I want to show that every Hausdorff, locally compact and second countable is $\sigma$-compact.

I'm having trouble writing this rigorously. Can we proceed as follows:

Let $X$ be a locally compact Hausdorff space. Let $\mathcal{B}=\{B_{n}: n \in \mathbb{N}\}$ be a countable basis, then for each $x \in X$ find $U \subseteq X$ open such that $x \in U$ and $\overline{U}$ is compact. Then choose $B_{n} \in \mathcal{B}$ such that $x \in B_{n} \subseteq U$. Since $\overline{U}$ is compact then $\overline{B_{n}}$ is compact. So it seems that $X$ is the countable union of the closure of $B_{n}'s$. Can we simply write this as:

$X= \bigcup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \{\overline{B_{n}}: B_{n} \in \mathcal{B}, \overline{B_{n}} \ \textrm{is compact}\}$

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Using this work you can probably prove a standard lemma: in a second countable space, every cover has a countable subcover. $\endgroup$ – Dylan Moreland Aug 14 '11 at 5:30
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ every open cover has a countable subcover $\endgroup$ – GEdgar Aug 14 '11 at 13:03
  • $\begingroup$ the last line for the index it might not be the whole of $N$ but rather some subset of $N$. $\endgroup$ – Uncool Mar 20 '19 at 13:19

The argument is basically just fine, but the notation in that last line is a bit off: when you write $\bigcup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$, you’re saying that you want to take the union of some sets indexed by natural numbers. What follows $\bigcup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ should be a typical one of these sets with index $n$. If you knew that every member of $\mathcal{B}$ was compact, for instance, you could write $X = \bigcup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\operatorname{cl}B_n$. What you want here is simply $X = \bigcup \{\operatorname{cl}B:B \in \mathcal{B}\text{ and}\operatorname{cl}B\text{ is compact}\}$.

If fact, you never needed to index $\mathcal{B}$ in the first place. It’s perfectly fine to say this:

  • Let $\mathcal{B}$ be a countable base. Since $X$ is locally compact, for each $x\in X$ there is an open nbhd $U_x$ of $x$ with compact closure, and since $\mathcal{B}$ is a base for $X$, there is some $B_x \in \mathcal{B}$ such that $x \in B_x \subseteq U_x$. Clearly each $B_x$ has compact closure, and $X = \bigcup\limits_{x\in X}\operatorname{cl}B_x$. There are only countably many distinct members of $\mathcal{B}$, so there are only countably many different sets $B_x$, and we have therefore expressed $X$ as the union of countably many compact subsets, as desired.

Or you could replace that last sentence with something like this:

  • $\{B_x:x\in X\} \subseteq \{B \in \mathcal{B}:\operatorname{cl}B\text{ is compact}\} \subseteq \mathcal{B}$, so $\{B_x:x\in X\}$ is countable, and $X = \bigcup\limits_{x\in X}\operatorname{cl}B_x$ therefore expresses $X$ as a countable union of compact subsets.

There are many other perfectly good ways to do it; I’m just trying to give you some idea of what’s possible, since you’re working on the proof-writing as much as you are on the mathematics itself.

  • $\begingroup$ thank you again! I believe you meant "Since $X$ is locally compact" instead of $X$ is $\sigma$-compact in the first line of your paragraph. $\endgroup$ – user10 Aug 14 '11 at 6:54
  • $\begingroup$ @user10: I did indeed; thanks. I’ve fixed it. $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Aug 14 '11 at 7:09
  • $\begingroup$ If I understand this correctly, the fact that it is a Hausdorff space here is superfluous. $\endgroup$ – Dusan Aug 14 '11 at 11:05
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @Dusan: Requiring $X$ to be Hausdorff avoids having to worry about which definition of local compactness is being used; this Wikipedia article has some details. $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Aug 15 '11 at 16:12

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.