I am given $G$ locally compact group, and I want to show that there exists a clopen subgroup $H$ of $G$ that is $\sigma$-compact.

So here's what I did so far:

for $e \in U$, where $U$ is a nbhd of the identity element we know that $x \in x\bar{U}$, and $x\bar{U}$ is compact in $G$, now take some finite open cover of this set,$\cup_{i=1}^{n} V_i$, again this set is open nbhd of $x$ so again its closure is compact, and its closure equals the union of $\bar{V_i}$, now I am kind of stuck, I wish I could take this set as the clopen subgroup, but I don't think that I know that it's closed under multiplication, right?


Hint: Take a compact symmetric neighborhood $K$ of the identity and consider the $\sigma$-compact subgroup $H = \bigcup_{n =1}^{\infty} K^n$.

  1. Prove that $H$ is an open subgroup.

  2. Prove that an open sugroup of a topological group is closed — its complement is a union of (open) cosets.

As additional exercises I suggest:

  1. Prove that the connected component of the identity is a clopen subgroup. (Connected components are open and open subgroups are closed)

  2. Prove that a connected locally compact group $G$ is $\sigma$-compact.

  • $\begingroup$ Ah, thanks. it does look closed under multiplication. $\endgroup$ – MathematicalPhysicist Dec 9 '11 at 11:43
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, and since $K^{-1} = K$ it is closed under inversion. $\endgroup$ – t.b. Dec 9 '11 at 11:44
  • $\begingroup$ I have another question, which I think uses the same trick, and I don't want to open another post just for it. I am given $G$ a topological group, and I want to show that every compact clopen nbhd of $e$ contains a compact clopen subgroup, $H<G$. Now, here I think I just need to take $K$ which is compact and clopen nbhd of $e$ (which I can always take as being symmetric), and then take $H=\cap_{n=1}^{\infty}K^n$, obviously it's contained in $K$, and it's a subgroup, and it's compact as a countable intersection of compact sets, is this right for this question? $\endgroup$ – MathematicalPhysicist Dec 10 '11 at 11:52
  • $\begingroup$ You're right that the idea is very similar. However, your idea doesn't seem to give an open subgroup in general. See e.g. Hewitt-Ross, Theorem (7.5), p.61 for the standard argument. $\endgroup$ – t.b. Dec 10 '11 at 12:06

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.