3
$\begingroup$

Fix a Hausdorff space $X$. Let $\mathcal{C}_X$ be the category of compactifications of $X$:

  • The objects of $\mathcal{C}_X$ are spaces $Y$ with a mapping $\iota_Y: X \to Y$ such that:

    • $Y$ is Hausdorff

    • $Y$ is compact

    • $\iota_Y$ is a homeomorphism onto its image

    • $\iota_Y(X)$ is dense in $Y$

  • The morphisms of $\mathcal{C}_X$ are continuous mappings $f: Y \to Z$ such that:

    • $f \circ \iota_Y = \iota_Z$

In particular, since $\iota_Y(X)$ is dense in $Y$, $f: Y \to Z$ is unique.

Are the following statements correct?

  1. If $X$ is noncompact and locally compact, then the one-point compactification $X^*$ is the terminal object in $\mathcal{C}_X$.

  2. If $X$ is Tychonoff, then the Stone-Čech compactification $\beta X$ is the initial object in $\mathcal{C}_X$.

What more can we say about $\mathcal{C}_X$? For example, does it have products or coproducts?

Related:

$\endgroup$
5
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Do those linked posts not address your questions 1 and 2? Their titles seem to, at least... $\endgroup$
    – Lee Mosher
    Commented Apr 4 at 20:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LeeMosher Not really. The first linked post places different assumptions on the space $X$. The second linked post does ask the same thing, but is very unspecific about what category they want to work in. $\endgroup$
    – Smiley1000
    Commented Apr 5 at 5:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you read the latter part of Eric Wofsey's answer in the first link, you will see that he answers your question about $X^*$. Since your $Y$ is Hausdorff, it is KC, and as $X$ is locally compact and Hausdorff, $X^*$ is Hausdorff. The map $$Y \to X^* : y \mapsto \begin{cases}y&y\in \iota_Y(X)\\\infty&y\notin \iota_Y(X)\end{cases}$$ is the desired morphism between an arbitrary compactification $Y$ of $X$ and $X^*$. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 5 at 19:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Does this post answer your question? $\endgroup$
    – Lee Mosher
    Commented Apr 6 at 0:26
  • $\begingroup$ @LeeMosher I don't quite like the answer provided there yet, but since it's a community wiki, I think the most reasonable action would be to close my question as a duplicate of that question and to improve the community wiki answer as much as possible. $\endgroup$
    – Smiley1000
    Commented Apr 6 at 6:19

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

The category $\mathcal{C}_X$ is complete and cocomplete if and only if $X$ is locally compact.

As you pointed out yourself, this category is always a preorder. I will first show that it is equivalent to the poset of closed equivalence relations on $\beta X\setminus X$ if $X$ is locally compact: As soon as $X$ is Tychonoff, every compactification $Y$ of $X$ will be the image of a surjective map $f:\beta X\to Y$ and as such is fully determined by its restriction to the boundary $\beta X\setminus X$. If $X$ is even locally compact, it will be open in each compactification, so that each boundary $Y\setminus X$ is itself compact and thus given by a quotient of $\beta X\setminus X$. Conversely, every Hausdorff quotient of this Stone-Čech-Boundary then gives a compactification in this way.

Therefore, the category $\mathcal{C}_X$ is equivalent to the partial order of closed equivalence relations on $\beta X \setminus X$ with the natural ordering of set containment. This category is indeed complete and cocomplete: The infimum of a set of closed equivalence relations is just their intersection, while the supremum is given by the closure of the equivalence relation generated by their union.

It remains to see that the assumption of local compactness was really necessary. At first it seems promising that $X$ needs this property for the one-point compactification to feature (as the terminal object) in $\mathcal{C}_X$. But this lack is not yet a proof, since there might perhaps be some other, nonobvious, terminal object in this case. However, this is not the case: Observe that, for any two points $x,y\in \beta X\setminus X$, the quotient space $\beta X/x=y$ is still in $\mathcal{C}_X$. (This is straightforward to check.) But then, the supremum $Y$ of all these compactifications, were it to exist, would contain only one point beside $X$ (since all others must be identified). But this cannot happen unless $X$ was locally compact to begin with, so this supremum does not exist.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .