I'm trying to prove that the following two definitions of $T_{3}$ spaces are equivalent, and hitting an impasse.

Definition 1: For any point and closed set not containing the point, there are disjoint neighborhoods of each.

Definition 2: Every neighborhood of a point contains the closure of a smaller neighborhood of the point.

What I have so far:

Assume definition 1, and let $ x $ be ant point, $ U $ any neighborhood of it, so therefore there is some open set $ O$ such that $ x \in O \subseteq U $. Then $ x \not\in O^{C} $ and $ O^{C} $ closed, so by being a $T_{3}$ space, we can infer that there exist neighborhoods $x\in U_{x}$ and $O^{C}\subseteq U_{O^{C}}$ such that $U_{x}\cap U_{O^{C}} = \emptyset$. Then $U_{x} \cap O^{C} = \emptyset$ and therefore $U_{x} \subseteq O \subseteq U$.

What remains for this half of the proof is to show that $\overline{U}_{x} \subseteq U$, but I'm just not seeing it. I've tried showing that each contact point of $U_{x} \in U$ but can't find a way--and I've tried using the fact that $\overline{U}_{x}$ is closed and therefore I could try to apply the first definition of a $T_{3}$ space again, but I don't see any relevant points that I can show are not in $\overline{U}_{x}$. I don't see how I could claim, at this time, that $\overline{U}_{x}\cap U_{O^{C}} = \emptyset$.


Suppose the space is regular. Then, take a point $x$ and a neighborhood of it, $U$. Then $U^C$ is closed. So by regularity, you can separate $x$ and $U^C$ by disjoint open sets, $A$ and $B$ respectively. Then, $A$ is a neighborhood of $x$, and $\overline{A}$ is disjoint from $U^C$, since for any point $b \in U^C$, $B$ is a neighborhood of $b$ that is disjoint from $A$.


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.