of nonempty compact sets and hence their intersection is not empty: if it is empty then complements of $\overline {B_n}, n=2,3,,$ cover the compact set $\overline {B_1}$. Hence there is a finite sub-cover. But this means $\cap_{n=1}^{N} \overline {B_n} (=\overline {B_N})$ is empty for some $N$, a contradiction.

$\endgroup$

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.