On page 14, Probability Measures on Metric Spaces,Parthasarath(1967):

We recall that a totally disconnected seperable metric space, every open set can be expressed as a countably disjoint union of closed and open sets.

I'm only able to show it's true in some examples, say, $\Bbb Q$ and Cantor set, but with no luck in general.

Added:Here's a screenshot of relevant part of the statement:enter image description here

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The validity of the result Parthasarathy sets out to prove is not affected by this slip. The only thing he actually uses is that the unit interval is a continuous one-to-one image of a completely metrizable zero-dimensional space (the complement of a countable subset of the Cantor set). $\endgroup$ – Martin Jul 4 '13 at 10:51
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin: Thank you. If you don't tell me that, I would probably skip that proof. $\endgroup$ – Metta World Peace Jul 4 '13 at 11:09

The result is false.

If the stated result were true, every totally disconnected, separable metric space would have a base of clopen sets and would therefore be zero-dimensional. However, Example $6.2.19$ of Engelking, General Topology, is an example of a totally disconnected, separable metric space that is not zero-dimensional. I shan’t go through the details, which are a bit lengthy, but the space itself is the subspace of $\ell_2$ consisting of the square-summable sequences of rational numbers, with the usual $\ell_2$ metric.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, sir. I'll accept your answer after I checked the book you mentioned. A minor quesion for clarification: Could it be the case that "a countably disjoint union of closed and open sets" mean that a countably disjoint union sets that are either open or closed? It seems to be too obvious by second countability axiom. $\endgroup$ – Metta World Peace Jul 4 '13 at 10:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MettaWorldPeace: You’re welcome. I doubt it, because if that were the intent, the result would be trivial: just express each open set as itself! (There are, I think, a couple of editions of Engelking; mine is the $1977$ English-language edition published in Poland.) $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Jul 4 '13 at 10:41

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.