Point-Set Topology With Topics Basic General Topology

Point-Set
Topology with
Topics
Basic General Topology for
Graduate Studies
This page intentionally left blank
Point-Set
Topology with
Topics
Basic General Topology for
Graduate Studies
Robert André
University of Waterloo, Canada
World Scientific
NEW JERSEY • LONDON • SINGAPORE • BEIJING • SHANGHAI • HONG KONG • TAIPEI • CHENNAI • TOKYO
Published by
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
5 Toh Tuck Link, Singapore 596224
USA office: 27 Warren Street, Suite 401-402, Hackensack, NJ 07601
UK office: 57 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: André, Robert (Mathematician), author.
Title: Point-set topology with topics : basic general topology for graduate studies /
Robert André, University of Waterloo, Canada.
Description: New Jersey : World Scientific, [2024] | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2023021913 | ISBN 9789811277337 (hardcover) |
ISBN 9789811277344 (ebook for institutions) | ISBN 9789811277351 (ebook for individuals)
Subjects: LCSH: Topology--Textbooks. | Point set theory--Textbooks.
Classification: LCC QA611 .A537 2024 | DDC 514/.322--dc23/eng20230819
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023021913
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Copyright © 2024 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval
system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the publisher.
For photocopying of material in this volume, please pay a copying fee through the Copyright Clearance
Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. In this case permission to photocopy
is not required from the publisher.
For any available supplementary material, please visit

https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/13439#t=suppl
Desk Editors: Logeshwaran Arumugam/Rosie Williamson
Typeset by Stallion Press

Email: [email protected]
Printed in Singapore
To
R.C.
Je me plaisois surtout aux Mathématiques à cause de la
certitude et de l’évidence de leurs raisons. Mais je ne
remarquois point encore leur vray usage.
René Descartes
Discours de la Méthode (1637)
For though we love both the truth and our friends, piety
requires us to honor the truth first.
Aristotle
Nicomachean Ethics (350 BC)

∼ tion ∼
I like it when the longing becomes belonging, dance of polar-

ities ultimately becomes union, feeling the other like the lost
part of oneself.
So. . . union becomes “ tion.”
Roberta Colzani
(2021)
Preface
This text was prepared to serve as an introduction to the study of

general topology. Most students in mathematics are required, at some
point in their study, to have knowledge of the fundamentals of gen-
eral topology and master topological techniques that may be useful
in their area of specialization. “Trust us, not only will you be glad
to be skilled at using these tools, but a lot of concepts you study in
your field of interest will eventually be seen as specific cases investi-
gated in a more general context in general topology” they are told.
It sometimes occurs that some students develop a particular fascina-
tion for general topology in spite of it occasionally being described
as being “no longer in fashion anymore”. Recall that mathematicians
such as George Cantor and Felix Hausdorff, were also told that some
of the mathematics they spent time investigating was “not in fash-
ion”. Reasons for the continued study of this topic often go beyond
the simple perception that it is a practical or useful tool. The intri-
cate beauty of the mathematical structures that are derived in this
field become its main attraction. This is, of course, how this writer
perceives the subject and served as the main motivation to prepare
a textbook that will help the reader enjoy its study. Of course, one
would naturally hope that an author would write a book only about
something he or she feels passionate about. I often heard some stu-
dents describe general topology as being “hard”. Well, some of it is.
But I have often thought that maybe this perception was developed
because they did not approach it quite in the right way. In this text,
we try to improve on the ways that students are introduced to it.
vii
viii Point-Set Topology with Topics
But first, I should at least write a few words about the mathe-
matical content of this textbook. The choice of content as well as
the order and pace of the presentation of the concepts found in the
text were developed with senior math undergraduate or math gradu-
ate students in mind. The targeted reader will have been exposed to
some mathematical rigor to a level normally found in an introduction
to mathematical analysis texts or as presented in an introduction to
linear algebra or abstract algebra texts. The first two sections of Part
I consist mostly of a review in the form of a summarized presentation
of very basic ideas on normed vector spaces and metric spaces. These
are meant to ease the reader into the main subject matter of general
topology (in Chapters 3–20 of Parts II–VI). Parts II–VI normally
form the core material contained in most, one or two semester, Basic
General Topology course. Once we have worked through the most
fundamental concepts of topology in Chapters 1–20, the reader will
be exposed to brief introductions to more specialized or advanced
topics. These are presented in Part VII in the form of a sequence of
chapters many of which can be read or studied, independently, or in
short sequences of two or three chapters, provided the student has
mastered Chapters 3–20.
Chapters related to the more basic ideas of general topology are
followed by a list of Concept review type questions. These questions
highlight for students the main ideas presented in that section and
will help test their understanding of these concepts. The answers
to all Concept review questions are in the main body of the text.
Attempting to answer these questions will help the student discover
essential notions which are often overlooked when first exposed to
these ideas. Reading a section provides a certain level of under-
standing, but answering questions, even simple ones, related to its
content requires a much deeper understanding. The efforts required
in answering correctly such questions leads the student to the ability
to solve more complex problems in the Exercise sections. If the stu-
dent desires a more in-depth study of a topic in Part VII, there are
many excellent topology books that can satisfy this need.
Textbook examples will serve as solution models to most of the
exercise questions at the end of each section.
In certain sections, we make use of elementary set theory. A stu-
dent who feels a bit rusty when facing the occasional references to set
theory notions may want to review some of these. For convenience,
Preface ix
a summary of the main set theory concepts appear at the end of

the text in the form of an appendix to the book. A more extensive
coverage of naive set theory is offered in the book Axioms and Set
Theory by this author. It is highly recommended and will serve as
an excellent companion to this book.
As we all know, any textbook, when initially published, will con-
tain some errors, some typographical, others in spelling or in format-
ting and, what is even more worrisome, some mathematical. Critical
or alert readers of the text can help weed out the most glaring mis-
takes by communicating suggestions and comments directly to the
author. This will be much appreciated by this writer as well as by
future readers.
Robert André
University of Waterloo, Ontario
About the Author
Robert André is a Ph.D. graduate from the University of Manitoba

with a specialization in Point-Set topology under the supervision of
Dr. R. Grant Woods. He has lectured at the University of Manitoba
and the University of Regina and 17 years as a faculty member of the
Department of Pure Mathematics at the University of Waterloo in
Ontario, Canada. He also lectured mathematics for 13 years at the
high school level in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and New Brunswick.
xi
Contents
Preface vii
About the Author xi
Part I Norms and Metrics 1

Chapter 1. Norms on Vector Spaces 3
Chapter 2. Metrics on Sets 23
Part II Topological Spaces: Fundamental

Concepts 37
Chapter 3. A Topology on a Set 39
Chapter 4. Set Closures, Interiors and Boundaries 61
Chapter 5. Bases of Topological Spaces 85
Chapter 6. Continuity on Topological Spaces 117
Chapter 7. Product Spaces 143
Chapter 8. The Quotient Topology 189
xiii
xiv Point-Set Topology with Topics
Part III Topological Spaces: Separation Axioms 207

Chapter 9. Separation with Open Sets 209
Chapter 10. Separation with Continuous Functions 237
Part IV Limit Points in Topological Spaces 275

Chapter 11. Limit Points in First Countable Spaces 277
Chapter 12. Limit Points of Nets 285
Chapter 13. Limit Points of Filters 309
Part V Compact Spaces and Relatives 335

Chapter 14. Compactness: Definition and Basic Properties 337
Chapter 15. Countably Compact Spaces 363
Chapter 16. Lindelöf Spaces 377
Chapter 17. Sequentially and Feebly Compact Spaces 387
Chapter 18. Locally Compact Spaces 407
Chapter 19. Paracompact Topological Spaces 423
Part VI The Connected Property 439

Chapter 20. Connected Spaces and Properties 441
Part VII Topics 475

Chapter 21. Compactifications of Completely
Regular Spaces 477
Chapter 22. Singular Sets and Singular Compactifications 515

Contents xv
Chapter 23. On C-Embeddings and Pseudocompactness 537
Chapter 24. Realcompact Spaces 561
Chapter 25. Perfect Functions 581
Chapter 26. Perfect and Freudenthal Compactifications 597
Chapter 27. Spaces Whose Elements Are Sequences 611
Chapter 28. Completing Incomplete Metric Spaces 633
Chapter 29. The Uniform Space and the Uniform

Topology 643
Chapter 30. The Stone–Weierstrass Theorem 669
Chapter 31. Metrizability 679
Chapter 32. The Stone Space 693
Chapter 33. Baire Spaces 723
Chapter 34. The Class of F -Spaces 735
Appendix 747
Bibliography 791
Index 795
Part I
Norms and Metrics

Chapter 1
Norms on Vector Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we review a few basic notions about inner products on
vector spaces and how they are used as a mechanism to construct a
distance measuring tool called “norm” We then define “norm on an
abstract vector space” with no reference to an inner product. We show
how to distinguish between norms that are induced by an inner prod-
uct and those that are not. We then provide a few examples of norms
on vectors spaces of continuous functions, C[a, b]. We end this sec-
tion with a formal definition of the compact property in normed vector
spaces.
1.1 Review of Inner Product Spaces
We begin by reviewing a few basic notions about those vector

spaces we refer to as inner product spaces. Recall that the set
Rn = {(x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) : xi ∈ R} equipped with two operations,
addition and scalar multiplication, is known to be a vector space. We
can also equip a vector space with a third operation called “dot prod-
uct” which maps pairs of vectors in Rn to some real number. The
dot-product is a specific real-valued operation on Rn which belongs
to a larger family of vector space operations called inner products.
We briefly remind ourselves of a few facts about inner products on
abstract vector spaces.
3
4 Point-Set Topology with Topics
Definition 1.1 Let V be a vector space over the reals. An inner

product is an operation which maps pairs of vectors in V to a real
number. We denote an inner product on V by v , w.
A real-valued
function on V × V is referred to as an inner product if and only if it
satisfies the following four axioms:
IP1: The number v , v is greater than or equal to 0 for all v in V.

Equality holds if and only if v = 0. (Hence, if v is not 0, v , v
is strictly larger than 0.)
∈ V , u, v = v , u (Commutativity)
IP2: For all v , w
∈ V , u + w,
IP3: For all u, v , w v
v = u, v + w,
IP4: For all u, v ∈ V , and α ∈ R, αu, v = αu, v
A vector space V is called an inner product space if it is equipped

with some specified inner product.
Definition 1.2 Let V be an inner product space. If v is a vector in

V we define

v = v , v
The expression v is called the norm (or length) of the vector v
induced by the inner product u, v on V.
Example 1. It is easily verified that, for x = (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) and

y = (y1 , y2 , y3 , . . . , yn ) in Rn , its well-known dot-product
x, y = x · y = x1 y1 + x2 y2 + · · · + xn yn
satisfies the four axioms above and so is an inner product on the

vector space Rn . This is often referred to as the Euclidean inner
product or the standard inner product on Rn . The norm on Rn induced
Norms on Vector Spaces 5
by the dot product is
x = (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn )

= (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) · (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn )

n

= x2i
i=1
This particular norm is referred to as the Euclidean norm on Rn .

It is also referred to as the L2 -norm on Rn , in which case, it will
be represented as x2 . We will use this particular norm to measure
distances between vectors in Rn . That is, the distance between x =
(x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) and y = (y1 , y2 , y3 , . . . , yn ) is defined to be

n

x − y = (xi − yi )2
i=1
In the case where n = 2 or 3, this represents the usual distance

formula between points in 2-space and 3-space, respectively. In the
case where n = 1, it represents the absolute value of the difference
of two numbers.
Example 2. Consider the vector space, V = C[a, b], the set of all
continuous real-valued functions on the closed interval [a, b] equipped
with the usual addition and scalar multiplication of functions. We
define the following inner product on C[a, b] as:
b
f, g = f (x)g(x) dx
a
Showing that this operation satisfies the inner product axioms IP1
to IP4 is left as an exercise. In this case, the norm of f , induced by
this inner product, is seen to be

b
f = f (x)2 dx
a
It is also referred to as the L2 -norm on C[a, b] and we represent it as

f 2 .
The following theorem called the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality
offers an important problem solving tool when working with inner
product spaces. The norm which appears in the inequality is the one
induced by the given inner product. This inequality holds true for
any well-defined inner product on a vector space.
Theorem 1.3 (Cauchy–Schwarz inequality). Let V be a vector

space equipped with an inner product and its induced norm. Then,
for vectors x and y in V,
|x, y | ≤ xy
Equality holds true if and only if x and y are collinear (i.e., x = αy
or y = αx).
Proof. The statement clearly holds true if y = 0.

Let x, y be two (not necessarily distinct) vectors in V where y = 0.
For any real number t,
0 ≤ x − ty , x − ty
= x2 − 2tx, y + t2 y 2
Choosing
x, y
t=
y 2
in the above equation we obtain
x, y 2
0 ≤ x2 −
y 2
The inequality, |x, y | ≤ xy , follows.

We now prove the second part of the statement. If x and y are

collinear, say x = α
y , then
|x, y | = |α
y , y |
= |α|y , y
= |α|y y
= αy y
= xy
Conversely, suppose |x, y | = xy . If y is zero then 0 = ty and
x, y 2
so x and y are collinear. Suppose y = 0. Consider t = .
y 2
x, y 2
x − ty, x − ty = x2 − (as described above)
y 2
=0
So, by IP1, x − ty , x − ty = 0 implies x − ty = 0 so x and y are
collinear. We have shown that equality holds if and only if x and y
are collinear.
We now verify that a norm, , which is induced by an inner product

, on the vector space V will always satisfy the following three
fundamental properties:
(1) For all x ∈ V , x ≥ 0, equality holds if and only if x = 0.
(2) For all x ∈ V and scalar α ∈ R, αx = |α|x.
(3) For all x, y ∈ V , x + y ≤ x + y .
The first property follows from the fact that the norm is defined as
being the square root of a number. The second property follows from
the straightforward argument:

αx = αx, αx
√
= α2 x, x
= |α|x
The third property is referred to as the triangle inequality. It’s non-

trivial proof invokes the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality. We prove it
below.
Corollary 1.4 The triangle inequality for norms induced by inner

products. For any pair of vectors x and y in an inner product space,
x + y ≤ x + y . If equality holds then the two vectors x and y
are collinear.
Proof.
x + y2 = x + y , x +

y
= x2 + 2x, y + y 2
≤ x2 + 2|x, y | + y 2
≤ x2 + 2xy + y 2 (Cauchy–Schwarz)
= (x + y )2
Thus x + y ≤ x + y , as required.

In the case where we have equality: Suppose we have x + y =
x + y . Then x + y2 = (x + y )2 . From the develop-
ment above, the inequalities must be equalities, so we must have
x, y = xy . This means |x, y | = x||y . By the Cauchy–
Schwarz theorem, x and y are collinear.
Example 3. Use the the dot product properties and the law of
cosines, c2 = a2 + b2 − 2ab cos θ (where a, b, c represent the lengths
of the sides of a triangle ABC and θ is the angle between to the
sides AB and AC) to prove the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality in R2 .
Solution: Consider the two vectors a and b in R2 where one is not a

scalar multiple of the other. Then the extremities of the two vectors
form a triangle with angle θ between a and b. Then the norms a, b
and b − a are numbers which can represent the length of the sides
of the triangle. Let θ represent the angle between a and b.
We apply the cosine law to obtain
b − a2 = a2 + b2 − 2a b cos θ
If a, b represents the dot-product, we obtain, by applying the dot-

product properties and the property a2 = a,a
a2 − 2b,a + b2 = a2 + b2 − 2a b cos θ

−2b,a = −2a b cos θ
b,a = a b cos θ
b,a
= cos θ
a b
Since cos θ ≤ 1,
|b,a |
≤1
a b
Example 4. Suppose a and b = (1, 0) are two vectors in R2 where

a = 1 with angle between a and b = θ. Show that a, b = cos θ, as
is represented in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1. Dot-product in the plane.

Solution: This follows from the above example and

a, b a, b
cos θ = =
a b 1×1
1.2 Norms on Arbitrary Vector Spaces
We now show that norms on a vector space can exist independently

from inner products.
Definition 1.5 Let V a vector space over the reals. A norm on V

is a function, : V → R, which satisfies the three following norm
axioms:
N1: For all v ∈ V , v ≥ 0. The equality v = 0 holds true if and
only if v = 0. Hence, if v is not 0, v > 0.
N2: For all v ∈ V , α ∈ R, αv = |α|v .
N3: For all v , u ∈ V , u + v ≤ u + v (Triangle inequality).
A vector space V is called a normed vector space if it is equipped
with some specified norm satisfying these three norm axioms. It is
denoted by (V, ). Note that the vector space V need not be an
inner product space, nor need there be any relationship between
and some inner product.
This function, : V → R, will be used to measure the “distance”,

x − y , between any two vectors x and y. Note that x − y =
(−1)(y − x) = | − 1|y − x = y − x. That is, “the distance
between x and y is the same as the distance between y and x ”.
We provide a few examples of functions known to be norms.
Example 5. The norm induced by the inner product of an inner
product space (V, , ) has already been shown to satisfy the axioms
N1, N2, and N3.
Example 6. The 1-norm on Rn is defined as
n

x1 = (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn )1 = |xi |
i=1
It can be shown to satisfy the three norm axioms. (Left as an
exercise.)
Example 7. The ∞-norm on Rn is defined as
x∞ = (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn )∞ = max{|x1 |, |x2 |, . . . , |xn |}
It can be shown to satisfy the three norm axioms. (Proving that N1

and N2 are satisfied is left as an exercise.)
We prove that the ∞-norm on Rn satisfies the triangle inequality
N3.
Proof of x+y ∞ ≤ x∞ + y ∞ . Note that |xi | ≤
maxi=1...n {|xi |} for each i, and |yi | ≤ maxi=1...n {|yi |} for each i. Then
for each i = 1 to n,
|xi + yi | ≤ |xi | + |yi |

≤ max {|xi |} + max {|yi |}
i=1...n i=1...n
= x∞ + y ∞
Then max{|xi −yi |} ≤ x∞ +y ∞ and so x +y∞ ≤ x∞ +y ∞ ,
1...n
as required.
Example 8. Let p ≥ 1. The p-norm on Rn is defined as
n 1/p

p
xp = (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn )p = |xi |
i=1
It can be shown that this function satisfies the three norm axioms.
We will not prove this for p in general.
Note that when p = 2 the p-norm is simply the Euclidean norm
on Rn . Since the Euclidean norm is induced by an inner product, it
automatically satisfies the three norm axioms. Proving that, for any
p ≥ 1, the p-norm satisfies N1 and N2 is straightforward. But proving
that the triangle inequality holds true for all p ≥ 1 is not easy. The
interested readers can look the proof up in most real analysis texts
or find it online.
A natural question comes to mind . Are all norms on a vector
space V induced by some inner product? The answer is no!
The following theorem tells us how to recognize those norms which
are induced by some inner product.
Theorem 1.6 Suppose is a norm on a vector space V. There

exists an inner product , such that x = x, x, for all x ∈ V,
if and only if, for all x, y ∈ V, the norm satisfies the parallelogram
identity
2(x2 + y 2 ) = x + y2 + x − y 2
Proof. The proof involves showing that, if satisfies the paral-

lelogram identity then the identity
1
x, y = x + y 2 − x − y 2
4
is a valid inner product on V which induces . The proof is routine
and so is not presented here.
Examples of norms on C[a, b]

Example 9. The Lp -norm. Let V = C[a, b] denote the family of all
real-valued continuous functions on the closed interval [a, b] equipped
with the usual + and scalar multiplication. If p ≥ 1, then we define
the Lp -norm on C[a, b] as follows:
b 1/p
p
f p = |f (x)| dx
a
In the case where p = 1, we have

b
f 1 = |f (x)| dx
a
which is easily shown to satisfy the three norm axioms. In the case
where p = 2, then this norm is one which is induced by the inner
product
b
f, g = f (x)g(x) dx
a
on C[a, b].
It is straightforward to show that, for all p ≥ 1, f p satisfies N1

and N2. But proving that f + gp ≤ f p + gp , for all p ≥ 1, is
difficult. This inequality is referred to as the Minkowski inequality.
The interested readers will find a proof in most real analysis texts or
online.
Example 10. The sup-norm: We define another norm on the vector
space, C ∗ (S), of all bounded continuous real-valued functions on the
space S. Recall that the supremum of a subset A of an ordered set S,
written as “sup A” is the least upper bound of A which is contained
in S. Note that sup A may or may not belong to A. We define the
sup-norm on C ∗ (S) as
f ∞ = sup {|f (x)| : x ∈ S}
The sup-norm is also referred to as the “infinity-norm” or “uniform

norm”. Showing that this is a valid norm is left as an exercise.
1.3 Convergence and Completeness in a Normed

Vector Space
Convergence of sequences forms and important part of analysis. In

what follows, norms on Rn are always assumed to be the Euclidean
norm, unless otherwise stated. An infinite sequence in a normed vec-
tor space, V , is a function which maps N (not necessarily one-to-one)
onto a subset, S, of V. This means that a sequence is the indexation of
the elements of a countable subset, S, by using the natural numbers.
For example, S = {x0 , x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , . . .}. Note that some of these
may be repeated (since the function mapping N into S need not be
one-to-one). We generalize the notion of a “convergent sequence and
its limit” in R to a “convergent sequence and its limit” in a normed
vector space (V, ).
Definition 1.7 Let (V, +, α, ) be a vector space equipped with

a norm . We say a sequence of vectors {xn } in V converges to a
vector a in V with respect to the norm if
For any ε > 0, there exists an integer N > 0 such that
xn − a|| < ε whenever n > N .
If the sequence of vectors {xn } converges to the vector a, then we

write
lim xn = a
n→∞
The following proposition lists the standard properties respected by

limits in normed vector spaces.
Proposition 1.8 Let {xn } and {yn } be two sequences in the normed
vector space V. Suppose {xn } converges to a. Let α and β be scalars.
(a) limn→∞ (αxn ± βyn ) = α limn→∞ xn ± β limn→∞ yn .
(b) (limn→∞ xn = a) ⇔ (limn→∞ xn − a = 0).
(c) If x = (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) ∈ Rn then |xi | ≤ x2 , for i = 1 to n.
(d) A sequence of vectors {xk : k = 1, 2, 3, . . .} in Rn converges to
the vector a = (a1 , a2 , a3 , . . . , an ) (with respect to the Euclidean
norm) if and only if the components of the vectors in {xk } con-
verge to the corresponding components of a (with respect to the
absolute value).
Proof. The proof is omitted.
If a sequence, T = {fn : n ∈ N}, in C ∗ (S) converges to f with respect

to the sup-norm, ∞ , then we will say that
“ T converges uniformly to f ”
and that f is the “uniform limit” of the sequence T .
Suppose C ∗ (S) is given for some space S and {Tx : x ∈ S} is a
family of sequences in R where,
Tx = {fn (x) : n ∈ N}
each of which converges (pointwise) to some number ux . Suppose
that, for a given ε > 0, there exists an N > 0 such that n > N
implies |ux − fn (x)| < ε, independent of the value of x. Define the
function, f : S → R as f (x) = ux . Then, when N > 0,
sup {|fn (x) − f (x)| : x ∈ S} = fn − f ∞ ≤ ε
so {fn : n ∈ N} converges uniformly to f . This provides another way

of recognizing the uniform limit of a sequence of functions. That is,
we show that, the existence of an N depends only on the value of ε
and not the particular value of x.
Example 11. Show that the uniform limit, f , of a sequence, {fn },
in C ∗ (S), is continuous on S and so belongs to C ∗ (S).
Solution: Let T = {fn : n ∈ N} be a sequence in C ∗ (S) which
converges uniformly to f . Let a ∈ S and ε > 0. It suffices to show that
there is a δ > 0 such that x − a < δ implies that |f (x) − f (a)| < ε.
See that, there is N > 0 such that n > N implies
|f (x) − f (a)| ≤ |f (x) − fn (x)| + |fn (x) − fn (a)| + |fn (a) − f (a)|
< fn − f ∞ + |fn (x) − fn (a)| + fn − f ∞
< ε/3 + |fn (x) − fn (a)| + ε/3
For n > N , fn is continuous so there exists δ > 0 such that |x−a| < δ
implies |fn (x) − fn (a)| < ε/3.
Then |x − a| < δ implies |f (x) − f (a)| < ε. So f is continuous
on S.
We now define those sequences in a normed vector space called
Cauchy sequences. As we shall soon see all convergent sequences of
(V, ) must be Cauchy sequences, but some “subsets” S of V have
Cauchy sequences which do not converge in S.
Definition 1.9 A sequence of vectors {xn } in a normed vector space

V is said to be a Cauchy sequence in V , or simply said to be Cauchy,
if for any ε > 0, there exists an integer N > 0 such that xm −xn < ε
whenever m, n > N .
At first glance, the reader may feel that a Cauchy sequence is

just another way of referring to a “convergent sequence”. In many
situations, this is indeed the case. But there are sets, S, containing
Cauchy sequences which do not converge to a point inside S. For
example, we may refer to the sequence {1, 1/2, 1/3, . . . , 1/n, . . .} as
a sequence in the vector space R, or, as a sequence in the subset
S = {x : 0 < x ≤ 1} where S inherits the absolute value norm
from R. The given sequence certainly converges to 0 in R and so

can easily be proven to be Cauchy in R. Using the same norm on
S we must conclude that it is also Cauchy in S. However, there
is one property of S which clearly distinguishes it from R: It is that
R contains the limit of this Cauchy sequence while S does not contain
the limit of this same sequence. So we will use Cauchy sequences to
help us categorize subsets of a vector space based on whether they
contain the limits of all their Cauchy sequences, or not.
This motivates the following definition of complete subsets of a
normed vector space.
Definition 1.10 A subset S of a normed vector space V is a complete

subset of V if every Cauchy sequence in S converges to a vector in S.
Definition 1.10.1 A complete normed vector space is referred to as

Banach space.
Definition 1.10.2 If V is a complete normed vector space whose

norm is induced by an inner product then V is referred to as a Hilbert
space. That is, if (V, +α, , ) is complete then V is a Hilbert space.
Even if all Hilbert spaces are Banach spaces not all Banach spaces
are Hilbert spaces.
Theorem 1.11 Completeness of (R, | |). The space (R, | |) is com-

plete with respect to | |.
Proof. Let T = {xn : n ∈ N} be a Cauchy sequence in R.

We claim that T is bounded: For ε = 1, there exists N such
that n, m > N implies |xn − xm | < 1. If k > N then |ak | = |ak −
aN + aN | < |ak − aN | + |aN | < 1 + |aN |. Then T is bounded by
max {|a0 |, |a1 |, |a2 |, . . . , |aN | + 1}. So T is bounded as claimed.
We are required to show that T converges to a point in R. By

the Bolzano–Weierstrass theorem1 T has a subsequence M = {xnk :
k ∈ N} which converges to, say, L ∈ R.
We claim that T must also converge to L: There exists N such
that n, m > N implies |xn − xm | < ε/2. We can pick K > 0 such that
|xnk − L| < ε/2 whenever k > K. We can choose M = max {K, N }.
Since nk ≥ n (by definition of subsequence), if n > M ,
|xn − L| ≤ |an − ank | + |ank − L| < ε/2 + ε/2 = ε
So T converges to L, as required.
Theorem 1.12 (Completeness of (Cb (S), ∞ )). Let S be a

space and Cb (S) be the set of all bounded real-valued functions on
S equipped with the sup-norm, ∞ . Then Cb (S) is a complete space
with respect to ∞ .
Proof. Let {fn : n ∈ N} be a Cauchy sequence in Cb (S). We are

required to show that {fn : n ∈ N} converges to a function f in
Cb (S) with respect to ∞ .
Let x ∈ S. Then
|fn (x) − fm (x)| ≤ fn − fm ∞ < ε for all m, n > N
Then U = {fn (x) : n ∈ N} is Cauchy in R. Since R is complete (see

Theorem 1.11), U converges to, say, ux . For each x ∈ S define the
function, f : S → R, as f (x) = ux ∈ R. Then {fn : n ∈ N} converges
pointwise to f (x). For m ≥ N ,
|f (x) − fm (x)| = | lim f (x) − fm (x)|

n→∞
= lim |f (x) − fm (x)|

n→∞
≤ lim fn − fm ∞
n→∞
≤ε
1
Bolzano–Weierstrass: Every bounded sequence in R has a convergent subse-
quence.
N independent of the value of x in S. Then f −fn ∞ ≤ ε. Therefore,

f is the uniform limit of the Cauchy sequence, {fn : n ∈ N}. Then
f ∈ Cb (S). So Cb (S) is complete.
We will not dwell on the notions of convergence and completeness of

subsets at this time. We will return to discuss these concepts in the
more general contexts of metric spaces and topological spaces.
1.4 The Compact Property on Normed Vector Spaces
We will present immediately the formal definition of the compact

property in normed vector spaces. The notion of compactness will
also be discussed in a the more general context of metric spaces and
topological spaces. This definition will be followed by an important
characterization of the compact property valid for normed vector
spaces with a finite basis. The proof is non-trivial and so is omitted
here. The complete proof is usually presented in texts which serve as
an introduction to real analysis.
One of the main reasons for an early introduction of compact
subsets in such a course is to access the important “Extreme value
theorem” which states that “A continuous function on a compact
subset, T , of a normed vector space, V , attains its maximum value at
a point inside T ”. The Heine–Borel theorem allows us to refer to com-
pact subsets as being those subsets that are “closed and bounded”.
In abstract topological spaces, we will not have access to this tool,
since the Heine–Borel theorem applies only to those normed vector
spaces with a finite basis.
Definition 1.13 A subset, T , of a normed vector space, V , is said

to be compact 2 if and only if every sequence, {xi : i ∈ N}, in T has a
subsequence, {xf (i) : i ∈ N}, which converges to some point, p, which
belongs to T .
2
When we revisit the property of compactness in our study of topological spaces,
we will replace the word “compact” with the words “sequentially compact”.
Theorem 1.14 (The generalized Heine–Borel theorem). A

subset of normed vector space with a finite base is compact if and
only if it is both closed and bounded.
Proof. The proof is omitted.
Exercises
1. Prove that, if x and y are vectors in Rn , then

| x − x − y | ≤ y .
2. Exercise questions on norms.
(a) Consider the vector space, C[a, b], of all continuous functions
on the interval [a, b]. Recall that 1 : C[a, b] → R is defined
as
b
f 1 = |f (x)|dx
a
Show that 1 is a valid norm on C[a, b].

(b) Let {fn : n ∈ N, n = 0} be a sequence of constant functions
defined as fn (x) = 2 + n1 for each n. That is, f1 (x) = 3,
f2 (x) = 5/2, f3 (x) = 7/3, and so on. If {fn } is viewed as a
subset of C[−1, 2] equipped with the norm 1 determine,
2
lim |fn (x)| dx
n→∞ −1
Justify all your steps carefully.

3. Recall that C[a, b] is the vector space of all continuous functions
on the interval [a, b].
b
(a) Show that f, g = a f (x)g(x) dx is a valid inner product.
(b) Let be the norm on C[0, 1] which is induced by the inner
product given in part (a) of this question. Compute ex .

4. Recall the definition of “p-norm”: xp = ( ni=1 |xi |p )1/p , on Rn .
(a) Compute (−1, 0, 1)3 .
(b) Hölder’s inequality on Rn says that “if p, q ≥1 and 1/p +

n
1/q = 1, then (x1 y1 , x2 y2 , . . . , xn yn )1 = i=1 |xi yi | ≤
xp y q ”. Note that p and q are not assumed to be inte-
gers; Hölder’s inequality holds true as long as the condition
“1/p + 1/q = 1” is satisfied. Although it is difficult to see
why this inequality is of any interest or is of any value at
this point, we will assume it holds true and use it to prac-
tice using simpler concepts. Show that the Cauchy–Schwarz
inequality on Rn , |x, y | ≤ x2 y 2 , (where x, y is the
Euclidean inner product) follows from the Hölder’s inequal-
ity on Rn .
(c) Hölder’s inequality on C[a, b] says that “if p, q ≥ 1 and 1/p +
1/q = 1, then f g1 ≤ f p gq ”. Show that the Cauchy–
Schwarz inequality on C[a, b],
|f, g| ≤ f 2 g2
follows from the Hölder’s inequality on C[a, b].

5. Invoke the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality to show that
√ 1/2 √ 1/2
2−1 π/4 √ √ 2−1
− ≤ cos x sin x dx ≤
2 0 2
6. Let f be a function in C[a, b]. Show that limp→∞ f p ≤ f ∞ .

7. A subset S of a normed vector space is bounded if there exists a
positive number M such that x < M for all x in S. Show that
any Cauchy sequence {xn } in a normed vector space (V, )
when viewed as a set is bounded.
8. Suppose (V, ) is a normed vector space and {xn } is a sequence
in V which does not converge to 0. If δ ∈ R, let Bδ (0) = {x ∈ V :
x < δ}. Show that there exists some δ > 0 and a subsequence
{xni }∞
i=1 of {
xn } such that {xni } ∩ Bδ (0) = ∅.
9. Convergence of vectors in a normed vector space.
(a) Review the definition of “convergence of a sequence of vec-
tors in a normed vector space”. Let (V, ) be an abstract
normed vector. Suppose V contains a sequence of vectors,
{un : n ∈ N}, which converges to some vector in V. Show that
lim un = lim un

n→∞ n→∞
Hence, whenever the sequence, {un : n ∈ N}, converges in V

then so does the sequence, {un : n ∈ N}, of real numbers.
(b) Let v ∈ R2 . Construct a sequence {un } in R2 such that
limn→∞ un = v where limn→∞ un = v .
(c) Suppose {xn } and {un } are two sequences in Rn which both
converge to the same point y . Show that the sequence {xn −
un } must converge to 0.
10. Let {xn : n ∈ N} and {yn : n ∈ N} be sequences in a normed
vector space (V, +, α, ). Let {αn : n ∈ N} be a sequence of
real numbers.
(a) Show that, if {xn : n ∈ N} and {yn : n ∈ N} converge to
x and y , respectively, then the sequence {xn + yn : n ∈ N}
converges to x + y .
(b) Show that, if {xn : n ∈ N} converges to the vector x and
{αn : n ∈ N} converges to the real number α then the
sequence of vectors, {αn xn : n ∈ N}, converges to αx.
11. Suppose (V, ) is a normed vector space and {xn } is a Cauchy
sequence in V. Show that if {xn } has a convergent subsequence,
say {xni }∞
i=1 , then {
xn } converges in V.
12. Let δ > 0. Suppose (V, ) is a normed vector space and {xn }
is a sequence in V such that xn > δ for all
n. Show that if
xn
{xn } is Cauchy then so is the sequence x on B = {x ∈ V :
n
x = 1}.
13. Suppose (V, ) is a normed vector space and B = {x ∈ V :
x = 1}.
(a) Show that if V is complete with respect to the norm
then B is complete with respect to the same norm inherited
from V.
(b) Show that if B is known to be complete with respect to the
norm , then V must also be complete with respect to .
14. Let M be an n-dimensional subspace of the inner product space

(V, , , ). Prove that M is complete with respect to the norm
|| ||. Essentially this says that all subspaces of finite dimensional
inner product spaces are complete subsets.
15. Suppose (V, ) is normed vector space whose norm satisfies the
parallelogram identity
2(x2 + y 2 ) = x +

y 2 + x − y 2
(a) Show that x, y = 14 (x + y 2 − x − y2 ) (referred to as the

polarizing identity) satisfies the three inner product axioms
IP1, IP2, and IP4.
(b) Show that the polarizing identity in part (a) satisfies the
inner product property x + y , z = x, z + y , z hence, the
polarizing identity is a valid inner product.
(c) Show that this inner product induces the norm of V.
16. It is known that for any x ∈ Rn , x∞ = limp→∞ xp . Prove
this for the case where n = 2.
Chapter 2
Metrics on Sets
Abstract
In this section, we define the concept of a “metric” on a set, giving
rise to “metric spaces”. The metric is defined as a tool for measuring
distances between points in the given set. Many metrics can be defined
on a set as long as they each satisfy three metric axioms. Metrics are
then used to determine whether a given sequence converges to a point
or not. The subsets of a set called “open ball” and “open sets” are
then defined. Functions are then introduced to map points from one
metric space to another metric space. We are particularly interested in
those functions which are continuous on their respective domains. The
topological version of the notion of continuity is presented in terms of
“open sets”.
2.1 Measuring Distance in Arbitrary Sets
We now generalize a few notions of distances between vectors in a

normed vector space to distances between points in an arbitrary set.
Arbitrary sets, in their most rudimentary form, do not usually appear
with some algebraic structure defined on them (such as vector spaces,
for example, on which addition and scalar multiplication are defined).
When a set is equipped with addition and scalar multiplication at
the onset, subtraction a − b of two points a and b is easily given
meaning. With a previously defined norm, we measured the length,
a −b, of the difference a −b to obtain the number which represents
a notion of distance between a and b. This method is inspired by the
way we normally determine the distance between two real numbers,
23
say −7 and 2.5, in the vector space, R, for example. In R, distance

between points is expressed by referring to the absolute value. To
measure distances between points in arbitrary sets we will proceed
differently. Given a set S, rather than defining a “norm” function
: S → R on S, we will define a function, ρ : S × S → R, which
maps pairs of points x and y in S to a number which will represent
the distance between these two points in a that particular set. This
function is what we will call a “metric” on S. There will be certain
restrictions on the properties possessed by ρ. We would, of course,
not want ρ to give us a distance x → y which is different from the
distance y → x. Also, we definitely do not want ρ to give a “negative”
distance between two points. With different metrics, ρ1 and ρ2 , the
set, (S, ρ1 ), may be different in nature from the set, (S, ρ2 ).
Definition 2.1 Let S be a non-empty set. A metric, ρ on S, is a

function, ρ : S × S → R, which satisfies three metric axioms:
M1: For every x, y ∈ S, ρ(x, y) ≥ 0. Also,
− Identity of indiscernibles: ρ(x, y) = 0 implies x = y.
− Indiscernibility of identicals: x = y implies ρ(x, y) = 0.
M2: Symmetry: For every x, y ∈ S, ρ(x, y) = ρ(y, x).
M3: Triangle inequality: For every x, y, z ∈ S, ρ(x, y) ≤ ρ(x, z) +
ρ(z, y).
A set S equipped with a metric, ρ, is called a metric space. It is
expressed as (S, ρ).
Many metrics can be defined on a given set S. For a given set, S, if

ρ1 and ρ2 are different metrics then (S, ρ1 ) and (S, ρ2 ) are considered
to be different metric spaces. We provide a few examples.
Example 1. Let (V, ) be a normed vector space. Define ρ : V ×
V → R as ρ(x, y ) = x −
y . The function, ρ, is easily seen to satisfy
the two first metric axioms, M1 and M2. The triangle inequality for
norms guarantees that M3 also holds true. Then ρ, thus defined on V ,
is a metric induced by a norm and so (V, ρ) is a metric space (it can
simultaneously be viewed as a normed vector space depending on
the context) when considering the normed vector space, (R2 , 2 ),
Metrics on Sets 25
the metric induced by the norm 2 is the distance formula: For

x = (x1 , x2 ) and y = (y1 , y2 ),

ρ(x, y ) = x − y2 = (x1 − y1 )2 + (x2 − y2 )2
This particular example shows that, given any normed vector

space (V, ), we can always express it as a metric space, (V, ρ),
by defining ρ(x, y ) = x −
y . However, one should remember that
a metric space (S, ρ) need not be a normed vector space, since S
itself need not be a vector space equipped with addition and scalar
multiplication, both of which are necessary to define a norm on S.
Example 2. Let ρ : R2 × R2 → R be defined as:
ρ(x, y ) = ρ((x1 , x2 ), (y1 , y2 )) = sup {|x1 − y1 |, |x2 − y2 |}
It is left to the reader to verify that this function satisfies all three
metric axioms, and so is a valid metric on R2 .
Example 3. Let S be any non-empty set. The function ρ : S×S → R
defined as

0 if x = y
ρ(x, y) =
1 if x = y
can be verified to satisfy all three metric axioms and so is a valid

metric on S. Any pair of distinct points are at a distance of one from
each other while a point is at a distance zero from itself. This metric
is referred to as the discrete metric.
Example 4. Consider the set of all integers Z. Let k : Z × Z → N
be defined as
k(x, y) = max {2n : 2n divides x − y }
We define ρ : Z × Z → R as follows:
⎧
⎪
⎨0 if n = m
ρ(n, m) = 1
⎪
⎩ if m = n
k(m, n)
We verify that ρ is indeed a metric on Z.
— It follows directly from the definition that ρ(n, m) is non-negative

and ρ(n, m) = 0 if and only if m = n. So ρ satisfies property M1.
— We see that 2n divides x − y if and only if 2n divides y − x. Then
1 1
k(x, y) = k(y, x). Then, if m = n, ρ(m, n) = k(m,n) = k(n,m) =
ρ(n, m). So ρ satisfies M2.
— Suppose ρ(m, n) = 1/2d and ρ(n, t) = 1/2e . Then 2d |(m − n) and
2e |(n − t). We will suppose, without loss of generality, that e ≤ d.
It is easily verified that 2e |(m − t). It follows that k(m, t) ≥ 2e ,
hence,
1
ρ(m, t) =
k(m, t)
1
≤
2e
= ρ(n, t)
≤ ρ(m, n) + ρ(n, t)
So ρ(m, t) ≤ ρ(m, n)+ ρ(n, t). We have shown that ρ satisfies M3.
2.2 Metric Subspaces
We know that certain subsets of a vector space are referred to as

“subspaces” provided they satisfy specific conditions. There are no
required conditions on a subset, T , of (S, ρ) to be called a “metric
subspace” provided we know what its metric will be.
Definition 2.1.1 Suppose (S, ρ) is a metric space and T ⊆ S.

Then T can inherit the metric ρ of its superset, S, and declare itself
to be a metric space (T, ρ|T ), simply by restricting the function ρ :
S × S → R to ρ|T : T × T → R. In this case, (T, ρT ) is referred to
as a metric subspace of (S, ρ). The metric, ρT , is referred to as the
subspace metric.
For example, suppose (R, ) is a normed vector space. Suppose

ρ is the metric on R induced by its norm, , and T = (−3, 5] ⊂ R.
Then (T, ρT ) is a metric subspace of R.1
1
Of course, T is not a vector subspace of the vector space R.
Metrics on Sets 27
Of course, metric subspaces of a metric space S are themselves

metric spaces.
2.3 Convergence and Completeness in a Metric Space
We now direct our attention to those subsets of the set S which are
sequences. The definition of a sequence, {xn }, does not involve the
notions of “norm” or “metric” and so is precisely as we previously
defined it in the section on normed vector spaces. However, conver-
gence or divergence of a sequence depends very much on the tool
we use to measure distances in the set. The following definitions of
limits and convergence in a metric space are in many ways identical
to those involving norms.
Definition 2.2 Let (S, ρ) be a metric space. We say that a sequence,

{xn }, of points in S converges to the point, a, in S with respect to
the metric ρ if and only if
for any ε > 0, there exists an integer N > 0 such that
ρ(xn , a) < ε whenever n > N .
If the sequence of points {xn } converges to the point a (with respect
to the metric ρ), then we write
lim xn = a
n→∞
Just as for limits in normed vector spaces, we can say that {xn }
converges to the point a with respect to a metric ρ in different ways:
lim xn = a ⇔ lim ρ(xn , a) = 0

n→∞ n→∞
Definition 2.2.1 Suppose (S, ρ) is a metric space, T ⊆ S and {xn }

is a sequence in S which converges to the point a with respect to ρ.
Then we will say that the point a is a limit point of T .
Note that, if {xn } ⊆ T ⊆ (S, ρ) and a is the limit of this sequence

with respect to ρ, this does not guarantee that a also belongs to T .
Consider, for example, the metric space (R, ρ) where ρ(x, y) =

|x − y| and T = {π + 1/n : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}. Then (T, ρ) is also a
metric space. We see that the point π is clearly a limit point of T
but π ∈ T .
Just as in normed vector spaces, the notion of “Cauchy sequence”
can also be defined in terms of metrics.
Definition 2.3 A sequence of points {xn } in a metric space (S, ρ)

is said to be a Cauchy sequence in S, with respect to the metric ρ (or
simply said to be Cauchy) if and only if, for any ε > 0, there exists
an integer, N > 0, such that ρ(xm , xn ) < ε, whenever m, n > N .
Example 5. Every convergent sequence is a Cauchy sequence. The

following brief argument confirms what we intuitively feel must be
true: If {xi } converges to the point, a, with respect to the metric,
ρ, then {xi } is a Cauchy sequence. To prove this, we let ε > 0. By
hypothesis, there exists N > 0 such that n > N ⇒ ρ(xn , a) < ε/2. If
m > N , then, invoking the metric axiom M3,
ρ(xm , xn ) ≤ ρ(xm , a) + ρ(xn , a) < ε/2 + ε/2 = ε
So {xi } is Cauchy with respect to the metric ρ.
Definition 2.4 Let (S, ρ) be a metric space. The set S is complete

with respect to the metric ρ if every Cauchy sequence in S converges
to some point in S.
Example 6. Consider the set S = (0, ∞). Let ρ1 denote the discrete
metric on S and ρ2 be defined as ρ2 (x, y) = |x − y|. We compare the
two metric spaces (S, ρ1 ) and (S, ρ2 ).
Claim 1: The metric space, (S, ρ2 ), is not complete. See that the
sequence {1/n : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} is a sequence in (R, ρ2 ) which
Metrics on Sets 29
converges to 0, with respect to ρ2 and so is a Cauchy sequence in

(R, ρ2 ). It is then a Cauchy sequence inside S. Since the Cauchy
sequence {1/n} does not converge in S, then S is not a complete
subset of S.
Claim 2: The metric space, (S, ρ1 ), is a complete metric space. Let
{xi } be a Cauchy sequence in S with respect to the discrete metric
ρ1 . Let ε = 1/2. Then there exists N > 0 such that m, n > N implies
ρ1 (xm , xn ) < ε = 1/2. Then if m, n > N , ρ1 (xm , xn ) = 0. This means
xn = xN +1 , for all n > N . Then for any ε, n > N ⇒ ρ1 (xN +1 , xn ) =
0 < ε so {xi } converges to xN +1 ∈ S. We conclude that (S, ρ1 ) is a
complete metric space.
Note that a metric space (S, ρ) may be a complete metric space
and still have proper subsets which are not complete metric sub-
spaces.
2.4 Open and Closed Subsets of a Metric Space
We now define a few fundamental subsets of metric spaces.
Definition 2.5 Let (S, ρ) be a metric space.

(a) If y ∈ S, and ε > 0 we define an open ball of radius ε of center
y as being the set
Bε (y) = {x ∈ S : ρ(y, x) < ε}
(b) Let U ⊆ S. We say that U is an open subset in S if U is the union

of open balls each of which is entirely contained in U . That is,
for each x ∈ U , there exists a real number number εx > 0 such
that
U = ∪{Bεx (x) : x ∈ U }
Instead of saying “U is an open subset of S” we often simply say

“U is open in S”.
(c) Let F ⊂ S. We say that F is a closed subset of S if and only if

every limit point of F belongs to F .2 That is,
F = {x ∈ S : x = lim xn for some sequence {xn } ⊆ F }

n→∞
Instead of saying “F is a closed subset of S” we often simply say

“F is closed in S”.
Example 7. We define the metric ρ on R as ρ(x, y) = |x − y|. If U

is the the interval (−5, 3) = {x ∈ R : −5 < x < 3}, then U is an
open subset in R since, for every point x ∈ U , we can find ε > 0
such that (x − ε, x + ε) ⊆ (−5, 3). However, V = (−4, 3] is not an
open subset in R since V contains a point 3 such that the open ball
(3 − ε, 3 + ε) ⊆ V no matter how small we choose ε to be.
Example 8. We define the metric ρ on the set U = (−5, 3] as
ρ(x, y) = |x − y|. Consider the subset S = (0, 3]. The subset S is
open in the metric space U since, for each y ∈ S there is εy such
that, S = ∪{Bεy (y) : y ∈ S}. Some readers might object, stating
that there can be no ε such that Bε (3) ⊆ S. But we must be care-
ful and see that we are viewing S as a subset of the metric space
U = (−5, 3]. See that, if we choose ε = 1/2, Bε (3) = {x ∈ U :
(3 − ε, 3 + ε)} = (3 − ε, 3] ⊆ (2, 3] is indeed entirely contained in S.
Example 9. We define the metric ρ on R2 as ρ(x, y ) = x − y2 .
The x-axis, U = {(x, 0) : x ∈ R} is closed in R2 since if a = (a, b) is a
limit point of U then there must exist a sequence {(xn , 0)} such that
(a, b) = limn→∞ (xn , 0) = (limn→∞ xn , limn→∞ 0); this implies b = 0,
hence, (a, b) ∈ U . It then follows that U is closed in R2 .
Example 10. Let S be an arbitrary non-empty set equipped with
the discrete metric ρ. For any x ∈ S, B1/2 (x) = {x} ⊆ {x} hence,
{x} is an open subset of S. Let x be a limit point of {x}. The only
sequence in {x} is the constant sequence {x, x, x, . . .} which converges
to x ∈ {x}. Hence, {x} is closed in S.
2
Recall that x is a limit point of a set F if there exists a sequence inside F which
converges to x.
Metrics on Sets 31
Remark. We can similarly define the notion of an “open subset S”

of a normed vector space (V, ) by defining ρ(x, y ) = x − y , in
which case U is open in (V, ) if and only if U is open in (V, ρ). In
(V, )), the open ball, Bε (y ), centered at y is defined as Bε (y ) =
{x ∈ V : y − x = ρ(y , x) < ε}. Similarly, if F ⊆ (V, ), F is said
to be closed in V if and only if F contains all its limit points with
respect to the norm .
Theorem 2.6 Let (S, ρ) be a metric space.
(a) Both the empty set, ∅, and S are open subsets of S.

(b) Both the empty set, ∅, and S are closed subsets of S.
(c) Finite intersections of open subsets of S are open subsets of S.
(d) Arbitrarily large unions3 of open subsets of S are open in S.
Proof. The proofs of all four parts are left as an exercise.
Suppose (S, ρ) is a metric space and T ⊆ S. Let ρT : T × T →

R be the restriction of the function ρ to T × T . Then (T, ρT ) is a
metric space. Or we simply say that T is a subspace of (S, ρ). One
may wonder what relationship exists between the open sets of the
subspace T and the open sets of the space S. The following theorem
answers this question.
Theorem 2.7 Suppose (S, ρ) is a metric space and T ⊆ S equipped

with the metric ρT inherited from the set S. Also suppose U ⊆ T ⊆ S.
Then U is open in T (with respect to the metric ρT ) if and only if
there exists an open subset U ∗ in S (with respect to the metric ρ)
such that U = U ∗ ∩ T .
Proof. We are given that (S, ρ) is a metric space and T ⊆ S

equipped with the metric ρT inherited from the set S. Suppose
U ⊆ T ⊆ S.
3
The words “arbitrarily large unions” include the notion of the union of a count-
ably or uncountably infinite number of sets. For example, ∪{An : n ∈ N}.
(⇐) Suppose U ∗ is open in S and U = U ∗ ∩ T . If x ∈ U , then

there exists ε > 0 such that Bε (x) ⊆ S. Now
Bε (x) ∩ T = {y ∈ T : ρ(x, y) < ε)} = {y ∈ T : ρT (x, y) < ε)} = Bε (x)
by definition, an open ball radius ε center x, in T . Since U =

∪{Bε (x) : x ∈ U }, then U is open in T .
(⇒) Suppose U is an open subset of T ⊆ S. If x ∈ U then there
exists ε > 0 such that Bε (x) ⊆ U . Let Bε (x) = {y ∈ S : ρ(x, y) < ε}.
Then Bε (x) is an open subset of S such that Bε (x) ∩ T = {y ∈ T :
ρT (x, y) < ε} = Bε (x). Then
[∪{Bε (x) : x ∈ T }] ∩ T = ∪{Bε (x) ∩ T : x ∈ T }

= ∪{Bε (x) : x ∈ T }
=U
If U ∗ = ∪{Bε (x) : x ∈ T }, then U ∗ is an open subset of S such that

U = U∗ ∩ T.
Theorem 2.8 A subset F is a closed subset of a metric space (S, ρ)

if and only if its complement, S \F, is an open subset of S.
Proof. Recall that closed subsets of S are those subsets F which
contain all their limit points. So the statement says that F is closed
in S if and only if S\F contains no limit point of F . The proof is left
as an exercise.
2.5 Characterizations of Continuous Functions

on a Metric Space
In what follows we study continuous functions mapping one metric

space, (Sa , ρa ) to another metric space (Sb , ρb ).
Definition 2.9 Let (Sa , ρa ) and (Sb , ρb ) be two metric spaces.

Metrics on Sets 33
(a) We say that a function f : Sa → Sb is continuous at the point

u ∈ Sa if and only if it satisfies the following condition:
For every ε > 0, there exist δ > 0 such that ρa (u, x) <
δ ⇒ ρb (f (u), f (x)) < ε.
(b) If A ⊆ Sa , we say that a function f : A → Sb is continuous on

the set A if and only if it is continuous at each point in A.
There are various ways of recognizing continuous functions on a

subset T of a metric space (S, ρ). The following theorem illustrates
the most important ones.
Theorem 2.10 Let (Sa , ρa ) and (Sb , ρb ) be two metric spaces and
f : Sa → Sb be a function mapping the Sa into the set Sb . Then the
following are equivalent:
(1) The function f is continuous on Sa .

(2) Whenever a sequence {xn } in Sa converges to a point u ∈ Sa ,
then the sequence {f (xn )} in Sb converges to f (u) in Sb .
(3) Suppose f [Sa ] denotes the range of f on the domain Sa . For any
open subset U of f [Sa ] ⊆ Sb , the subset f ← [U ] = {x ∈ Sa :
f (x) ∈ U } is open in Sa .
Proof. We are given two metric spaces, (Sa , ρa ) and (Sb , ρb ) and a
function and f : Sa → Sb .
(1 ⇒ 2) Suppose f : Sa → Sb satisfies the formal definition of
continuity on Sa . Let u ∈ Sa and ε > 0. There exists δ such that
ρa (u, y) < δ ⇒ ρb (f (u), f (y)) < ε. Suppose {xn } is a sequence in Sa
such that limn→∞ xn = u. Then the sequence {f (xn )} and the point
f (u) are defined in Sb . We claim that {f (xn )} converges to f (u).
Since {xn } converges to u, there exist an N > 0 such that n > N
implies ρa (u, xn ) < δ. Then, for n > N , ρb (f (u), f (xn )) < ε. It then
follows that limn→∞ f (xn ) = f (u), as required.
(2 ⇒ 1) Suppose the function f : Sa → Sb is such that, for u ∈ Sa

and {xn } ⊆ Sa ,
lim xn = u ⇒ lim f (xn ) = f (u)
n→∞ n→∞
Let ε > 0. Suppose f is not continuous at u. Then there exists ε > 0

such that for any δ there exists x ∈ Sa such that ρa (u, x) < δ and
ρb (f (u), f (x)) > ε. Then, for any δn = n1 , there exists xn ∈ Sa
such that ρa (u, xn ) < δn = n1 and ρb (f (u), f (xn )) > ε. We can then
construct a sequence {xn } in Sa such that limn→∞ (xn − u) = 0 and
limn→∞ f (xn ) = f (u), contradicting our hypothesis.4 The source of
our contradiction is our supposition that f is not continuous at u.
So f must be continuous at u, as required.
(1 ⇒ 3) Suppose f : Sa → Sb satisfies the formal definition of
continuity on Sa . Let u ∈ Sa and ε > 0. Let U be an open subset
of f [Sa ] ⊆ Sb . Let u ∈ f ← [U ]. Then f (u) ∈ U . Since U is open in
f [Sa ], there exists ε > 0 such that Bε (f (u)) ⊆ U where Bε (f (u)) =
{x ∈ f [Sa ] : ρb (f (u), x) < ε}. Since f is continuous at u, there exists
δ > 0 such that ρa (u, x) < δ ⇒ ρb (f (u), f (x)) < ε. This means that,
if x ∈ Bδ (u), then f (x) ∈ Bε (f (u)). Then
u ∈ Bδ (u) ⊆ f ← [Bε (f (u))] ⊆ f ← [U ]
So f ← [U ] is open in Sa , as required.
(3 ⇒ 1) Suppose f : Sa → Sb is a function on Sa such that
whenever U is open in f [Sa ], f ← [U ] is open in Sa . Let u ∈ Sa and
ε > 0. By hypothesis, f ← [Bε (f (u))] is open in Sa and contains u.
Then there exists δ > 0 such that u ∈ Bδ (u) ⊆ f ← [Bε (f (u))]. This
means that if ρa (u, x) < δ then ρb (f (u), f (x)) < ε, as required.
Note that the third characterization of a continuous function on a

set, “U is open ⇒ f ← [U ] is open”, is normally not used to determine
continuity of f at a point in the domain. This characterization “U is
open ⇒ f ← [U ] is open” is referred to as the topological definition
of continuity on a set while the second characterization “{xn } →
a ⇒ {f (xn )} → f (a)” is referred to as the sequential definition of
continuity at a point.
4
Note that the axiom of choice is invoked here.
Metrics on Sets 35
Exercises
1. Prove parts (a)–(d) of Theorem 2.6.

2. (a) Show that the function which appears in Example 2 on
page 25 is a valid metric.
(b) Show that the function which appears in Example 3 on
page 25 is a valid metric.
3. Define ρ : R × R → R as ρ(x, y) = |x − y|. Prove that, thus
defined, ρ is a valid metric on R.
4. Let ρ1 and ρ2 be two metrics on the set S.
(a) For a given k > 0 we define the function kρ : S × S → R as
(kρ)(x, y) = k × ρ(x, y). Show that kρ is valid metric on S.
(b) If ρ1 +ρ2 : S ×S → R is defined as (ρ1 +ρ2 )(x, y) = ρ1 (x, y)+
ρ2 (x, y) show that ρ1 + ρ2 is a valid metric on S.
(c) If ρ : S × S → R is defined as ρ(x, y) = min {1, ρ1 (x, y)}
show that ρ is a valid metric on S.
5. Suppose {xn } is a sequence in a metric space (S, ρ). Show that
if limn→∞ xn = a and limn→∞ = b where both a and b belong to
S then a = b.
6. We define two functions ρ1 : R2 × R2 → R and ρ2 : R2 × R2 → R
as follows:
ρ1 ((a1 , a2 ), (b1 , b2 )) = |a1 − b1 | + |a2 − b2 |
ρ2 ((a1 , a2 ), (b1 , b2 )) = max {|a1 − b1 |, |a2 − b2 |}
(a) Show that ρ1 thus defined is a valid metric on R2 .
(b) Show that ρ2 thus defined is a valid metric on R2 .
(c) Show that limn→∞ {xn } = x ∈ R2 with respect to ρ1 if and
only if limn→∞ {xn } = x ∈ R2 with respect to ρ2 .
7. Let a, b be distinct points in the metric space (S, ρ). Find disjoint
open sets A and B such that a ∈ A, b ∈ B and A ∩ B = ∅.
8. Suppose g : S → R and h : S → R are two continuous functions
on the metric space (S, ρ). Show that the set U = {x ∈ S :
h(x) < g(x)} is an open subset of M .
9. Prove that a finite subset of a metric space (S, ρ) is always closed
in S.
10. Prove Theorem 2.8: A subset F is a closed subset of a metric
space (S, ρ) if and only if its complement, S\F , is an open subset
of S.
Part II
Topological Spaces:
Fundamental Concepts
Chapter 3
A Topology on a Set
Abstract
In this section, we define the notion of a topological space. We will begin
by describing those families of subsets of a set which form a topology,
τ , on a set, showing along the way how to recognize“open subsets” and
“closed subsets”. There can be many topologies on a set. Given a pair of
topologies τ1 and τ2 on S one can sometimes be seen as being “weaker”
or “stronger” than the other. We have provided many examples both in
the main body of the text as well as in the given exercises.
3.1 Introduction
In our review of metric spaces we realized, in Theorem 2.10, that

a function, f : S → T , from a metric space S to another metric
space T is continuous whenever the following condition is satisfied:
“The set, f ← [U ], is open in S whenever the set, U , is open in T ”.
We learned that, some sets are described as being “open”, others as
being “closed”, some are both open and closed, while some are neither.
We then learned how to distinguish one from the other. For exam-
ple, we recognized closed sets as being those whose complement is
open. We can recognize a closed set, F , as being one that “contains the
limit point of every convergent sequence in F ”. It seems that know-
ing various characterizations for each type of set is not only useful,
but important. How did this notion of an “open set” originate? Recall
that we constructed open sets in a set S with the help of a norm or
metric previously defined on S. These two distance measuring tools
39
defined on S allowed us to define the notion of an “open ball” in S

which, in turn, allowed us to recognize those subsets, T , of S which
are open.
We would now like to define “open set” in a much more abstract
context, in a way that is independent of any distance measuring tool
such as a norm or metric. We will gradually add more structure to
what we will call, topological spaces. We will then proceed to clas-
sify the family of all topological spaces according to some of their
intrinsic properties. Thus gathering together those spaces with sim-
ilar properties. It may occur that a particular class of topological
spaces, is actually a subclass of some other class.
Definition 3.1 Let S be a non-empty set.

(a) A topology on S is a collection, τ , of subsets of S which possesses
the following properties:
O1: Both the empty set, ∅, and S belong to τ .
O2: If C ⊆ τ , then ∪{C ∈ C } is a set which also belongs to τ .
O3: If F is a finite subset of τ , then ∩{C ∈ F } is also a set
which belongs to τ .
We will refer to O1, O2, and O3 as the open set axioms.1
(b) If τ is a topology on a set S (as defined above) then each member,
U ∈ τ , is called an open subset of S. We often simply say that
“U is open in S”.
(c) Suppose we have defined a topology, τ , on some set S. Then this
set, S, when considered together with this topology τ , is called
a topological space and can be represented as (S, τ ). The condi-
tion, O2, can also be expressed by the phrase “τ is closed under
arbitrary unions”. The condition, O3, can also be expressed by
the phrase “τ is closed under finite intersections”.
1
Some readers may notice that, if C = ∅ ⊆ τ , then, by O2, ∪{C ∈ ∅} = ∅ ∈ τ .
Also, if the finite subset, F , is empty then, by O3, ∩{C ∈ ∅} = S ∈ τ . So,
theoretically, it would be sufficient to axiomatize “open sets” with O2 and O3
where O1 would logically flow from these two. The axiom O1 is normally included
for convenience to make it easier to identify a topology.
A Topology on a Set 41
It is important to remember that the elements of a topology τ

on S are all subsets of S. To say that S is an open subset of S it
is to assume that a topology τ has been previously defined; that
is, that τ satisfies the three properties stated above. There can be
many topologies defined on a given set. If τ1 and τ2 are two different
topologies on a set S, then (S, τ1 ) and (S, τ2 ) are considered to be
distinct topological spaces even though they contain the same points.
When we view (S, τ1 ) and (S, τ2 ) simply as sets they are of course
equal. We speak of U as being an open subset of S when it is clearly
understood from the context that U is a member of a predefined
topology τ on S.
Example 1. Suppose (S, ρ) is a metric space and Bε (y) = {x ∈ S :
ρ(x, y) < ε} represents an open ball of radius ε and center y in S.
Let
τρ = {∅} ∪ {U ⊆ S : U is the union of open balls in S}
Then τρ is a topology on S. (Showing that τρ satisfies the three open

set axioms is left as an exercise.) We say that τρ is the topology
induced by the metric ρ on S.
If a metric, ρ, is defined on S, a set A belongs to τρ if and only if
A is open in the metric space (S, ρ). In this sense, every metric space
is a topological space.
Note: There exist topological spaces whose topology is not derived
from a metric ρ. Those topological spaces whose open sets can be
derived some metric have a special name.
Definition 3.2 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space. We will say that

(S, τ ) is metrizable if there exists a metric, ρ, on S such that τ = τρ
(where τρ is induced on S by ρ).
From this definition, we can state that the class of all topological
spaces can be subdivided into two subfamilies: One consists of all
metrizable spaces the other of non-metrizable ones.
For example, the usual metric ρ(x, y) = |x − y| on R induces a
topology, τρ , on R. We normally refer to this topology as being the
usual topology on R. In many textbooks it is also referred to as the
Euclidean topology on R. In this case, the open subsets of R are the

sets which are unions of open intervals Bε (y) = (y − ε, y + ε). For
example, the sets U1 = ∪{(n, n + 1) : n ∈ Z} and U2 = (−4, 9) can
be shown to belong to τρ , but the subset U3 = [−7, −3) ∈ τρ . (It is
left to the reader to verify this.)
Example 2. (A non-metrizable space). Consider the set S = R2
equipped with the topology
τ = {B ⊆ R2 : R2 \B is countable}2 ∪ {∅, R2 }
(a) Verify that the family, τ , of subsets of R2 is indeed a topology

on R2 .
(b) Verify that the topological space, R2 , equipped with the topol-
ogy, τ , described above is not metrizable.
Solution: Given: τ = {B ⊆ R2 : R2 \B is countable} ∪ {∅, R2 }.
(a) Verification that the sets in τ satisfy the three open sets axioms
O1, O2, and O3 is left as an exercise.
(b) Suppose ρ is a metric on R2 such that τ = τρ . We will show that,
given τ = τρ , then ρ(x, y ) > ρ(x, z) + ρ(y , z), contradicting the
fact that ρ is a valid metric on R2 .
Suppose x and y are distinct points in R2 and ρ(x, y ) = α = 0.
Consider the open balls Bα/2 (x) and Bα/2 (y ). Since both balls
belong to τ , each ball has a countable complement; so each ball
is an uncountable subset. Hence, Bα/2 (y ) cannot be entirely con-
tained in R2 \Bα/2 (x). That means that Bα/2 (y ) ∩ Bα/2 (x) = ∅.
Let z ∈ Bα/2 (y ) ∩ Bα/2 (x). Then
ρ(x, z) + ρ(y , z) < α/2 + α/2

=α
= ρ(x, y )
We see that ρ(x, y ) > ρ(x, z)+ρ(y , z) and so ρ does not satisfy the
triangle inequality, contradicting the fact that ρ is a metric on R2 .
2
If A is a subset of a space S, then S\A is the complement of A. It denotes the
set of all points in S which don’t belong to A.
So there can be no metric ρ on R2 such that τ = τρ . We conclude

that the topological space, (R2 , τ ), is not a metrizable space.3
We introduce the following supplementary definition.
Supplementary definition: If (S, τ ) is a topological space and x ∈

U where U is an open subset of S, then we say that U is an
open neighborhood of x.
Furthermore, if U is open and T is a subset of S such that x ∈ U ⊂ T ,

then we say that T is a neighborhood of x.
Note that a point, x, in a topological space, (S, τ ), always has at

least one open neighborhood, namely S. If T = (−2, 4) ∪ (4, 7] in R,
equipped with the usual topology, we see that T is a neighborhood
of 3 but not a neighborhood of 4 nor of 7 (since there is no open set
U such that 7 ∈ U ⊆ T ).
Definition 3.3 Suppose τ1 and τ2 are two topologies on a given set

S. If τ1 ⊆ τ2 , then we say that τ1 is a weaker topology than τ2 on S
or that τ2 is a stronger topology than τ1 on S. We can also say that
τ1 is a coarser topology than τ2 on S, or that τ2 is a finer topology
than τ1 on S. We will say that the two topological spaces (S, τ1 ) and
(S, τ2 ) are equivalent if and only if τ1 = τ2 .
Example 3. Suppose S is a non-empty set and P(S) denotes the

power set of S (i.e., P(S) denotes the collection of all subsets of S).
Let τd = P(S). Then τd is a topology on S. It is left to the reader
to verify this. In this case, for every single point x ∈ S, {x} is open
in S.
3
Later, once we covered the concept of “Hausdorff ” this problem will be
more easily solved by stating that “this space is not metrizable because it not
Hausdorff ”.
Supplementary definition: For a given space S, if
τd = P(S)
the topology, τd , is referred to as the discrete topology on S.
If S is equipped with the discrete topology then every non-empty

subset of S is an open neighborhood of the elements it contains.
Example 4. For a non-empty set S, if τi = {∅, S}, then the two-
element set, τi , is a topology on S.
Supplementary definition: If τi = {∅, S}, the topology, τi , is

normally referred to as the indiscrete topology on S. In this case, for
any x ∈ S, S is its only neighborhood.
Since all topologies on S must at least contain ∅ and S, τi is

the weakest (coarsest) of all topologies on S. On the other hand,
τd = P(S) is the strongest (finest) of all topologies on S. For any
topology τ on S, we then have
τi ⊆ τ ⊆ τd
It is left for the reader to verify the following important fact.
Fact: Given a family {τk : k ∈ I} of topologies on a set S, it is an

easy exercise to show that the family ∩k∈I τk is also a topology on S.4
This fact can also be expressed as The set of all topologies is closed
under arbitrary intersections.
But ∪{τk : k ∈ I} need not necessarily be a topology

on S. For example, verify that τ1 = {∅, S, {b}, {a, b}} and τ2 =
{∅, S, {c}, {a, c}} are two topologies on S; but their union, τ1 ∪ τ2 ,
is not a topology on S. (Since {a, b, c} ∈ τ1 ∪ τ2 . Verify this.)
4
Caution: However, arbitrary unions of topologies may not form a topology on
a set.
3.2 Closed Subsets of a Topological Space
In our brief overview of metric spaces, (S, ρ), we defined a closed

subset, F , of S as one which contains all its limit points. We then
saw that, in a metric space S, a subset, F , of S is closed if and
only if its complement, S \F , is open.5 Metric spaces were equipped
with a “metric” so that we could discuss the much needed notions
of “convergence of a sequence” and “closed set” in a set S. We now
formally define the analogous notions of “closed subsets in a topolog-
ical space”. We will not discuss the concepts of “convergence” and
“limit points” in a topological space immediately. We will be doing
an in-depth study of this topic in a section later in this book.
Definition 3.4 Let F be a subset of a topological space (S, τ ). If

the complement, S \F , of F is an open subset in S then we say that
F is a closed subset in S.
The definition of “closed” states that “(S \ F is open) ⇒ (F is

closed”). Conversely,
A is closed ⇒ A = S \ [S \A] is closed

⇒ [S \A] is open
We can then actually write
(F is closed) ⇔ (S \F is open)
Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space and F = {A ⊂ S :

A is closed in S}. Then we can define the topology in terms of F ,
τ = {A : S \A ∈ F } and F = {A : S \A ∈ τ }
Theorem 3.5 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and I be any indexing

set. Then,
(a) Both ∅ and S are closed in S.
5
S \F = {x ∈ S : x ∈ F }.
(b) If {Fi : i ∈ I} is a family of closed subsets of S then ∩{Fi : i ∈ I}

is a closed subset of S.
(c) If {Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , k} is a finite family of closed subsets of S
then ∪{Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , k} is a closed subset of S.
Proof.
(a) Since ∅ is open, then S = S\∅ is closed. Since S is open, ∅ = S\S
is closed.
(b) Let {Fi : i ∈ I} be a family of closed subsets of S. Then, for
each i ∈ I, S \Fi is open. Since (by De Morgan’s law) S \∩{Fi :
i ∈ I} = ∪{S \Fi : i ∈ I} is open (being the union of open sets),
then ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} is a closed subset of S.
(c) This part is left as an exercise.
Supplementary proposition: Defining a topology on S in terms

of “closed sets”. Suppose we are given a set S and family, F = {F :
F ⊆ S} of elements from P(S) which satisfies the following three
conditions:
F1: The sets ∅, S both belong to F .
F2: If {Fi : i ∈ I} ⊆ F then ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} ∈ F .
F3: If {Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , k} is a finite subset of F then ∪{Fi :
i = 1, 2, 3, . . . k} ∈ F .
Then the family, τ = {S \F : F ∈ F }, forms a topology on S.
Proof. The proof showing that τ is a topology is left to the reader.
It easily follows from an application of De Morgan’s law.6
Supplementary definition: The conditions F1, F2, and F3

described above are referred to as the
closed set axioms.
6
That is, S \ [∪i∈I Fi ] = ∩i∈I [S \Fi ] and S \ [∩i∈I Fi ] = ∪i∈I [S \Fi ].
Example 5. Suppose S is a non-empty set and
F = {F : F is a finite subset of S} ∪ {∅, S}
Then the set F satisfies the three closed sets axioms F1, F2, and F3.
(Verify this!) Then τ = {S \F : F ∈ F } forms a topology on S. The
elements of τ are
τ = {∅, S} ∪ {U ⊂ S : S \U is finite}
Given a set S, the family of subsets,
τ = {A : A ⊆ S and S \A is finite} ∪ {S, ∅}7
forms a topology of S called the cofinite topology on S or the Zariski

topology on S.
3.3 Subspace Topology on a Subset
We previously defined the notion of a “metric subspace”, T , as

being a subset of a metric space, (S, ρ), equipped with the subspace
metric, ρT .
In the more general case of a topological space, (S, τ ), any subset
T can be declared to be a “topological subspace” provided the reader
understands what topology is defined on T . Suppose H is a non-
empty subset of a topological space (S, τ ). Then H can inherit its
topology from τ , in a natural way, as shown the following theorem.
Theorem 3.6 Let (S, τ ) be topological space and H ⊆ S.

(a) Let
τH = {U ⊂ H : U = K ∩ H, for some K ∈ τ }
Then τH is a topology on H.
7
If S \U is finite, we say U is cofinite.
(b) Let
FH = {F ⊂ H : F = M ∩ H where M = S \ K, K ∈ τ }
Then FH represents all closed subsets of the topological space

(H, τH ).
Proof. The proof is left as an exercise.
Definition 3.7 If (S, τ ) is topological space and H ⊆ S and
τH = {U ⊂ H : U = K ∩ H, K ∈ τ }
then τH is called the subspace topology or relative topology on H

induced by S, or inherited from S. In such a case, we will say that
(H, τH ) is a subspace of S.
Some subsets of a topological space (S, τ ) can be both open and

closed. For example, if (R, τi ) is equipped with the indiscrete topol-
ogy, τi = {∅, R}, both ∅ and R are the only open subsets of R and
so both ∅ and R are the only closed subsets of R. That is, ∅ and R
are simultaneously open and closed in R. We consider a less trivial
example.
Example 6. Let H = [3, 5). Consider the subset
T = H ∪ {9} = [3, 5) ∪ {9}
of (R, τ ) where R is equipped with the usual topology, τ . Suppose

the subspace (T, τT ) is equipped with the subspace topology inherited
from τ . Now H is a subset of both T and R. Since H = T ∩[2, 6], then
H is closed in T with respect to the subspace topology τT . Since H =
T ∩ (2, 5), then H is open in T with respect to the subspace topology
τT . So the subset, H, is both open and closed in the subspace, T .
Note, however, that H is neither open nor closed in S.
There is a special adjective used to refer to those subsets which
are both open and closed. Since its use is fairly common, we formally
define it below.
Definition 3.8 If T is a subset of a topological space (S, τ ), and T

is both open and closed with respect to τ , we say that. . .
T is clopen in S.
Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space which contains the

non-empty subset (F, τF ) equipped with the subspace topology, τF ,
inherited from S. If one speaks of an open subset, U , of F , it may
sometimes not be obvious whether U ∈ τ or U ∈ τF . To be more
specific, we can write “U is an S-open subset in F ” to mean U ∈ τ
and “U is an F -open subset of F ” to mean U ∈ τF .8
3.4 Other Examples
We provide a few more examples of topological spaces.

Example 7. Let S be a set and B ⊆ S. Let τB = {A ∈ P(S) : B ⊆
A} ∪ {∅}.
(a) Verify that τB is indeed a topology.
(b) Describe the closed subsets of (S, τB ).
Solution: We are given that B ⊆ S and τB = {A ∈ P(S) : B ⊆
A} ∪ {∅}.
(a) We verify that τB is a topology on S by confirming that it satisfies
the open set axioms O1, O2, and O3.
— By definition, ∅ ∈ τB ; also, since B ⊆ S then S ∈ τB .
— Suppose U is a non-empty subset of τ . Then B ⊆ U for each
U ∈ U . So B ⊆ ∪{U : U ∈ U }. Hence, ∪{U : U ∈ U } ∈ τB .
— Suppose F is a finite subset of τB . Then B ⊆ F for each
F ∈ F . So B ⊆ ∩{F : F ∈ F }. Hence, ∩{F : F ∈ F } ∈ τB .
(b) We now describe the closed subsets of S. We consider the sets,
A, such that A ∩ B = ∅, and those satisfying A ∩ B = ∅.
— If A ⊆ S such that A ∩ B = ∅, then B ⊆ S \A; this means
S \A is open, hence, A is a closed subset of S.
8
Note that if F is S-open and U is an F -open subset of F then U is also S-open.
— Suppose, on the other hand, that for A ⊆ S and A ∩ B = ∅.

We claim that S is the only closed subset which contains A.
To see this, note that if F is closed then S\F is open and so
either contains B or is ∅. If A ∩ B = ∅ and A ⊆ F then S\F
cannot contain B so S \F = ∅, which means that F = S.
So the closed subsets of S are the family
F = {F ⊂ S : F ∩ B = ∅} ∪ {S}
Example 8. Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and suppose B is a
fixed subset of S. Let
τB = {A ∈ P(S) : A = C ∪ (D ∩ B) where C, D ∈ τ }
(a) Verify that τB is another topology on S.

(b) Is one of the two topologies, τB , τ , stronger than the other? Are
these two topologies equivalent topologies?
Solution: We are given that (S, τ ) is a topological space and B is a
fixed subset of S.
(a) We begin by showing that τB satisfies the three open set axioms
O1, O2, and O3.
— We know ∅, S ∈ τ . So we have ∅ = ∅ ∪ (∅ ∩ B) ∈ τB and
S = S ∪ (S ∩ B) ∈ τB .
— Suppose U = {Ci ∪ (Di ∩ B) : i ∈ I} ⊆ τB , where Ci , Di ∈ τ
for all i ∈ I. Then ∪i∈I Ci , and ∪i∈I Di both belong to τ . Then

[Ci ∪ (Di ∩ B)] = [∪i∈I Ci ] ∪ ([∪i∈I Di ] ∩ B) ∈ τB
i∈I
Thus, τB is closed under arbitrary unions.

— Suppose F = {Ci ∪ (Di ∩ B) : i = 1, 2, . . . , n} ⊆ τB . Then

[Ci ∪ (Di ∩ B)] = [(Ci ∪ Di ) ∩ (Ci ∪ B)]
i=1,...,n i=1,...,n
= [∩i=1,...,n (Ci ∪ Di )] ∩ [(∩i=1,...,n Ci ) ∪ B]

= [∩i=1,...,n (Ci ∪ Di )] ∩ [(∩i=1,...,n Ci )]
∪ [∩i=1,...,n (Ci ∪ Di ) ∩ B]
∈ τB
So τB satisfies the three open set axioms O1, O2, and O3.
(b) We claim that τ ⊆ τB : See that, if C ∈ τ , then C = C ∪(∅∩B) ∈

τB , so τ ⊆ τB . So τB is a topology on S which is finer (stronger)
than τ .
We claim that these two topologies are not equivalent: Suppose
B ∈ τ , D ∈ τ and B ⊂ D. Then ∅ ∪ (D ∩ B) = B ∈ τ . Since
B ∈ τB , then τB contains elements which are not in τ . So τ ⊂ τB .
In the above example, we say that “the topology τB extends τ
over B”.
3.5 Free Union of Topological Spaces
Suppose we are given a family of topological spaces. There is a way

to unite them into one single new larger topological space without
altering their individual topology. This is referred to a being the “free
union” of these topological spaces. We define this concept.
Definition 3.9 Let {Si : i ∈ I} be a family of topological spaces.

For each space, Si , we associate a space, Si∗ = {i} × Si in such a way
that Si∗ and Si are identical except for the fact that {i} × Si has a
label i attached to Si . This is to guarantee that if i = j then Si∗ and
Sj∗ are entirely different sets and so have empty intersection. This
allows us to view the family, {Si∗ : i ∈ I}, as being pairwise disjoint,
in the sense that no two spaces have elements in common. We define
the free union of the family {Si : i ∈ I},9 denoted as, i∈I Si∗ , as
being the topological space

Si∗ = ∪{Si∗ : i ∈ I}
i∈I

in which U is open in i∈I Si∗ if and only if U ∩ Si∗ is open for each
i ∈ I. This topology, thus defined, is referred to as the
disjoint union topology.
9
Some texts may refer to this set as direct sum or free sum or topological direct
sum.
Example 9. For each n ∈ N\{0}, let Ln denote the set,

π
sin ( 4n )
Ln = (x, yn ) : yn = gn (x) = π x, x = 0
cos ( 4n )
Let L0 = {(x, 0) : x ∈ R} and
T = ∪{Ln : n ∈ N\{0}} ∪ {L0 }
It is possible to view T as a single subset of R2 and equip it

with the subspace topology, in which case open neighborhoods of
points on L0 would intersect points on other lines. For a different
topology, we could view T as a free union of disjoint subspaces of
R2 , where each line is equipped with the subspace topology. With
the free union topology, an open neighborhood of a point on a line
is restricted to the line itself. Each line would be clopen in T . For
example, {(x, 0) : 1 < x < 7} would be an open neighborhood of
(5, 0) in T .
3.6 Topics: G-Delta and F -Sigma Sets
Besides the fundamental open and closed subsets of a topological

space introduced earlier, there are other subsets defined in terms of
open and closed sets with special properties. Two of these are called
G-delta’s, F -sigma’s. Developing some familiarity with these now will
be good practice. As well, it will allow us to freely refer to them in
various examples, theorems and exercise questions to come.
The G-delta and F -sigma sets in a topological space. We have seen
that arbitrary unions of open subsets of a topological space are open.
However, only the intersection of (at most) finitely many open sets
are guaranteed to be open. Similarly, arbitrary intersections of closed
sets are closed, but the union of (at most) finitely many closed sets
are guaranteed to be closed. The intersection of countably many open
sets and the union of countably many closed sets may be relevant in
the study of certain types of spaces.
Before we continue, we remind the reader that a non-empty set S
is said to be “countable” if it is finite or, in the case where it is
infinite, the elements of S can be indexed by the natural numbers.
That is, S = {xi : i = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . .}. We can also say that S is
countable if there exists a function f : N → S mapping the natural
numbers onto S. We now formally define those special subsets of a

topological space we call G-delta’s and F-sigma’s.
Definition 3.10 The sets in a topological space, (S, τ ), which are

the intersection of at most countably many open sets are called Gδ -
sets (or simply Gδ ). Those sets in S which are the union of at most
countably many closed sets are called Fσ -sets (or simply Fσ ). Neither
of these special sets need be open or closed.
Trivially, if F is closed in (S, τ ) then F is an Fσ and if U is open

then U is a Gδ .
Example 10. If R is equipped with the usual topology, the set
T = [2, 7] is obviously a Fσ . It is also a Gδ since
[2, 7] = ∩{(2 − 1/n, 7 + 1/n) : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
So some sets can be both a Gδ and an Fσ with respect to the same

topology τ .
Example 11. On the other hand, suppose (S, τi ) is equipped with
the indiscrete topology, τi = {∅, S}. If T is a proper non-empty
subset of S, we see that T ⊆ ∅ and T = S; so T is neither a Gδ nor
an Fσ with respect to τi .
Example 12. We consider the set of all rationals, Q, as a subset of
R equipped with the usual topology. It is known that Q is countably
infinite and so can be expressed in the form Q = {xi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}.
Then Q = ∪{{xi } : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} where each {xi } is a closed subset
of R. So Q is an Fσ .10
The following theorem exhibits properties respected by each Fσ
and Gδ and the families of all Gδ ’s and Fσ ’s of a topological space.
Theorem 3.11 Suppose F is an Fσ and G is a Gδ in S.

(a) The complement of F in S is a Gδ and the complement of G in
S is an Fσ .
10
Once we have the necessary tools we will prove that Q is not a Gδ .
(b) There exists a sequence, {Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}, of closed subsets

of S such that
Fi ⊆ Fi+1 for all i = 1, 2, 3, . . ., and F = ∪{Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
(c) There exists a non-increasing sequence, {Gi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}, of

open subsets of S such that
Gi+1 ⊆ Gi for all i = 1, 2, 3, . . ., and G = ∩{Gi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
(d) Suppose F denotes the family of all Fσ ’s in S and {Fi : i =

1, 2, 3, . . .} represents at most countably many elements in F .
Then
∪{Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} ∈ F and ∩ {Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , k} ∈ F

for any k
(e) Suppose G denotes the family of all Gδ ’s in S and {Gi : i =

1, 2, 3, . . .} represents at most countably many elements in G .
Then
∩{Gi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} ∈ G and ∪ {Gi : i = 1, 2, 3, · · · , k} ∈ G

for any k
Proof. Given: (S, τ ) be topological space; F is an Fσ and G is a

Gδ in S.
(a) Suppose
F = ∪{Ki : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , where each Ki is closed in S}
S \F = S \(∪{Ki })
= ∩{S \Ki } (By De Morgan’s rule)
= a Gδ -set
The proof of the second part of (a) follows by a similar applica-

tion of De Morgan’s rule.
(b) The proof is left as an exercise for the reader.
(c) The proof is left as an exercise for the reader.
(d) For countable unions of Fσ ’s:

∞

[∪{F(i,j) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}] = ∪{F(i,j) : (i, j) ∈ N × N}
j=1
where N × N is known to be countable.

For finite intersections of Fσ ’s:
k

[∪∞
j=1 {F(i,j) }] = {F(1,j1 ) ∩ · · · ∩ F(k,jk ) }
i=1 (j1 ,...,jk )∈N×N×···×N
where N × N × · · · × N is known to be countable.

(e) This part is proved similarly to part (d).
We summarize two of the results in the above theorem:
The family, F , of all Fσ ’s of a topological space is
closed under countable unions and closed under finite
intersections.
The family, G , of all Gδ ’s of a topological space is

closed under countable intersections and closed under finite
unions.
We will see a bit later that, in certain specific classes of topologi-

cal spaces, Fσ ’s are closed and Gδ ’s are open. We have to do some
groundwork before we can discuss these.
3.7 Topics: The Family of Borel Sets11
Topological spaces each contain a particular family of subsets of

P(S) which plays a role in certain fields of study where topology
is applied. Particularly in analysis. Before we formally define it, we
begin by defining a special type of subset of P(S) called a “σ-ring”.
A subset, K , of P(S) is called a σ-ring if:
(1) For any A ∈ K , S \A ∈ K .
(2) Whenever {Ai : i ∈ N} ⊆ K then ∪{Ai : i ∈ N} ∈ K .
11
This is a more specialized topic. It can be omitted without loss of continuity.
To summarize, a σ-ring is simply a family of sets which is “closed

under complements” and “countable unions of its sets”. See that
P(S), itself a σ-ring, may contain many σ-rings. Given a topological
space, (S, τ ), we will consider all those σ-rings in P(S), which con-
tain τ . To obtain the unique smallest σ-ring, B, in P(S) that con-
tains τ , we then take the intersection of all σ-rings in P(S) which
contain τ ,
B = ∩{K ⊆ P(S) : K is a σ-ring, τ ⊆ K }
The reader should verify that this “intersection of all σ-rings in P(S)
which contain τ ” is itself a σ-ring containing τ ; we emphasize, that
this intersection is the unique and smallest such σ-ring. We have a
name for this particular set.
Definition 3.12 Given a topological space (S, τ ), we call the small-

est σ-ring, B, in P(S) which contains τ ,. . .
the family of Borel sets in S.
Each member, A ∈ B, is referred to as a Borel set. That is,
{A = “a Borel set in S”} ⇔ {A ∈ B}
Every topological space, S, has its unique family, B, of Borel sets.

We identify a Borel set by confirming that it belongs to B. To help
us identify Borel sets we list a few properties of B. The reader is left
to verify that B. . .
— is closed under complements,
— is closed under countable unions and countable intersections,
— contains all Gδ ’s and all Fσ ’s.
The definition of a “Borel set” in S makes it difficult to recognize
such a subset of S. But it also makes it easy to recognize a large
subfamily of B: “All open subsets (including ∅ and S itself), all
Gδ ’s and all Fσ ’s are Borel sets”. But there may be others.
Theorem 3.13 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space. The family, B, of

Borel sets is the unique smallest subfamily of P(S), that
(a) contains τ ,
(b) is closed under complements,
(c) is closed under countable unions.
Furthermore, B satisfies the following three properties:
(1) B contains all Fσ ’s of S,
(2) B is closed under countable intersections,
(3) B contains all Gδ ’s of S.
Proof. Given: (S, τ ) is a topological space.
Suppose B is the family of Borel sets in P(S). By definition, B
is the intersection of all σ-rings that
(a) contain τ ,
(b) that are closed under complements,
(c) closed under countable unions.
So B is itself the unique smallest σ-ring of subsets of S which satisfies
these three properties.
Since B contains τ , it contains all open subsets of S and since
it is closed under complements, it contains all closed subsets of S.
Since it is closed under countable unions, then it must contain all
Fσ ’s. This establishes property 1.
We now verify that B is closed under countable intersections: Let

{Ai : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} be a countable family of subsets in B. Then
∩{Ai : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} = S \S \(∩{Ai : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .})

= S \∪[S \{Ai : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}]
∈B
This establishes property 2.

It then follows that, since B contains all open sets, it follows from
property two that it must also contain all Gδ ’s of S. This establishes
property 3.
The above theorem guarantees that every open set, closed set,
Gδ and Fσ in a topological space S can be referred to as a Borel
set in S. It is sometimes difficult to identify subsets of a topological
space (S, τ ) which are not Borel sets (with respect to τ ). Consider for
example, the topological space (S, τi ) equipped with the indiscrete
topology. If A is a non-empty proper subset of S then A is not a
Borel set since {∅, S} = τi is the smallest σ-ring which contains τi
and does not contain the element A. On page 76 of this text we
provide another example.
Concept Review
1. Given a set S, what does a topology τ on S represent? How does

one verify whether a family of subsets is a topology?
2. Given an open subset, U , of a topological space, (S, τ ), what is
the relationship between U and τ ?
3. What are the three open set axioms of a topological space (S, τ )?
4. Given a metric space, (S, ρ), describe a topology on S which is
induced by ρ.
5. Describe the usual topology on R.
6. Given a point, x, in a topological space, (S, τ ), what is a neigh-
borhood of x?
7. Given two topologies, τ1 and τ2 , what does it mean to say that
τ1 is weaker than τ2 ?
8. Given two topologies, τ1 and τ2 , what does it mean to say that
τ1 is finer than τ2 ?
9. Given a non-empty set, S, describe the discrete topology on S.
10. Given a non-empty set, S, describe the indiscrete topology on S.
11. Suppose F is a closed subset of the topological space (S, τ ). What
is the relation between F and τ ?
12. What are the three closed set axioms, F1, F2, and F3, of a topo-
logical space (S, τ ).
13. If S is a non-empty set what do we mean by the cofinite or Zariski
topology on S?
14. If T is a subset of the topological space (S, τ ) what is the sub-
space topology on T ?
15. Suppose B is a subset of the topological space (S, τ ) such that
B ∈ τ . Describe the topology τB which extends τ over B?
16. What does it mean to say that a set is metrizable?
17. What is a Gδ of a topological space? What is an Fσ of a topo-
logical space?
18. Describe the family of Borel sets in a topological space (S, τ ).
19. Provide a few examples of Borel sets in R equipped with the

usual topology. Is Q a Borel set? Why?
20. Define the topological space called the “free union” of the spaces,
{Si : i ∈ I}.
Exercises
1. Prove the statement in Theorem 3.5.

2. Consider the open interval S = (−3, 7) in R.
(a) Construct a topology τ on S which contains five elements.
(b) Consider the subset T = (−2, 4] ⊂ S. For the topology τ
constructed in part (a) what is the subspace topology τT on
T inherited from S.
(c) Are the open subsets of T necessarily open subsets of S?
3. Consider R equipped with the usual topology τ (induced by the
Euclidian metric). Let (Q, τQ ) be the set of all rational numbers
equipped with the subspace topology inherited from R. Consider
the subset T = [−π, π) ∩ Q. Determine whether T is open in Q,
closed in Q, both open and closed in Q, or none of these.
4. Construct a topology other than the discrete or indiscrete topology
on the set S = { , ♦, }.
5. Let F = {A ⊆ R : A is countable}∪{∅, R}. Show that F satisfies
the three conditions F1, F2, and F3 described on page 46. Then
use this to construct a topology on R. (This is referred to as being
the cocountable topology.
6. Suppose τA and τB are two topologies on a set S. Determine
whether τA ∩ τB is a topology on S.
7. If R is equipped with the usual topology and Z represents the set
of all integers determine whether Z is open or closed (or both or
neither) in R.
8. Suppose R is equipped with the usual topology and T = [1, 4] ∪
(6, 10) ⊂ R where T is equipped with the subspace topology.
Determine whether [1, 4] is open in T , closed in T or both open
and closed in T . Determine whether (6, 10) is open in T , closed
in T or both open and closed in T .
Chapter 4
Set Closures, Interiors

and Boundaries
Abstract
In this section, we introduce the notions of closure and interior of subsets
of a topological space. The concept of the boundary of a set is then
defined in terms of its interior and closure. Based on their properties,
we derive the “closure axioms” and “interior axioms”. We then begin
viewing closure and interior of sets as being operators on P(S). From
this perspective, we better see how closure and interior operators on
P(S) can be used to topologize a set, providing examples on how this
can be done.
4.1 The Closure of a Set
If T = (2, 7] is viewed as a subset of the topological space R

(equipped with the usual topology), we easily see that it is not closed
since its complement, R\T = (−∞, 2] ∪ (7, ∞), is not open in R. And
yet we feel that it wouldn’t take very much for us to “make it closed”:
We need only add the element, 2, to T to obtain the closed subset
T ∗ = [2, 7]. Adding the fewest number of points possible to a set
T to obtain a closed set is what we will refer to as obtaining the
closure of T . The key words here are “fewest number” of points, and
no more. In this case, we would say that the “closure of T = (2, 7] is
the set T ∗ = [2, 7], the smallest closed subset of R which contains all
the elements of T . With this example in mind, we will now formally
define a concept called “closure of a subset”.
61
Definition 4.1 Let S be a topological space and T ⊆ S. We define

the closure of T in S, denoted by, clS T (or by clS (T )), as
clS T = ∩{F : F is closed in S and T ⊆ F }
The reader should first be aware of the following verifiable facts

for any subset, T , of the topological space S.
(1) The closure of T , clS T , is closed in S: This follows from the fact
that arbitrary intersections of closed sets are closed.
(2) The set T ⊆ clS T : This follows from the definition of closure
of T .
(3) The set, clS T , is the smallest closed set which contains T : Sup-
pose A is a closed set containing T . Then A ∈ {F : F is closed
in S and T ⊆ F }. Hence, clS T ⊆ A.
(4) If T is closed then T = clS T : This is true since T is the smallest
closed set containing T .
Supplementary definition. Let A be a subset of a topological

space S.
If x is a point in S such that, for every S-open neighborhood U
of x, U ∩ A contains some point other than x, then we say that. . .
x is a cluster point of A.
The set of all cluster points of A is called the derived set of A.
This definition provides us with another way of describing a closed

set:
The set B is closed if and only if it contains all its cluster
points.
Verification of this fact is left to the reader.

For example, if B = (1, 3) ∪ (3, 5] ∪ {6} in R, the derived set (i.e.,
the set of all cluster points of B) is [1, 5]. The element, 6, is not a
cluster point of B since there is an open neighborhood, (5.5, 7) of {6}
Set Closures, Interiors and Boundaries 63
which does not meet other elements of B. The set B is not closed
since it doesn’t contain the cluster points 1 and 3.
Example 1. Let T be the open interval, (0, 1), viewed as a subset

of R equipped with the usual topology. Then clR T = [0, 1]. To prove
this we must show that:
(1) [0, 1] is closed by showing that R\[0, 1] is open.

(2) {0, 1} ⊆ A for any closed set A containing the interval (0, 1).
This is left as an exercise.
Example 2. If Q is the set of all rational numbers then clR (Q) = R.
Proof. To prove this we will show that, if F is a closed subset of

R such that Q ⊆ F , then F = R.
Suppose F is a closed subset of R such that Q ⊆ F . Then R\F is

open. Suppose R\F = ∅. Then R\F is the union of open intervals
each of which must contain a rational number. Since Q ∩ (R\F ) = ∅,
this contradicts Q ⊆ F . Then R\F = ∅. This means that the only
closed set containing Q is R. So clR (Q) = R.
Example 3. Suppose S is a topological space induced by the metric
ρ (i.e., the elements of τ are unions of open balls of the form Bε (x) =
{y : ρ(x, y) < ε}). Suppose F is a non-empty subset of S. We define
ρ(x, F ) = inf {ρ(x, u) : u ∈ F }
Show that clS F = {x : ρ(x, F ) = 0}.

Solution: To do this, we must show
(1) F ⊆ {x : ρ(x, F ) = 0},

(2) S \ {x : ρ(x, F ) = 0} is open in S,
(3) If F ⊆ A where A is a closed subset of S, then {x : ρ(x, F ) =
0} ⊆ A.
The details are left as an exercise.

We now list and prove a few of the most fundamental closure
properties.
Theorem 4.2 Let A and B be two subsets of a topological space

(S, τ ). Then,
(1) clS (∅) = ∅.
(2) If A ⊆ B then clS (A) ⊆ clS (B).
(3) clS (A ∪ B) = clS (A) ∪ clS (B) (Closure “distributes” over
finite unions).
(4) clS (clS (A)) = clS (A).
Proof.
(1) Since ∅ is closed, clS (∅) ⊆ ∅. Since ∅ ⊆ clS ∅, then clS (∅) = ∅.
(2) We are given that A ⊆ B. If F is closed in S and B ⊆ F then
A ⊆ B ⊆ F . Then
A ⊆ ∩{F : F is closed in S and B ⊆ F } = clS (B)
By (1) of the facts above, clS (B) is closed in S and so
clS (A) = ∩{F : F is closed in S and A ⊆ F } ⊆ clS (B)
We have shown that clS (A) ⊆ clS (B).

(3) Since A ⊆ A ∪ B and B ⊆ A ∪ B, then clS (A) ⊆ clS (A ∪ B) and
clS (B) ⊆ clS (A ∪ B) (by parts (1) and (2)). So,
clS (A) ∪ clS [B) ⊆ clS (A ∪ B)
Since A ⊂ clS (A) and B ⊂ clS (B), A ∪ B ⊆ clS (A)∪ clS (B), a
closed subset in S. Since clS (A ∪ B) is the smallest closed set
containing A ∪ B, then
clS (A ∪ B) ⊆ clS (A)∪ clS [B)
We conclude that clS (A ∪ B) = clS (A) ∪clS (B).

(4) By part (1) A ⊆ clS (A) ⊆ clS (clS (A)). Since clS (A) is closed
(see Fact (1)), clS (clS (A)) ⊆ clS (A). It then follows that
clS (clS (A)) = clS (A).
Example 4. Closure does not distribute over intersections. Sup-

pose A = (2, 5) and B = (5, 7). Then clR (A ∩ B) = clR (∅) = ∅.
On the other hand, clR (A) = [2, 5] and clR (B) = [5, 7] hence,
clR (A) ∩ clR (B) = {5}. This shows that clS (A) ∩ clS (B) = clS (A∩B)
may sometimes occur.
It is however possible to prove that
clS (A ∩ B) ⊆ clS (A) ∩ clS (B)
Proving this is left as an exercise.

Remark on closures of arbitrary unions. We have seen in The-
orem 4.2 that clS (A ∪ B) = clS A ∪ clS B, so the “closure distributes
over finite unions”. This does not hold true for arbitrary unions.
Consider the sets of the form

1 1
Ai = , 3 where clR Ai = ,3
i i
for i = 1, 2, 3, . . . Verify that ∪{clR (Ai ) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} = (0, 3] (left

as an exercise).
Since clR [∪{Ai : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}] = [0, 3] (left as an exercise), then
∪{clR (Ai ) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} = clR [∪{Ai : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}]
4.2 Closure Viewed as an Operator on P(S)
The closure of a set can be viewed as an action
clS : P(S) → P(S)
performed on a set. It takes an arbitrary set, A, and associates to

it another set, clS (A), obtained by adding sufficiently many points
(but no more) so as to produce a “closed set”. It can then be viewed
as a function. With this in mind, we define the Kuratowski closure
operator.
Definition (Kuratowski closure operator). Suppose S is a non-

empty set and K : P(S) → P(S) is a function which satisfies the
four conditions:
K1: K(∅) = ∅ and A ⊆ K(A)
K2: If A ⊆ B then K(A) ⊆ K(B)
K3: K(A ∪ B) = K(A) ∪ K(B)

K4: K(K(A)) = K(A)
A function, K : P(S) → P(S), satisfying these four properties
is referred to as a Kuratowski closure operator where K1–K4 are the
Kuratowski closure operator axioms.
Topologizing a set S by using a closure operator: The reader

should notice that, in the above definition, the set S is not described
as being a “topological space” since no topology is defined on it. It
is just a set. The following theorem shows that, if we are given a
Kuratowski operator, K : P(S) → P(S), on P(S) then we can use
K to generate a topology, τK , on S such that
clS A = K(A)
for all A ∈ P(S).
Theorem 4.3 Let S be a set and suppose K : P(S) → P(S) satis-

fies the four Kuratowski closure operator axioms. Define F ⊆ P(S)
as
F = {A ⊆ S : K(A) = A}
(a) Then F , is the set of all closed subsets of some topology, τK , on

S. That is,
τK = {S \A : where A ∈ F }
(b) Furthermore, in (S, τK ), clS (A) = K(A), for any A ⊆ S.

Proof. Given: The operator K : P(S) → P(S). Also, F = {A ⊆
S : K(A) = A}.
(a) To prove the statement (a), it will suffice to show that F satisfies
the three “closed sets” conditions F1, F2, and F3 on page 46.
If so, then we can define τK by invoking the statement of the
proposition on page 46.
— Note that {∅, S} ⊆ F . To see this note that, by K1, S ⊆

K(S) ⊆ S ⇒ K(S) = S. Both ∅ and S belong to F . The
set F satisfies condition F1.
— Suppose U = {Fi : i ∈ I} is an arbitrarily large family of
sets in F . By K1, ∩U ⊆ K(∩U ). Also, by K2, K(∩U ) ⊆
K(Fi ) = Fi for each i ∈ I. So K(∩U ) ⊆ ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} =
∩U . Hence, K(∩U ) ⊆ ∩U . So K(∩U ) = ∩U . We then
have K(∩U ) ∈ F . The set F is then closed under arbitrary
intersections. The set F satisfies condition F2.
— We now show that F is closed under finite unions. We must
show that if A and B ∈ F then K(A ∪ B) = A ∪ B. Consider
A, B ∈ F . By K2,
A ∪ B ⊆ K(A ∪ B)
A ∪ B ⊆ K(A) ∪ K(B) ⇒ K(A ∪ B) ⊆ K(K(A) ∪ K(B)) (By K2)

⇒ K(A ∪ B) ⊆ K(K(A)) ∪ K(K(B)) (By K3.)
⇒ K(A ∪ B) ⊆ A ∪ B (By K4.)
We conclude that K(A ∪ B) = K(A) ∪ K(B). The set F satisfies

condition F3.
So F is the set of all closed sets in S. This means the topology
τK on S is
τK = {S \A : where A ⊆ F }
Hence, the set, F = {A ⊆ S : K(A) = A}, represents all closed
subsets of S (with respect to τK ).
(b) We now prove the second statement, clS (A) = K(A).
Let A ⊆ (S, τK ). Then clS (A) ∈ F . So K(clS (A)) = clS (A). We
claim that, from this we can obtain clS (A) = K(A).
Proof of claim:
Let A ⊆ S.
K(K(A)) = K(A) (By K4)
⇒ K(A) ∈ F
⇒ S \K(A) ∈ τK
⇒ K(A) is closed with respect to τK
⇒ clS (A) ⊆ K(A) (By K2, A ⊆ K(A).)
A ⊆ clS (A) ⇒ K(A) ⊆ K(clS (A)) (By K2)

⇒ K(A) ⊆ clS (A) (Since K(clS (A)) = clS (A))
We conclude that clS (A) = K(A), as claimed.
We have shown that any Kuratowski closure operator K :

P(S) → P(S) can be used to construct a topology, τK , on S in
such a way that, for any A ⊆ S, K(A) = clS (A). We illustrate this
in the following example.
Example 5. We consider the set R2 , a set with uncountably many
elements. We define a function K : P(R2 ) → P(R2 ) as follows:
K(A) = A if A is countable
K(A) = R2 if A is uncountable
K(∅) = ∅
Show that K is a Kuratowski operator. Then find the topology on

R2 induced by the operator K.
Solution: Proving that K satisfies the properties K1–K4 is routine
and so is left as an exercise. Then, thus defined, K is a Kuratowski
closure operator. By Theorem 4.3 the set
F = {A ⊆ R2 : K(A) = A} = {A ⊆ R2 : A is countable} ∪ {∅, R2 }
represents the set of all closed subsets of the topological space

(R2 , τK ). We deduce that
τK = {B ⊆ R2 : R2 \B is countable} ∪ {∅, R2 }
Definition 4.4 We will refer to τK in this example as the cocountable

topology on R2 .
4.3 The Interior of a Set
Given a non-empty set A the “closure of A” has been defined as being

the intersection of all closed subsets of S which contain A. We now
wish to consider the union of all open subsets of S which are entirely
contained in A.
Definition 4.5 Let A be a non-empty subset of the topological

space (S, τ ). We say that a point x is an interior point of A if there
exist an open subset, U , of S such that x ∈ U ⊆ A. We define the
interior of A, denoted intS A (or as intS (A)) as follows:
intS A = {x ∈ S : x ∈ U ⊆ A for some open U in S.}
If A contains no interior points then we will say that the interior,

intS A, of A is empty.
Clearly intS A ⊆ A. For example, if A = (2, 4]∪{5}, intR A = (2, 3).

The element 5 does not belong to intR A since there is no open interval
U in R such that 5 ∈ U ⊆ A. The fact that {5} is open in A is
irrelevant.
The reader is left to verify that intS A can equivalently be
described as being
the largest open subset of S which is entirely contained in A.
The following theorem shows a relationship between the interior

and closure of a set. It also proposes a method to determine the
interior of a set, A, by considering the closure of its complement,
S \A.
Theorem 4.6 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and A be a subset

of S. Then,
S \ intS (A) = clS (S \A)

Proof. Given: (S, τ ) is a topological space and A is a subset of S.

Since intS (A) ⊆ A, then S \ A ⊆ S\intS (A). But S \ intS (A) is
closed in S, hence,
clS (S \A) ⊆ S \ intS (A)
Also,
S \A ⊆ clS (S \A) ⇒ S \(clS (S \A)) ⊆ A
⇒ S \(clS (S \A)) ⊆ intS (A)
⇒ S \intS (A) ⊆ (clS (S \A))
We thus obtain S \ intS (A) = clS (S \A)
Using this theorem, we let the reader verify that the following
three statements are equivalent:
(a) intS (A) = S \clS (S \A),
(b) intS (S \A) = S \clS (A),
(c) clS (A) = S \(intS (S \A)).
Just as for the closure of a set, we have four basic similar proper-
ties for the interior of sets.
Theorem 4.7 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and A and B be

subsets of S.
(a) The set, intS (A), is open in S. Also, intS (A) is the largest open
subset of S which is entirely contained in A.
(b) If B ⊆ A then intS (B) ⊆ intS (A).
(c) The set intS (A ∩ B) = intS (A) ∩ intS (B). (IntS “distributes”
over finite intersections.)
(d) The set intS (intS (A)) = intS (A).
Proof. The proofs of statements (a), (b), and (d) are left as an
exercise.
Proof of intS (A ∩ B) = intS (A) ∩ intS (B):
S \intS (A ∩ B) = clS (S \(A ∩ B))
= clS [(S \A) ∪ (S \B)]
= clS (S \A) ∪ clS (S \B)
= [S \intS (A)] ∪ [S \intS (B)]
= S \[intS (A) ∩ intS (B)]
intS (A ∩ B) = intS (A) ∩ intS (B)
Example 6. Given that R is equipped with the usual topology what

is intR (Q)?
Solution: We consider the subset, Q, of all rationals in R. By The-
orem 4.7 part (a), intR (Q) ⊆ Q. If intR (Q) is non-empty, it should
be a union of non-empty open intervals. But every open interval in
R contains an irrational; then intR (Q) = ∅.
Example 7. If R is equipped with the usual topology, then
intR ([0, 1]) = (0, 1).
Example 8. The set intR (A ∪ B) need not be equal to intR (A) ∪
intR (B): If R is equipped with the usual topology, then

intR [0, 1] ∪ [1, 2] = (0, 2)
while
intR [0, 1] ∪ intR [1, 2] = (0, 1) ∪ (1, 2)
4.4 The Interior Viewed as an Operator

intS : P(S) → P(S)
Just as for closures of sets we can view “intS ” as a function, I :

P(S) → P(S).
Definition 4.8 Let S be a non-empty set and I : P(S) → P(S) be

a function satisfying the properties:
I1: I(S) = S
I2: I(A) ⊆ A, for all A ⊂ S
I3: I(I(A)) = I(A), for all A ⊂ S
I4: I(A ∩ B) = I(A) ∩ I(B), for all A, B ∈ P(S) (I distributes
over finite intersections).
The function I : P(S) → P(S) satisfying the listed properties
is called an interior operator. We refer to I1–I4 as being the interior
operator axioms.
Topologizing a set S by using an interior operator. Again,

just as for the closure operator, the definition of the function, I :
P(S) → P(S), doesn’t refer to any topology on S. But we will
show that the function, I, can be used to define a topology on S by
choosing appropriate sets in its range. We desire a topology, τ , such
that A is open in S if and only if A = intS A = I(A).
Theorem 4.9 Let S be a set and suppose I : P(S) → P(S) satis-

fies the four interior operator axioms. Define U ⊆ P(S) as
U = {A ⊆ S : I(A) = A}
Then,
(a) The set U forms a topology on S.
(b) Furthermore, if S is equipped with topology U , intS (A) = I(A),
for any A ⊆ S.
Proof. Let S be a set and I : P(S) → P(S) be a function
satisfying the four interior operator axioms I1–I4 listed above. Let
U = {A ∈ P(S) : I(A) = A}.
(a) We are required to prove that U forms a topology on S.
We see that:
— By I1, I(S) = S, so S ∈ U . By I2, I(∅) ⊆ ∅. Since ∅ ⊆ I(∅),
then I(∅) = ∅ and so ∅ ∈ U .
— Suppose A and B belong to U . By property I4, I(A ∩ B) =

I(A)∩I(B) = A∩B. So U is closed under finite intersections.
— To show that U is closed under arbitrary unions we first
verify that
(A ⊆ B) ⇒ (I(A) ⊆ I(B)) (∗)
A⊆B ⇒A=B∩A
⇒ I(A) = I(B ∩ A) = I(B) ∩ I(A)
⇒ I(A) ⊆ I(B)
Let {Ai }i∈M be a collection of sets in U . It suffices to show
I(∪{Ai }i∈M ) = ∪{Ai }i∈M .
I(Ai ) ⊆ ∪{I(Ai )}i∈M ⇒ I(I(Ai )) ⊆ I(∪{I(Ai )i∈M ) (By *)
⇒ I(Ai ) ⊆ I(∪{I(Ai )}i∈M )
(since Ai ∈ U for all i ∈ M )
⇒ ∪{I(Ai )}i∈M ⊆ I(∪{I(Ai )}i∈M )
By I2, I(∪{I(Ai )}i∈M ) ⊆ ∪{I(Ai )}i∈M . Then I(∪{I(Ai )}i∈M ) =
∪{I(Ai )}i∈M so ∪{I(Ai )}i∈M ∈ U .
Then set U satisfies the three open set axioms O1, O2, and
O3. So U is a topology on S, as required.
We will denote the topology U on S induced by the operator I,
by τI .
(b) We are now required to show that I(A) = intS (A) with respect
to τI .
Suppose A ⊆ S.
By I3, I(I(A)) = I(A), so I(A) ∈ U = τI ; so I(A) is open.
Since intS (A) is the largest open subset of S contained in A, and
I(A) ⊆ A (by I2),
I(A) ⊆ intS (A)
Also see that, since intS (A) ∈ τI = U and intS (A) ⊆ A,
intS (A) = I(intS (A))
⊆ I(A) (By * above A ⊆ B ⇒ I(A) ⊆ I(B))
then intS (A) ⊆ I(A).
We conclude that I(A) = intS (A).
We provide a few examples.
Example 9. Let I : P(R) → P(R) be a function defined as
I(R) = R
I(A) = A\Q otherwise
(a) Show that I : P(R) → P(R), thus defined, is an interior oper-

ator on P(R).
(b) Use the interior operator described in part (a) to define a topol-
ogy, τI , on R.
(c) For the topology, τI , on R shown in part (b), describe the open
subsets, the closed subsets of R, the closure of sets and the inte-
rior of sets.
(d) A Borel sets example: If F represents the set of all closed subsets
with respect to the topology, τI , on R, show that
B = τI ∪ F
is the smallest σ-ring containing τI and so is a family of Borel

sets.
Solution:
(a) We show I is an interior operator.

1. By definition, I(R) = R so I1 is satisfied.
2. Also, if A = R, I(A) = A\Q ⊆ A. So I2 is satisfied.
R
3. If A =
I(I(A)) = I(A)\Q
= (A\Q)\Q
= A\Q
= I(A)
So, I(I(A)) = A. So I3 is satisfied.

4. If neither A nor B is R,
I(A ∩ B) = (A ∩ B)\Q
= (A\Q) ∩ (B \Q)
= I(A) ∩ I(B)
So, I(A ∩ B) = I(A) ∩ I(B). Then I4 is satisfied.

This means that I : P(R) → P(R) is an interior operator.
(b) We now use the interior operator described in part (a) to topol-
ogize R.
Since I : P(R) → P(R) has been shown to be an interior oper-
ator, then
τI = {A : I(A) = A}
= {A : A\Q = A} ∪ {R}
= {A : A does not contain any points of Q} ∪ {R}
is a topology on R.
(c) For the topology, τI , on R we now describe the open subsets, the
closed subsets of R, the closure of sets and the interior of sets.
Open sets in R . Open sets in R, are R itself and all sets which
do not contain any rationals, including ∅.
For example, if J is the set of irrationals and r ∈ J, then, since
{r} contains no rationals, {r} is an open singleton set. Also, if
q ∈ Q, R is the only open set containing q. So, {q} is not an open
singleton set.
Closed sets in R . Suppose B is not R. We claim that B is
closed in R with respect to τI if and only if Q ⊆ B:
Q ⊆ B ⇔ R\B = (R\B)\Q
⇔ R\B = I(R\ B)
⇔ R\B is open (with respect to τI )
⇔ B is closed (with respect to τI )
For example, if r ∈ J, since Q ⊆ {r}, the singleton set, {r}, is

not a closed set.
Closure of a set. Then taking the closure of a subset A of R

comes down to adding all of Q to A. That is, if A = R, clR A =
A ∪ Q. For example, if q ∈ Q, since clR {q} = Q, {q} is not closed.
Interior of a set in R . IntR A = A ∩ J. Finding the interior of

A comes down to removing any trace of Q in A.
(d) We are required to show: The set, B = τI ∪ F , is the smallest
σ-ring containing τI and so is a family of Borel sets of R.
Given: F is the set of all closed subsets in R with respect to τI .
We claim that B is a σ-ring.
Closure of B under countable unions. If U ∈ τI and V ∈ F

then U ∪ V ∈ F (since an open subset union a closed subset
containing Q contains Q. So U ∪ V is a closed subset.)
The set F is closed under countable unions (since closed sub-
sets are those subsets of R which contain all of Q, arbitrary
unions of elements of F are closed with respect to τI ). This
actually show that F contains all its Fσ ’s. Since all Fσ ’s are
closed, then all Gδ ’s are open and so belong to τI .
Trivially, τI is closed under arbitrary unions and so is closed
under countable unions.
Closure of B under “complements”. Let U ∈ B. If U ∈ τI

then R\U ∈ F . If U ∈ F then R\U ∈ τI .
So, B is a σ-ring, as claimed. Since it must contains τI and all
complements, it is the smallest σ-ring containing τI . By defini-
tion, it is a family of Borel sets of R with respect to τI .1
4.5 The Boundary of the Subset of a Space
We have seen that, for any subset, A, of a topological space (S, τ ),
intS (A) ⊆ A ⊆ clS (A)
1
Note that, if T is the closed interval [1, 3] in R then T ∈ τI ∪ F (since [1, 3]
contains some elements of Q, but does not contain all of Q) and so is not an
element of the unique family, B, of all Borel sets, with respect to τI . We can then
refer to it as a non-Borel set.
Often, clS (A) \ intS (A) = ∅. We will now briefly discuss those sets
whose points belong to clS (A)\intS (A).
Definition 4.10 Let A be a subset of a topological space (S, τ ). We

define the boundary of A, denoted as bdS (A), as
bdS (A) = clS (A) \ intS (A)2
The expressions, FrS (A), ∂S (A), BdS (A) are also commonly used
to represent the “boundary of A”. It is easily verified that
bdS (A) = clS (A) ∩ clS (S \intS A)
Since the finite intersection of closed sets is closed, we see that
the boundary, bdS (A) of a set A, is always closed. Furthermore, for
any set A in S, both A and S \A share the same boundary (like adja-
cent neighbors who share the same fence). It is always the case that
intS (A) ∩ bdS (A) = ∅ and that intS (A), bdS (A) and intS (clS (S\A))
are pairwise disjoint sets whose union is S. The reader is left to verify
this.
Example 10. If Q is viewed as a subset of R equipped with the
usual topology then
bdR (Q) = clR (Q)\ intR (Q)
= R\∅
=R
Example 11. If B = [0, 1] is a closed interval viewed as a subset of

R equipped with the usual topology then bdR (B) = {0, 1}. It is left
to the reader to verify this.
Example 12. Let B = {(x, y) ∈ R2 : x2 + y 2 < 1}be a subset of R2
equipped with the topology induced by the Euclidean metric. Then
bdR2 (B) = clR2 (B)\intR2 (B) = {(x, y) ∈ R2 : x2 + y 2 = 1}
The reader is left to verify the details.
2
The word “Frontier” is also sometimes used instead of “boundary”. When the
term “Frontier of A” is used, it is denoted by FrS A.
Example 13. Suppose the set of natural numbers N is equipped

with the cofinite topology.3 Let E denote the set of all even natural
numbers. Then
bdN (E) = clN (E)\intN (E)
= N\∅
=N
Example 14. Suppose B = (0, 1) ∪ (1, 2] viewed as a subset of

R equipped with the usual topology. We compute the boundary
to be,
bdR (B) = clR (B)\intR (B)
= [0, 2] \ (0, 1) ∪ (1, 2)
= {0, 2}
It is interesting to note that
intR (clR (B)) = intR ([0, 2])
= (0, 2) = B
4.6 On Dense Subsets of a Topological Space
Suppose B and A are subsets of (S, τ ) such that A ⊆ B and B \A

contains only boundary points of A. When two sets relate to each
other in this way we say that “A is dense in B”. We define this
formally.
Definition 4.11 Suppose A and B are subsets in a topological space

(S, τ ). If
A ⊆ B and B ⊆ clS (A)
3
The open subsets are those whose complement is finite.
then we will say that
A is a dense subset of B.
In the case where B = S, then A is dense in S if and only if clS A = S.
If A ⊆ S is such that intS clS A = ∅ then we say that A is nowhere

dense in S.
Example 15. Suppose
A = {(x, y) : x2 +y 2 < 1} and B = A∪{(0, 1), (1, 0), (0, −1), (−1, 0)}
Since
A ⊆ B and B ⊂ clR2 A = {(x, y) : x2 + y 2 ≤ 1}
then A is dense in B.
Example 16. A nowhere dense subset. Let A = {6} be a subset of
R. Then clR A = {6} and intS clS A = ∅. So A is nowhere dense in
the space R.
Another example: The set of all integers, Z, is nowhere dense in
R, since intR clR Z = ∅.
Example 17. Verify that the set C = {(x, y) : x2 + y 2 = 1} is
nowhere dense in R2 .
On countable dense subsets of a space. The property in the
following definition is one which refers to an upper bound for the
cardinality of a dense subset of a topological space. Hence, in a way
it expresses a restriction on its size.
Definition 4.12 We will say that a topological space (S, τ ) is sep-

arable if and only if S contains a countable dense subset.
For example, the topological space, (R, τ ), equipped with the

usual topology is a separable space since, clR Q = R, and the sub-
set of all rational numbers is a countable subset of R. Note how the
border of Q is much larger than Q itself.
We will subdivide the class of all topological spaces into two sub-
classes: Those that are separable and those that are not.
4.7 Topic: Regular Open Sets and Regular Closed Sets
Suppose A is a non-empty open subset of a topological space (S, τ ).

We know that A ⊆ clS A is always true. Also, it is always true that,
if A is open, A = intS A ⊆ intS clS A (by part b) of Theorem 4.7). So
it is always true that
A ∈ τ ⇒ A ⊆ intS clS A (†)
One may wonder whether, when A is open, must we have equality
between A and intR clR A. The following simple example will help
answer this question.
Let A = (1, 3) ∪ (3, 7), an open subset of R. Then by applying the
above reasoning we have,
A = (1, 3) ∪ (3, 7) ⊆ intR clR A = intR [1, 7] = (1, 7)
So in the case where A = (1, 7), we do have equality; but if A =
(1, 3) ∪ (3, 7) we have an open subset, A, such that A = intR clR A.
Then the best we can then do is affirm that, when A is open, A is a
subset of intS clS A. We have a special name for those open subsets
where equality holds.
Definition 4.13 An open subset, A, of a topological space (S, τ ) is

called a regular open subset of S if and only if A = intS clS A. In this
book, we denote the set of all regular open subsets of S by Ro(S).
We know that for an open set A, it is always true that, A ⊆

intS clS A. Then
S \( intS clS A) ⊆ S \A ⇒ clS [ S \(clS A) ] ⊆ S \A
⇒ clS intS (S \A) ⊆ S \A
So it is always true that,
F closed ⇒ clS intS (F ) ⊆ F
Then, if A is regular open, A = intS clS A, so for the complement,

F = S \A, we can say that
F = clS intS (F )
So, F = clS intS (F ) if and only if the complement of F is regular
open.
We have a name for the complements of regular open subsets.
Definition 4.14 A closed subset, F , of a topological space (S, τ ) is

called a regular closed subset of S if and only if
F = clS intS F
Hence, the regular closed subsets of S are precisely the complements
of the regular open subsets. We denote the set of all regular closed
subsets of S by Rc(S).
Example 18. Let S be a topological space and Ro(S) be the set of

all regular open sets in S.
(a) Verify that Ro(S) is closed under finite intersections but is not
closed under finite unions.
(b) We know that, if A = intS clS A, then A belongs to Ro(S). Sup-
pose A is some non-empty subset of S which does not belong to
Ro(S). Verify that intS clS A belongs to Ro(S).
(c) If Rc(S) denotes the set of all regular closed sets in S, show that
Rc(S) is closed under finite unions.
Solution: Given: Ro(S) is the set of all regular open sets in S.
(a) Suppose A and B are open subsets. Then A∩ B is open. Suppose
A = intS clS A and B = intS clS B. Then
intS clS (A ∩ B) ⊆ intS (clS A ∩ clS B) By Theorem 4.7
= intS clS A ∩ intS clS B
=A∩B
Since A ∩ B ⊆ intS clS (A ∩ B) and intS clS (A ∩ B) ⊆ A ∩ B, then
A ∩ B is regular open.
So, the family of all regular open sets is closed under finite
intersections.
On the other hand, (1, 5) and (5, 9) are both regular open but
(0, 5) ∪ (5, 9) is not. So, the family of all regular open sets is not
closed under finite unions.
(b) We are given A ⊆ S. We are required to show that intS clS A is
regular open. See that
intS clS (intS clS A) ⊆ intS clS (clS A) (Since intS clS A ⊆ clS A)
= intS clS A
Since intS clS A ⊆ intS clS (intS clS A), then intS clS A is regular
open.
(c) This part is left an exercise.
Concept Review
1. Given a topological space (S, τ ) and T ⊆ S, define the closure,

clS (T ), in S, with respect to the topology τ .
2. Does clS “distribute” over finite unions? How about finite inter-
sections?
3. List the four Kuratowski closure operator axioms, K1–K4.
4. If K : P(S) → P(S) satisfies the four Kuratowski closure oper-
ator axioms describe a topology on S which can be constructed
from K.
5. Define the cocountable topology on R2 . Describe the Kuratowski
operator used to develop this topology.
6. Given a topological space (S, τ ) and A ⊆ S, define “interior
point” of A with respect to τ . Define the interior, intS (A), of A
with respect to τ .
7. Does intS distribute over finite unions? How about finite inter-
sections?
8. State the four interior operator axioms I1–I4 for I : P(S) →
P(S).
9. Given a set S, describe a topology that can be constructed on S
by using the operator I : P(S) → P(S).
10. Describe the topology induced on R by the operator I(A) = A\Q.
11. Define the boundary of a set with respect to a topology τ on S.

12. Define what we mean when we say that “A is dense in B”.
13. Define what we mean when we say that “A is nowhere dense
in B”.
14. Define a regular open subset and a regular closed subset of a
space.
15. Show that for any subset U of S, intS clS U is regular open in S.
Exercises
1. Let T = (0, 1) be viewed as a subset of R equipped with the

usual topology. Show that clR (T ) = [0, 1]. This is Example 1 on
page 63.
2. Suppose S is a topological space induced by the metric ρ (i.e.,
the elements of τ are unions of open balls of the form Bε (x) =
{y : ρ(x, y) < ε}). Suppose F is a non-empty subset of S. We
define ρ(x, F ) = inf{ρ(x, u) : u ∈ F }. Show that clS (F ) = {x :
ρ(x, F ) = 0}. This is Example 3 on page 63.
3. Consider R equipped with the usual topology τ (induced by the
Euclidian metric). Let (Q, τQ ) be the set of all rational numbers
equipped with the subspace topology inherited from R. Consider
the subset T = [−π, π) ∩ Q. Determine whether T is open in Q,
closed in Q, both open and closed in Q, or none of these.
4. In Example 4 on page 65, it is show that clS (A) ∩ clS (B) =
clS (A ∩ B) sometimes occurs. Show that clS (A ∩ B) ⊆ clS (A) ∩
clS (B) is always true.
5. Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and A and B be subsets of S.
Show that:
(a) intS (A) is open in S. Also, intS (A) is the largest open subset
of S which is entirely contained in A.
(b) If B ⊆ A then intS (B) ⊆ intS (A).
(c) intS (A ∩ B) = intS (A)∩ intS (B).
(d) intS (intS (A)) = intS (A).
(This is Theorem 4.7, part (c) is already proven.)
6. Let S be a set and I : P(S) → P(S) be an interior operator
satisfying the four conditions I1–I4 listed on page 72. Show that,
if τ = {A ∈ P(S) : I(A) = A}, (S, τ ) is a topological space such

that I(A) = intS (A) for all A ∈ P(S).
7. If B = [0, 1] is a closed interval viewed as a subset of R equipped
with the usual topology show that bdR (B) = {0, 1}.
8. Let B = {(x, y) ∈ R2 : x2 + y 2 1, x0} ∪ {(x, y) ∈ R2 : x2 + y 2 ≤
1, x ≤ 0} be a subset of R2 equipped with the topology induced
by the Euclidean metric. Show that
bdR2 (B) = clR2 (B)\intR2 (B) = {(x, y) ∈ R2 : x2 + y 2 = 1}
9. Show that A is both open and closed in the topological space

(S, τ ) if and only if bdS (A) is empty.
10. Let A and B be two subsets of the topological space (S, τ ). Show
that if bdS (A)∩ bdS (B) = ∅ then intS (A ∪ B) = intS (A) ∪
intS (B).
11. Let B = [0, 7) ∪ {9} where B is equipped with the subspace
topology inherited from R itself equipped with the usual topol-
ogy. If A = {0} ∪ {3} ∪ (5, 7), find (i) clB (A), (ii) bdB (A), and
(iii) intB (A).
Chapter 5
Bases of Topological Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we define a neighborhood system of x ∈ S with respect
to a given topology on S. Given a topology, τ , on S, we define a “base
for the topology τ ”. We deduce a set-theoretic property called the “base
property” possessed by any base. Those subsets of P(S) which satisfy
the described property will be shown to be a base for some topology
on S. We introduce the notion of a “subbase for the topology τ ” by
describing its properties. We then show how to topologize a set both
from a collection of sets which possesses the “base property” and also
from an arbitrary collection of subsets.
5.1 Neighborhoods of Points
It is not always easy to confirm that a given subset, S , of P(S) is

a well-defined topology, τ , on a set S. Ultimately, we would prefer a
topology on S to be described in a way that provides some intuitive
idea about what its open subsets are like. In this section, we describe
a subfamily, B, of open sets from which every open set in τ is con-
structed. With this objective in mind, we begin by introducing the
concept of neighborhoods of a point in (S, τ ).
Definition 5.1 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and x ∈ A ⊆ S. We

will say that A is a neighborhood of x with respect to τ if x ∈ intS (A).
85
For a given x ∈ S, the set
Ux = {A ∈ P(S) : A is a neighborhood of x}
is called a neighborhood system of x with respect to τ .

A subfamily, Bx , of a neighborhood system, Ux , such that, for any
open set, A, containing x there exists Ux ∈ Bx such that x ∈ Ux ⊆ A,
is called a neighborhood base at x. If every element of Bx is open then
we can say it is an open neighborhood base at x.
Note that, since the definition of a neighborhood refers to the

“interior” of sets, a neighborhood system is always expressed with
respect to some topology, τ , defined on the set S. Distinguish the two
concepts defined in the above statement. We see that a neighborhood
base, Bx , at x is a subset of a neighborhood system at x. The set,
Bx , must be such that, any open neighborhood of x, contains an
element of Bx . While there can be only one neighborhood system at
x we will see that there can be more than one neighborhood base at
this point.
For example, B = [−1, 5) ∪ [6, ∞) is a neighborhood of 0 with
respect to the usual topology of R. The set
U3 = {U ∈ P(R) : 3 ∈ intR (U )}
is a neighborhood system of 3. If A belongs to U3 , the element “3”

must belong to the interior of A in the sense that 3 cannot be sitting
on A’s boundary. For example, [0, 4] ∈ U3 , but [1, 3] ∈ U3 . Note that,
for a given x ∈ S, its neighborhood system, Ux , with respect to τ is,
by definition, unique.
Based on the definition, we can make the following comments
about neighborhoods of a point in a topological space, (S, τ ).
— The empty set, ∅, is not the neighborhood of any point, so ∅ ∈
Ux for any x ∈ S.
— In general, a neighborhood, U , of a point x is not necessarily
open, but it must contain x in its interior, intS (U ).
— If x ∈ S, then Ux is not empty since S is a neighborhood of x. If τ
is the indiscrete topology, {∅, S}, then S is the only neighborhood
of every point x ∈ S.
Bases of Topological Spaces 87
The “neighborhood of a point” concept allows us to come up with

another characterization of open sets provided we have predefined
“interior of a set”. We propose:
“ [ A is open in S ] ⇔ [ x ∈ A ⇒ ∃ neighborhood, Ux ,
where x ∈ Ux ⊆ A ]”
This will work since this would imply that
A = ∪x∈A {intS (Ux ) : Ux ∈ Ux and Ux ⊆ A}
Or, we could simply say that “A is open in S provided A contains an

x-neighborhood, Ux , for each point x in A”. This definition of “open
set” (in terms of neighborhoods) is equivalent to its formal definition
of “open set”.
5.2 A Base for a Topology
In our study of normed vector spaces (as well as of metric spaces) we

have seen that, introducing the notion of “open ball, Bε (x), center x
with radius ”, led to a convenient way of constructing a subfamily,
Bx = {Bε (x) : ε > 0}, of open neighborhoods of a point x. Every
open subset of S can then simply be described as being the union
of open neighborhoods of the form Bε (x) contained in the set. The
collection of open sets,
B = ∪{Bx : x ∈ S}
is sufficient to generate all open subsets of S.
Definition 5.2 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space. Suppose B is a

subset of τ satisfying the property:
For any A ∈ τ , A is the union of elements of a subset, C ,
of B.
We call the subset, B, a base for open sets or an open base for the
topology τ (often abbreviated by simply saying a base for S). The
word basis is sometimes used instead of “base”.1
The elements of a base are referred to as basic open sets.2
If F is a family of closed subsets of S satisfying the property:
For any closed subset B in S, B is the intersection of ele-

ments of a subset, C , of F .
We call the subset, F , a base for closed sets of S.
A base for open sets is generally not unique. Given the topological
space (R, τ ), where τ is the usual topology, both τ and B = {(a, b) :
a < b} are bases for R.
It is easily verified that if F is a base for closed subsets of S then
the family, B, of all complements of the elements of F will form a
base for open sets.
How does one go about constructing a useful base for a topology?
A good way to start is to determine some properties possessed by a
known useful open base. The following theorem characterizes a base
for a topology on a set S.
Theorem 5.3 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and B ⊂ τ . Then

the following are equivalent:
(1) The family B is a base for τ .

(2) For any x ∈ S, B contains an open neighborhood base, Bx , of
sets at x.
(3) If U ∈ τ and x ∈ U, there exists B ∈ B such that x ∈ B ⊆ U .
1
Both words “base” and “basis” are commonly used; thus the reader can assume
these have the same meaning.
2
Note that, if A = ∅ ∈ τ , then A is the union of all elements from C = ∅ =
{ } ⊆ B. So B also generates the empty set.
Proof. We are given that (S, τ ) is a topological space and B ⊂ τ .

(1 ⇒ 2) Suppose the set B is a base for a topology τ on S and x ∈ S.
Let
Bx = {B ∈ B : x ∈ B}
Suppose A is an open subset of S which contains x. It suffices to show

that Bx contains an open neighborhood U of x such that x ∈ U ⊆ A.
By hypothesis and Definition 5.2, A = ∪{B : B ∈ B}. Then, there
exists some Bx ∈ B such that x ∈ Bx ⊆ A. By definition, Bx ∈ Bx .
So, Bx is an open neighborhood base of x contained in B.
(2 ⇒ 3) This follows immediately from the definition of “neighbor-
hood base”.
(3 ⇒ 1) Suppose A ∈ τ . If A is empty then A is the union of all open
sets in ∅ = { } ∈ B. Suppose x ∈ A. By hypothesis, there exists
B ∈ B such that x ∈ B ⊆ A. Then A is the union of sets from B.
So B is a base for open subsets of S.
5.3 The “Base Property”
We have seen how an arbitrary set can be topologized by two dif-

ferent techniques. One by using a Kuratowski closure operator, the
other by using an interior operator. These operators must satisfy
certain axioms. If they do, then we can define a particular topology
corresponding to the operator. In this section, we will propose two
other methods for topologizing a set. We will first discuss another
characterization of a base for a topology on a set S.
Theorem 5.4 Let S be a non-empty set and B ⊆ P(S). The set

B is a base for a topology τ on S if and only if S = ∪{B : B ∈ B}
and, if x ∈ A ∩ B for some A, B ∈ B, then there exists C ∈ B such
that x ∈ C ⊆ A ∩ B.
Proof. We are given that S is a non-empty set and B ⊆ P(S).
(⇒) Suppose the set B is a base for a topology τ on S.
Since S ∈ τ, then S = ∪{B : B ∈ C } where C ⊆ B. Since

∪{B : B ∈ B} ⊆ S, then S = ∪{B : B ∈ B}.
Suppose x ∈ A ∩ B for some A, B ∈ B. Then A, B ∈ τ and so

A ∩ B ∈ τ . Since A ∩ B is open and (by Theorem 5.3) B contains
an open neighborhood base, Bx , there exists Bx ∈ Bx ⊆ B such
that x ∈ Bx ⊆ A ∩ B. So Bx plays the role of C is the statement, as
required.
(⇐) We are given that B ⊆ P(S) and satisfies the two property:
S = ∪{B : B ∈ B} and if x ∈ A ∩ B for some A, B ∈ B then there
exists C ∈ B such that x ∈ C ⊆ A ∩ B.
Let T = {A ⊆ S : A = ∪{C : C ∈ C } for some subset C of B}.
We are required to show that T is a topology on S and that B
is base for T .
If we show that T is a topology on S then, by definition, B is a
base for T .
O1: The set S belongs to T : Since S = ∪{B : B ∈ B}, then S ∈ T .
We claim the set ∅ belongs to T : The union of all elements in
∅ ⊂ B is ∅. So ∅ ∈ T .
O2: Claim : The set T is closed under unions. Let {Aα : α ∈
Γ} ⊆ T . For α ∈ Γ, Aα = ∪{B : B ∈ Bα ⊆ B}. Then
∪α∈Γ {Aα } = ∪α∈Γ {∪B∈Bα {B}}, a union of elements in B. So
∪α∈Γ {Aα } ∈ T .
O3: Claim : The set T is closed under finite intersections. Let A, C ∈
T . It suffices to show that A ∩ C ∈ T . Let x ∈ A ∩ C. See that
A = ∪{B : B ∈ BA ⊆ B} and C = ∪{B : B ∈ BC ⊆ B}
There exist BA ∈ BA and BC ∈ BC such that x ∈ BA ∩ BC . By

hypothesis, there exists Bx ∈ B such that x ∈ Bx ⊆ BA ∩ BC ⊆
A ∩ C. Then for every x ∈ A ∩ C there exists Bx ∈ B such that
x ∈ Bx ⊆ A ∩ B. Then A ∩ B = ∪x∈A∩C {Bx }; so A ∩ C ∈ T ,
as required.
So, T is a topology on S. By definition of T , every element of
T is a union of elements of B so, by definition of “open base”, B is
base of T .
In this text, we will call the special property which is satisfied

by B ⊆ P(S) in the theorem statement, the “base property”. We
formally define this below.
Definition 5.4.1. Let S be a non-empty set and let B be a subset

of P(S).
Base property: The set B satisfies the base property, if S = ∪{B :

B ∈ B} and, if x ∈ A ∩ B for some A, B ∈ B, then there exists
C ∈ B such that x ∈ C ⊆ A ∩ B.
Theorem 5.4 guarantees that, given any non-empty set S, if a
subset, B, of P(S) satisfies the base property then B forms a base
for some topology, τ , on S. The family, τ , is made precisely of the
arbitrary unions of the elements of subsets of B. In this case, we say
that B generates the topology τ . The above statement is a powerful
tool for topologizing sets.
Throughout our study of general topology, it will be very useful to
have a variety of examples of topological spaces at hand. The reader
is encouraged to take note of these, or at least bookmark them, for
future reference in this book. For this purpose, most are given a
particular name so that they can be more easily be referred to in the
index of this book. The following examples, illustrate how the above
result is used to topologize a subset of R2 .
Example 1. Recall that a Gδ -set is a subset of a space, (S, τ ) which
is a countable intersection of elements of τ . Let
G = {G ∈ P(S) : G is a Gδ -set} ⊆ P(S)
(the set of all Gδ -sets in a topological space, (S, τ )). Show that G is
an open base for some topology, τG , on S.
Solution: Since every element of τ is an element of G , then S =
∪{G : G ∈ G }. Suppose A, B ∈ G and x ∈ A ∩ B. Then there exists
open subsets, {Ui : i ∈ N} and {Vi : i ∈ N}, such that A = ∩{Ui :
i ∈ N} and B = ∩{Vi : i ∈ N}. Then
x ∈ (∩{Ui : i ∈ N}) ∩ (∩{Vi : i ∈ N})
= ∩{Ui ∩ Vi : i ∈ N} (A Gδ .)
⊆A∩B
Since ∩{Ui ∩ Vi : i ∈ N} is a Gδ , then G satisfies the base property

and so generates a topology, τG .
We will refer to τG as the
Gδ -topology generated by τ .
Example 2. The Moore plane. Also called, Niemytzki’s topology

(Figure 5.1).
Let S = {(x, y) ∈ R2 : y ≥ 0}. The set Bε (a, b) represents the
usual open ball of center, (a, b), and radius ε. Let
A = {Bε (x0 , y0 ) : x0 ∈ R, y0 > 0, and ε < y0 }
For each x ∈ R and ε > 0, let
Dε (x, 0) = {(x, 0)} ∪ Bε (x, ε)
That is, Dε (x, 0) is an open ball, Bε (x, ε), of radius ε tangent to the
horizontal axis at (x, 0) with the point (x, 0) attached to it. Let
D = {Dε (x, 0) : x ∈ R, ε > 0}
Let B = A ∪ D. Show that B is the base for some topology on S.

Solution: If we show that B satisfies the “base property” then B is
a base which generates a topology, τ , on the half-plane S. It is first
easily seen that S = ∪{B : B ∈ B}.
We consider case 1: Suppose A, B ∈ B and (x, y) ∈ A ∩ B where
y > 0. Then the situation is analogous to what occurs in R2 with the
usual topology, and so
(x, y) ∈ Bε (x, y) ⊆ A ∩ B
for some ε > 0.

We consider case 2: Suppose A, B ∈ B and (x, 0) ∈ A ∩ B. Then
A = {(x, 0)} ∪ Bε1 (x, ε1 ) and B = {(x, 0)} ∪ Bε2 (x, ε2 ). Let ε =
min{ε1 ,ε2} and C = {(x, 0)} ∪ B (x, ε). Then
2 ε
(x, 0) ∈ C ⊆ A ∩ B
Figure 5.1. Moore plane.
By invoking Theorem 5.4, we conclude that B is a base for a topology,

τM , on S.
This well-known topological space, (S, τM ), is referred to as the
Moore plane. Some authors also refer to this topology, τM , on S, as
the Niemytzki’s tangent disc topology.
The topology τM is strictly stronger than τ , the usual topology. To
see this, let τ represent the subspace topology on the set S, inher-
ited from R2 equipped with the usual topology. We verify that τM
is strictly stronger than τ . Let B(0, 0) denote a basic open neigh-
borhood of the point (0, 0) in τM . Then B(0, 0) ∩ {(0, 0)} = {(0, 0)}.
The set Bε (0, 0) ∩ S is a half-open disc which contains the interval,
(−ε, ε), and so cannot be contained in B(0, 0). Then B(0, 0) ∈ τ so
TM ⊆ τ . On the other hand, given (u, 0) ∈ Bε (0, 0) ∩ S one can con-
struct a neighborhood base element, B(u, 0), of radius small enough
so that it is contained in Bε (0, 0) ∩ S. So τ ⊆ τM .
So the Moore plane topology is strictly stronger than the usual
topology on S.
Example 3. The radial plane. Consider the set R2 . We will equip

R2 with what is called the radial plane topology. If (x, y) ∈ R2 , we
define a “radial ball centered at (x, y)”, B(x,y) , in R2 , as follows:
The singleton set, {(x, y)}, union the set of all open
line segments originating at (x, y), precisely one in each
direction.
The line segments need not be of the same length. For each (x, y),
let
B(x,y) = {B(x,y) : B(x,y) is a radial ball centered at (x, y)}
Show that the collection, B = ∪{B(x,y) : (x, y) ∈ R2 }, forms a

valid base for a topology, τ ∗ , on R2 . Then show that the topology,
τ ∗ , generated by B is strictly stronger than the usual topology, τ .
Solution: First part: We claim that B satisfies the “open base prop-
erty” and so generates a topology on R2 . Clearly, R2 = ∪{B(x,y)
: (x, y) ∈ R2 }. Suppose (x, y) ∈ U ∩ V where U , V ∈ B(x,y) . Let KU
be a line segment in a particular direction originating at (x, y) such
that KU ⊂ U and KV be a line segment originating at (x, y) pointing
in the same direction as KU but KV ⊂ V . Let KU ∩V = KU ∩ KV .
Then KU ∩V is an open line segment originating at (x, y) which is
contained in U ∩ V . This can be repeated for all open lines in all
directions originating at (x, y) to obtain a radial ball, M(x,y) . So
there exists M(x,y) ∈ B(x,y) such that
(x, y) ∈ M(x,y) ⊆ U ∩ V
So, B satisfies the open base property.

Hence, by Theorem 5.4, B is an open base which generates a
topology on R2 , say τ ∗ . We are done with the first part of the
question.
Second part: We claim that the usual topology, τ , is contained in
τ ∗ . Suppose (x, y) ∈ U where U is an open base element of τ centered
at (x, y). Then U = Bε (x, y) for some ε. Let (a, b) ∈ Bε (x, y). Then
there exists δ > 0 such that Bδ (a, b) ⊆ Bε (x, y). Let V be a set such
that all open line segments originating at (a, b) are of length less than
δ/2. Then V ∈ B and V ⊆ Bδ (a, b) ⊆ Bε (x, y). So U ∈ τ ∗ . Then
τ ⊆ τ ∗ , as claimed.
We claim that τ ∗ is strictly stronger than τ . To show this it suffices
to show that τ ∗ contains an element which does not belong to τ .
Consider the sets U = B1 (0, 1) and V = B1 (0, −1).3 Then, if L =

{(x, 0) : x ∈ R, |x| ≤ k} the set,
W = U ∪L∪V
representing the two balls U and V with a straight horizontal line
through (0, 0) added to them does not belong to τ . However, the set
M (0, 0) which has rays emanating from (0, 0), in all directions, each
of which is contained in W is an open neighborhood of (0, 0) in τ ∗ .
So τ is a proper subset of τ ∗ , as claimed.
5.4 The Subbase of a Topology
We have seen that, when given an arbitrary set S, a subfamily of

P(S) which satisfies the “base property” can be used to generate
a topology on S. We shall soon see that any subfamily family of
P(S) can be used to generate a base which, in turn, will generate a
topology, τ , on S. We will refer to such a family as a “subbase” for
τ . Even if this may, at first, appear to be a very convenient way to
generate topologies on a set, it does make it more difficult to predict,
from a subbase, what the topology generated by such a collection of
sets will be like. So, for this convenience, there is a price to pay. We
know that we can obtain a topology from a collection of sets which
satisfies the “base property” in a single step: base → τ . But to obtain
a topology, τ , from a subbase requires two steps:
subbase → base → τ
But the notion of a subbase is nevertheless interesting to investigate
since, if a space is already equipped with a topology, τ , it can be
useful to understand what kind of subbase generates τ . It may allow
us to dig deeper into the background of τ to better see why τ satisfies
certain properties.
Definition 5.5 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space. A subbase for the

topology τ is a non-empty subfamily, S , of τ such that the set, B,
3
The set B1 (0, 1) refers to the open ball center (0, 1) and radius 1 while B1 (0, −1)
refers to the open ball center (0, −1) with radius 1.
defined as
B = {B : B = ∩{U : U ∈ F } where F is a finite subset of S }
forms a base for τ .
The definition states that, if a base of τ can be obtained from the

set of all finite intersections of the elements of a collection, S , then
S , is called a subbase of τ . This of course means that every element
of a subbase of τ belongs to τ and so is open.
In the following two examples, we are given a particular topology
on a set. For each topological space we identify a subbase for the
given topology.
Example 4. A subbase for the usual topology on R. Consider the
sets
(a, ∞) = {x ∈ R : a < x}
(−∞, b) = {x ∈ R : x < b}
and the family
S = {(a, ∞) : a ∈ R} ∪ {(−∞, b) : b ∈ R}
We see that S forms a subbase for the usual topology τ on R
since the set of all finite intersections of elements of S form the
set, B = {(a, b) : a < b}, known to be a base of τ .
Example 5. Consider (N, τd ) where τd is the discrete topology (see
the definition on page 44). Then τd = P(N).
The set of all singleton sets, B = {{n} : n ∈ N}, forms a base for
τd since every subset of N is the union of elements from some subset
C ⊆ B. If
Na = {n ∈ N : n ≤ a}
Mb = {n ∈ N : n ≥ b}
and
S = {Na : a ∈ N} ∪ {Mb : b ∈ N}
then B is a subset of the family of finite intersections of elements of
S . So, S is a subbase for the topology τd on N.
5.5 A Subbase as a Generator of a Topology
We now show how any non-empty subset, S , of P(S) will generate

a topology, τS on S. This topology, will have S as “subbase”.
Suppose {τj : j ∈ I} represents the class of all topologies on S.
Suppose S is a set and S is a non-empty subset of P(S). Let
J = {τj : j ∈ I, S ⊆ τj }
denote all topologies on S which contain S . The set J is non-empty
since it at least contains the discrete topology, τd = P(S), which, by
definition, contains S . Since the family of all topologies on a set is
closed under intersections (see page 44), (but not necessarily under
unions) then the family
τS = ∩{τj : j ∈ I, S ⊆ τj }
is also a topology on S which contains all elements of S . In fact, it
is easily verified that τS is the smallest possible topology on S which
contains S .
In the following theorem, we show that S is a subbase for the
constructed topology, τS , on S.
Theorem 5.6 Let S be a non-empty set and S ⊆ P(S). Suppose

τS = ∩{τj : τj is a topology on S, S ⊆ τj }
Then S is a subbase for τS on S which contains S .
Proof. Given: S ⊆ P(S) and τS = ∩{τj : j ∈ I, τj is a topology
on S, S ⊆ τj }.
We have already seen that τS is the smallest topology on S with
contains S .
Let
B = {B : B = ∩M ∈F M where F is a finite subset of S }
Claim: We claim that B is a basis for a topology τ on S.

Note that, the empty set, ∅, is a finite subset of S . Then
∩M ∈∅ M = {x ∈ S : x ∈ M for every M ∈ ∅} = S
So, S ∈ B.
Let A, D ∈ B and A and D be finite subfamilies of S such that

A = ∩M ∈A M and D = ∩M ∈D M . Then A ∪ D is a finite subfamily
of S . Suppose x ∈ A ∩ D. Then
x = (∩M ∈A M ) ∩ (∩M ∈D M ) = ∩M ∈A ∪D M = A ∩ D
If E = ∩M ∈A ∪D M , x ∈ E ⊆ A ∩ D.
Then B is a base for some topology τ on S, as claimed. Also S
is a subbase for τ .
Since τS is the smallest topology which contains S , then τS ⊆ τ .
On the other hand, if U ∈ τ then U is the union of elements of
B ⊆ τS . So U ∈ τS . We conclude that τ ⊆ τS .
Then τS = τ and so S is a subbase of τS .
The above theorem guarantees that any non-empty subset of

P(S) is a subbase for some topology on S. We provide the following
examples where this principle is applied.
Example 6. Consider the sets Xa = {x ∈ R : a < x} and Yb = {x ∈
R : x ≤ b} and the family S = {Xa : a ∈ R} ∪ {Yb : b ∈ R}. We see
that the intersections of finite subsets of S are either ∅ or of the
form (a, b]. So,
B = {(a, b] : a < b} ∪ {∅}
forms a base for a topology, τS , on R generated by the subbase S .

This topology is referred to as the
upper limit topology on R
or the Sorgenfrey line.4

Example 7. Consider the set, S = {[a, b] : a < b}, of all non-empty
closed and bounded intervals in P(R).
We see that S does not satisfy the “base property” (since there
does not exist [x, y] in S such that [x, y] ⊆ [a, b]∩[b, c]) and so cannot
form a base for a topology on R.
4
If B = {[a, b) : a < b} ∪ {∅}, this topology is referred to as the
lower limit topology on R.
However, the theorem guarantees that S is a subbase for some

topology on R. Describe this topology.
Solution: We see that non-empty finite intersections of elements of
S are of the form [c, d] where c ≤ d. In particular, [u, x]∩[x, v] = {x}
is an open base element for all x ∈ R. So, the subbase S will generate
an open base, B = {{x} : x ∈ R}, for the discrete topology, τd .
We see that the subbase, S , holds more sets then is really required
to generate τd . We can reduce its size to
S ∗ = {[x − 1, x] : x ∈ R} ∪ {[x, x + 1] : x ∈ R}
Since, for each x ∈ R, [x−1, x]∩[x, x+1] = {x}, S ∗ still generates τd .

Example 8. Consider two topological spaces (S, τS ) and (T, τT ).
Using the sets S and T we can construct a new set, the Cartesian
product S × T , defined as S × T = {(x, y) : x ∈ S, y ∈ T }. We can
topologize the set S × T by defining a suitable subbase.
We will proceed as follows. Define the two projection functions
πS : S ×T → S and πT : S ×T → T as πS (x, y) = x and πT (x, y) = y,
respectively. We will define as subbase for S × T
S = {πS−1 (U ) : U ∈ τS } ∪ {πT−1 (V ) : V ∈ τT }
where πS−1 (U ) = U × T and πT−1 (V ) = S × V . By referring to the

principle (A × B) ∩ (C × D) = (A ∩ C) × (B ∩ D) (verify this!), the
basis B induced by this subbase is of the form
B = {U × V : U ∈ τS , V ∈ τT }
The topology on S × T whose base is B is called the product topol-

ogy on S × T . Such topological spaces created by combining known
topological spaces are important and so will be discussed in depth in
the next few chapters.
Supplementary definition: Two bases B and B ∗ are said to be

equivalent bases for a particular set S if they generate the same
topology.
Note that the usual basis for R and the basis for the upper limit
topology described in the example above are not equivalent bases
since (a, b] does not belong to the usual topology on R. However,
since
(a, b) = ∪{(a, b − 1/n] : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} ∈ τS
then every base element for the usual topology belongs to τS and
so. . . the usual topology is weaker than τS .
In the following example, we illustrate a different topology, τscat
on R. The topological space, (R, τscat ), is known as the scattered line
or the discrete irrational extension of R.
Example 9. Consider the real line, R. Let τ denote the usual
topology on R and J denote the subset of all irrationals. Let
τscat = {U ∪ V : U ∈ τ and V ⊆ J}
Verify that τscat is indeed a topology on R. Find a base for this

topology.
Solution: O1: Since ∅ ∈ τ and ∅ ⊆ J, ∅ = ∅∪∅ ∈ τscat . So ∅ ∈ τscat .
Since R = R ∪ J, then R ∈ τscat .
O2: Let A = {Ui ∪ Vi : i ∈ I} be a subfamily of τscat . Then
∪A = ∪{Ui ∪ Vi : i ∈ I}

= Ui ∪ Vi
i∈I i∈I

where i∈I Ui ∈ τ and i∈I Vi ⊆ J. So ∪A ∈ τscat .
O3: Let D = {Ui ∪ Vi : i = 1 to n} be a finite subfamily of τscat .
Then
(U1 ∪ V1 ) ∩ (U2 ∪ V2 ) = (U1 ∩ U2 ) ∪ [(U1 ∩ V2 ) ∪ (V1 ∩ (U2 ∪ V2 ))]
The right-hand side is an element of τscat (where U1 ∩ U2 ∈ τ and

(U1 ∩ V2 ) ∪ (V1 ∩ (U2 ∪ V2 )) ⊆ J). Proceeding by finite induction on
n, we conclude O3 is satisfied.
So τscat is indeed a topology on R.
Suppose A ∈ τscat contains the rational number q. Then A = U ∪V
for some U ∈ τ and V ⊆ J. Since q is not irrational, q ∈ U . Then
there exists ε > 0 such that q ∈ (q − ε, q + ε) ⊆ U ⊆ A. So, the family

{(q − ε, q + ε) : ε > 0} forms a neighborhood base for q in τscat .
On the other hand, if r ∈ J, and A ∈ τscat contains r, then {r} =
∅ ∪ {r} ∈ τscat . So, {{r} : r ∈ J} forms neighborhood base of r.
Then
{{r} : r ∈ J} ∪ {(q − ε, q + ε) : ε > 0, q ∈ Q}
forms a base for the scattered line.
5.6 Topic: Spaces with Countable Bases
Some properties of a topological space, S, may depend on the car-

dinality of an open base on S. We will see that some spaces have a
countable open base while others simply have a countable neighbor-
hood base at each point. It will be useful to discuss these notions as
soon as possible in the text.
Definition 5.7 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space. The topological

space, S, is said to be
first countable
if and only if every point, x ∈ S, has a countable neighborhood base.
The topological space, S, is said to be
second countable
if and only if the smallest of its open bases is a countable base.
Countability properties. We have discussed a countability prop-

erty which is indirectly related to the topology of a space before.
Recall (from Definition 4.10) that a space is
separable
if it has at least one countable dense subspace. The three properties,
separable, first countable and second countable are often referred to as
“the countability properties” of a topological space. When introduced
to an unfamiliar topological space we often try to determine which
property (or properties) apply to the space in question. We begin by
discussing in which ways these properties relate to each other.
Theorem 5.8 A second countable topological space is a first count-

able space.
Proof. Suppose (S, τ ) is a second countable space. Then S has a
countable base, B. Then, for each x ∈ S, Bx = {B ∈ B : x ∈ B}
is a neighborhood base at x. Since B is countable and Bx ⊆ B, Bx
cannot be uncountable. So (S, τ ) is first countable.
The class of all first countable spaces is a subclass of all second

countable spaces. However, there are some uncountably large topo-
logical spaces which are first countable but not second countable.
The following example illustrates such a space.
Example 10. Suppose τS represents the upper limit topology on R
(the Sorgenfrey line) (see Example 4 on page 98). Recall that, when
R is equipped with this topology, B = {(x, y] : x, y ∈ R} is an
open base for R. Show that (R, τS ) is first countable but not second
countable.
Solution: The space, (R, τS ) is first countable: For each x ∈ R,
Bx = {(x − 1/n, x] : n ∈ N}
is a countable neighborhood base at x. So, (R, τS ) is first countable.
The space, (R, τS ) is not second countable: Let the function φ :
R → B be defined as
φ(x) = (x − 1, x]
So, φ[R] ⊆ B. If x = y, then
φ(x) = (x − 1, x] = (y − 1, y] = φ(y)
Since R is uncountable and φ is one-to-one on its domain, R, then
φ[R] is an uncountable subset of B. Also, {(∞, b ] : a ∈ R} ∪ {(c, ∞) :
c ∈ R} forms a subbase for τS generating a base which contains every
element of φ[R]. So B is uncountable.
So, (R, τS ) is not second countable. As required, metrizable spaces
turn out to be first countable spaces. That is, every point of a metriz-
able space has a countable neighborhood base. We already have the
tools needed to prove this immediately.
Theorem 5.9 Any metrizable space is first countable.

Proof. Suppose (S, τ ) is a metrizable space whose open sets are
generated by the metric ρ. Then the set
Bx = {B1/n (x) : n ∈ N, n > 0}
(an open ball center x with radius 1/n) forms a countable neighbor-
hood base at x.
Hence, S is a first countable space.
Example 11. Since R (equipped with usual topology) is metrizable,

then it is first countable.
Example 12. Verify that the space, R, when equipped with the
usual topology, is second countable.
Solution: We are required to show R has a countable open base.
Suppose U is an open subset of R and x ∈ U . Then there exists
an open interval, Bε (x) = (x − ε, x + ε), such that x ∈ Bε (x) ⊆ U .
We consider two cases:
— If x ∈ Q, then there exists integer m such that x ∈ B 1 (x) ⊆
m
Bε (x) ⊆ U .
— If x is an irrational, we know that there is a sequence of rationals
which converges to x, so we can find a rational y in B 1 (x), such
4m
that
x ∈ B1/4m (y) ⊆ Bε (x)
We have just shown that B = {Bm (y) : y, m ∈ Q} forms a base

for the open sets in R. Since Q is countable, then so is Q × Q2 so
|B| = |{Bm (y) : (y, m) ∈ Q × Q}| = |Q × Q| = ℵ0
We have shown that, when equipped with the usual topology, R has
a countable base for open sets.
2
See appendix on cardinalities.
Example 13. Recall that the radial plane, (R2 , τr ), is equipped

with what is called the radial plane topology, τr (see the example on
page 93). The open sets in the radial plane are defined as follows:
The subset U is an open neighborhood of q if and only if q ∈ U ,
and U is the union of a set of open line segments, precisely one in
each direction, each one originating at q. It is shown on page 93, that
this is a valid topology and that it is strictly stronger than the usual
topology on R2 . Verify that the radial plane is not first countable.
Solution: Let p ∈ R2 . Suppose (R2 , τr ) is first countable. Then p
has a countable open neighborhood base,
Bp = {Bi : i ∈ N\{0}}
We will construct an element, V , of τr which contains p but does not

contain any element of Bp .
For each radial set, Bi ∈ Bp , let ri be the length of the longest ray
originating at p which appears in Bi and |ri | denote its length. We
then inductively construct a sequence of rays, R = {ri∗ : i ∈ N\{0}}
each originating at p in the direction of ri and of length
|ri∗ | = |ri /2i |
Since we have only countably many rays, the set
{ri∗ : i ∈ N\{0}} ∪ {p}
is not yet a complete radial set centered at p. We will add uncount-

ably many more rays of arbitrary length to the ones we have to obtain
a complete radial open set, V , centered at p. No open neighborhood
Bi can be contained in this V (since the rays become arbitrarily
small, shrinking down to p). So, Bp cannot be an open neighbor-
hood base for p. So, p must have an uncountable open neighborhood
base.
5.7 Topic: Relating the Countable Base Property

with the Separable Property
Recall that in Definition 4.10, we defined a separable topological space

as being a space which has a countable dense subset. We saw, for
example, that, since Q is a countable dense subset of the reals, R is

separable.5
In the following theorem, we see that all second countable spaces
are guaranteed to have a countable dense subset. The proof of this
statement follows from a more general result (in part (a)) which
states that, given any space S, given any open base, B, S has a
dense subset D whose cardinality, |D|, is less than or equal to the
cardinality of B.
Theorem 5.10 (“Second countable ⇒ separable” theorem).

Suppose B is an open base of the space (S, τS ) such that, amongst all
bases of S, it is one of least cardinality.
(a) There exists in S a dense subset, D such that |D| ≤ |B|.
(b) Any second countable topological space is a separable space.
Proof. We are given that B = {Bi : i ∈ I} is a base such that if
any other base has cardinality J, J ≥ |I|.
(a) For each i ∈ I, choose xi ∈ Bi . (Choice!)6 Let D = {xi : i ∈ I}.
Then |D| ≤ |B|.
We claim that D is dense in S: Let U be a non-empty open
subset of S.
Then, for x ∈ U there exists Bi ∈ B such that x ∈ Bi ⊆ U .
Then xi ∈ Bi ⊆ U . Then U ∩ D = ∅. So every open set in S
intersects D. This means that D is dense in S, as claimed.
Then D is a dense subset of S such that |D| ≤ |I|. Since I
is the smallest indexing set for any open base, then D has a
cardinality which is less than or equal to the cardinality of any
base.
(b) It follows immediately from part (a) that “second countable
property” implies the “separable property”. For, if |B| = ℵ0 ,
then D is a countable dense subset of S. So, S is separable.
We have just shown that those spaces that have a countable base
of open sets must have a countable dense subset. In general, the
5
Where R is equipped with the usual topology.
6
Existence theorems often (but not always) suggest an application of the Axiom
of choice in the proof. Keep an eye open for it.
converse does not hold true. That is, there are spaces that have a
countable dense subset which do not have a countable base of open
sets. But if S is a metrizable space then the converse holds true, as
we shall now see.
Theorem 5.11 Separable metrizable spaces are second countable.

Proof. We are given that S is a metrizable separable topological
space. Then there is a metric, ρ, on S such that the space, S, is
equivalent to (S, ρ).
Since S is separable, then S has a countable dense subset, D =
{xi : i ∈ N\{0}}.
For each i and n in N\{0} let B(i,n) = B1/n (xi ), be an open ball
center xi and radius 1/n. Consider
B = {B(i,n) : i, n ∈ N\{0}}
For x ∈ S, let Ux be an open neighborhood of x. Then there exists,
j ∈ N\{0} such that B1/j (x) ⊆ Ux . Since D is dense in S, B1/j (x)∩D
is non-empty. Say,
xk ∈ B 1 (x) ∩ D
2j
Then
x ∈ B 1 (xk ) ⊆ B 1 (x) ⊆ Ux
2j 2j
Then B is a countable base for open sets in S. So, the separable

metric space, S, is second countable.
The following diagram summarizes the above results.

metrizable + separable metrizable
⇓ ⇓
second countable =⇒ first countable
⇓
separable
Example 14. From the above statements, we have another proof
that the set of all reals equipped with the usual topology is both
separable and second countable.
5.8 Topic: Hereditary Topological Properties
Some properties on spaces are carried over from the whole space to
their subspaces, while others are not. Those properties that do are
called “hereditary properties”.
Definition 5.12 A topological property, say P , of a space (S, τS ) is

said to be a hereditary topological property provided every subspace,
(T, τT ), of S also has P .
Example 15. Show that metrizability is a hereditary property.

Solution: Suppose (S, τ ) is metrizable. Then there exists a metric ρ
such that (S, τ ) and (S, ρ) have the same open sets. Suppose T ⊆ S
has the subspace topology and ρt : T × T → R is the subspace metric
on T . Then (T, τt ) and (T, ρt ) have the same open sets and so T is
metrizable. So, subspaces of metrizable spaces are metrizable.
“First countable” is another example of a hereditary topological
property. However, “separable” is not a hereditary topological prop-
erty. Witness the separable space, R with the usual topology; its
subspace of all irrationals, J, has no countable dense subset.
However, the reader may want to verify that, if S is separable and
V is an open subspace of S, then V is separable.
We now show that the “second countable” property is hereditary.
Theorem 5.13 Suppose (S, τS ) is a second countable topological

space. Then any non-empty subspace of S is also second countable.
So “second countable” is a hereditary property.
Proof. Suppose (S, τS ) has a countable base B = {Bi : i ∈ N}.

Suppose (T, τ ) is a non-empty subspace of S. Let U be an open
subset of T . Then there exists an open subset U ∗ of S such that
U = U ∗ ∩ T . Then there exists N ⊆ N such that U ∗ = ∪{Bi : i ∈ N }.
Then U = ∪{Bi ∩T : i ∈ N }. So BT = {Bi ∩T : i ∈ N} is a countable
basis of T . Hence, T inherits the second countable property from its
superset S.
5.9 Topic: Ordinal Space
Ordinal numbers play a useful role in general topology. This “linearly

well-ordered” set often serves as a counterexample to certain conjec-
tures. Recall that a linearly ordered set is said to be “well-ordered” if,
every non-empty subset contains its least element.
We state some of the most fundamental facts about ordinal num-
bers.
Definition 5.14 An ordinal number is a set whose elements are

themselves sets.7 We say that the set, α, is an ordinal number if
it satisfies the two properties:
— If u, v are elements of α, they are themselves “sets of sets” such
that either u ∈ v, v ∈ u, or u = v.
— If u ∈ v, and v ∈ α, then u ∈ α.
The elements of an ordinal number, α, are linearly ordered by

“∈ or =”. The first countable ordinal numbers are in fact the nat-
ural numbers. Each ordinal is the set whose elements are all of its
predecessors.
∅ = 0
{∅} = {0} = 1
{∅, {∅}} = {0, 1} = 2
{∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}} = {0, 1, 2} = 3
{∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}, {∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}}} = {0, 1, 2, 3} = 4
.. ..
. .
n ∪ {n} = {0, 1, 2, . . . , n} = n + 1
.. ..
. .
{0, 1, 2, 3, . . .} = ω
ω ∪ {ω} = ω+1
.. ..
. .
See that n + 1 = {0, 1, 2, 3, . . . , n} is both a subset of n + 2 and an
ordinal contained in the next ordinal, n + 2 = {0, 1, 2, 3, . . . , n, n + 1}.
7
The family of all ordinal numbers is too large to be called a “set”. So, we refer
to it as the class of all ordinal numbers.
Also see that any n + 1 is both a subset of ω and an element of ω

(where ω is the first countably infinite ordinal).
All elements of an ordinal are themselves ordinals (a statement
which requires proof). Those ordinals that do not contain a maximal
ordinal (such as ω, for example) are referred to as limit ordinals.
These can also be recognized by the fact that limit ordinals don’t have
an immediate predecessor. The limit ordinal, ω, can be expressed as
a half-open interval,
ω = [0, ω) = {ordinal α : α < ω}
where “α < ω” is interpreted as α ∈ ω. A non-limit ordinal, β + 1 =

{0, 1, 2, . . . , β} can be expressed as an interval
β + 1 = [0, β] = [0, β + 1) = {α : α ≤ β}
where “α ≤ β” is interpreted as “α ∈ ω or α = β”.

In the case of non-limit ordinals, β + 1 = [0, β],
∪ (β + 1) = ∪[0, β] = ∪{α : α “∈or=” β} = β

sup (β + 1) = sup [0, β] = sup{α : α “∈or=” β} = β
Limit ordinals are quite different in nature. We can recognize non-

zero limit ordinals by the following characterization. The following
three statements are equivalent:
— The ordinal, γ = [0, γ) = {α : α ∈ γ}, is a limit ordinal.
— For the ordinal γ, ∪γ = ∪[0, γ) = γ.
— For the ordinal γ, sup γ = sup[0, γ) = γ.
From this characterization, we can eventually argue (this is not
immediate) that the union of all countable ordinals must be an
uncountable ordinal, ω1 , which we refer to as the first uncountable
ordinal. The ordinal ω1 ∪ {ω1 } = ω1 + 1 is its successor.
5.10 Topic: Topologizing an Ordinal Set
We will topologize an initial segment of ordinals, S = [0, ωα ], (either

with an open or closed right end) by defining an appropriate subbase,
S , which will generate a collection, B, satisfying the “base prop-
erty”. The collection, B, will, in turn, generate a topology on S.
Definition 5.15 Let ωγ be an ordinal and S = [0, ωγ ] =

{ordinals α : α ≤ ωγ }.
Suppose β and μ are both ordinals which belong to S. Let
Sμ = (μ, ωγ ] = {α ∈ S : α > μ}
Sβ = [0, β) = {α ∈ S : α < β}
The standard subbase of S is defined as
S = {Sμ : μ ∈ S}∪{Sβ : β ∈ S} = {(μ, ωγ ] : μ ∈ S}∪{[0, β) : β ∈ S}
This subbase will generate a base, B, which in turn will generate the
topology, τω , of S.
When the space S is equipped with the topology τω , (S, τω ), is
referred to as an
ordinal space.
The topology that is generated by this subbase is called the
interval topology on the set of ordinals.
A few facts about an ordinal space. When we say “ordinal space” we

mean a set of ordinals with the topology generated by the described
subbase S . But the best way to memorize the topology of the ordinal
space is to remember what the elements of its base for open sets look
like. Remember that there are two types of ordinals: limit ordinals
and successor (non-limit) ordinals. Every ordinal number, α, without
exception, has an immediate successor, α + 1, by definition. Some
ordinals, γ, have an immediate predecessor, say β, provided
γ =β+1
In this case, sup [0, γ) = sup [0, β + 1) = sup [0, β] = β.
While some ordinals, μ don’t have an immediate predecessor
(limit ordinal). In this case,
sup {δ : δ < μ} = sup [0, μ) = μ
So, when we consider the intersection of two elements, (μ, ωγ ] and
[0, β), of the subbase, S , we get the open-ended interval (μ, β). At
this point, we see only two possible cases for β:
— Case 1: Suppose β has an immediate predecessor, say γ (because

β = γ + 1). In this case, we can express (μ, β) as the half-open
interval, (μ, γ].
— Case 2: Suppose β doesn’t have an immediate predecessor. Then
β = {δ : δ < β}. In this case, (μ, β) can be expressed as the half-
open interval, (μ, β].
In both cases, we have an open base element which is a half-open
interval. So, we conclude that a base, B, for open sets in the ordinal
space, S = [0, ωγ ], is the set
B = {(α, β] : α, β ∈ S, α < β}
This is easier to remember.8
5.11 Topic: On Bases Generated by Regular

Open Sets
Suppose we are given a topological space (S, τ ). Recall that, in 4.12,

we defined:
An open subset, U , of S is called a regular open subset if
it satisfies the property,
U = intS clS U
In the expression, intS clS U , the interior and closure are with respect
to the topology τ on S. The symbol
Ro(S) = {U ∈ τ : U is regular open}
represents the set of all regular open subsets of S. So Ro(S) ⊆ τ . But

since Ro(S) is not closed under unions (see the example on page 81)
then it is not, by itself, a topology on S.
Clearly, ∅ and S belong to Ro(S). On page 81, we showed that
Ro(S) is closed under finite intersections. Then, if x ∈ S and x ∈
A ∩ B where {A, B} ⊆ Ro(S), since A ∩ B ∈ Ro(S), then Ro(S)
8
A more detailed study of the ordinals in the context of set theory is found in
Axioms and set theory, by Robert André (can be found online).
satisfies the “base property”. Then, by Theorem 5.4,
Ro(S) is an open base for some topology, say τs , on S
The elements of Ro(S) are all open with respect to τ but not all
elements in τs are necessarily regular open in S. Furthermore, there
may be some open sets in τ which are not unions of elements in Ro(S)
and so these are not in τs . So we have possibly distinct topologies,
τs and τ , where
Ro(S) ⊆ τs ⊆ τ
Note that the topology generated by Ro(S) is weaker than τ , but

under certain conditions, τ and τs may be equivalent topologies.
Definition 5.16 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and τs denote the

topology whose base is Ro(S). We have seen that τs and τ may be
distinct topologies for the same underlying set, S.
If τs is a proper subset of τ , the topological space, (S, τs ), is called
the semiregularization of S with respect to τ .
If τ = τs , then we will call (S, τ ) a semiregular topological space.9
That is, a semiregular topological space is a space such that for all
U ∈ τ , U is the union of regular open sets.10
The semiregularization of, (S, τ ), is akin to running τ through a

strainer where only the elements of τs successfully make it through.
The reader should verify that the set of real numbers, R, equipped
with the usual topology is an example of a semiregular topological
space. Hence, it is its own semiregularization. We will refer to various
properties of semiregular spaces further on in the text.
9
We will specify later in this text that, in the literature, semiregular spaces are
assumed to be Hausdorff. But for now this is irrelevant.
10
The choice of the name “semiregular space” suggests that we will be introduced
to a “regular space” at some point. This is the case. We will show in Chapter 9
that “regular spaces” (to be defined in that chapter) are semiregular spaces, but
there exists semiregular spaces which are not regular spaces.
5.12 Topic: Spaces with a Base of Clopen Sets
We now consider the set, B(S) = {U ∈ P(S) : U is clopen}, of all

clopen sets in the topological space, (S, τ ). The set B(S) is never
empty since ∅ and S are elements of that set. Furthermore, if U and
V belong to B(S) and x ∈ U ∩ V , given that U ∩ V also belongs to
B(S) then B(S) satisfies the “base property”.
This means that B(S) forms a base for some topology, τb , on S.
Since B(S) ⊆ τ , then the topology, τb , is weaker than τ , but may,
under certain conditions, be equivalent to it.
Definition 5.17 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and τb denote the

topology whose base is
B(S) = {U ∈ P(S) : U is clopen}
If τ = τb , then we say that (S, τ ) is a zero-dimensional topological

space.
Example 17. Consider the subspace, (Q, τ ), of rational numbers

with the subspace topology of R itself equipped with the usual topol-
ogy. Verify that Q is a zero-dimensional topological space.
Solution: Consider U = {(a, b) : a < b, a and b irrationals} ⊆ R.
This forms a base for open sets in R. Then UQ = {U ∩ Q : U ∈ U }
forms a base for open sets for Q. Each element of UQ is clopen in Q
so Q is zero-dimensional.
This example confirms that there are non-discrete zero-
dimensional spaces.
Concept Review
1. Define a neighborhood system of x with respect to τ .

2. Define a neighborhood base of x with respect to the topology τ .
3. Is ∅ a neighborhood of a point x? Is a neighborhood of x neces-
sarily open?
4. Define a base for a topology τ .
5. Find a base for the usual topology τ on R.

6. Give a characterization of a base of τ in terms of “neighbor-
hoods”.
7. What does it mean to say that a subset P(S) satisfies the “base
property”?
8. Describe the Moore plane and the base for its topology.
9. Given an arbitrary subset S of P(S) explain how it can be used
to construct a topology on S.
10. Define a subbase for a topology.
11. Describe a subbase for the usual topology on R.
12. Describe a topology generated by a subbase S in terms of other
topologies on S.
13. Given two topological spaces S and T and a Cartesian product
S × T . Find a useful subbase involving projection maps that can
be used to generate a topology on S × T .
14. Describe the upper limit topology (or Sorgenfrey topology) on R
in terms of its base and subbase.
15. Is R with the upper limit topology first countable? Is it second
countable.
16. What does it mean to say that two subsets of P(S) are equiva-
lent topologies for the set S.
17. What can we say about the size of the neighborhood bases at
the points of R with respect to the usual topology?
18. hat can we say about the size of the base of R with respect to
the usual topology?
19. Define first countable topological space.
20. Define second countable topological space.
21. Is R equipped with the usual topology first countable? What
about second countable?
22. Describe a topological space which is first countable but not sec-
ond countable.
23. State a relationship between “second countable” and
“separable”.
24. Describe the topology on an ordinal space.
25. Metrizable space are necessarily first countable. Describe a neigh-
borhood base.
26. Describe how the set of regular open subsets can be used to
generate a topology on a space.
27. What does it mean to say that a property is hereditary?
28. Define a semiregular space.

29. Given a topological space, (S, τ ), what is the semiregularization
of (S, τ )?
30. Define a zero-dimensional space. As an example provide a sub-
space of R which is zero-dimensional.
Exercises
1. Show that, if F is a closed subset of the topological space (S, τ )

and x ∈ F , then x has a neighborhood which does not intersect F .
2. Let x = (a, b) ∈ R2 equipped with the usual (Euclidean) topology.
For each q ∈ R, let Bx (q) = {(x, y) : max{|a − x|, |b − y|} < q}.
Show that Bx = {Bx (q) : q ∈ R, q ≥ 0} forms a neighborhood
base at x.
3. Suppose τ1 and τ2 are two topologies on the set S with respective
bases B1 and B2 . Show that τ1 ⊆ τ2 if and only if whenever
x ∈ B1 there exists B2 ∈ B2 such that x ∈ B2 ⊆ B1 .
4. Let A and B be two infinite sets each equipped with the cofinite
topology. Describe a basis of A × B equipped with the product
topology.
5. Let (S, τ ) be a topological space with base B. If A ⊆ S, show
that BA = {B ∩ A : B ∈ B} is a base for the open sets of A.
6. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be two first countable topological spaces.
Show that S ×T equipped with the product topology is first count-
able.
7. Prove that, if (A, τ1 ) is a subspace of (B, τ2 ) and (B, τ2 ) is a
subspace of (C, τ3 ) then (A, τ1 ) is a subspace of (C, τ3 ).
Chapter 6
Continuity on Topological Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we formally define the notion of a continuous function
mapping one topological space into another. We discuss various charac-
terizations of these. An important subclass of continuous functions is the
one called “homeomorphisms”. We will see why these are fundamental
in the study of topological spaces.
6.1 Basic Notions and Notation Associated to Functions

Mapping Sets to Sets
We begin by establishing the notation and terminology we will use

in our discussion of functions. Suppose f : S → T is a well-defined
function mapping a topological space, S, into another topological
space, T . For f : S → T the expressions, “f is one-to-one and onto”
and “f is a bijection between S and T ” are simply different ways of
conveying the same idea.
The function, f : S → T , induces another function, f : P(S) →
P(T ), where
f [A] = {y ∈ T : y = f (x) for some x ∈ A ⊆ S}
Essentially, f [A] is the image of the set A under the function

f : S → T . The function f : S → T also induces the function
117
f ← : P(T ) → P(S) where
f ← [B] = {x ∈ S : where f (x) ∈ B}
We can also say that, if f ← [B] = D, then D is the “inverse image”

or “pre-image” of B under f , or that the function f ← “pulls back”
the set B onto the set D inside the domain S of f . In the case where
f ← [{y}] = {x}, if there is no risk of confusion, we will simply write
f ← (y) = x.1 In the case where f : S → T is one-to-one and onto T
then f ← can itself be seen as a well-defined function, f ← : T → S,
and so we can write “f ← (x) = y if and only if f (y) = x” (without
using the square brackets).
In this book, if f : S → R is a function and 0 ∈ f [S], f −1 will be
interpreted as follows:
1
f −1 (x) =
f (x)
In the following theorem statement, we review some basic principles

on how functions act on sets. In particular, we are reminded of the
following three principles:
(1) A function “respects arbitrary unions of sets”.
(2) If a function is one-to-one it will “respect arbitrary intersec-
tions”. Otherwise, a function “does not always respect intersec-
tions of sets”.
(3) An inverse function, f ← , “always respects unions, intersections
and complements of sets”.
Theorem 6.1 Let f : A → B be a function mapping the set A to

the set B. Let A be a set of subsets of A and B be a set of subsets
of B. Let D ⊆ A and E ⊆ B. Then:

(a) f S∈A S = S∈A f [S].

(b) f S∈A S ⊆ S∈A f [S] where equality holds true only if f is
one-to-one.
1
Note that f need not be one-to-one on all of the domain in order for us to
speak of f ← in this way.
Continuity on Topological Spaces 119
(c) f [A\D] ⊆ B \f [D]. Equality holds true only if f is one-to-one

andonto
B.
(d) f ← S∈B S = S∈B f ← [S].

(e) f ← S∈B S = S∈B f ← [S].
(f) f ← [B \E] = A\f ← [E].
Proof.

(a) x∈f S ⇔ x = f (y) for some y ∈ S
S∈A S∈A
⇔ x = f (y) for some y in some S ∈ A

⇔ x = f (y) ∈ f [S] for some S ∈ A

⇔ x∈ f [S]
S∈A
(b) It will be helpful to first prove this statement for the intersection
of only two sets U and V. The use of a Venn diagram will also
help visualize what is happening.
So, we first prove the statement: f [U ∩ V ] ⊆ f [U ] ∩ f [V ] with
equality only if f is one-to-one on U ∪ V .
Case 1: We consider the case where U ∩ V = ∅.
Then f [U ∩ V ] = ∅ ⊆ f [U ] ∩ f [V ]. So, the statement holds true.
Case 2: We now consider the case where U ∩ V = ∅.
x ∈ f [U ∩ V ] ⇔ x = f (y) for some y ∈ U ∩ V

⇔ x = f (y) for some y contained in both U and V
⇒ x = f (y) ∈ f [U ] and f [V ]
⇔ x ∈ f [U ] ∩ f [V ]
We now show that if f is one-to-one on U ∪ V , then f [U ]∩ f [V ] ⊆

f [U ∩ V ] and so equality holds true.
— Suppose x = f (y) ∈ f [U ] ∩ f [V ]. Then there exists u ∈ U
and v ∈ V such that f (u) = f (v) = f (y). Since f is one-to-
one, u = v = y. This implies y ∈ U ∩ V . Hence, f [U ∩ V ] =
f [U ] ∩ f [V ].
The proof of the general statement is left as an exercise.
(c) Proof isleft as an exercise.

←
(d) x ∈ f S ⇔ x = f (y) for some y ∈ S
S∈B S∈B
(By definition of f ← .)
⇔ x = f (y) for some y in some S ∈ B
⇔ x ∈ f ← [{y}] ⊆ f ← [S] for some S ∈ B

⇔ x∈ f ← [S]
S∈B

Thus, f ← S∈B S = S∈B f ← (S).
(e) Proof is left as an exercise.
(f) Proof is left as an exercise.
6.2 Continuous Functions on Topological Spaces
Given two topological spaces, (S, τS ) and (T, τT ), we will discuss var-
ious types of functions, f : S → T , which map S into T . The reader
is already familiar with those functions called “continuous functions”
mapping R to R. We will generalize this notion of continuity to topo-
logical spaces.
Our formal definition of a continuous function mapping a topo-
logical space into another is presented below. Those readers who
are familiar with the “epsilon-delta” definition of a continuous func-
tion (normally presented in any Introduction to analysis course) will
notice the analytical approach cannot be used in topology since topo-
logical spaces, in their most rudimentary form are not equipped with
distance functions such as absolute values, norms or metrics.
Definition 6.2 Let f : S → T be a function mapping (S, τS ) into

(T, τT ). We say that
f : S → T is continuous on S if, for any open subset U ∈ T ,
f ← [U ] is open in S.
If x ∈ S, we will say that “f is continuous at the point x” if, for any

neighborhood, U , of f (x) (inside T ) there exists a neighborhood V
of x such that f (x) ∈ f [V ] ⊆ U .
So, a function f : S → T is continuous if f pulls back open sets in T

to open sets in S”.
The above definition has two parts to it. The first describes con-
tinuity of f on a set while the second describes continuity of f at
a point x. Clearly, we cannot apply the first definition to determine
continuity of f at a point. But a set A is simply a collection of points.
If a function f can be shown to be continuous at every point x in a
set A we would hope that, we would obtain continuity on the set as
defined in part (a). The next theorem confirms that this is the case.
Theorem 6.3 Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be two topological spaces and
f : S → T be a function. Then f is continuous on S if and only if f
is continuous at every point of S.
Proof. (⇒) Suppose f is continuous on S, x ∈ S and y = f (x) ∈
f [S]. We are required to show that f is continuous at the point x.
Suppose U is a neighborhood of y. By definition of continuity on a
set, f ← [intT U ] is an open neighborhood of x ∈ f ← [{y}] ⊆ f ← [intT U ]
in S. By definition of neighborhood, there exists an open set, V ⊆
f ← [intT U ], such that x ∈ V . Then y = f (x) ∈ f [V ] ⊆ U . So, we
have found the required neighborhood, V , of x. So f is continuous
at the point x.
(⇐) Suppose that f is continuous at every point of S. Let U be
a non-empty open subset of f [S] ⊆ T . We are required to show that
f ← [U ] is open in S.
Let x ∈ f ← [U ]. Then f (x) ∈ U . Since f is continuous at x,
then there exists a neighborhood V of x such that f [V ] ⊆ U . Now
x ∈ intT V ⊆ f ← [f [V ]] ⊆ f ← [U ]. Then f ← [U ] is an open subset of S.
So f is continuous on S.
There are other ways of recognizing those functions which are con-
tinuous on a set. For example, if f : S → T satisfies the property,
“f ← [F ] is closed in S whenever F is closed in the codomain T ”

then, when U is open in T , S \ f ← [U ] = f ← [T \ U ] is closed in S.

Then f ← [U ] is open in S and so f is continuous on S. The reader is
left to verify that the converse also holds true.
Other useful characterizations of continuity on a topological space
are given as follows.
Theorem 6.4 Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be two topological spaces and
f : S → T be a function.
(a) The function f is continuous on S if and only if f pulls back
subbase elements of the topological space T to open sets in S.2
(b) The function f is continuous on S if and only if f pulls back
open base elements of the topological space T to open sets in S.3
(c) The function f is continuous on S if and only if, for any subset
U of S,
f [clS U ] ⊆ clT f [U ]
Proof. The proofs of parts (a) and (b) are left as an exercise.
(c) ( ⇒ ) Suppose f is continuous on S. To show that f [clS U ] ⊆
clT f [U ] it will suffice to show that x ∈ clT f [U ] implies x ∈ f [clS U ].
Suppose x ∈ clT f [U ]. Then there musts exist an open V in T
such that x ∈ V ⊆ T \clT f [U ]. Then f ← (x) ⊆ f ← [V ] ⊆ S \U . By
continuity of f , f ← [V ] is open in S and so clS U ∩ f ← [V ] = ∅. Then
f [f ← (x)] = x ∈ f [clS U ]. So f [clS U ] ⊆ clT f [U ].
The proof of ( ⇐ ) is left as an exercise.
Suppose A is a subspace of the topological space, (S, τ ), equipped

with the subspace topology, τA . Suppose f : S → T is known to be
continuous on its domain. Then, when f is restricted to f |A on A,
f |A preserves the continuity property on A. This is confirmed by the
following theorem statement.
Theorem 6.5 Let (S, τS ), (T, τT ), and (Z, τZ ) be topological spaces.
2
That is, f ← [B] is open in S whenever B is a subbase element of T .
3
That is, f ← [B] is open in S whenever B is a base element of T .
(a) If f : S → T and g : T → Z are both continuous on their domains

then g ◦ f : S → Z is continuous on S. (That is, the composition
of continuous functions is continuous.)
(b) Suppose f : S → T is a continuous function on S and A ⊆ S.
Let f |A : A → T denote the restriction of f to the subset A.
Then f |A is continuous on A.
Proof. (a) The proof of part (a) is left as an exercise.

(b) Let U be an open subset of f [A] with respect to the subspace
topology τf [A] in T . Then there exists U ∗ ∈ τT such that U = U ∗ ∩
f [A]. Now
x ∈ f |←
A [U ] ⇒ {x ∈ A : f (x) ∈ U }
⇒ x ∈ {x ∈ S : f (x) ∈ U ∗ } ∩ A
⇒ x ∈ f ← [U ∗ ] ∩ A
Since f is continuous on S, f ← [U ∗ ] ∩ A is an open subset of A with

respect to the subspace topology. So f |← A [U ] is open in A.
We have seen that continuous functions are those functions which

“pull back” open sets to open sets, or, equivalently, “pull back” closed
sets to closed sets. We will encounter at least two other similar types
of functions, which are not necessarily continuous.
Definition 6.6 Let f : S → T be a function mapping the topolog-

ical space, (S, τS ), into the space, (T, τT ). We say that f : S → T is
an open function on S, if for any open subset U of S, f [U ] is open in
the space, (T, τT ). We say that f : S → T is a closed function on S,
if for any closed subset F of S, f [F ] is closed in the space, (T, τT ).4
The reader should be alerted to the fact that an open function need
not be a continuous function; similarly, a closed function need not be
4
Whether the function f : S → T is open or closed depends on the topology
defined on S and T .
continuous. Also, we caution the reader by pointing out that, even

if f : S → T is an open function, it does not necessarily follow that
f ← : T → S is a continuous function on T . (See one of the examples
that will follow.) However, for one-to-one functions f , “f is closed if
and only if f is open” is true, as we shall now prove.
Supplementary theorem. Suppose f : S → T is one-to-one and

onto T . Then f is an open function if and only if f is a closed function.
Proof. (⇒) Suppose f : S → T is a one-to-one and onto open

function. We are required to show that f is also a closed function.
Let F be a closed subset of S. Then U = S \F is open in S and so
f [U ] is open in T . Then
f [U ] = f [S \F ]
= f [S]\f [F ] (Since f is one-to-one)
= T \f [F ]
Since T \ f [F ] is open in T, then f [F ] is closed in T . We conclude

that f is a closed function, as required.
Proof of the converse (⇐) is left to the reader.
Example 1. Suppose (R, τ ) denotes the real line with the usual
topology, τ , and (R, τS ) denotes the real line with the upper limit
topology (Sorgenfrey line), τS .
Let i : (R, τ ) → (R, τS ) denote the identity map, i(x) = x. Verify
that this identity map is open on (R, τ ) but is not continuous on its
domain.
Solution: Since the function i(x) = x maps the open base element,
(a, b), of τ to the open set (a, b) ∈ τS (as we have seen earlier, τ ⊂ τs ),
then i maps open sets to open sets hence, i is an open function. But
(a, b ] ∈ τ . So i← [(a, b ]] = (a, b ] ∈ τ . So, the open identity map i is
not continuous on R with respect to τ .
This example illustrates that, if the codomain has more open sets
then the domain, then the identity function will not pass the test of
continuity.
Example 2. Let (R2 , τ ) be equipped with the usual topology. Sup-

pose the open ball center (0, 0) of radius 1,
B = {(x, y) ∈ R2 : x2 + y 2 < 1}
is equipped with the subspace topology, τB . We define the function

f : B → R2 as follows:
f (x, y) = (x, y)
If U is an open subset of B then f [U ] = U ∩ B an open subset of

R2 . So f is an open map. But f is not a closed map. To see this note
that B is a closed subset of itself with respect to τB . On the other
hand, f [B] = B is not closed in the codomain R2 .
If f is one-to-one and onto, we arrive at a different conclusion, as
we shall now see.
Theorem 6.7 Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces. For a

one-to-one and onto continuous function f : S → T,
f ← : T → S is continuous ⇔ f : S → T is open
Proof. The proof is left as an exercise.
6.3 Homeomorphic Topological Spaces
For a continuous function, f : S → T , its inverse function, f ← : T →

S, may, or may not, be continuous, even if f is one-to-one. Those
one-to-one continuous functions f : S → T where f ← is continuous
on f [S] ⊆ T are fundamental in the study of topology. They have a

special name.
Definition 6.8 Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces and

f : S → T be a function. If f simultaneously satisfies all three of the
following conditions,
(1) f is one-to-one on S and onto T
(2) f is continuous on S
(3) f ← is continuous on T
then the function, f , is called a homeomorphism from S onto T . If
f : S → T is a homeomorphism then S and T are said to be homeo-
morphic topological spaces, or f is said to map S homeomorphically
onto T .
Example 3. Let the open interval, S = (−π/2, π/2), be equipped

with the usual subspace topology. The one-to-one and onto func-
tion, tan : S → R, is well-known to be continuous on its domain,
S. Similarly its inverse (arctan), tan← : R → S, is continuous on its
domain, R. By definition, tan is a homeomorphism. We can then say
that S = (−π/2, π/2) and R are homeomorphic topological spaces.
In fact, as we shall see, any non-empty open interval of R is homeo-
morphic to R.
Theorem 6.9 Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces. Suppose

f : S → T is one-to-one and onto S. The following are equivalent:
(1) The function f is a homeomorphism.
(2) The function f is both continuous and open.
(3) The function f is both continuous and closed.
Proof. The proof follows from the statement in Theorem 6.7. It is
left as an exercise.
When the function f : S → T is one-to-one and open but is not

onto T , the pair S and T cannot be said to be homeomorphic spaces.
In this case, S is homeomorphic to the proper subspace, f [S], of T .
We often express this situation by saying that “f embeds S in T ”.

We define this formally.
Supplementary definition. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological

spaces and f : S → T be a function mapping S into T (which may
or may not be “onto”). If f is a homeomorphism then we say that
f embeds S into T
or, simply that “f is an embedding”. When the specific homeomor-
phism in question is not explicitly described, we might simply say
that
T contains a homeomorphic copy of S.
This homeomorphic copy is, of course, the image of the hypothesized

homeomorphism.
Also note that, if f : S → T embeds S into T , then f ← : f [S] → S
is also a homeomorphism.
We have seen that, if f : S → T is a homeomorphism between the
two topological spaces (S, τS ) and (T, τT ), the one-to-one function, f ,
maps each open base element in τS to a unique set in τT , and vice-
versa. Since f is one-to-one, it respects both arbitrary unions and
arbitrary intersections; then every element of τS will be paired, under
f , to exactly one element in τT . This suggests that some properties in
S which involve open sets will be “mirrored” inside T . We will refer
to such properties as “topological properties”. We formally define
this notion.
Definition 6.10 Suppose P is property which is satisfied on a topo-

logical space S. If P is satisfied in any homeomorphic copy of S, then
P is called a topological property or a topological invariant.
If f : S → T is known to be a homeomorphism and P is known

to be a topological property, then, by definition,
P is satisfied in f [S] if and only if P is satisfied in S.
Example 4. Recall that in a metric space, (S, ρ), a sequence, {xn :
n ∈ N}, is referred to as being a Cauchy sequence if and only if,
for every ε > 0, there exists N such that whenever n, m > N then
ρ(xn , xm ) < ε. Being a “Cauchy sequence” in a metric space property
which does not translate easily to a topological space. To see this
consider the continuous function g(x) = 1/x on R\{0}. The function
g maps R \ {0} homeomorphically onto itself. The sequence T =
{1, 1/2, 1/3, . . .} is a Cauchy sequence in the domain of g. But g[T ] =
{1, 2, 3, . . .} is not Cauchy in the image of g in R\{0}.5
Example 5. Consider the following property, P , on a space S:
Every real-valued continuous function on S assumes its
maximum value on S.
Verify that P is a topological property.
Solution: The negation, ¬P , of the property P is: “There is a contin-
uous real-valued function on S which does not attain its maximum
value in S”. We will show that ¬P is a topological property. The
desired result will follow.
Suppose S is a space which satisfies ¬P . Then there exists a con-
tinuous function,
f :S→R
which does not attain its maximum value in S.
Let h : S → T be a homeomorphism mapping S onto T . We claim
that T also satisfies ¬P .
Proof of claim: Consider the continuous function, f ◦h← : T → R.
If b ∈ T , then h← (b) ∈ S. Then, by hypothesis, there must exist
a ∈ S such that f (a) > (f ◦h← )(b). Note that (f ◦h← )(h(a)) = f (a) >
(f ◦h← )(b). Thus f ◦h← does not assume a maximum value on T . Then
T also satisfies ¬P , as claimed.
We conclude that S satisfies ¬P if and only if T satisfies ¬P .
Then S satisfies P if and only if T satisfies P . So, P is a topological
property.
It is interesting to note that the closed interval [0, 1] cannot be
homeomorphic to R since elementary calculus shows that [0, 1] sat-
isfies property P and R does not.
5
We will eventually see that the notion of uniform continuity of a function on
a subset of a metric space also does not translate automatically to a topological
space.
6.4 Continuity and Countability Properties
We have previously defined the three countability properties,

separable
first countable
second countable.
We would like to verify whether or not a continuous function will
always carry over each of these properties from its domain into its
codomain.
Recall that a topological space, (S, τ ), is separable if and only
if S contains a countable dense subset. We expect that “separable”
is a topological property. This fact is confirmed by the following
result which shows that separability is carried over by continuous
functions. Hence, if S is separable, every topological space which is
homeomorphic to S is also separable.
Theorem 6.11 Suppose (S, τS ) is a separable topological space.

Then any continuous image of S is also separable.
Proof. Suppose (S, τS ) is separable and f : S → T is a continuous
function mapping S onto the topological space (T, τT ).
We claim that the image, T , of S under f is also separable. Given
that S is separable, then it contains a countable dense subset, say D.
Since the cardinality of the image of a function is less than or equal
to the cardinality of its domain, then f [D] is a countable subset of
T . It now suffices to show that f [D] is dense in T . Suppose U is a
non-empty open subset of T . Continuity of f guarantees that f ← [U ]
is open and so there must exist x ∈ f ← [U ] ∩ D. Then
f (x) ∈ f [f ← [U ] ∩ D]
⊆ f [f ← [U ]] ∩ f [D]
= U ∩ f [D]
Hence, every open subset U of T intersects f [D] in a non-empty set.
We conclude that f [D] is dense in T . So, T is separable.
A simple continuous function is (by itself) not quite strong enough

to carry over the second countable property or the first countable
property from its domain to its codomain. We suspect that homeo-

morphisms can certainly do so. But, as we shall see, we don’t need
the full power of a homeomorphism for this. The following theorem
shows that a continuous open function will suffice. If so, since home-
omorphisms are both continuous and open, then “second countable”
and “first countable” are topological properties.
Theorem 6.12 Let f : S → T be a continuous open function map-

ping S onto a space T . If the space S is second countable then T
is second countable. If the space S is first countable then T is first
countable.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces and f : S → T

be a continuous open function mapping S onto T .
If S is second countable then S has a countable open base, B.
Consider the family, BT = {f [B] : B ∈ B}. By hypothesis, BT
is a set of countably many open subsets of T . We claim that the
countable set, BT , is a base for open sets in T .
Proof of claim: Let U be a non-empty open subset of T and let
y ∈ U . Let x ∈ f ← (y) ∈ f ← [U ]. Since f is continuous, f ← [U ] is open
in S, so there exist an open V ∈ B such that x ∈ V ⊆ f ← [U ]. Since
f is declared to be open, f (x) = y ∈ f [V ] ∈ BT , an open subset of
U . We can then conclude that U is the union of elements from BT .
So, BT forms a base for T , so T is second countable.
The proof that the “first countable” property is carried over by
continuous open functions is left as an exercise.
6.5 The Weak Topology Induced by a Family of Functions
Suppose (T, τT ) is a space and we are given a function, f : S → T ,

mapping the set S onto the topological space, T (where S is not
yet topologized). With this premise alone, we would normally not
discuss the continuity of f since “continuity” is defined in terms of a
topology on both the function’s domain and codomain. But we could
first hypothesize “continuity of f ” and then force on S enough open
sets so that this family of open sets would support the continuity
of f .
Is this hard to do? It is quite easy. We need only equip the domain,
S of f , with the discrete topology, τd . Then, no matter how f is
defined, since every subset of S is open then f is, by definition,
continuous on S. But this is not entirely satisfactory — nor an inter-
esting problem — since the discrete topology on S doesn’t depend
on the function, f , at all. We can tighten up our question a bit so
that the topology on S will relate to the specific function f .
Let f : S → T be some function mapping the set S into the
topological space T . We will topologize S so that, not only is the
function f guaranteed to be continuous on S, but that the chosen
topology is the smallest such topology. To do this, we will define
Sf = {f ← [U ] : U ∈ τT }
a subset of P(S), declaring it to be a subbase for a topology. By

taking all finite intersections of elements from Sf we will generate
the subset, Bf , of P(S) which satisfies the “base property”. By
taking all unions of elements from Bf we will generate the smallest
topology, τf , with subbase Sf . The family τf is the weakest topology
possible that will guarantee the continuity property on f . We will
refer to τf as being the weak topology on S induced by f . Eliminating
just one element from this topology would be sufficient to prevent f
from being continuous on S. Also the topology we obtain is directly
related to the function f . If we consider a different function we may
obtain a different topology.
If we want the two functions f : S → T and g : S → T to be
continuous on S, we would require more open sets on S. That is, the
required subbase would have to be,
S{f,g} = {f ← [U ] : U ∈ τT } ∪ {g← [U ] : U ∈ τT }
In this case, the topology generated by the subbase S{f,g} would be

called the weak topology induced by {f, g}.
We can generalize this even more. Rather than restrict ourselves
to only two functions each with the same domain S, we will consider
the more general weak topology on S induced by a family of functions

{fα : S → Tα }α∈I , formally defined as follows.
Definition 6.13 Let S be a non-empty set and {(Tα , τα ) : α ∈ Γ}

denote a family of topological spaces. For each α ∈ Γ, suppose
fα : S → Tα
is a function mapping S onto Tα . Let
S = {fα← [Uα ] : Uα ∈ τα }α∈Γ
Then S can be declared to be the subbase of a topology, τS , on S.

The topology τS is called the
weak topology induced by the family of functions {fα : α ∈ Γ} on S.
The reader is encouraged to keep this definition in mind. We will

refer to the weak topology induced by a set of functions when we will
discuss the question of a suitable topology on the Cartesian product
of a family of topological spaces.
6.6 Topic: Continuous Functions on a Dense Subset
We examine particular properties of a continuous function on a dense

subset of (S, τ ).
Note that, if A is dense in B and A ⊆ D ⊆ B, then D must be
dense in B. The reader is left to verify this. It is also easy to verify
that, if D is dense in S, then S \D cannot contain any non-empty
open subsets of S.
Before we state the next theorem, we provide the following def-
inition. If f : S → T and g : S → T are two functions such that
f (x) = g(x) for all x ∈ A ⊆ S then we will say that
f and g agree on A.
We present the following theorem concerning continuous functions

which agree on a dense subset of topological space.
Theorem 6.14 Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space and (T, τρ )

is a metrizable topological space induced by the metric ρ. Suppose
f : S → T and g : S → T are two continuous functions which agree
on some dense subset D of (S, τ ). Then f and g must agree on all
of S.6
Proof. Let (T, ρ) be the metric space which is equivalent to (T, τρ ).

Let
D = {x ∈ S : f (x) = g(x)}
By hypothesis, f and g agree on D. We are required to show that

D = S.
Suppose a ∈ S \ D; then f (a) = g(a). Then there exists in T ,
disjoint basic open balls, Bε (f (a)) and Bε (g(a)), of S of radius
ρ( f (a), g(a) )
ε=
3
with center f (a) and g(a), respectively. Since both f and g are con-
tinuous on S, both f ← [Bε (f (a))] and g← [Bε (g(a))] are open in S
each containing at least the point a. So the open subset
f ← [Bε (f (a))] ∩ g← [Bε (g(a))] = ∅
in S. We claim that f ← [Bε (f (a))] ∩ g← [Bε (g(a))] ∩ D = ∅. For if,
x ∈ f ← [Bε (f (a))] ∩ g← [Bε (g(a))]
f (x) ∈ Bε (f (a)) and g(x) ∈ Bε (g(a)) so f (x) = g(x) (since Bε (f (a))

and Bε (g(a)) are disjoint). So a ∈ S\D. So S\D is empty. So, D = S,
as required.
6
Once we have introduced the concept of “Hausdorff”, this statement generalizes
from “metrizable topological spaces” to “Hausdorff topological spaces”.
6.7 Topic: On Algebras of Continuous Real-Valued

Functions
We now take a quick glance at the algebra,7 (C(S), +, ·, scalar mult),

of those continuous functions on a topological space, S, with range
in R. If S is a topological space, we denote the set of all continuous
functions, f : S → R, mapping S into R by C(S). The set C(S) is
normally considered equipped with the algebraic operations +, · and
scalar multiplication defined as
(f + g)(x) = f (x) + g(x)
(f · g)(x) = f (x)g(x)
(αf )(x) = αf (x)
We will assume that the reader is able to write proofs showing that
C(S) is closed under sums, multiplication and real scalar multiplica-
tion and that |f | defined as
|f |(x) = |f (x)|
also belongs to C(S) whenever f is in C(S). We will also refer to
(C(S), +, ·) as a ring of continuous functions. The elements of C(S)
can be partially ordered with “≤”8 where
f ≤ g if and only if f (x) ≤ g(x)
for all x ∈ S. We also define the operations ∨ and ∧ on C(S) as
(f ∨ g)(x) = max {f (x), g(x)} for x ∈ S
(f ∧ g)(x) = min {f (x), g(x)} for x ∈ S
Verification of the following formulas is left to the reader.
f + g + |f − g|
f ∨g =
2
f + g − |f − g|
f ∧g =
2
7
An algebra is a set with + and · and scalar multiplication by elements of a field.
8
A partially ordered set is a set P on which is defined a binary relation “≤”
which is reflexive, antisymmetric and transitive.
From these, we can conclude that both f ∨ g and f ∧ g are continuous

whenever f and g are continuous.
6.8 Topic: The Pasting Lemma and a Generalization
The continuity of a function, f , on a given space can sometimes be

more easily confirmed by determining the continuity of f on some
of its subspaces. The “pasting lemma” is a statement which says
that two continuous functions can be “pasted together” to create
some other continuous function. The lemma is implicit in the use of
piecewise functions.
Lemma 6.15 Let A and B be closed subsets of a topological space

S such that S = A ∪ B. Then f : S → T is continuous if and only if
f |A and f |B are both continuous.
Proof. Let f : S → T be a function and A and B are both closed

in S.
(⇒) Suppose f is continuous on S. Then, by Theorem 6.5 both
f |A and f |B are continuous on A and B, respectively.
(⇐) Suppose both f |A and f |B are continuous on the closed sub-
sets A and B, respectively. Let F be a closed subset of T . Then both
f |← ←
A [F ] and f |B [F ] are closed since each is the pre-image of f when
restricted to A and B, respectively. Then their union, is also closed,
being a finite union of closed sets. So, f ← [F ] = f |← ←
A [F ] ∪ f |B [F ],
a closed subset of S. So, f is continuous on S.
We generalize the pasting lemma to the case where f acts on

an infinite collection of closed sets. The statement in the following
theorem involves a family (possibly infinite) of subsets referred to as
being a “locally finite collection”.
Definition 6.16 A locally finite collection, C , of subsets of a topo-

logical space, S, is one for which every point in S has at least one
neighborhood which meets only finitely many elements of C .
Such families of subsets satisfy an interesting property, presented in

the following lemma.
Lemma 6.17 Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space. Let U = {Ui :

i ∈ I} be a locally finite collection of sets in S. Then U ∗ = {clS Ui :
i ∈ I} is also locally finite.
Furthermore,
clS [∪{Ui : i ∈ I}] = ∪{clS Ui : i ∈ I}
Proof. Let U = {Ui : i ∈ I} be a locally finite collection of sets

in S.
Then, for x ∈ S, there is an open neighborhood B such that
B ∩ U = ∅ for finitely many members of U and B ∩ U = ∅ for all
others. For these “other”. U ’s, since B is open in S, B ∩ clS U = ∅.
In the case where B ∩ U = ∅, then B ∩ clS U = ∅ for finitely many
U ’s. The existence of this open neighborhood B of x is all that is
required to prove the local finiteness property of {clS Ui : i ∈ I}.
We now prove the second part. Let
M = ∪{Ui : i ∈ I}
We are required to prove clS M = ∪{clS Ui : i ∈ I}.

Clearly, ∪{clS Ui : i ∈ I} ⊆ clS M . So, we need only prove clS M ⊆
∪{clS Ui : i ∈ I}.
Let p ∈ clS M . We claim that p ∈ ∪{clS Ui : i ∈ I}. There exists
an open neighborhood B of p such that B ∩ clS Ui = ∅ for finitely
many elements, F , in U ∗ .
See that, for p ∈ clS M ,

p ∈ clS M = clS ∪{Ui ∈ U : clS Ui ∈ F } ∪{Ui ∈ F }

= clS [∪{Ui ∈ U ∗ : clS Ui ∈ F }] clS [∪{Ui ∈ F }]

= clS [∪{Ui ∈ U ∗ : clS Ui ∈ F }] ∪{clS Ui ∈ F }
(clS Ui is closed and F is finite)
Now p cannot belong to clS [∪{Ui ∈ U ∗ : clS Ui ∈ F }] since B ∩

clS Ui = ∅ for all clS Ui ∈ F . Then p ∈ ∪{clS Ui ∈ F } ⊆ ∪{clS Ui :
i ∈ I}, as claimed.
So, clS M = ∪{clS Ui : i ∈ I}, as required.
It follows from the lemma that, if F = {F : F ∈ F } is any locally

finite collection of closed sets, then
clS [∪{F : F ∈ F } = ∪{F : F ∈ F }
Theorem 6.18 Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space. Let F be a

locally finite family of closed subsets which covers all of S (i.e., S =
∪F ). Let f : S → T be a function mapping S into a space T . Then
f is continuous on S if and only if f |F : F → T is continuous on
each F ∈ F .
Proof. By Theorem 6.5, part b), we need only prove (⇐).

(⇐) Suppose F is a locally finite collection of closed subsets of S
which covers all of S. Also suppose f : S → T is a function mapping
S into a space T such that f |F : F → T is continuous on each F ∈ F .
We are required to show that f is continuous on all of S. To prove
this, it suffices to show that, if A is closed in T , then f ← [A] is closed
in S.
Let A be a closed subset of T . Then,
f ← [A] = ∪{F ∩ f ← [A] : F ∈ F }

= ∪{f |←
F [A] : F ∈ F }
Since f |F is continuous for each F ∈ F , then f |←

F [A] is a closed
subset of F . Then there exists a closed subset G of S such that
f |←
F [A] = G ∩ F , a closed subset of S.
Consider the collection
C = {f |←
F [A] : F ∈ F }
of closed subsets of S. Note that fF← [A] = ∪C . We will show that

this set is closed in S.
Claim. We claim that C is locally finite.

Proof. Let p ∈ S. Then there exists an open neighborhood, V , of
p and a finite subcollection, G , of F such that V ∩ F = ∅ if F ∈ G
and V ∩ F = ∅ for F ∈ F \G .
Note that for F \G ,
V ∩ f |← ←
F [A] = V ∩ (F ∩ f [A])
= (V ∩ F ) ∩ f ← [A]
= ∅ ∩ f ← [A]
=∅
Then at most finitely many elements of C intersect the neighborhood
V of p. So, C is locally finite collection of closed subsets, as claimed.
Then f ← [A] = ∪C is closed (see paragraph preceding the theo-
rem).
Then f : S → T is continuous on S.
In the above theorem, if the members of the collection F are all open
(rather than all closed as hypothesized in the theorem) the family F
need not be locally finite and so the statement may not hold true.
Corollary 6.19 Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space. Let F = {Fi :

i ∈ F } be a finite family of closed subsets which covers all of S (i.e.,
S = ∪U ). Let f : S → T be a function mapping S into a space T .
Then f is continuous on S if and only if f |Fi : Fi → T is continuous
on each Fi ∈ F .
Proof. See that, if F = {Fi : i ∈ F } be a finite family of closed
subsets which covers all of S, then F is a σ-locally finite cover of
closed sets on S. The result follows immediately from the theorem.
Concepts Review
1. Given the function f : S → T and A ⊆ S, define f [A].

2. Given the function f : S → T and B ⊆ S, define f ← [B].
3. State the formal topological definition of “f is continuous func-

tion on the set A”.
4. State the formal topological definition of “f is continuous func-
tion at the point x”.
5. Give a formal theorem statement which link the above two defi-
nitions of continuity.
6. A continuous function f : S → T pulls back open subbase ele-
ments in P(T ) to what kind of set in S?
7. A continuous function f : S → T pulls back open base elements
in P(T ) to what kind of set in S?
8. If f : S ⇒ T is continuous on S and A ⊆ S, show that f |A is
continuous on A.
9. Is it correct to say “f : S → T is continuous if and only if f pulls
back closed sets to closed sets”?
10. What does it mean to say f : S → T is an open functions?
11. What does it mean to say f : S → T is a closed functions?
12. Is it okay to say that “open functions are always closed”? What
about “continuous”?
13. What does it mean to say that f : S → T is a homeomorphism?
14. What does it mean to say that S and T are homeomorphic
spaces?
15. Give two characterizations of homeomorphic functions.
16. What is a topological property?
17. Is “first countable” a topological property? What about “second
countable”?
18. Do continuous functions necessarily carry over the second count-
able property to its codomain? What about the first countable
property?
19. What does it mean to say that A is a dense subset of B?
20. What can we say about two continuous functions which agree on
a dense subset of a metrizable topological space?
21. What does it mean to say that a topological space is separable?
22. What can we say about continuous images of separable spaces?
23. What can we say about second countable spaces in reference to
the “separable property”?
24. Provide examples of hereditary and non-hereditary topological
properties.
25. Define the weak topology induced by a family of functions {fα :
S → Tα }α∈I .
26. Provide two characterizations of “f : S → T is continuous on S”

involving families of subsets which cover S.
Exercises
1. Suppose S = {a, b} is a set with topology τS = {∅, {a}, S}. Let

T = {a, b} where T is equipped with the discrete topology τd .
Let i : S → T denote the identity map. What can we say about
the continuity or non-continuity of the functions i : S → T and
i← : T → S?
2. Let f : S → T be a continuous function mapping (S, τS ) onto
(T, τT ). If U is a Gδ in T , is f ← [U ] necessarily a Gδ in S? Show
that f pulls back Fσ ’s in T to Fσ ’s in S.
3. Let f : (S, τS ) → (T, τT ) be a continuous function mapping S
onto T . Show that f is continuous on S if and only if f [clS [U ]] ⊆
clT f [U ] for any U ∈ P(S).
4. Recall that infinite countable sets are those sets which can be
mapped one-to-one and onto the natural numbers N. Suppose
X and Y are both countable dense subsets of (R, τ ) where τ is
the usual topology. Show that X and Y must be homeomorphic
subspaces of R.
5. Consider the topological spaces S = (R2 , τ1 ) and T = (R, τ )
where τ1 and τ represent the usual topology. (The open base of
τ1 are the open balls, Bε (x, y), with center (x, y) and radius ε).
Consider the function f : S → T defined as f (x, y) = x.
(a) Show that f is an open function.
(b) Show that f is not a closed function. (Hint: See that F =
{(x, y) : xy = 1} is a closed subset of S. Consider the image
of F under f .)
6. Prove: The function f : S → T is a closed function if and only
if whenever F is a closed subset of S then {t ∈ T : f ← [{t}] ∩
F is non-empty} is a closed subset of T .
7. Suppose f : S → T is a closed function. Show that whenever V
is an open subset of S and f ← [{x}] is a subset of V then x ∈
intT (f [clS V ]).
8. Suppose f : S → T is a closed function and F is closed subset

of S. Show that the restriction, f |F : F → f [F ], is also a closed
function.
9. Suppose U and V are subsets of S such that U ∪ V = S and
x ∈ U ∩ V . Suppose f : S → T is a function such that both f |U
and f |V are continuous on U and V , respectively. Show that f
is continuous at x.
10. Suppose that f : S → T is a one-to-one and onto function. Show
that f is a homeomorphism if and only if, for any U ∈ P(S),
f [clS U ] = clT f [U ].
Chapter 7
Product Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we will review some fundamental facts about those sets
that are “Cartesian products of sets”. We will then consider two topolo-
gies on a Cartesian product of topological spaces and study some of
their most fundamental properties. In the last half of the chapter, we
will look at some applications where product spaces play an important
role. In particular, we prove the existence of a continuous function which
maps the closed interval [0, 1] onto the product space, [0, 1]×[0, 1]×[0, 1],
a cube in a three-dimensional space.
7.1 Fundamentals of Cartesian Products
In topology, Cartesian products are a rich and important source of

examples of various known topological properties. Given a family of
known topological spaces, we can construct a new larger topological
space with it’s own particular properties. For this reason, it is crucial
to understand them well. The best way to do this is to practice using
them in various contexts.
Most students are exposed to the notion of a Cartesian product
with two or three factors, in some form or other, at the high school
level. For example,
A × B × C = {(a, b, c) : a ∈ A, b ∈ B, c ∈ C}
When discussing infinite Cartesian products of sets we must pro-

ceed cautiously while deciding which topology we will adopt to best
143
suit our purposes. We thought it would be best if we begin by pre-

senting a formal definition of products of sets. Those readers already
well familiar with these concepts can skim through this section and
go directly to Section 7.2.
Definition 7.1 Let {Sα : α ∈ I} be an indexed

family of sets. The
Cartesian product of these sets, denoted by α Sα , or in more detail
as

Sα = { f | f : I → ∪α∈I Sα }
α∈I
is the set of all functions f mapping the index set, I, into the union,
∪ 1
α∈I Sα , such that, for β ∈ I, f (β) ∈ Sβ . So, if u is an element of
α Sα and yα = f (α), then we can express it in the form
u = {f (α) : α ∈ I} = {yα : α ∈ I} = yα α∈I

or we can write it more simply as {yα } = yα . If β ∈ I, the set,
Sβ , is called the βth factor

of the Cartesian product, α Sα , while
yβ is called the βth coordinate of the element, yα α∈I
For example, if I = {1, 2, 3},

Sα = {(a, b, c) : a ∈ S1 , b ∈ S2 , c ∈ S3 } = S1 × S2 × S3
α∈I

The size of α∈I Sα depends on the size of the respective sets, Sα ,
and the size of the index set.
If we are given an indexed family of sets, say {Sα : α ∈ J},
where all factors, Sα , represent the same set, S, the reader should be
familiar with the following notation:

SJ = S
α∈J
1
We will assume that a verification involving a combination
of the Axiom of
union and the Axiom of power set guarantees that α Sα is indeed a “set”.
Product Spaces 145
The expression, S J , is normally interpreted as meaning “the set of

all functions mapping J into S”. For example, if J = N and Sα = R
for all α ∈ J, then

RN = R
α∈N
It thus represents all countably infinite sequences of real numbers,

{a0 , a1 , a2 , a3 , . . .}, or equivalently, the set of all functions mapping
N into R. Another example is, RR , which represents the set of all
functions mapping R into R. Since R is not normally viewed as an
index set, the set, RR , of all functions mapping R into R is not often
expressed as a Cartesian product.2
7.1.1 A few words on the definition of Cartesian

product
In our definition of Cartesian product we refer to an indexed family,
{Sα : α ∈ I}, of sets. We didn’t state explicitly that each one of these
is non-empty. Should we include this requirement in the definition?
What happens if, say Sβ = ∅, for some β ∈ I? Since there is nothing
in Sβ , then there cannot exist a function which will map β tosome
element in Sβ and so the cautious reader will conclude that α Sα
must be empty. This is not catastrophic since to say the product is
non-empty is to assume that each factor is non-empty. So, we can
leave it as is. On the other hand, if no Sα is empty, are we guaranteed
that there exists at least one function, f : I → ∪α∈I Sα , such that f
assigns β in I to a particular element in Sβ ? If so, is there a way to
decide which element should be selected by f ? The assumption that
at least one such function exists invokes the statement in the Axiom
of choice:
Given any set A of non-empty sets, there is a rule f which
associates to each set A in A some element a ∈ A.
So, the Axiom of choice grants us permission to assume that at least

one function f will select a point f (β) = mβ in Sβ for us. However,
other than this guarantee that at least one f exists, we have no way
2

If we write the product, α∈R Sα , then the reader can assume that the Well-
ordering theorem (equivalent to the Axiom of Choice) has been invoked to linearly
order R.
of ever determining what that function f is. We are assuming the

existence of a mathematical entity we will never ever see. Invoking
the Axiom of choice is not ideal, but it is the best we can do. For
most people, the fact that the Cartesian product of non-empty sets
is non-empty is obvious and so they don’t lose any sleep over it.
Throughout this section, we will, as a rule, assume the Axiom of
choice holds true, and not point out it’s application at each place it
is involved, unless it is of particular interest to do so.
In this book,
we declare that the “Cartesian product of topological
spaces, S = i∈I Si ”, we will always mean “the non-empty Cartesian
product, S, of spaces”.
7.1.2 A few set-theoretic properties of Cartesian

products
We have yet to topologize Cartesian products of spaces. But before
we do so, we present a few of the Cartesian product’s most funda-
mental properties.

Definition 7.2 Let S = i∈I Si be a Cartesianproduct of sets.
The family of functions {πi : i ∈ I} where πi : i∈I Si → Si , is
defined as
πj (xi i∈I ) = xj

We will refer to πj as being the jth projection which maps i∈I Si
onto Sj .
Theorem7.3 Let {Si : i ∈ I} and {Ti : i ∈ I} be two families of sets

and S = i∈I Si and T = i∈I Ti be their corresponding Cartesian
products.

(a) If i∈I Si ⊆ i∈I Ti, then Si ⊆ Ti for each i ∈ I.
(b) For Ui , Vi , both subsets of Si ,

(i) i∈I Ui ∩ i∈I Vi = i∈I (Ui ∩ Vi )

(ii) i∈I Ui ∪ i∈I Vi = i∈I (Ui ∪ Vi )
Product Spaces 147
Proof. (a) Let β ∈ I. Since the βth projection map, πj , is onto the
(Sj )th factor,

S j = πj S i ⊆ πj Ti = Tj
i∈I i∈I
The proofs of part (b) are left for the reader.
7.2 Topologizing the Cartesian Product of

Topological Spaces
Taking Cartesian products of large numbers of topological spaces is

a powerful way to construct new topological spaces from “old” ones.
There is more than one topology for us to choose from, some of which
will eventually be more useful than others. For finite products, there
is one which most users would consider as being the most intuitive
and as being the “standard” one. For infinite products the choice of
topology may depend on the context.
The third example on page 99, illustrates how one might proceed
to topologize the Cartesian product of two spaces (S, τS ) and (T, τT ).
In that example, the topology, τ , on S ×T was generated by choosing,
as subbase for τ , the family of sets
S = {πS← [U ] : U ∈ τS } ∪ {πT← [V ] : V ∈ τT }
where πS : S × T → S and πT : S × T → T are projection maps.
Recall that πS (a, b) = a for all b ∈ T and πT (a, b) = b for all a ∈ S
and so πS← (a) = {a} × T and πT← (b) = S × {b}. So, the set of all finite
intersections of the elements in S forms a base, B, for this topology.
Thus, the base elements of τ are of the form
πS← [U ] ∩ πT← [V ] = (U × T ) ∩ (S × V )
= (U ∩ S) × (V ∩ T )
=U ×V
where U ∈ τS and V ∈ τT . That is, B = {U × V : U ∈ τS , V ∈ τT }.
Note that, in this particular example, the topology constructed
for S × T is the
weak topology induced by the projection functions {πS , πT }
This “weak topology” on S × T comes with the guarantee of continu-

ity for each projection map, πα , on S × T . This motivates the choice
of the “standard topology” for arbitrary products described in the
following definition.
Definition 7.4 Let {(Sα , τα ) : α ∈ I} be an indexed family of

non-empty topological spaces and

S= Sα
α∈I
be the Cartesian product of these spaces. Let {πα : α ∈ I} be the

family of the associated projection maps

πβ : Sα → Sβ
α∈I
We define the product topology or the standard topology as being

the weak topology on α∈I Sα induced by the family of functions
{πα : α ∈ I}. The Cartesian product of topological spaces, when
equipped with this weak topology, is referred to as a product space.
The family of all sets of the form,
{πα← [U ] : U ∈ τα }
is the subbase, S , for the product space. While each element of the
base of open sets, B, is of the form
∩α∈F {πα← [Uα ] : Uα ∈ τα }
where F is a finite subset of I.
Since πα← [Uα ] ∩ πα← [Vα ] = πα← [Uα ∩ Vα ], we can assume that all
the α’s in the finite set, F , are distinct. This assumption does not
alter the definition of product topology. Also, πβ← [Uβ ] is a subset of

α∈I Sα where, if α = β, the αth factor is, Sα , itself, and only the
βth factor is Uβ . Hence, for any open base element, every factor is Sα
itself except for finitely many factors, Uα , as proper subsets of Sα .
It is also worth noting that
the product topology is the absolute
smallest topology on S = α∈I Sα which guarantees that each and
Product Spaces 149
every projection map in

{πα : Sα → Sα }
α∈I
is continuous on its domain, S.

Finally, note that the product topology depends on the topology
of each of the factors. It does not depend on some topology defined
on the index set, I.
7.2.1 Projection maps are open

In the following proposition, we will show that each map, πα , is also
open. This is a useful fact to remember.

Proposition 7.5 Given a product space, S = α∈I Sα , the projec-
tion map,
πβ : S → S β
is an open map.

Proof. Given: A product space, S = α∈I Sα , and a projection
map, πβ : S → Sβ .
Since functions respect arbitrary unions, it suffices to show that
the projection map sends basic open sets to open sets.
Let
∩{πα←i [Uαi ] : i = 1, 2, . . . , k}
be a basic open set in S.
If β = αj ⇒ πβ [∩{πα←i [Uαi ] : i = 1, 2, . . . , k}] = Uαj
If, for i = 1, 2, . . . , k, β = αi ⇒ πβ [∩{πα←i [Uαi ] : i = 1, 2, . . . , k}] = Sβ
So, πβ is an open map, as required.
Theorem 7.6 Let {(Sα , τα ): α ∈ I} be an indexed family of non-

empty topological spaces and α∈I Sα be the Cartesian product space
equipped with the product topology, τ . For each α ∈ I, Sα has an open

base represented by, Bα . Then the set
B ∗ = { ∩α∈F {πα← [Bα ] : Bα ∈ Bα } }α∈I
where F is finite, forms a base for τ .
Proof. Let V = ∩α∈F {πα← [Uα ] : Uα ∈ τα } (with F finite) be an

open base element of the product topology, τ . Suppose xα α∈I ∈ V .
Then, for each α ∈ F , there exists an open base element, Bα ∈ Bα ,
such that xα ∈ Bα ⊆ Uα . Then
xα α∈I ∈ ∩α∈F {πα← [Bα ] : Bα ∈ Bα } ⊆ V
Then every open base element of τ is the union of elements from B ∗ .

So B ∗ forms a base for the product topology.
7.2.2 The “box topology” on a Cartesian product

The product topology is not the only topology we can define on (infi-
nite) products of topological spaces.
Some readers may have noticed
that, for an infinite product, S = α∈I Sα , the collection
B ∗ = ∩α∈I {πα← [Uα ] : Uα ∈ τα }
(note the intersection of infinitely many sets) satisfies the “base prop-
erty”. Hence, this set will be a base for a topology τ ∗ which is different
from the product topology, τ , on S. In the literature, it is referred
to as the box topology. Note that every open base element, B ∈ B,
for the product topology is an open base element in B ∗ . Hence, the
“box topology” is stronger
(finer) than the “product topology”. In
fact, if every
factor of α∈I Uα is a proper open subset of Sα and
xα α∈I ∈ α∈I Uα ∗
∈ τ , then there does not exist a V ∈ B such
that xα α∈I ∈ V ⊆ α∈I Uα . Can you see why? So B ∗ ⊆ B.
Note that, for the Cartesian product of finitely many spaces, the
product topology and the box topology are equivalent topologies.
Example 1. Show that the product space R3 = R × R × R is
metrizable.
Product Spaces 151
Solution: This can be seen since the basic open sets in (R3 , τ )
equipped with the product topology are three-dimensional open rect-
angular boxes. While the basic open sets of (R3 , ρ), where ρ(x, y ) is
the distance between the two given points, are open balls. Since the
rectangular boxes can be filled with open balls and vice versa, the
metric space (R3 , ρ) and the product space R3 = R×R×R (equipped
with the product topology) are equivalent topological spaces. So
(R3 , τ ) is metrizable.
Example 2. The product space [0, 1]3 is metrizable. Since [0, 1]3 is
a subspace of the metrizable, R3 , then by the example on page 107,
[0, 1]3 is metrizable.
The notion of a uniform metric on a product S = j∈J [0, 1] is
discussed in the following example.

Example 3. Let S = j∈J [0, 1]. We define the following metric
on S,

ρ xj j∈J , yj j∈J = sup {|xj − yj | : j ∈ J}
The verification that this is a valid metric on S is left to the reader.
Clearly, the induced metric topology on S is not equivalent to the
product topology
(since,
for small ε, no j-factor of the open base
element, Bε xj j∈J , is equal to [0, 1]). The metric, ρ, is referred to
at the
uniform metric

on a product on S = j∈J [0, 1]. The topology induced by the uniform
metric is referred to at the

uniform topology on [0, 1]
j∈J
A word of caution: Theorems in which the a Cartesian product

equipped with the product topology is involved may not hold true if
that product is equipped with the uniform topology.
7.3 On Interiors, Closures and Boundaries

of Product Spaces
It is sometimes useful to know how to handle the interior and the

closure of a product. The interior of a product is well-behaved in
the case of a finite product space, while the closure of a product

distributes nicely over its factors even for infinite products.
Theorem 7.7 Let {(Sα , τα ) : α ∈ I} be an indexed family of non-

empty topological spaces and S = α∈I Sα be a Cartesian product
equipped with the product topology. Let T = α∈I Aα where each Aα
is a subspace of Sα . Then,

clS T = clSα Aα
α∈I

Proof. The Cartesian product space S = α∈I Sα and Aα ⊆ Sα
are given.
Let T = α∈I A α .
We claim that
α∈I clSα Aα ⊆ clS T .
Let xα ∈ α∈I clSα Aα . To show that xα ∈
clS T we must show
neighborhood of xα in S meets α∈I Aα .
that any open
Let U = α∈I Uα be a basic open neighborhood of xα in
α∈I S α .
Then, for each α, xα ∈ clSα Aα ∩ Uα . Then Uα ∩ Aα = ∅.
For each α, there exists yα ∈ Uα ∩ Aα . Then

yα ∈ Aα ∩ Uα = Aα ∩ U
α∈I α∈I α∈I
So,

xα ∈ clS Aα
α∈I

Then α∈I clSα Aα ⊆ clS Tas claimed.
We claim that clS T ⊆ α∈I clSα Aα .
Let xα ∈ clS α∈I Aα and Uβ be an open neighborhood of xβ
in Sβ . Then πβ← [Uβ ] is open in α∈I Sα . The set πβ← [Uβ ] contains

some point yα ∈ α∈I Aα . Then yβ ∈ Uβ ∩ Aβ . So, xβ ∈ clSα Aβ .
Therefore, xα ∈ α∈I cl Sα Aα .
We conclude that clS T ⊆ α∈I clSα Aα as claimed.
We then have

clS Aα = clSα Aα
α∈I α∈I
as required.
Product Spaces 153
Note that the above statement holds true also if the product is
equipped with the box topology.
Theorem 7.8 Let S and T be topological spaces which contain sub-

sets A and B, respectively. Then,
intS×T (A × B) = intS A × intT B
Proof. We are given the Cartesian product M = S ×T and A ⊆ S,

B ⊆ T.
Since intS A and intT B are both open in S and T , respectively,
then intS A × intT B is open in M . Since intS A × intT B ⊆ A × B, then
intS A × intT B ⊆ intM (A × B)
Conversely, let (a, b) ∈ intM (A × B). Then there is an M -open neigh-

borhood, U , of (a, b) such that
(a, b) ∈ U ⊆ intM (A × B) ⊆ A × B
Then U = ∪i∈I (Vi × Wi ), where Vi is open in S and Wi is open in T .

Let j ∈ I such that (a, b) ∈ Vj × Wj ⊆ U ⊆ A × B. Then a ∈ intS A
and b ∈ intT B. Then (a, b) ∈ intS A × intT B.
We conclude that intM (A × B) ⊆ intS A × intT B.
So, intM (A × B) = intS A × intT B.
We should be careful not to generalize the statement in the the-

orem immediately above
to arbitrary products.
Consider,M = n∈N R equipped with the product
topology, and
the subset, n∈N (0, 1), of M . Then n∈N intR (0, 1) = n∈N (0, 1).
On the other hand consider,

W = intM (0, 1)
n∈N

Let U = n∈N Yn be a basic open subset (with respect to the product
topology) of M , where Yn = R for all but finitely manyn’s. Since

n∈N (0, 1) cannot contain even a single basic M -open set, n∈N (0, 1)
can have no interior.

We conclude that intM n∈N (0, 1) =∅= n∈N intR (0, 1).
Example 4. Let S and T be topological spaces which contain subsets

A and B, respectively. Verify that
bdS×T (A × B) = [clS A × bdT B] ∪ [ bdS A × clT B]
Solution: See that
bdS×T (A × B) = clS×T (A × B)\intS×T (A × B)

= (clS A × clT B)\(intS A × intT B)
= [clS A\intS A × clT B)] ∪ [clS A × clT B \intT B]
= [bdS A × clT B] ∪ [clS A × bdT B]
7.4 Countability Properties Involving

Product Spaces
In this text, when we say “product space”, we will always mean the
Cartesian product equipped with the product topology. The product
topology is to be considered as the default topology unless stated
otherwise.
In the following two theorems, we investigate whether the count-
ably properties carry over from factors to product and vice versa.
Recall that a topological space, (S, τS ), is second countable if it has
at least one countable base for open sets. It is first countable if each
point, x ∈ S, has a countable open neighborhood base at x.
Theorem 7.9 Let {(Sα , τα ) : α ∈ N} be

an indexed countable family
of non-empty topological spaces and S = α∈N Sα be the correspond-
ing product space.
(a) Then the product space, S, is second countable if and only if each
Sα issecond countable.
(b) Then the product space, S, is first countable if and only if each
Sα isfirst countable.

Proof. We are given that S = α∈N Sα is a product space of
countably many factors.
Product Spaces 155
We will prove part (a).

(⇒) Suppose S is second countable. We claim that each Sα is second
countable.
Recall (from Proposition 7.5) that the projection map πα is con-
tinuous is and open for each α ∈ N. Hence, by Theorem 6.12, given
that πα is continuous each Sα = πα [S] is second countable. We are
done with this direction. (Note that the countability of the index set
plays no role in this direction.)
(⇐) We are given that,for each α ∈ N, (Sα , τα ) is a second countable
topological space, and α∈N Sα is a countable product equipped with
the product topology, τ .
By hypothesis, for each α ∈ N, Sα has a countable base, Bα , of
open sets. Then, by Theorem 7.6, the elements of τ of the form
∩α∈F {πα← [Bα ] : Bα ∈ Bα }
when gathered together form a base, B, for open sets in τ . Since
each Bα is countable, then so is the subfamily
{πα← [Bα ] : Bα ∈ Bα, α ∈ N}
of the base, B, of S. Let F = {F : F ⊂ N, F is finite}. Note that
the set, F , has countably many elements (see footnote3 ). (This is
where the countable the number of factors is countable is taken into
consideration.)
Since the cardinality of F × Bα × N is ℵ0 , then the base
B = { ∩α∈F {πα← [Bα ] : Bα ∈ Bα } }F finite, α ∈ N

is countable. This means α∈N Sα is second countable.
The proof of part (b) is similar and so is left as an exercise.
In the following analogous theorem, the “separable property” will

carry over from factors to the product and vice-versa, provided the
3
The number of finite subsets of N is countable: For each n ∈ N, let Un =
{A ∈ P(N) : max A ≤ n}, the set of all subsets of {0, 1, 2, . . . , n}. Then, for each
n, |Un | = 2n+1 . The countable union of countable sets is countable (see 19.3 of
Appendix A.2), so ∪n∈N {Un } is countable. If F is a finite subset of N, F ∈ Um
for some m. Then ∪n∈N {Un } contains all finite subsets of N. Then the number of
finite subsets of N is countable.
number of factors in the product is restricted to no more than c =

|R| = 2ℵ0 . The provided proof is notationally involved, but exhibits
an interesting technique.
Theorem 7.10 Let {(Sα , τα ) : α ∈ I} be a family of sets indexed

by the set I, where |I| ≤ c = 2ℵ0 . Also
suppose that Sα is a non-
singleton set, for all α ∈ I. Let S = α∈I Sα be the corresponding
product space. Then S is separable if and only if each Sα is separable.

Proof. We are given that S = α∈I Sα is a product space of non-
empty non-singleton sets where | I | ≤ c = 2ℵ0 .
(⇒) Suppose S is separable. Recall from the proof that appears on
page 149, the projection map πα is continuous for each α ∈ N. Hence,
by Theorem 6.11, the continuous image of a separable space is separa-
ble, so each Sα = πα [S] is separable. We are done with this direction.
The cardinality of I is irrelevant for this direction.
(⇐) Suppose each Sα is separable and |I| ≤ c. Then |I| ≤ | [0, 1] |.
So, there is a one-to-one function f : I → [0, 1] which maps I into
[0, 1].We can then index the product space S with f [I]. That is,
S = α∈I Sf (α) . So, if x ∈ S then x is of the form xf (α) α∈I .
Since each factor of S is separable, each Sf (α) contains a countable
dense subset
Df (α) = {df (α)n : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
We will now construct a countable subset, D ∗ , of S which is dense
in S.
For each k ∈ N\{0} we can construct in [0, 1] a finite sequence of
pairwise disjoint closed intervals
Ak = {[aj , bj ]k : j ∈ {1, 2, . . . , k} }
such that aj , bj ∈ Q ∩ [0, 1] and aj+1 > bj ≤ 1.
For each k, if α ∈ I, f (α) ∈ [aj , bj ]k for, at most, one j ∈
{1, 2, . . . , k}.
See that W = ∪{Ak : k = 1, 2, 3, . . .} is a countable set of inter-
vals. We can then index the elements of W as
W = {[aj , bj ]k,n : j ∈ {1, 2, . . . , k}, k ∈ {1, 2, 3, . . .},
n ∈ {1, 2, 3, . . .}}
where, for each n, [aj , bj ]k,n = [aj , bj ]k ∈ Ak .
Product Spaces 157

We define a function h : W → α∈I Df (α) ⊆ α∈I Sf (α) as
follows:
yf (α) = df (α)n if f (α) ∈ [aj , bj ]k,n

h([aj , bj ]k,n ) = yf (α) α∈I where
yf (α) = df (α)1 otherwise
Is h : W → S a well-defined function? Yes it is, since (as men-

tioned earlier) for each k, if α ∈ I, f (α) ∈ [aj , bj ]k for, at most, one
j ∈ {1, 2, . . . , k}.
Also note that every component of h([aj , bj ]k,n ) = yf (α) α∈I
belongs to some Df (α) (which is dense in Uf (α) ).
Let D ∗ = h[W ].
Claim 1: That D ∗ is countable in S.
Since thedomain of h, W , is countable then so is its range, D ∗ =

h[W ], in α∈I Sf (α) , as claimed.
Claim 2: That D ∗ is dense in S.
Let B = πα←1 [Uf (α1 ) ] ∩ · · · ∩ πf←(αk ) [Uf (αk ) ] be a basic open neighbor-

hood of a point in S = α∈I Sf (α) .
We need to verify that B ∩ D ∗ = ∅.
Since Df (α) = {df (α)n : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} is dense in Sf (α) , then for
each f (αi ) there exists df (αi ) n ∈ Uf (αi ) , for i = 1. . ., k.
i
If df (αi )m ∈ Sf (αi ) , then
πf (αi ) ← (df (αi )m ) = {yf (α) : f (αi ) ∈ [aj , bj ]k,m } = h([aj , bj ]k,m )] ∈ h[W ]
πf (αi ) ← (df (αi )1 ) = {yf (α) : f (αi ) ∈ [aj , bj ]k,m } = h([aj , bj ]k,m ) ∈ h[W ]
Then, h[W ] ∩ πα←1 [Uf (α1 ) ]∩· · ·∩πf←(αk ) [Uf (αk ) ] = ∅. Then B∩D ∗ =
∅, so D ∗ is dense in S, as claimed.

So, h[W ] is a countable dense subset of α∈I Sf (α) . Then
α∈I Sf (α) is separable, as required.
One should exercise caution when transferring a topological prop-

erty possessed by all factors of a product to the product itself. The
statements of the above two theorems were proven with particular
restrictions on the number of factors.
7.5 On Continuous Functions Involving

Product Spaces
The
choice of the “product topology” on a Cartesian product,
α∈I Sα , is due mostly to the fact that it guarantees the continuity
on a product space of all its projection maps, {πα : α ∈ I}. It is the
smallest topology that will guarantee this.

Lemma 7.11 Let S = α∈I Sα be a product space and (T, τ ) be a
space. Suppose g : T → S is a function mapping the space T to the
product space, S. For each α ∈ I, let
f α = πα ◦ g
Then
[g is continuous on T ] ⇔ [fα : T → Sα is continuous for all α]
Proof. Recall that, by definition of “product space”, each πα is

guaranteed to be continuous on S.
(⇒) If g : T → S is continuous then, for all α ∈ I, so is (πα ◦ g) :
T → Sα (since, by hypothesis, πα is continuous, and the composition
of continuous functions was shown to be continuous).
(⇐) We fix β ∈ I. We are given that (πβ ◦ g) : T → Sβ is continuous.
We are required to show that g is continuous. If Vβ is open in Sβ ,
since (πβ ◦ g) is continuous, then
g← πβ← [Vβ ] = (πβ ◦ g)← [Vβ ]

Product Spaces 159

is open in S = α∈I Sα . Since α∈I Sα is equipped with the product
topology, πβ← [Vβ ] is a subbase element for this topology. So, g pulls
back an open subbase element, πβ← [Vβ ], to an open subset of S =

α∈I Sα . By Theorem 6.4, g is continuous on T , as required.
Remark. In the above theorem, the fact that the Cartesian prod-
uct, S = α∈I Sα , is equipped with the product topology is what
guarantees that each πα is continuous. If S is equipped with the box
topology the theorem may not hold true.
The following
example illustrates how the above theorem may
break down if α∈I Sα is equipped with the box topology.

Example 5. Consider the Cartesian product n∈N R and suppose
R is equipped with the usual topology. Let i : R → R denote the
identity
function i(x) = x (a continuous function on R). Let g : R →
n∈N R be a function where, for each n ∈ N,
(πn ◦g)(x) = i(x)

(where πn is the nth projection map). If n∈N R is equipped with
the product topology we know, by the theorem above, that g must
R.
be continuous on
Suppose that n∈N R is equipped with the box topology. Show
that g need not be continuous.

Solution: If n∈N R is equipped with the box topology, consider the
open subset
B = (−1, 1) × (−1/2, 1/2) × (−1/3, 1/3) × (−1/4, 1/4) · · ·
with respect to the box topology. Suppose g← [B] was open in R. Then
there would exist ε, such that g[(−ε, ε)] ⊆ B. Then (πn ◦g)[(−ε, ε)] =
i[(−ε, ε)] = (−ε, ε) ⊆ (−1/n, 1/n) for all n. This can’t possibly be.
So g← [B] is not open. So g is not continuous on R.
Theorem 7.12 Let {Sα }α∈I and {Tα }α∈I be two sets of topological
α }α∈I be a family
spaces and let {f of functions, fα : Sα → Tα . Then
the function, g : α∈I Sα → α∈I Tα , defined as
g(xα α∈I ) = fα (xα )α∈I
is continuous if and only if fα is continuous on Sα for each α ∈ I.

Proof. Suppose S = α∈I Sα , T = α∈I Tα and {fα }α∈I is a
family of functions, fα : Sα → Tα . Let
πβS : S →Sβ and πβT : T →
Tβ be βth projection maps. Let g : α∈I Sα → α∈I Tα be defined
as g(xα α∈I ) = fα (xα )α∈I .
(⇐) For this direction, we are given that each function fα is contin-
uous on Sα . We want to show that the continuity of g follows.
To show continuity of g it will suffice to show
that g pulls back
subbase elements of α∈I Tα to open sets in α∈I Sα . Let Uβ be an
open subset of Tβ . Then πβ←T [Uβ ] is a subbase element for open sets

in T = α∈I Tα .
By Lemma 7.11, if πα ◦g is continuous for all α, then g is contin-
uous. It then suffices to show that g ← [πβ←T [Uβ ]] is open in S.
See that,
πβ←S [fβ← [Uβ ]] = πβ←S [{x ∈ Sβ : fβ (x) ∈ Uβ }]

= {xα α∈I ∈ S : fβ (xβ ) ∈ Uβ }
= {xα α∈I ∈ S : {fα (xα )} ∈ πβ←T [Uβ ]}
= {xα α∈I ∈ S : g(xα α∈I ) ∈ πβ←T [Uβ ]}
= g ← xα α∈I ∈ S : {xα } ∈ πβ←T [Uβ ]}
= g ← [πβ←T [Uβ ]]
so,
g ← [πβ←T [Uβ ]] = πβ←S [fβ← [Uβ ]]
Since both πβS and fβ are continuous, then the right-hand side is
open; so g ← [πβ←T [Uβ ]] is open. So, g is continuous, as required for ⇐.

(⇒) Suppose g : α∈I Sα → α∈I Tα is continuous, where
g(xα α∈I ) = fα (xα )α∈I
We are required to show that each fα : Sα → Tα is continuous.

Then for each β, (πβ ◦g)(xα α∈I ) = πβ (fα (xα )α∈I ) = fβ (xβ ) ∈
Tβ . Since both πβ and g are continuous on their domain, then so is
fβ on Sβ , as required. This proves ⇒.
Product Spaces 161
We expect that, if two product spaces, S and T , have correspond-

ing factors which are homeomorphic then S and T are homeomorphic.
In the proof of the following theorem, we confirm this by explicitly
exhibiting the required homeomorphism.

Theorem 7.13 Let S = α∈I Sα and T = α∈I Tα be two product
spaces. Suppose that, for each α ∈ I, Sα and Tα are homeomorphic.
Then the spaces S and T are homeomorphic.
Proof. For each α ∈ I, let fα : Sα → Tα be a homeomorphism

mapping S
α onto Tα .
Let g : α∈I Sα → α∈I Tα be defined as

g(xα α∈I ) = fα (xα )α∈I ∈ Tα
α∈I
Since each fα is continuous and one-to-one, then so is g (by The-

orem 7.12).
We claim that g is open.
By hypothesis, each fα is an open map. Let πα←1 [Uα1 ] ∩
← ←
πα2 [Uα2 ] · · · ∩ παk [Uαk ] be an open base element in α∈I Sα . Since g
is one-to-one, see that
g πα←1 [Uα1 ] ∩ πα←2 [Uα2 ] · · · ∩ πα←k [Uαk ]

= g πα←1 [Uα1 ] ∩ g [πα←2 [Uα2 ] · · · ∩ g [πα←k [Uαk ]
= fα1 πα←1 [Uα1 ] × · · · × fαk πα←k [Uαk ]
with all other factors equal to Tγ .

Since each fαi is open, RHS is open in α∈I Tα .
Since the right-hand side is open, then g is open. So g is a homeo-

morphism.
We have shown that g(xα α∈I ) = fα (xα )α∈I is the required
homeomorphism mapping S onto T .
We now show that every product space contains a homeomorphic

copy of each of its factors.

Theorem 7.14 Let S = α∈I Sα be a product space. Then, for each
α ∈ I, S contains a subspace which is a homeomorphic copy of Sα .
Proof. Let β ∈ I. For α = β, we choose and fix kα ∈ Sα . Let

T = Tα = {xα i∈I : Tβ = Sβ and [α = β] ⇒ [Tα = {kα }]}
α∈I
So, every T is a subspace of S. We claim that T is homeomorphic

to Sβ .
We define g : Sβ → T as g(x) = xα α∈I , where xβ = x, and if
α = β, xα = kα . Then g maps Sβ one-to-one and onto T ⊆ S. Then
the function, (πβ ◦ g) : Sβ → Sβ is the continuous identity map onto
Sβ . Invoking Theorem 7.11, we conclude that g is continuous on Sβ .
So, g embeds
Sβ in the proper subset T of α∈I Sα and so embeds
Sβ in α∈I Sα , as required.
Example 6. Let {(Sn , ρn ) : n ∈ N} be a countable family of metric

spaces. Suppose that, for each n ∈ N, sup{ρn (x, y) : x, y ∈ Sn } ≤ 1.
Let

S= Sn
n∈N
the set of all sequences with the nth entry in Sn . Let ρ : S × S → R

be defined as
ρn ( f (n), g(n) )
ρ(f, g) =
2n
n∈N
Verify that ρ : S × S
→ R is a metric on S. Furthermore, verify that
the topology on S = n∈N Sn derived by the metric ρ is the product
topology.

Solution: We are given that S = n∈N Sn where each Sn is a metric
space and, for each n,
sup{ρn (x, y) : x, y ∈ Sn } ≤ 1
That is, the distance between any two elements of Sn does not
exceed 1.
Product Spaces 163
We claim that ρ : S × S → R thus defined, is a valid metric on S.

For f, g ∈ S let f = f (n)n∈N and g = g(n)n∈N .
ρn ( f (n), g(n) )
For M1, ρ(f, g) = n∈N n
≤ n∈N 1n = 2 ≥ 0.
2 2
ρn ( f (n), g(n) )
If ρ(f, g) = n∈N = 0, then ρn ( f (n), g(n) ) = 0 for
2n
all n. Since f = f (n)n∈N and g = g(n)n∈N, then f = g.
ρn ( f (n), g(n) ) ρn ( g(n), f (n) )
For M2, ρ(f, g) = n∈N = n∈N =
2n 2n
ρ(g, f ).
For M3, we compare ρ(f, h) and ρ(f, g) + ρ(g, h). Since, for each
n, ρn ( f (n), h(n) ) ≤ ρn ( f (n), g(n) ) + ρn ( g(n), h(n) ), then
ρn (f (n), h(n))
ρ(f, h) =
2n
n∈N
ρn (f (n), g(n)) + ρn (g(n), h(n))

≤
2n
n∈N

ρn (f (n), g(n)) ρn (g(n), h(n))
= +
2n 2n
n∈N
ρn (f (n), g(n)) ρn (g(n), h(n))

= +
2n 2n
n∈N n∈N
(all terms are positive)

= ρ(f, g) + ρ(g, h)

So, ρ is a valid metric on S = n∈N Sn , as claimed.
We will now compare the the metric topology on (S, ρ) to the
product topology on S.
Let f = f (n) ∈ S. Let V = B1/2p (f ) be an open ball in S
with respect to ρ. We claim that V is open in S with respect to the
product topology.
Proof of claim: Let
U = {g ∈ S : g = g(n), ρ(f (n), g(n)) < 2−p−n−2 for n ≥ p + 2}
Note that U is a union of open base elements and so is an open subset

of S with respect to the product topology. It suffices to show that
U ⊂ V . If y ∈ U , then
ρn (f (n), g(n))
ρ(f, g) =
2n
n∈N

ρ0 (f (0), g(0)) ρ1 (f (1), g(1))
= + + ···
20 21

ρp+2 (f (p + 2), g(p + 2))
+
2p+2
ρp+3 ( f (p + 3), g(p + 3) )
+ + ···
2p+3

2−p−0−2 2−p−1−2 2−p−2−2 2−p−(p+2)−2
< + + + · · · +
20 21 22 2p+2
1 1
+ p+3 + p+4 + · · · +
2 2

1 1 1 1
= + + + · · · + 3p+6
2p+2 2p+4 2p+6 2

1 1 1
+ + + + ···+
2p+3 2p+4 2p+5
1 1
< +
2p+1 2p+1
1
=
2p
So, g ∈ V = B1/2p (f ).
So, V is open in S with respect to the product topology.
Suppose now that U is an open subbase element in S with respect
to the product topology. Suppose U contains the point a = a(n)n∈N .
It will suffice to find an ε such that Bε (a) (with respect to ρ) is
contained in U .
Now, U is of the form {x : f (n) ∈ Wn } where Wn = Sn for all n
except, possibly, for some k ∈ N where Wk is open in Sk . Then there
is an ε1 such that
Ba = {g ∈ S : ρk (a(k), g(k)) < ε1 }

Product Spaces 165
is a subset of U containing a. Then
ρk (a(k), g(k)) ε1
< k
2k 2
Choose ε = ε1 /2k . We then claim that Bε (a) ⊆ Ba ⊆ U (with respect

to the metric, ρ).
Proof of claim: Let g ∈ Bε (a). Then
ρn (a(n), g(n)) ε1
ρ(a, g) = n
<ε= k
2 2
n∈N
Since
ρk (a(k), g(k)) ρn (a(n), g(n))
≤ = ρ(a, g) < ε = ε1 /2k
2k 2n
n∈N
then this g ∈ Ba . So, Bε (a) ⊆ Ba ⊆ U , with respect to ρ. We conclude

that U is open in (S, ρ).
Then, the metric space, (S, ρ), and the product space, (S, τ ), have
the same topology.
7.6 Topic: Product Spaces are “Commutative”
What effect does it have on the topology of a product space if we

alter the order of its factors? We investigate this question by first
considering a particular case in the following example.
Example 7. Show that for topological spaces S1 , S2 , and S3 ,
S = S1 × S2 × S3 and T = S3 × S1 × S2
are homeomorphic.
Solution: Let q : {1, 2, 3} → {3, 1, 2} be the one-to-one function
where q(1) = 3, q(2) = 1, q(3) = 2. Let q ∗ : S1 ×S2 ×S3 → S3 ×S1 ×S2
be defined as
q ∗x1 , x2 , x3 = x3 , x1 , x2
We claim that πq(3) ◦q ∗ is continuous. If so we can apply Theorem

7.11, to conclude q ∗ is continuous. Let U be an open subset of Sq(3) .
Then U × S1 × S2 is a basic open set in T . Then
(πq(3) q ∗ )← [U ] = q ∗← [πq(3) ← [U ]]
= q ∗← [U × S1 × S2 ]
= S1 × S2 × U (Since q ∗ [S1 × S2 × U ] = U × S1 × S2 )
(a basic open subset of S).
So, πq(3) ◦q ∗ is continuous, as claimed. Similarly, πq(2) ◦q ∗ and

πq(1) ◦q ∗ are continuous. By Theorem 7.11, q ∗ : S → T is contin-
uous. Similarly q ∗← : T → S is continuous. So, q ∗ : S → T is a
homeomorphism, as required.
In the next theorem, we generalize the proof in the example to
one involving larger product spaces.

Theorem 7.15 Let S = α∈I Sα and let q : I → J be a one-to-
one function mapping I onto an indexing set, J. Then there is a
homeomorphism mapping S onto T = α∈I Sq(α) .

Proof. Let S = α∈I Sα and let q : I → J be a one-to-one function
mapping the indexing
set, I, onto the indexing
set, J. We are required
to show that T = α∈I Sq(α) and S = α∈I Sα are homeomorphic.
Let q ∗ : S → T be defined as q ∗ (xα α∈I ) = xq(α) α∈I .
Since q is one-to-one and onto J, then both q ∗ : S → T and
q ∗← : T → S are one-to-one and onto. Then πq(α) ◦q ∗ : S → Sq(α) ,
where
(πq(α) ◦q ∗ )(xα α∈I ) = πq(α) (xq(α) α∈I ) = xq(α)
Let Uq(β) be an open neighborhood of xq(β) in Sq(β) .

Then
(πq(β) ◦q ∗ )← [Uq(β) ] = q ∗← [πq(β) ← [ Uq(β) ] ]

= q ∗← [· · · × Sq(i) × · · · × Uq(β) × · · · × Sq(i) × · · · ]
= · · · × Si × · · · × Uβ × · · · × Si × · · ·
(a basic open subset of S).
Product Spaces 167
So, πq(3) ◦q ∗ is continuous, as claimed. By Theorem 7.11, q ∗ : S → T

is continuous.
Similarly q ∗← : T → S is continuous. So, q ∗ : S → T is a homeo-
morphism, as required.
The above theorem confirms that “altering the order of the factors
of a product space produces another product space which is home-
omorphic to the original one”. We can summarize the statement by
saying that. . .
product spaces are commutative.
7.7 Example: The Tychonoff Plank
We now briefly discuss the product of two ordinal spaces, for future
reference. The ordinal space was introduced in Definition 5.14.4 In the
following example, ω1 represents the first uncountable ordinal, while,
ω0 represents the first countable infinite ordinal. Let W represent
the ordinal space, [0, ω1 ], and T represent the ordinal space, [0, ω0 ].
Recall (from the discussion which appears after Definition 5.14) that
the elements of the open base for an ordinal space are of the form
(α, β].
Let
S = W × T = [0, ω1 ] × [0, ω0 ]
be the product space of the two given ordinal spaces. Then the ele-
ments of S can be viewed as ordered pairs (α, β) ∈ W × T . Since
both sets are linearly ordered, it doesn’t hurt to visualize the prod-
uct space, S, as a Cartesian plane of numbers where W represents
the horizontal axis and T represents the vertical axis. We would then
have (0, 0) in the lower left corner and (ω1 , ω0 ) in the top right cor-
ner. The topological space S = [0, ω1 ] × [0, ω0 ] equipped with this
topology is commonly referred to by topologists as the
Tychonoff plank.
4
A more detailed study of the ordinals in the context of set theory is found in
Axioms and set theory, by Robert André (can be found online).
The subspace S ∗ of S defined as
S ∗ = S \{(ω1 , ω0 )}
simply obtained by deleting the top right corner from the Tychonoff
plank is appropriately referred to as the
Deleted Tychonoff plank.
As an open neighborhood base of the point, (β, μ) ∈ S, we can use

elements of the form
B(β,μ) = {(α, β] × (γ, μ] : α < β and γ < μ}
The Tychonoff plank may appear to be a topological space that

is, in many ways, similar to the the product space R × N but, as we
will eventually see, has quite different properties. Both the Tychonoff
plank and the Deleted Tychonoff plank are useful topological spaces
to remember.
7.8 Topic: Embedding a Topological Space

in a Product Space
In this section, we will show how a particular family, F , of continuous

functions on a topological space, (S, τ ), can be used to embed S in a
product space whose factors are the range of the functions in F . This
method is exhibited in a theorem titled “The Embedding Theorem
I”. The Embedding theorem I applies only to topological spaces, S, in
which singleton sets are closed. In order to understand this theorem
one must be familiar with two very important notions in topology:
— Family of functions which separates points and closed sets of S.
— Evaluation map with respect to a family, F , of functions.
Definition 7.16 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space and {(Sα , τα ) :

α ∈ Γ} be an indexed family of non-empty topological spaces. Let
F = {fα : α ∈ Γ} be a set of continuous functions, fα : S → Sα ,
each one mapping S onto its range fα [S] ⊆ Sα .
Product Spaces 169
(a) We say that F separates points and closed sets if, whenever F
is a closed subset of S and x ∈ F , then there exists at least one
function fβ ∈ F such that fβ (x) 5
∈ clSβ fβ [F ].
(b) We define a function, e : S → α∈Γ Sα , as follows:

e(x) = fα (x)α∈Γ ∈ fα [S] ⊆ Sα
α∈Γ α∈Γ

We refer to the function e : S → α∈Γ Sα as the

evaluation map of S into α∈Γ Sα with respect to F
Theorem 7.17 The embedding theorem I. Let (S, τS ) be a topo-

logical space in which every singleton set in S is a closed sub-
set of S. Given an indexed family of non-empty topological spaces,
{(Sα , τα ) : α ∈ Γ}, let F = {fα : α ∈ Γ} be a set of continuous
functions where each fα maps S onto its range, fα [S], inside Sα .
F separates points and closed sets of its domain, S, and

(a) If
α∈Γ Sα is equipped with the product topology, then the evalu-
ation map,

e(x) = fα (x)α∈Γ ∈ fα [S] ⊆ Sα
α∈Γ α∈Γ
with respect to F , is both continuous and one-to-one on S.

(b) Furthermore, the function, e : S → α∈Γ Sα , maps S homeo-
morphically onto

e[S] ⊆ fα [S] ⊆ Sα
α∈Γ α∈Γ
Hence, this evaluation

map embeds a homeomorphic copy of S
into the product space, α∈Γ Sα .
5
Similar expressions such as “the subsets A and B are completely separated”
and “the real-valued function, f : S → R separates A and B if A ⊆ Z(f ) and
B ⊆ Z(f − 1) for some f ∈ C(X)” will be defined when discussing normal spaces
in Definition 10.2.
Proof. We are given that (S, τS ) is a topological space in which all

singleton sets, {x}, are closed in S and a family of topological spaces,
{Sα : α ∈ Γ}. For the set,
F = {fα : S → Sα }α∈Γ , of continuous functions on S, we define

e:S→ α∈Γ fα [S] ⊆ α∈Γ Sα
as an evaluation map with respect to F .

(a) Note that, for each α ∈ Γ and x ∈ S, (πα ◦ e)(x)) =
πα ( fα (x)α∈Γ ) = fα (x). Since, for each α ∈ Γ, fα is continuous,
then so is πα ◦ e : S → fα [S]. By Lemma 7.11, e : S → α∈Γ fα [S] is
continuous.
We claim that e : S → α∈Γ fα [S] is one-to-one on S. Suppose a
and b are distinct points in S. Then, since the single set {b} is closed
and F separates points and closed sets, there exists β ∈ Γ such that
fβ (a) ∈ clSβ fβ [{b}]. Then the βth component of e(a) = fα (a)α∈Γ
and e(b) = fα (b)α∈Γ are distinctand so e(a) = e(b). We conclude
that the evaluation map e : S → α∈Γ fα [S] is one-to-one on S, as
claimed.
prove that the evaluation map e : S → α∈Γ fα [S] embeds
(b) To
S into α∈Γ Sα , it will suffice to show that it is an open function
and then invoke Theorem 6.9.
Let U be a non-empty open subset of S with the point u ∈ U .
Then F = S \U is closed in S. Since F separates points and closed
sets, there exists β ∈ Γ such that fβ (u) ∈ clSβ fβ [F ]. That means,
fβ (u) ∈ Sβ \ clSβ fβ [F ] .
We now show that e[U ] is open in α∈Γ Sα .
Note that,
(πβ ◦ e)(u) = πβ (e(u))

= πβ ( fα (u)α∈Γ )
= fβ (u)
∈ Sβ \ clSβ fβ [F ]
Since e(u) ∈ πβ← Sβ \ clSβ fβ [F ] and since πβ is continuous, then

πβ← Sβ \ clSβ fβ [F ] is an open neighborhood of e(u) in α∈Γ Sα . It
Product Spaces 171
now suffices to show that
πβ← Sβ \ clSβ fβ [F ] ⊆ e[U ]
Suppose e(a) ∈ πβ← Sβ \ clSβ fβ [F ] .
e(a) ∈ πβ← Sβ \ clSβ fβ [F ] ⇒ (πβ ◦ e)(a) ∈ πβ πβ← Sβ \clSβ fβ [F ]
⇒ fβ (a) ∈ Sβ \clSβ fβ [F ]
⇒ fβ (a) ∈ clSβ fβ [F ]
⇒ a ∈ S \ F = S \(S \U ) = U
⇒ e(a) ∈ e[U ]
So, πβ← Sβ \ clSβ fβ [F ] is an open neighborhood of e(u) which

is entirely contained
in e[U ]. We conclude e[U ] is open in α∈Γ Sα
and so e : S → α∈Γ Sα is a homeomorphism.

shown that e : S →
We have thus α∈Γ Sα embeds S into the
product space, α∈Γ Sα .
7.9 Topic: The Cantor Set: Viewed a the Continuous

Image of a Product Space
The Cantor set is a notion which is part of general mathematical

culture. We often refer to it because of its interesting set-theoretic
and topological properties. It can be described in various ways. We
will formally provide a set-theoretic definition of the Cantor set and
then study it from a topological point of view.
7.9.1 A prologue to a definition of the Cantor set

Recall that Z+ = {1, 2, 3, . . .}. Let D = {0, 1, 2, . . . , 8, 9}. So,
Z+ +
n∈Z+ D = D represents the set of all functions mapping Z into
D. The set, n∈Z+ D can be described as the set of all countably
infinite ordered strings, of the form,

mn n∈Z+ ,
where mn ∈ {0, 1, 2, . . . , 9}

Suppose we define the function, ϕ : n∈Z+ D → [0, 1] (the closed
interval in R from 0 to 1) as follows:
∞
mn
ϕ(m1 , m2 , m3 , . . . , mn , . . . , ) =
10n
n=1
Note that every number x ∈ [0, 1] (represented in its infinite decimal

expansion 0.m1 m2 m3· · ·) can be expressed in the form,
∞
mn
x= = 0.m1 m2 m3 · · ·
n=1
10n
For example,
∞
0
ϕ(0, 0, 0, , . . .) = =0
10n
n=1
∞
9
ϕ(9, 9, 9, . . .) = = 0.9999. . . = 1
n=1
10n
ϕ(2, 9, 9, . . .) = 0.2999. . . = 0.3000. . . = ϕ(3, 0, 0, . . .)

and so ϕ maps n∈Z+ D onto [0,1] but is not necessarily one-to-one
(since an endless string of 9’s and an endless string of 0’s may be
mapped to the same element in [0, 1]). But the entire set [0,1] is,
indeed, the image of n∈Z+ D under ϕ.
∗
However, if we reduce the size∗ of D to say, D = {0, 1, 2, 5, 7, 9},
then the function, ϕ : n∈Z+ D → [0, 1], defined similarly, would
produce a range which is a proper subset of [0, 1] which would contain
multiple gaps in it (since the digits 3, 6, and 8 are lacking in the
ordered strings of the domain).
If we set D = {0, 1, 2} and every number x in [0, 1] is expressed
in its triadic expansion form6 then the set

ϕ n∈Z+ {0, 1, 2} = [0.000. . . 3 , 0.2222. . . 3 ] = [0, 1]
6
. . . , 0, 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 100, 101, 102, 110,. . .
Product Spaces 173
would look like,

∞
mn
ϕ(mn n∈Z+ ) = n
= 0.m1 m2 m3 · · ·3 ∈ [0.000. . . 3 , 0.2222. . . 3 ]
n=1
3
= [0, 1]
For example,
∞
0
ϕ(0, 0, 0, . . .) = 0.0000. . . 3 =
3n
n=1
∞
2
ϕ(2, 2, 2, . . .) = 0.2222. . . 3 = =1
n=1
3n
∞
1 1
ϕ(1, 1, 1, . . .) = 0.1111. . . 3 = n
= (Verify!)
3 2
n=1
ϕ(0, 1, 2, 2, . . .) = 0.0122223 . . . = 0.0200000000. . . 3

= ϕ(0, 2, 0, 0, 0, . . .)

Note that, ϕ is not one-to-one onto n∈Z+ {0, 1, 2}.
we shrink the set {0, 1, 2} to D = {0, 2}, with mn ∈ {0, 2} and
If
ϕ : n∈Z+ {0, 2} → [0, 1] is defined as
∞
mn
ϕ(mn n∈Z+ ) = = 0.m1 m2 m3 . . .3 ∈ [0.000. . . 3 , 0.2222. . . 3 ]
3n
n=1
= [0, 1]
0.m1 m2 m3 . . .3 contains only 0’s and 2’s. The set,

where
ϕ n∈Z+ {0, 2} is now a proper subset of [0.000. . . 3 , 0.2222. . . 3 ] =
[0, 1].
In this case, ϕ is indeed onto [0, 1] its domain. For example, even
if 0.02000. . . 3 = 0.01222. . . 3
ϕ← (0.012222. . . 3 ) = ϕ← (0.02000. . . 3 ) = {0, 2, 0, 0, 0, . . .}
So, every point in [0, 1] can be expressed with simply 0’s and 2’s in
ternary expansion form.
The “Cantor set” involves the particular function

ϕ: {0, 2} → [0, 1]
n∈Z+

who’s range, ϕ n∈Z+ {0, 2} , is a proper subset of [0, 1].
Definition 7.18 The Cantor set: A definition. Suppose Z+ = N\

+
{0} and n∈Z+ {0, 2} = {0, 2}Z , the set of all countably infinite
sequences of 0’s and 2’s. Let the function

ϕ: {0, 2} → [0, 1]
n∈Z+
be defined as
∞
mn
ϕ(mn n∈Z+ ) =
3n
n=1
where ϕ(mn n∈Z+ ) = 0.m1 m2 m3 . . .3 is an element of [0, 1]

expressed in its triadic expansion form. Since the digit 1 is lack-
ing in the ordered strings, ϕ is one-to-one on its domain and
the range, ϕ [ n∈Z+ {0, 2} ], is a proper subset of the interval,
[0.000. . . 3 , 0.2222. . . 3 ] = [0, 1], with multiple gaps in it. The one-
to-one image,

C = ϕ[ {0, 2} ]
n∈Z+

of n∈Z+ {0, 2} is a proper subset of [0.000. . . 3 , 0.2222. . . 3 ] = [0, 1].
The set, C, is referred to as the Cantor set.
Then the Cantor set can be seen as
∞

mn
C= : mn ∈ {0, 2}
n=1
3n
∞ mn
all possible values of the infinite sum n=1 3n where mn = 0 or 2.
Product Spaces 175
7.9.2 What does the Cantor set look like?

The definition of the “Cantor Set”, C, states that C is a particular
subset
of the closed unit interval, [0, 1]. The Cantor set is the range,
n∈Z+ {0, 2} ], under the a well-defined function, ϕ, with domain,
ϕ [
n∈Z+ {0, 2}. This definition, by itself, is not very useful when trying
to visualize what kind of subset of [0, 1] it represents. If the reader is
willing to go through the trouble of verifying this, C does not con-
tain any of the points in the 2 2
2 2
open intervals, (1/3, 2/3), (1/3 , 2/3 ),
, 8/3 ). Since ϕ maps n∈Z+ {0, 1, 2} onto [0, 1], then ϕ will map
(7/3
n∈Z+ {0, 2} only onto a proper subset of [0, 1]. Such gaps will occur.
It doesn’t take long before one sees a pattern emerge. We normally
view the Cantor set as a set which is inductively constructed in stages
by successively defining a nested sequence, C0 , C1 , C2 , . . ., of subsets
of [0,1]. Ultimately we define the Cantor set as being the intersection,
C = ∩n∈N Cn , of all of these (after convincing ourselves that C would
not be empty). We can visualize this procedure as follows.
C0 = [0, 1]
C1 = C0 \(1, 3)

1 2 7 8
C2 = C1 \ 2 2 ∪
3 3 32 32
C3 = C2 \. . .open middle thirds in C2
..
.
Cn+1 = Cn \. . . open middle thirds of the remaining intervals in Cn
..
.
The construction of Cn is normally described by saying “. . .to

obtain Cn , subtract open middle thirds from Cn−1 ” After inductively
obtaining an infinite sequence of nested sets, {Cn }n∈N , in this way
we define the Cantor set as being the infinite intersection
C = ∩∞
n=0 Cn
We visualize the Cantor set geometrically (up to the construction of

C5 ) as follows.

In Definition 7.18 of the Cantor set, C = ϕ[ n∈Z+ {0, 2}] → [0, 1]
where
∞
mn
ϕ(mn n∈Z+ ) =
3n
n=1
the topology of the sets involved was not discussed.

So, we didn’t
speak of the “continuity” of ϕ on the product n∈Z+ {0, 2}. We will
define topologies of all sets involved in the most natural
way. We will
equip the set {0, 2} with the discrete topology, the set n∈Z+ {0, 2}
with the product topology, and finally, the Cantor set C, with the
subspace topology inherited from R. We will now show that, the
Cantor set, C, is a homeomorphic copy of n∈Z+ {0, 2}.

Theorem 7.19 The one-to-one function, ϕ : n∈Z+ {0, 2} → [0, 1],
defined as
∞
mn
ϕ(mn n∈Z+ ) =
n=1
3n

which maps the product space n∈Z+ {0, 2} homeomorphically onto
the Cantor set,

C=ϕ n∈Z+ {0, 2}
a subsetof [0, 1]. So, the Cantor set is a topological copy of the product
space, n∈Z+ {0, 2}, contained in [0, 1].

Proof. Given the one-to-one function ϕ : n∈Z+ {0, 2} → [0, 1]
where
∞
mn
ϕ(mn n∈Z+ ) =
3n
n=1
Product Spaces 177

Let ε > 0. First note that, for all mn n∈Z+ ∈ n∈Z+ {0, 2},
∞
2
|ϕ(mn n∈Z+ )| ≤ =1
3n
n=1
∞ 2

Then the sequence, n=k 3k n∈Z+
, converges to zero. So, there
exists N such that
∞
2
<ε (∗)
3n
n=N +1

Claim 1: The function ϕ is continuous. If kn n∈Z+ ∈ n∈Z+ {0, 2}
then
∞
kn
ϕ(kn n∈Z+ ) = n
=x∈C
n=1
3
Let Bε (x) be and open interval in R with center x and radius ε.

Then Bε (x)∩C is an open neighborhood of x in C. To show continuity
of ϕ at kn n∈Z+ , it will suffice to find an open neighborhood, U , of
kn n∈Z+ such that ϕ[U ∞ ] ⊆ Bε (x) ∩ C.
kn
Since the series, n=1 3n , converges to x, then the sequence
m k n ∞ kn

x − n=1 3n = n=m+1 3n converges to zero as m tends to
infinity. Then,

∞ k ∞
n 2
≤ < ε (By *)
3
n 3n
n=N +1 n=N +1
Let U = π1← (k1 ) ∩ · · · ∩ πN

← (k ) be an open base neighborhood of
N
{kn } in n∈Z+ {0, 2} and suppose bn n∈Z+ is some element in U .
This implies b1 = k1 , b2 = k2 , . . . , bN = kN . So,

∞
bn
|x − ϕ(bn n∈Z+ )| = x −
3n
n=1

∞ k ∞
n bn
= −
3n 3n
n=1 n=1
∞
|kn − bn |
≤0+
3n
n=N +1
∞
2
≤
3n
n=N +1
<ε
Then ϕ[U ] ⊆Bε (x)∩ C. Then ϕ is continuous at kn
n∈Z+ , and so
at all points of n∈Z+ {0, 2}. Then ϕ is continuous on n∈Z+ {0, 2},
as claimed.
Claim 2: The function ϕ is homeomorphic. To prove that ϕ is a
homeomorphism it will suffice to show it is an open function.
kn
For y = kn n∈Z+ ∈ n∈Z+ {0, 2}, ∞ n=1 n converges to ϕ(y).
3
Let U = πj←1 (kj1 ) ∩ · · · ∩ πj←m (kjm ) be an arbitrary open neigh-
borhood base element of kn n∈Z+ .
To show that ϕ is open, it will suffice to find some ε such that
Bε (ϕ(y)) ∩ C ⊆ ϕ[U ].
1
Let N = max {j1 , j2 , . . . , jm } and let ε = N+1 . (**)
3
We claim that, if | ϕ(kn n∈Z+ ) − ϕ(zn n∈Z+ ) | < ε, then
ϕ(zn n∈Z+ ) ∈ ϕ[U ].

∞ k ∞
n z n
| ϕ(kn n∈Z+ ) − ϕ(zn n∈Z+ ) | = −
3n n=1 3n
n=1

∞ k −z
n n
=
3n
n=1
N
kn − zn
∞
kn − zn

= + <ε
3n 3n
n=1 n=N +1
Then
N ∞
−1 kn − zn kn − zn 1
−ε = < + < N +1 = ε
3N +1 n=1 3n 3n 3
n=N +1
∞ N ∞
−1 kn − zn kn − zn 1 kn − zn
− < < N +1 −
3N +1 3n 3n 3 3n
n=N +1 n=1 n=N +1
Product Spaces 179
After some computation we obtain,

N
−4 kn − zn 4
N +1
< n
< N +1 (Verify this!)
3 n=1
3 3
To show that ϕ(zn n∈Z+ ) ∈ ϕ[U ], it suffices to show that, yn −

zn = 0 for n = 1 to N .
For m = 1 to N , let
m
kn − zn
Sm =
3n
n=1
4 4
Suppose k1 − z1 = 2 or −2; then S1 = ±2/3 ∈ (− N+1 , N+1 ). So
3 3
k1 − z1 = 0.
Suppose km − zm = 0 for m < N and km+1 − zm+1 = 2 or −2.
4 4
Then Sm+1 = ±2/3 ∈ (− N+1 , N+1 ). So km+1 − zm+1 = 0.
3 3
We then have yn − zn = 0 for n = 1 to N .
This is precisely what was needed to show that ϕ({zn }) ∈ ϕ[U ].
1
This means that, for our choice of ε = N+1 (at (**)), Bε (ϕ({kn }) ∩
3
C ⊆ ϕ[U ]. So, ϕ is an open map on n∈Z+ {0, 2}. So, ϕ is a homeo-
morphism, as claimed.
The theorem is proved, as required.

The Cantor set was defined as being the range ϕ [ n∈Z+ {0, 2}] of
n∈Z+ {0, 2}. But
the above statement shows it is much more. Since
we have shown n∈Z+ {0, 2} is a homeomorphic copy of C then, topo-
logically speaking, the subspace,
C, of [0, 1] we call the Cantor set
“is” the product space, n∈Z+ {0, 2}. The topological point of view
certainly provides much more insight on the nature and various prop-
erties of C as well as those sets that are linked to it via continuous
functions. The set-theoretic definition of C is blind to this aspect.
7.9.3 About the cardinality of C

Our geometric description of the construction of the Cantor set, C,
showed that C was obtained by successively removing open middle-
third interval from a previous set, leaving behind, at least, the end-
points of countably many closed intervals. The endpoints, all of them
of the form, m3n , (mn ∈ {0, 2}) are rationals and are never removed
n
and so must belong to C. This may lead one to believe that C is

countably infinite. But our formal definition of C (as well as the pre-
vious theorem) shows that this cannot be so. It states that
C can be
mapped homeomorphically onto the uncountable set n∈Z+ {0, 2}.
+
Then, |C| = 2|Z | = 2ℵ0 = c. So C is uncountable. We leave the
reader to reflect on the more challenging question: If x is a point in
C which is not an endpoint of a middle third, what does it look like?
How can it be that a “non-endpoint” is left behind?
7.9.4 Is the Cantor topological space discrete?

By this question, we are wondering whether every single point of C
is both open and closed. We have shown that the Cantor set, C, is
the homeomorphic image of the product space, n∈Z+ {0, 2}. If every
point of C was open then every point of n∈Z+ {0, 2} would be open.
But this is easily verified not to be the case. Since no point of the
product
space can contain a basic open set of the product space,
n∈Z+ {0, 2}.
So, C can be viewed as a sprinkling of an uncountable set of points
in [0, 1]. It interesting to note that C can continuously be mapped
onto [0, 1] as the following theorem shows.7
Theorem 7.20 There is a continuous function, δ : C → [0, 1],

which maps the Cantor set, C, onto the closed interval [0, 1].

Proof. Recall that the function, ϕ :
n∈Z+ {0, 2} → C, maps
n∈Z+ {0, 2} homeomorphically onto C. It is defined as
∞
mn
ϕ(mn n∈Z+ ) =
n=1
3n

We begin by defining a similar
function, ψ : n∈Z+ {0, 2} → [0, 1]
which maps the same set, n∈Z+ {0, 2}, onto [0,1]. It is defined as
∞
mn
ψ(mn n∈Z+ ) =
2n+1
n=1
7
The rest of this section can be omitted without loss of continuity.
Product Spaces 181
We claim that ψ is continuous on its domain and onto the closed

interval [0, 1]. To see that ψ is onto [0, 1] simply note that the
expression
∞ ∞ ∞
mn mn /2 sn
= = = 0.s1 s2 s3 s4 . . .2 ∈ [0, 1]
2n+1 2n 2n
n=1 n=1 n=1
where each sn is 0 or 1 and 0.s1 s2 s3 s4 . . .2 is simply the dyadic expan-

sion for an element in [0, 1].8
To prove continuity of ψ proceed precisely as for ϕ in the previous
theorem.
We define δ : C → [0, 1] as
δ = ψ ◦ϕ←

where ϕ← continuously maps C one-to-one and onto n∈Z+ {0, 2}
and ψ continuously maps n∈Z+ {0, 2} onto [0, 1].9 So, δ continuously
maps C onto [0, 1], as required.
7.10 Topic: Peano’s Space Filling Curve10
As a final example of an application of product spaces we show the

somewhat surprising result which states that a cube
[0, 1]3 = {(x, y, z) : x, y, z ∈ [0, 1]}
equipped with the product topology, in R3 is the continuous image

of the closed interval [0, 1] with the usual topology inherited from R.
8
For example, if y = mn n∈Z+ is the string {2, 0, 2, 0, 2, 0, . . .}, then ψ(y) =
0.10101010. . . a point in [0, 1] in dyadic expansion form. The function ψ
is easily seen to be onto [0, 1]. For example, given x = [0.001001001. . ., ],
ψ({0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 2, . . .}) = x.
9
Note that ψ is not one-to-one since ψ maps the two distinct strings
{0, 0, 2, 2, 2, . . .} and {0, 1, 0, 0, 0, . . .} to the same point 0.001111 . . . =
0.01000000 . . .
10
Pronounced: pay-an-o. This section can be omitted without loss of continuity.
In the first example, we show that there is a continuous function

which maps the Cantor set onto the cube, [0, 1]3 .
Example 8. Find a function, t : C → [0, 1]3 , which maps the Cantor
set, C, continuously onto the cube [0, 1]3 .
Solution: We first list a few relevant functions presented in this
chapter up to now.

— ϕ : n∈Z+ {0, 2} → ϕ n∈Z+ {0, 2} = C:
This function maps n∈Z+ {0, 2} homeomorphically onto C.
(Theorem 7.19).

— ϕ← : C → n∈Z+ {0, 2}:
The function ϕ← maps C homeomorphically onto n∈Z+ {0, 2}.

— δ : n∈Z+ {0, 2} → [0, 1]:
There exists a continuous function δ mapping n∈Z+ {0, 2} onto
[0,1]. (By Theorem 7.20.)

— q ∗ : n∈Z+ {0, 2} → n∈Z+ ∪Z+ ∪Z+ {0, 2}:
A B C
Since Z+ = N\{0} is countably infinite, it has the same cardinality
as 3Z+ . Then there is a one-to-one function mapping Z+ onto
3Z+ = Z+ + +
A ∪ ZB ∪ ZC (the disjoint union of three
+
copies of Z ).
∗
Then there is a homeomorphism, q mapping n∈Z+ {0, 2} onto

+ {0, 2}. (By Theorem 7.15.)
n∈Z+ +
A ∪ZB ∪ZC

— f : + + + {0, 2} → + {0, 2} × {0, 2} ×
n∈Z A ∪ZB ∪ZC n∈ZA n∈Z+
B
n∈Z+ {0, 2}:

C
There
is an onto homeomorphism f with domain n∈Z+ ∪Z+ ∪Z+ {0, 2}
A B C
defined as
f (xα α∈3Z+ ) = fA (xα α∈3Z+ ), fB (xα α∈3Z+ ), fC (xα α∈3Z+ )
where fA , fB and fC are defined in proposition 7.21 as
fA (xα α∈3Z+ ) = xα α∈Z+
A
fB (xα α∈3Z+ ) = xα α∈Z+

B
fC (xα α∈3Z+ ) = xα α∈Z+

C

— h: n∈Z+ {0, 2} ×
A n∈Z+ {0, 2} ×
B n∈Z+ {0, 2} → [0, 1] × [0, 1] ×
C
[0, 1]:
Product Spaces 183

If TA = n∈Z+ {0, 2}, and h[TA ×TB ×TC ] = δ[TA ]×δ[TB ]×δ[TC ]
A
then h continuously maps TA × TB × TC onto [0, 1] × [0, 1] × [0, 1].
(By 7.12 and 7.20.)
By appropriately composing these functions, we have,

C → 1-1 onto ϕ←→ {0, 2}
n∈Z+

→ 1-1 onto q∗→ {0, 2}
n∈Z+ + +
A ∪ZB ∪ZC

→ 1-1 onto f → {0, 2} × {0, 2} × {0, 2}
n∈Z+
A n∈Z+
B n∈Z+
C
→ onto h→ [0, 1] × [0, 1] × [0, 1]
Let
t = h◦f ◦q ∗ ◦ϕ←
Then the function, t : C → [0, 1]3 , continuously maps C onto [0, 1]3 ,
as required.
Example 9. Show that there exists a function which continuously
maps [0, 1] onto the cube [0, 1]3 .
Solution: We adopt the notation introduced in the previous
example.
Each of the three functions
fA = πA ◦t = πA ◦h◦f ◦q ∗ ◦ϕ← : C → [0, 1]

fB = πB ◦t = πB ◦h◦f ◦q ∗ ◦ϕ← : C → [0, 1]
fC = πC ◦t = πC ◦h◦f ◦q ∗ ◦ϕ← : C → [0, 1]
continuously maps the points in the Cantor set, C, onto the points
of [0, 1].
Recall that C is a subset of [0, 1] with multiple open intervals
missing. Also recall that a function g : [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a continu-
ous extension of fA if g is continuous on [0, 1] and g|C = fA . We
can then extend the continuous function fA : C → [0, 1] to a con-
tinuous function FA : [0, 1] → [0, 1] so that, on each missing open
interval (a, b) in C, FA is defined as the being the function which

is linear from (a, FA (a)) = (a, fA (a)) to (b, FA (b)) = (b, fA (b)).
The continuous extension, FA , of fA then maps [0, 1] continuously
onto [0, 1]. The same holds true for the similarly defined functions,
FB : [0, 1] → [0, 1] and FC : [0, 1] → [0, 1].
We then have the three continuous onto functions,
FA : [0, 1] → [0, 1]
FB : [0, 1] → [0, 1]
FC : [0, 1] → [0, 1]
We define the function F : [0.1] → [0, 1]3 , as
F (x) = FA (x), FB (x), FC (x) ∈ [0, 1] × [0, 1] × [0, 1]
Since all three functions FA , FB , and FC are continuous, then by

Theorem 7.12, F is continuous on [0, 1]. So, F continuously maps
the closed interval [0, 1] onto [0, 1]3 .
We normally refer to the continuous image of the closed interval

[0, 1] as a
curve.
In this sense, saying that “there is a curve that can fill the cube
[0, 1]3 ” or “there is a curve that goes through every point of the cube
[0, 1]3 ” is another way of saying that “[0, 1] can be mapped contin-
uously onto the cube [0, 1]3 ”. The reader who follows through the
proof carefully will notice that it can be generalized to the statement
“For any integer n there is a curve which goes through each point of
the cube [0, 1]n ”. The set
[0, 1]n
is referred to as a cube, for any natural number, n ≥ 1. The curve is

referred to as Peano’s space filling curve.11
11
Interested readers are referred to Mathematical Intelligencer 6(3) (1984), p. 78
for a graphic representation of a space filling curve.
Product Spaces 185
7.11 Topic: Product Spaces Are “Associative”
We address the question: How can we simplify the product of a prod-

uct spaces? We begin by illustrating what we mean by this question.
Let I = {1, 2, . . . , 12}, A = {1, 2, 3, 4}, B = {5, 6}, and C =
{7, 8, . . . , 12}. The set I is the disjoint union the of sets A, B and C.
Let {(Sα , τα ) : α ∈ {1, 2, . . . , 12} be a set of 12 topological spaces.
Consider the two product spaces S and Y defined as follows:

S= Sα and Y = Sα × Sα × Sα
α∈I α∈A α∈B α∈C
We wonder, “How do the two product spaces compare?”. We see that
S is a product space with twelve factors, while Y is a product space
of only three factors. This observation is sufficient to conclude that
S = Y . On the other hand, we see that each of the three factors of Y
are themselves product spaces, all three with factors, Sα , identical to
the ones found in S. While we have excluded, the possibility that S
equals Y , it would be reasonable to suspect that these two spaces are
homeomorphic copies of each other. We will present this conjecture
as a proposition (in just a slightly more general form) followed by its
proof.
Proposition 7.21 Let {(Sα , τα ) : α ∈ I} be a set of non-empty

topological spaces. Suppose I is the disjoint union of three non-empty
subsets, A, B, and C where the elements in A ∪ B ∪ C respect the
order in which they appear in I. Then

S= Sα and Y = Sα × Sα × Sα
are homeomorphic product spaces.

Proof. We define three
functions, fA : S → α∈A Sα , fB : S →
α∈B Sα and fC : S → α∈C Sα as follows:
fA (xα α∈I ) = xα α∈A
fB (xα α∈I ) = xα α∈B
fC (xα α∈I ) = xα α∈C

All three functions are easily seen to be onto α∈A Sα , α∈B Sα and

α∈C Sα , respectively.
Note that,
For β ∈ A, (πβ ◦fA )(xα α∈I ) = xβ = πβ (xα α∈I )
For β ∈ B, (πβ ◦fB )(xα α∈I ) = xβ = πβ (xα α∈I )
For β ∈ C, (πβ ◦fC )(xα α∈I ) = xβ = πβ (xα α∈I )
By Theorem 7.11, the functions fA , fB , and fC are all continuous
on S.
We now consider the function

f: Sα → Sα × Sα × Sα
defined as

f (xα α∈I ) = fA (xα α∈I ), fB (xα α∈I ), fC (xα α∈I )

We claim f is one-to-one and continuous on α∈I Sα .
Since fA , fB , and fC are all three continuous, then, by Theorem
7.12, f : S → Y is continuous on its domain S. Also, since I is the
disjoint union of A, B, and C, then f maps S one-to-one and onto Y .
(Verify this!). So, f is one-to-one and continuous as claimed.
To show that f is a homeomorphism it now suffices to show that
it is open.
Let V = πα← 1
[Uα1 ] ∩ πα←2 [Uα2 ] ∩ · · · ∩ πα←k [Uαk ] be an open base
element in S = α∈I Sα . Then
f [V ] = fA [V ], fB [V ], fC [V ]
For fA [V ] = fA [πα←1 [Uα1 ] ∩ πα←2 [Uα2 ] ∩ · · · ∩ πα←k [Uαk ]]:
fA [πα←i [Uαi ]] = Uαi if αi ∈ A

= Sα if αi ∈ A
α∈A
The same holds true for fB and fC .

So f [V ] = fA [V ], fB [V ], fC [V ] is open.
The given homeomorphism, f , confirms that the product spaces

Sα and Sα × Sα × Sα
α∈A∪B∪C α∈A α∈B α∈C
are homeomorphic.
Product Spaces 187
Concept Review
1. Give a general definition of a Cartesian product of sets.

2. Provide two definitions of the Cantor set.
3. Define the product topology on a Cartesian product.
4. Define the box topology on a Cartesian product.
5. Define what we mean by product space.
6. What do we mean by “partitioning” a product space and how
does it change its topology.
7. What effect does changing the order of the factors have on the
topology of a product space.
8. Describe the Tychonoff plank and its topology.
9. What does it mean to say that a set of functions F separates
points and closed sets of a set S.
10. Define evaluation map with respect to a set of functions F .
11. State the Embedding theorem.
12. The embedding theorem describes a homeomorphism between a
topological space and a product space. What are these spaces?
What is the homeomorphism?
13. The Cantor set equipped with the usual topology is shown to
be homeomorphic to a product space. Which one? Describe the
homeomorphism.
14. Describe a continuous function which maps the Cantor set, C,
continuously onto the closed interval [0, 1].
15. Is the Cantor set a countable subset of R?
16. Is the Cantor set, equipped with the subspace topology, discrete?
Is it second countable?
17. Does there exist a continuous function which maps C onto the
cube, [0, 1]3 ?
18. Does there exist a continuous function which maps [0, 1] onto the
cube, [0, 1]3 ?
Exercises

1. Show that α∈Γ Sα is dense in α∈Γ Tα if and only if, for each
α ∈ Γ, Sα is dense in Tα .
2. Suppose that, for eachα ∈ Γ, Sα ⊆ Tα . Then α∈Γ Sα is a subset
of the product space, α∈Γ Tα . Show that the product topology

on α∈Γ Sα is the same as the subspace topology α∈Γ Sα inher-
its from α∈Γ Tα .
3. Given the product space α∈Γ Sα , show that the projection map
πα : α∈Γ Sα → Sα is an open function. Is it a closed function?
4. If in the product space, S = α∈Γ S α , each Sα is discrete,
describe the open subsets of S.
5. If in the product space, S = α∈Γ Sα , each Sα is indiscrete,
describe the
open subsets of S.
6. Let X = α∈Γ Sα and Y = γ∈Φ Tγ be two product spaces
where Γ and Φ have the same cardinality confirmed by the
one-to-one function q : Γ → Φ. For each α, Sα and Tq(α)
are homeomorphic topological spaces. Show that X and Y are
homeomorphic.
7. Suppose we are given a topological space (S, τS ) and a family of
topological spaces, {(Tα , τα ) : α ∈ Γ}. Suppose F = {fα : α ∈ Γ}
is a family of functions, fα : S → Tα , where each fα maps its
domain S into Tα . Let
B = {fα← [U ] : (α, U ) ∈ Γ × τα }
Show that B is a base for open sets of S if and only if F separates

points and closed sets in S.
8. Suppose U ⊆ S and V ⊆ T . Show that intS×T (U × V ) = intS U ×
intT V .
9. Show that, if the product space, α∈Γ Sα , is first countable, then
Sα is first countable for each α ∈ Γ.
Chapter 8
The Quotient Topology
Abstract
In this section, we will present a method to topologize the range, T , of
a function, f , whose domain, S, is a topological space. The topology on
the range is referred to as the “quotient topology induced by f ”. When
the function f is used for this purpose, it is referred to as the associated
quotient map.
8.1 The Strong Topology Induced by a Function
We have previously discussed a function, f , with an untopologized

domain, S, which is mapped to a topological space (T, τT ). We topol-
ogized S in such a way that guarantees the continuity of the function
f : S → T on S. To do this, we must be sure that S is provided with
enough open sets so that f : S → T is continuous. The easiest way to
do this is to assign to S the discrete topology, since, on such a space
any function will be continuous on S. But, ideally, we preferred a
topology which is custom-made for f and τT . We then opted for the
weak topology induced by f and τT . Namely,
τS = {U ⊆ S : U = f ← [V ], for some open V in T }
In this section, we will work the other way around. We are given a
topological space, S, and a function f : S → T . We wish to assign to
T a topology, τT , that will guarantee that f is continuous on S.
Again, we could take the easy way out by assigning to T the indis-
crete topology, {∅, T }. It only has one non-empty open set, T , pulled
189
back by f to the open set, S ∈ τS . We again obtain continuity, but

one which is independent of the function, f . We opt for choosing a
topology on T which is custom made for the given function, f , and
the topology on the domain. That is, we will choose the strongest
topology on T that will guarantee continuity of f on the given topo-
logical space (S, τS ). With this mind, we present the following formal
definition.
Definition 8.1 Let f : S → T be a function mapping the topologi-

cal space (S, τS ) onto the set T . We assign to the set T the following
topology
τf = {U ⊆ T : f ← [U ] is open in S}
The set, τf , is referred to as the quotient topology induced by f and
τS . When T is equipped with the quotient topology, then (T, τf ) is
referred to as the quotient space of S induced by f and f : S → T is
referred to as its associated quotient map.1
The set τf is referred to as being the strongest (or finest) topology
on T that will guarantee continuity of f : S → T on the given
topological space (S, τS ).
Since f ← respects both infinite unions and intersections of sets

then τf is a well-defined topology on T . Also since τf contains pre-
cisely those sets which are pulled back to some set in τS , and no other
sets, then τf is indeed the largest topology that guarantees continuity
for f on S. The quotient topology, τf , induced by f is then unique.
It is important for the reader to notice that, in the above defi-
nition, we declare the function f : S → T to be onto T . This fact
may be relevant in some of the proofs that follow. If f : S → T was
not declared to be onto T , we would at least have to modify our
definition of quotient topology to
τf = {U ⊆ f [S] : f ← [U ] ∈ τS }
Suppose we are given two topological spaces (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) and
a continuous function, f , mapping S onto T . If we are given no more
1
Some authors use the terms “identification topology” instead of quotient topol-
ogy and “identification map” instead of quotient map.
The Quotient Topology 191
information about τT , it may or may not be the quotient topology

induced by f . The following theorem shows that there are various
ways of recognizing a quotient topology induced by a given function.
By definition, quotient maps must at least be continuous.
Theorem 8.2 Suppose (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) are topological spaces and
f : S → T is a continuous function onto T .
(a) If f : S → T is an open map, then τT is the quotient topology on
T induced by f . That is, τT = τf .
(b) If f : S → T is a closed map, then τT is the quotient topology on
T induced by f . That is, τT = τf .
(c) If there is a continuous function g : T → S such that (f ◦ g)(x) =
x on T , then τT = τf .
Proof. We are given that f : S → T is a continuous function
mapping S onto T with topology τT . To show that τT is the quotient
topology induced by f it suffices to show that τT is the strongest
topology, τf that will guarantee continuity to this function, f . Since
f : S → T is continuous, and τf is the largest topology on T for
which f is continuous, then τT ⊆ τf . For each of the three parts, it
will then suffice to show that τf ⊆ τT .
(a) We are given that f : S → T is open.
We claim that τf ⊆ τT . Let U ∈ τf . By definition of τf , f ← [U ] is
open in S. Since f is both open and onto, then f [f ← [U ]] = U ∈
τT . So τf ⊆ τT . Hence, τT = τf .
(b) The proof of part (b) is similar to (a) and so is left to the reader.
(c) We are given that g : T → S is continuous such that (f ◦ g)(x) = x
(where f ◦ g : T → T ).
We claim that τf ⊆ τT . Suppose U ∈ τf . Then, by definition of
τf , f ← [U ] is open in S. We have
U = {x ∈ T : (f ◦ g)(x) = x ∈ U }
= (f ◦ g)← [U ]
= g ← [f ← [U ]]
⇒ U is open in T since g and f are continuous
⇒ U ∈ τT
Hence, U ∈ τT . So τf ⊆ τT , as claimed.
Then τf = τT , as required.
Example 1. Consider the Cartesian product R × R equipped

with the product topology. If π1 and π2 are the projection maps
π1 (a, b) = a and π2 (a, b) = b mapping R × R onto R equipped with
the usual topology, then the subsets of the form
π1← [U ] ∩ π2← [V ]
(where U and V are open in R) constitute the open base elements of

R × R. We have shown that the projection maps πi : R × R → R are
open functions. Then by part (a) of the above theorem, R equipped
with the usual topology is the same as the quotient space induced
by π1 : R × R → R. Since π1 [{a} × R] = {a} we often say that
π1 collapses the vertical lines in R × R to a point
Since there can be many different open maps from (S, τS ) into
(T, τT ), it is possible to have distinct maps f and g associated to the
same quotient topology, τT = τf = τg .
8.2 An Equivalence Relation Induced by a Function f
Any function, f , mapping a set S onto a set T can be used to partition

the domain into subsets we call “fibers in S induced by the function
f .” We will first formally define this set theoretic notion.
Definition 8.3 Let f : S → T be a function mapping a set S onto

a set T . If w ∈ T , we will refer to f ← [{w}] as the fiber of w under
the map f . Fibers in the domain are the preimages of singleton sets
with respect to f .2
2
The word “fiber” (or “fibre”) usually interpreted in this way in the field of set
theory. But it can have an entirely different meaning in other mathematical fields.
Its interpretation is determined by the context.
Let f : S → T be a function which maps the topological space

(S, τS ) onto the quotient space, (T, τf ). Using this function we will
construct a new set by defining a relation Rf on S as follows:
[ u is related to v ] ⇔ [ f (u) = f (v) in T ]
The phrase, “u is related to v” in S, can be more succinctly expressed
as
uRf v or (u, v) ∈ Rf
This essentially means that u and v are related if and only if
they both belong to the same fiber under the map f : S → T .3
The relation, Rf , on S is easily seen to be reflexive, symmetric and
transitive, and so Rf is an equivalence relation on S. We will denote
an equivalence class of x under Rf by
Sx = {y ∈ S : xRf y}
and the set of all such equivalence classes in S by
S/Rf = { Sx : x ∈ S }
Each element, Sx , is a fiber under f , and the set, S/Rf , can be viewed
as the set of all fibers in S under f . In set theory, S/Rf , is normally
called the quotient set of S induced by Rf . Just like the set of all
fibers of a function, f : S → T , partitions the domain, we see that
the set of all equivalence classes partitions the set S. By this we mean
that the elements of S/Rf are pairwise disjoint subsets which cover
all of S. One should remember that, when Sx is in S, it is a subset
of S, but, whenever Sx is in S/Rf , it is viewed as one of its elements.
There is a “natural” function, θ : S → S/Rf , defined as
θ(x) = Sx
mapping the points of the topological space (S, τS ) onto the “ele-
ments” of the set S/Rf . One might more figuratively say that θ col-
lapses each fiber, f ← (x), in S down to a unique element, Sx , in S/Rf ,
or, equivalently, maps fibers in S to singleton sets, {Sx }, in S/Rf .
3
In this context, a fiber is a set theoretic concept and is independent of the
topologies involved.
As long as no topology is declared on S/Rf our discussion remains

within the bounds of set theory. We will topologize S/Rf as being
the quotient space induced by the function, θ : S → S/Rf , a function
we can now refer to as a quotient map. So, S/Rf will be equipped
with the quotient topology, τθ . More specifically,
τθ = {U : θ ← [U ] is open in S}
The topology on S/Rf will be the strongest topology that guarantees

the continuity of θ : S → S/Rf .
We now have two quotient spaces induced by two functions with
domain (S, τS ):
f : S → (T, τf )
θ : S → (S/Rf , τθ )
An insightful reader may already have a feeling that the two quotient
spaces are topologically the same. To confirm this, we have to show
that they are linked by some homeomorphism. We will connect S/Rf
to T by defining a third function, φf : S/Rf → T as
φf (Sx ) = f (x) (where Sx = θ(x).)
which maps points of S/Rf to points of T (remembering that f is

onto T and so every element of T can be represented by f (x) for some
x in S). The following diagram illustrates the relationship between
S, S/Rf , and T .
f
S T
θ φf
S/Rf
This allows us to express the function, f , as a composition of

functions φf ◦ θ = f . The following definition refers to expressions
of the form f ← [f [U ] ]. One should keep in mind that, even though
it may occur that U = f ← [f [U ] ], it is always the case that U ⊆
f ← [f [U ] ].
In theorem below we will show that
φf : S/Rf → T maps S/Rf homeomorphically onto T
Definition 8.4 Let g : S → T be a function mapping the topological

space (S, τS ) onto a topological space (T, τT ). A subset, U ⊂ S, is
said to be g-saturated whenever U is the complete inverse image of
some subset V in T . Equivalently, U is g-saturated if and only if
U = g← (g(U )).
Theorem 8.5 Suppose f : S → T is continuous on S and U is a

non-empty open subset of T . Then f ← [U ] is θ-saturated.
Proof. It suffices to show that f ← [U ] = θ ← [ θ [ f ← [U ] ] ]. Since
f ← [U ] ⊆ θ ← [ θ [ f ← [U ] ] ], we need only show inclusion in the opposite
direction.
x ∈ θ ← [ θ [ f ← [U ] ] ] ⇒ θ(x) ∈ θ [ f ← [U ] ]
⇒ θ(x) ∈ {θ(y) : y ∈ f ← [U ]}
⇒ Sx ∈ {Sy : f (y) ∈ U }
⇒ f (x) ∈ U
⇒ x ∈ f ← [U ]
Then θ ← [ θ [ f ← [U ] ] ] ⊆ f ← [U ]. Then f ← [U ] is θ-saturated. That is,
θ ← [ θ [ f ← [U ] ] ] = f ← [U ]
Theorem 8.6 Suppose (S, τS ) is a topological space. Let (T, τf )

and (S/Rf , τθ ) be two quotient spaces induced by the quotient maps
f : S → T and θ : S → S/Rf , where θ(x) = Sx . Then the function,
φf : S/Rf → T defined as
φf (Sx ) = f (x)
maps S/Rf homeomorphically onto T .

Proof. We are given that f : S → T and θ : S → S/Rf and are

quotient maps, hence are continuous on S. We are required to show
that the function, φf : S/Rf → T , defined as, φf (Sx ) = (φf ◦ θ)(x) =
f (x), is a homeomorphism.
We claim that φf is one-to-one and onto T : See that, since f is
onto T , φf is onto T . Also, if Sx = Sy , then f (x) = f (y), which
implies φf (x) = φf (y); so φf is one-to-one and onto.
We claim that φf is continuous on S/Rf : Let U be open in T .
Since f is continuous f ← [U ] is open in S.
φ←
f
[U ] = {Sx : φf (Sx ) ∈ U }
= {Sx : φf (θ(x)) ∈ U }
= {θ(x) : f (x) ∈ U }
= {θ(x) : x ∈ f ← [U ]}
= θ[f ← [U ]]
We have shown above that f ← [U ] is θ-saturated hence

θ ← [ θ [ f ← [U ] ] ] = f ← [U ]. Since θ : S → S/Rf is a quotient map
and f ← [U ] is open then θ [ f ← [U ] ] is open. So, φ← f
[U ] is open. This
establishes the claim that φf is continuous.
We claim that φf is open on S/Rf : From the diagram above we
know that f = φf ◦ θ. So, θ = φ← f
◦f . Since θ is continuous then
(φ←f
◦f ) : S → S/Rf is continuous on S. Let U be an open subset of
S/Rf .
θ ← [U ] = (φ←
f
◦f )
←
[U ] ∈ τS
⇒ f ← [(φ←
f
)← [U ]] ∈ τS
⇒ f ← [φf [U ]] ∈ τS
Since T has the quotient topology induced by f , φf [U ] is open in T .

We have shown that φf is an open map, as claimed.
We have shown that the one-to-one onto function, φf : S/Rf → T ,
is both continuous and open, hence it maps S/Rf homeomorphically
onto T .
We summarize the main ideas behind the above result. If we are

given a topological space, (S, τS ), and a function f mapping S onto
a set T we have the two main ingredients necessary to topologize T

with the quotient topology, τf . We do so in a way that guarantees
continuity of the function, f : S → T . The fibers of the function, f ,
covers its domain. By collapsing, via the map θ, each fiber down to a
point we create another set, S/Rf , and topologize it with the quotient
topology, τθ . The expression “identifying the points of the fibers” is
also of common usage. This new topological space, (S/Rf , τθ ) has
been proven to be a homeomorphic copy of (T, τf ).
8.3 Decomposition Spaces
We have seen that the quotient space induced by θ : S → S/Rf

involves the decomposition of the set S into non-overlapping sets,
{Sx }. We will now slightly generalize this notion of “decomposition
of a set.” Suppose we are given a topological space (S, τS ). Rather
than partition S into equivalence classes, each of which contains all
the elements that belong to a particular fiber, Sx , of a function f ,
we can also partition the set S in an arbitrary way. By this we mean
that we express S as the union of non-intersecting subsets. We will
denote this set of subsets by DS . Each element x of S belongs to
some element, labeled Dx , of DS . Note that, if y ∈ Dx then Dx and
Dy are simply different labels for the same element of DS . The set
DS = {Dx : x ∈ S}
is reminiscent of a quotient set whose elements are equivalent classes

of some relation R on S. We can similarly define a function θ : S →
DS , on the topological space, S, where θ(u) = Du , the unique element
of DS which contains u. Then θ ← (Du ) = {x ∈ S : x ∈ Du } = Du ⊆
S. The set, DS , is not yet topologized, but we know of a procedure
to topologize it, since it is, after all, the range of a function θ on S.
We can equip DS with the quotient topology,
τθ = {U ⊆ DS : θ ← [U ] is open in S}
induced by θ. We formally define the concepts we have just presented.
Definition 8.7 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. If DS is collection

of pairwise disjoint subsets of S such that every element of S belongs
to some element of DS , then we say DS is a

decomposition of S.
The function, θ : S → DS , defined as θ(u) = Dx if and only if u ∈ Dx ,
mapping every element of S onto DS is called the decomposition map
of S onto DS . The function, θ, is also referred to as the identification
map. The function, θ, is said to identify the elements of the subset
Dx ⊆ S. If τθ is the quotient topology induced on DS by θ, then we
say that (DS , τθ ) is a
decomposition space or quotient space.
Why does all of this sound familiar? Recall that, if f : S → T ,

then the function, f , decomposes its domain, S, into fibers. In this
case, (DS , τθ ) is a copy of (S/Rf , τθ ).
The following theorem will help recognize the open subsets of
the decomposition space, DS . It states that open subsets U = {Dx :
Dx ∈ U } of DS correspond to open θ-saturated subsets ∪{Dx : Dx ∈
U } of S.
Theorem 8.8 Suppose (DS , τθ ) is a decomposition space of the topo-

logical space (S, τS ) and let U = {Dx : x ∈ I ⊆ S} be a subset of DS .
Then U is open in DS if and only if
∪{Dx : x ∈ I}
is open in S.
Proof. We are given that U = {Dx : x ∈ I ⊆ S} be a subset
of DS .
( ⇒ ) Suppose U is open in DS .
Then θ ← [U ] = {x ∈ S : θ(x) = Dx ∈ U } = {x ∈ S : x ∈ I} is
open in S. We are required to show that ∪{Dx : x ∈ I} is open in S.
θ ← [U ] = θ ← [∪{{Dx } : x ∈ I}]
= ∪{θ ← [{Dx }] : x ∈ I}
= ∪{Dx ⊆ S : x ∈ I}
is open since θ is continuous.
( ⇐ ) Suppose ∪{Dx ⊆ S : x ∈ I} is open in S. We are required

to show that U = {Dx : x ∈ I ⊆ S} is open in DS . To show that U
is open in DS it suffices to show that θ ← [U ] is open in S (since DS

is equipped with the quotient topology induced by θ).
∪{Dx ⊆ S : x ∈ I} = ∪{θ ← [{Dx }] : x ∈ I}

= θ ← [∪{ Dx : x ∈ I}]
= θ ← [U ]
Since ∪{Dx : x ∈ I} = θ ← [U ] is open then U is open.
Example 2. Consider the Cartesian product R × R equipped with

the product topology. We can partition this product into its vertical
lines. The projection function π1 : R × R → R can be seen as a
decomposition map which collapses the vertical lines to a point by
π1 [{a} × R] = {a}
In this case (since π1 is an open map), the quotient topology induced

by π1 on R is the usual topology. It is the finest (strongest) topology
on R such that π1 is continuous on R × R.
On the other hand, if we are given that R is equipped with the
usual topology the Cartesian product R×R can be equipped with the
weakest (coarsest) topology induced by the function π1 : R × R → R.
It has as open base
B = {π1← [U ] : U is open in R}
Example 3. Let J denote the set of all irrational numbers in the

closed interval [0, 1] and let
T = {1} ∪ J
a proper subset of [0, 1]. We define a function f : [0, 1] → T as follows

x if x is irrational in [0, 1]
f (x) =
1 if x is rational in [0, 1]
Let the domain, [0, 1], be equipped with the usual topology and the
range, T = {1} ∪ J, be equipped with the quotient topology induced
by the function f .
Describe the open subsets of the quotient space, T , induced by

the function f on [0, 1].
Solution: We are given that f fixes the irrationals in [0, 1] and col-
lapses all rationals to 1. The set T = {1} ∪ J is equipped with the
quotient topology induced by f .
The open subsets of {1} ∪ J are defined as
τf = {U ⊆ {1} ∪ J : f ← [U ] is open in [0, 1]}
We have f ← [∅] = ∅ and f ← [{1} ∪ J] = [0, 1] so {∅, {1} ∪ J} ⊆ τf .

Consider, for example, the open interval U = (1/5, π/4). Then
[U ∩ J] ∪ {1} ⊆ {1} ∪ J. So,
f ← [ [U ∩ J] ∪ {1} ] = f ← [U ∩ J] ∪ f ← [{1}]
= [ U ∩ J ] ∪ [ [0, 1] ∩ Q ]
Since [ U ∩ J ] ∪ [ [0, 1] ∩ Q ] is not open in [0, 1], then [ U ∩ J ] ∪ {1}

is not open in {1} ∪ J.
It seems that the complete, open, preimage, f ← [V ], of any non-
empty subset, V , of {1} ∪ J should contain open intervals and, at
least, both 0 and 1. Are there such proper subsets of [0, 1]? We test
the following subset:
f ← [V ] = [0, π/7) ∪ (π/7, π/5) ∪ (π/5, π/4) ∪ (π/4, 1]
is open in [0, 1]. We seek a set V in {1} ∪ J that f pulls back to the
subset, f ← [V ]. We test
f [f ← [V ]] = {1} ∪ J \{π/7, π/5, π/4}
to find
f ← [{1} ∪ J \{π/7, π/5, π/4}]

= [0, π/7) ∪ (π/7, π/5) ∪ (π/5, π/4) ∪ (π/4, 1]
An open subset of [0, 1].
So, {1} ∪ J \{π/7, π/5, π/4} ∈ τf .

Then
τf = { ∅} ∪ { {1} ∪ D : D is open and dense in J}
Example 4. Suppose we are given the subset, S = [0, 2π] × [0, 2π]
of R2 . We will decompose S as follows: For each point (x, 0) on the
line [0, 2π] × {0} let
D(x,0) = {(x, 0), (2π − x, 2π)}
So for each x ∈ [0, 2π], D(x,0) and D(2π−x,2π) represent the same
element of the decomposition, DS . For example, D(0,0) = D(2π,2π) =
{(0, 0), (2π, 2π)}.
For each (x, y) ∈ [0, 2π] × {0} ∪ [0, 2π] × {2π} let
D(x,y) = {(x, y)}
Each subset of the form D(x,0) is a subset of S which contains two

points. All other subsets of the decomposition are singleton sets. The
decomposition space, DS , of the subspace S obtained is referred to
as the Möbius strip.4 See Figure 8.1.
The two lines L1 = {(x, 0) : 0 ≤ x ≤ 2π} and L2 = {(x, 2π) : 0 ≤
x ≤ 2π} are collapsed together (after inverting one of the lines) to
form the Möbius strip.
Without the inversion of one of the lines, the decomposition space
becomes a topological representation of a cylindrical shell.
8.3.1 Moore plane decomposition

Example 5. Let (S, τS ) denote the Moore plane. (Review the
description of the Moore plane by looking over the example on
page 92.) Let F = {(x, 0)|x ∈ R} and W = S \ F . We can
then express S as the disjoint union of the sets F and W . Let
D = {{x} : x ∈ W } ∪ {F }, be the decomposition space of S which
results from collapsing the subset, F , down to a point and identifying
all other points to themselves.
4
In reference to August Ferdinand Möbius, 1790–1868, a German mathematician
and astronomer.
Figure 8.1. Topological representation of the Möbius strip.
Describe an open neighborhood base of each point in the decom-

position space D.
Solution: We are given the Moore plane, (S, τS ), and the decompo-
sition D = {{x} : x ∈ W } ∪ {F }. It easily verified that points in S
are closed and so S is T1 .
If θ : S → D is the corresponding quotient map, then θ(a, b) =
(a, b) if (a, b) ∈ W and θ(u, v) = F when (u, v) ∈ F . The quotient
topology on D is, by definition,
τθ = {U ⊆ D : θ ← [U ] is open in S}
The open neighborhood base of points, {x} ∈ D for x ∈ W is the

same as for τW . If τW is the subspace topology on the open subspace,
W , inherited from S, then τW ⊆ τθ .
We now describe an open neighborhood base for the element,

F ∈ D.
Let N = N\{0}. Consider the set, N R , of all functions which map
R into N .
We now construct a basic open neighborhood of the element F .
For f ∈ N R , let

1
Uf = ∪ B 1 x, : (x, 0) ∈ R × {0}
f (x) f (x)

1 1
where f (x) is the radius of each open ball of center x, f (x) tangent
←
to the x-axis. Since, for each f , θ [Uf ∪ {F }] = Uf ∪ F is open in S,
then
BF = {Uf ∪ {F } : f ∈ N R }
is an uncountably large base of open neighborhoods for F , since for
any open neighborhood V of the x-axis, there exists f ∈ N R such
that {(x, 0) : x ∈ R} ⊆ BF ⊆ V .
8.3.2 On subspaces of a decomposition space

Example 6. Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. Suppose (D, τD ) is a
decomposition space induced by some decomposition of S. Let T be
a non-empty subset of S. Then the decomposition D of S will induce
a decomposition space (DT , τT ),
DT = {D ∩ T : D ∈ D}
of T . We can identify another decomposition space (D|T , τ|T ) asso-
ciated to T :
D|T = {D ∈ D : D ∩ T = ∅}
The space, (D|T , τ|T ) is equipped with the subspace topology, τ|T ,
inherited from (D, τD ).
Provide an example that shows that (D|T , τ|T ) and (DT , τT ) are
generally not homeomorphic spaces.
Solution: Consider the decomposition, D = {{x} × R : x ∈ R}, of
R2 . Let T = {(x, 0) ∈ R2 : x < 0} ∪ {(0, 1)}, a subset of R2 , with the
subspace topology.
Let DT = {D ∩ T : D ∈ D}. Then DT = {{(x, 0)} : x < 0} ∪

{(0, 1)}.
Let θT : T → DT be the quotient function which maps a point x
in T to the unique element of DT which contains it. Then θT induces
a the quotient topology, τD on DT . That is, U is open in DT if and
only if, θT← [U ] is open in T . The function θT is clearly one-to-one on
T . Also, since θT← [{(0, 1)}] = {(0, 1)} is open in T (with respect to
the subspace topology), the point {(0, 1)} is a clopen element of DT .
The point {(0, 1)} in DT is referred to as an isolated point.
We now consider the decomposition,
D|T = {D ∈ D : D ∩ T = ∅}
We claim that D|T does not contain an isolated point, and so cannot
be homeomorphic to DT . Note that D|T = {{x} × R : x ≤ 0}.
Since every neighborhood of a vertical line in ∪D|T intersects another
vertical line then D|T cannot contain an isolated point. So, D|T and
DT cannot be homeomorphic.
Example 7. Let S n denote the n-sphere in the space, T = Rn+1\{0}
(equipped with the usual topology). That is, S n = {x ∈ Rn+1 \{0} :
x = 1}. For example, S 1 is the unit circle in R2 \{(0, 0)}, S 2 is the
sphere surface in R3 \{(0, 0)}. Let
Lλ = {λx : x ∈ T }
represent a line in T passing through the point, 0, and x with “slope”
λ. Then the collection of lines, {Lλ : λ ∈ R>0 }, constitutes a decom-
position, DT , of the space T . The elements of DT = {Dλ : λ ∈ R>0 },
are of the form Dλ = Lλ for λ ∈ R>0 .
Let f : T → S n be defined as
x
f (x) =
x
a continuous function on T . Then
f [Lλ ] = f [{λx : x ∈ T }] = λx/ λx ∈ S n ∩ Lλ
So, f is a function which collapses each set Lλ down to the singleton
set Lλ ∩ S n . Then, f induces a map
f ∗ : DT → S n
which is one-to-one on DT onto S n . If U is open in S n , f ∗ ← [U ] is
open in DT .
If V is open in DT , then f ∗ [V ] is open in S n . So f ∗ is a home-

omorphism mapping DT = T /Rf onto S n . So, S n is homeomorphic
to Rn+1 /Rf .
Note: See that S n cannot be homeomorphic to Rn+1 nor to Rn since
Sn is closed and bounded (compact) and neither Rn+1 nor Rn are.
Concept Review
1. Define the quotient topology induced by a function.

2. If τT is a topology on T for which f : S → T is continuous, how
does τT compare with the quotient topology, τf , induced by f ?
3. If τT is a topology on T for which f : S → T is a continuous
open map, how does τT compare with the quotient topology, τf ,
induced by f ?
4. If τT is a topology on T for which f : S → T is a continuous
closed map, how does τT compare with the quotient topology, τf ,
induced by f ?
5. What is a fiber of a point under a map f ?
6. Define the set S/Rf of all equivalence classes induced by a func-
tion f : S → T by referring to a function θ : S → S/Rf .
7. What topology is defined on S/Rf ?
8. How is the function φf : S/Rf → T defined?
9. If g : S → T is a function and U ⊆ S, what does it mean to say
that U is g-saturated?
10. If g : S → T is a function and U ⊆ S is g-saturated, is there a
way to describe the subset U in terms of g?
11. Given f : S → T and θ : S → S/Rf describe the homeomorphism
which links S/Rf to T .
12. Describe how to construct a decomposition space, DS , from a
topological space (S, τS ).
Exercises
1. Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. We define a relation, R, on S

as follows: (u, v) ∈ R if and only if clS {u} = clS {v}.
(a) Show that R is an equivalence relation on S.

(b) Let (S/R, τθ ) denote the quotient space induced by the natu-
ral map θ : S → S/R.
(i) If Sx is an element in S/R, is {Sx } necessarily a closed
subset of S/R?
(ii) If Sx and Sy are distinct elements of S/R, does there exist
an open set in τθ which contains Sx but not Sy ?
2. Describe the quotient space, R/R, if (u, v) ∈ R if and only if x − y
is an integer.
3. Suppose DR2 is a decomposition of R2 (with the usual topology)
whose elements are circles with center at the origin. Show that
the corresponding decomposition space, (DR2 , τθ ), and the set of
all non-negative real numbers, {x ∈ R : x ≥ 0}, equipped with
the usual topology are homeomorphic topological spaces.
Part III
Topological Spaces:
Separation Axioms
Chapter 9
Separation with Open Sets
Abstract
In this section we will present five classes of topological spaces which,
together, form a hierarchy of separation axioms. They differ by the way
their open sets can be used to separate their points and their closed
sets. For each of these spaces, we present a few of their characterizations
and basic properties. These five types of topological spaces are called,
Ti -spaces, where i = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4.
9.1 The T0 Separation Axiom
In this chapter, we will introduce five other classes of topological

spaces. We will also discuss various characterizations and properties
of these spaces. We distinguish these five classes by the separation
axioms they satisfy. The first one is referred to as the T0 axiom.
Definition 9.1 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. We say that S is

a T0 -space if, for every pair of distinct points u and v, there exists at
least one open set in τS , which contains one of these two points, but
not the other.1
1
A T0 -space is also known as a Kolmogorov space (named after the mathemati-
cian Andrey Kolmogorov).
209
Most of the topological spaces we have been exposed to are

T0 -spaces, so finding an example of a T0 -space is easy, as long as we
can justify why a particular space is declared to be T0 . The space,
R, with the usual topology, is T0 since, for any a, b ∈ R where a < b,
(a − 1, b) contains a but not b. We will soon see that the Euclidean
space, R, can separate points in much more intricate ways. For many,
the topological spaces of interest are, at the very least, T0 .
Are there any non-T0 -spaces? The indiscrete space (S, τi ) (where
S is not a singleton) with topology,
τi = {∅, S}
is not T0 . For, if a, b ∈ S, since S is the only non-empty open set,

it contains all points and so is unable to separate a point a from a
point b in the way prescribed by the T0 -property.
We provide another example of a non-T0 space. Consider the pro-
jection function π1 : R × R → R on the Cartesian product R × R.
This function collapses each vertical line in the product to a point.
We equip the product R × R with the weak topology induced by π1 .
Then {π1← [U ] : U is open in R} forms a base for open sets in R × R.
Consider the distinct points (a, b) and (a, c). Any basic open set of
R × R which contains (a, b) contains {a} × R. So, no open set con-
tains (a, b) but note (a, c) nor does it contains (a, c) but not (a, b).
So, R × R equipped with the weak topology induced by π1 is not T0 .
9.1.1 Combining the T0 separation property with

other topological properties
Even though T0 -spaces, by themselves, may be considered by some
as being of little interest, it is good practice to see what happens
when we combine the T0 -property with other topological properties.
Consider the following example in which we show that infinite second
countable T0 -spaces cannot be arbitrarily large.
Example 1. Suppose (S, τS ) is an infinite second countable T0 -space.
Show that the cardinality, |S|, of S is less than or equal to 2ℵ0 (where,
ℵ0 = |N|).
Solution: Since S is an infinite second countable space, then, by
definition, it has an open base, B, such that |B| ≤ ℵ0 . For each
Separation with Open Sets 211
x ∈ S, let
Bx = {B ∈ B : x ∈ B} ⊆ B
If y = x then Bx cannot equal By , for, if it did, then y ∈ Bx for

all Bx ∈ Bx , and there would be no Bx (By ) which can separate x
from y, a contradiction of the T0 property. So there is a one-to-one
function, f : S → P(B), defined as
f (x) = Bx
Then |S| = |{Bx : x ∈ S}|. Recall that the cardinality of the power
set, P(T ), of a set T is 2|T | . Since |B| ≤ ℵ0 , then |P(B)| = 2|B| ≤
2ℵ0 .
Since, for each x ∈ S, Bx ∈ P(B), then |{Bx : x ∈ S}| ≤
|P(B)|.
We conclude that
|S| = |{Bx : x ∈ S}| ≤ |P(B)| ≤ 2ℵ0
so the cardinality of a second countable T0 -space, S, is less than or

equal to 2ℵ0 , as required.2
9.2 The T1 Separation Axiom
In general, we prefer that topological a space (S, τ ) has points which

are closed subsets of S. The next separation axiom called, T1 , requires
that τ has sufficiently many open sets to guarantee that its singleton
sets, {x}, must be closed subsets.
Definition 9.2 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space. We say that S is

a T1 -space if, for every pair of distinct points u and v, there exists an
open set, U , which contains u but not v, and an open set, V , which
contains v but not u.3
2
Note that 2ℵ0 is the cardinality of R.
3
The T1 -spaces are also referred to as Fréchet spaces, named after the mathe-
matician Maurice Fréchet.
Of course, every T1 -space is T0 . Also, Rn , when equipped with the

usual topology, is a T1 -space. Are there T0 -spaces which are not T1 ?
In the following example we exhibit a T0 -space which is not T1 .
Example 2. Let S be a set which contains more than a single point.
Suppose u ∈ S and F ⊆ P(S) where
(1) For non-empty F , [F ∈ F ] ⇔ [u ∈ F ].
(2) ∅ ∈ F .
Verify that the two given conditions on F together satisfy the
closed sets axioms and so define a topology, τS , on S. Then show
that (S, τS ) is T0 , but not T1 .
Solution: We claim that F describes all closed subsets with respect
to the topology τS = {U : u ∈ U } ∪ {S}. Clearly, {S, ∅} ⊆ F . Finite
unions of sets each of which contains the point u will contain the
point u and arbitrary intersections of sets each of which contain u
will also contain u. Then F satisfies the closed set axioms. Then the
set, F , represents all closed sets for the topology
τS = {U : u ∈ U } ∪ {S}
We see that, if x = u, then S\{u} is an open neighborhood of x and

does not contain u. So, S is T0 . But since the only open neighborhood
of u is all of S, then S cannot be T1 . So, (S, τS ) is T0 not T1 .
9.2.1 Characterizations of T1 -spaces

The most useful characterization of T1 -spaces is given as follows. This
characterization is such that some may use it as a definition of T1 .
Theorem 9.3 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. The space S is T1

if and only if every singleton set, {x}, of S is a closed subset of S.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. If S is a singleton set
then, trivially, S is T1 and its only singleton set is S, which is closed.
Suppose S contains more than one point.
(⇒) Suppose S is T1 . Let u ∈ S. We claim that {u} is closed. For
each, x = u, there exists open, Ux such that, x ∈ Ux and u ∈ S \Ux .
Then {u} = ∩{S \Ux : x = u}, the intersection of closed subsets of

S. So, {u} is closed in S.
(⇐) Suppose every point of S is closed. Then, then for any u, y ∈ S,
if y = u, S\{u} is an open neighborhood of y which does not contain
u and S \{y} is an open neighborhood of u which does not contain
y. Hence, S is T1 .
Theorem 9.4 Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces.

(a) If S is a T1 -space then so are all its subspaces. So T1 is a hered-
itary property.
(b) Suppose S is a T1 space and f : S → T is a closed function.
Then f [S] is aT1 subspace of T .
(c) Suppose S = i∈I Si is a product space. The space S is a T1
product space if and only if each of its Si -factors is a T1 -space.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces.
(a) Suppose S is T1 and u ∈ W ⊆ S. Since {u} is a closed subset
of S, it is a closed subset of its subspace W (with respect to the
subspace topology). So, W is T1 (by Theorem 9.3).
(b) Suppose S is T1 and f : S → f [S] is a closed map. Let v ∈ f [S].
Then there exists x ∈ S such that f [{x}] = {v}. By hypothesis,
{x} is closed and fis closed so, {v} is closed. Hence, f [S] is T1 .
(c) (⇒) Suppose S = i∈I Si is a T1 product space. Recall that each
factor, Si , is homeomorphic to a subspace, Ui , of S. By part (a),
Ui is T1 and so Si is T1 .

(⇐) Suppose each factor, Si , of S = i∈I Si is T1 . Let q = <
ai >i∈I be a point in S. Then no Si is empty since, for each
i ∈ I, ai ∈ Si . Since each Si is T1 , for each coordinate ai , the
singleton set, {ai }, is a closed subset of Si . For all j ∈ I, πj :
S → Sj is continuous; then πj← ({aj }) is closed in S. Then {q} =

∩j∈I πj← ({aj }) is closed in S. So, S is T1 .
In the following example, we show that the decomposition space,

D, whose elements are the fibers of f : S → T , is T1 if and only if
the fibers of f are closed subsets of S.
Example 3. Let f : S → T be a function. Suppose τf is the quotient

topology on S induced by the quotient map f . Let DS = {Dx : x ∈
T } be a decomposition space of S, with elements, Dx = f ← (x). Show
that DS is T1 if and only if each of its elements, Dx = f ← (x), is a
closed subset of S.
Solution: Let f : S → (T, τT ) be a function. f ← (x) = Dx for each
x ∈ T and DS = {Dx : x ∈ T } be a decomposition space of S induced
by f , equipped with the quotient topology τf . Let q : S → DS be the
quotient map q(x) = Dx .
(⇐) We are given that, for each x ∈ T , Dx = f ← (x) is a closed
subset of S. We are required to show that DS is T1 . Let Sy ∈ DS . It
suffices to show that {Sy } is closed in DS . Consider
q ← [DS \{Sy }] = S \f ← [{y}]
where by hypothesis, S \f ← [{y}] is open in S. Since DS is equipped

with the quotient topology,
q ← [DS \{Sy }] open in S ⇒ DS \{Sy } open in DS
So, {Sy } is closed in DS . This implies DS is T1 .

(⇒) We are given that DS is a T1 quotient space. Then, for each
x ∈ T , {Dx } is a closed subset of DS . We are required to show that
Dx = f ← (x) is a closed subset of S. Since q : S → DS is continuous,
then q ← [{Dx }] = f ← (x) is closed in S, as required.
9.3 The T2 Separation Axiom or Hausdorff

Topological Space
We will now define a T2 -space. The terminology “T2 -space” helps

remind us that T2 ⇒ T1 ⇒ T0 . Although both T2 and Hausdorff
mean the same thing, the word “Hausdorff” is more commonly used.4
4
Sadly, the talented mathematician, Felix Hausdorff (along with many other
very talented European mathematicians) did not survive persecution by the Nazi
regime in Germany.
Definition 9.5 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. We say that S

is a T2 -space or Hausdorff space if, for every pair of distinct points
u and v, there exists non-intersecting open neighborhoods, U and V
such that u ∈ U and v ∈ V .
Clearly, any Hausdorff space, (S, τS ), satisfies the T1 axiom.

Hence,
if S is Hausdorff then, for each x ∈ S, {x} is a closed
subset of S.
Example 4. An infinite set, S, with the cofinite topology (also

referred to as the Zariski topology, see page 47) is T1 but not
Hausdorff since every pair of open neighborhoods will intersect with
infinitely many points in their intersection. However, it is easily
verified to be T1 .
Example 5. Any metrizable topological space, (S, τρ ), is Hausdorff
since, given distinct points a and b, Bε (a) ∩ Bε (b) = ∅ where ε <
ρ(a,b)
3 . A standard approach to verifying whether a topological space
is metrizable is to first check if it is Hausdorff. If it is not Hausdorff
then the question is settled.
9.3.1 Hausdorff characterizations

There are a few equivalent ways of expressing the Hausdorff
separation property. We present a few of the more common
characterizations.
Theorem 9.6 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. The following state-

ments are equivalent.
(a) The space, S, is Hausdorff.
(b) If u and v are distinct points in S then there exists an open
neighborhood, U, of u such that v ∈ clS U .
(c) If u ∈ S, then ∩{clS U : U is an open neighborhood of u} = {u}
(d) The set D = {(u, u) : u ∈ S} is closed in the product space,
S × S.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) be a topological space.

(a ⇒ b) We are given that S is Hausdorff. Suppose u and v are
distinct points in S. Then there exists disjoint open neighborhoods,
U and V , that contain u and v, respectively. See that U ⊆ S \V , a
closed subset of S; hence, clS U ⊆ S \V . Then v ∈ U ⊆ clS U .
(b ⇒ c) Suppose that, if u = v in S, there exists an
open neighborhood, U , of u such that v ∈ clS U . Then v ∈
∩{clS U : U is a neighborhood of u } is impossible. So, ∩{clS U :
U is a neighborhood of u } = {u}.
(c ⇒ d) Suppose that ∩{clS U : U is a neighborhood of u } = {u},
for all u ∈ S. Let D = {(a, a) ∈ S × S : a ∈ S}. We are required
to show that D is closed in S × S. Let (u, v) ∈ (S × S) \ D. Then
u and v are distinct elements of S. By hypothesis, there exists an
open neighborhood, U , of u such that v ∈ clS U . Then U × (S\clS U )
is an open neighborhood of (u, v). If a ∈ U , then a ∈ S \ clS U so
(a, a) ∈ U × (S \clS U ). So, U × (S \clS U ) does not intersect D. So,
(S × S)\D is open. Hence, D is closed.
(d ⇒ a) Suppose D is closed in S × S. Let u and v be distinct points
in S. Then (u, v) ∈ (S × S)\D. Since D is closed there exists and
open neighborhood, U × V of (u, v) which does not intersect D. Then
U and V are disjoint open neighborhoods of u and v, respectively.
So, S is Hausdorff.
In the following theorem, we show that a subspace will always

inherit the Hausdorff property from its topological space. Also, the
Hausdorff property is carried over from a set of factors, {Si }i∈I , to
the Cartesian product space, i∈I Si , they generate. The Hausdorff
property is also carried over from the domain, S, of a one-to-one
closed function, f , to its range, f [S].
However, continuous images of Hausdorff spaces need not neces-
sarily be Hausdorff, as the example following the theorem will show.
Theorem 9.7 Let (S, τS ) be a Hausdorff topological space and

{Si }i∈I be a family of Hausdorff topological spaces.
(a) If U is a subspace of S, then U is Hausdorff. That is, “Hausdorff ”
is a hereditary property.
(b) If f : S → T is a one-to-one closed function onto T, then T is

Hausdorff.
(c) The product space, i∈I Si , generated by the Hausdorff factors,
{Si }i∈I , is Hausdorff.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) be a Hausdorff topological space.
(a) Suppose u and v are distinct points in the subspace, W , of S.

Then there exists disjoint open neighborhoods, U and V , which
respectively contain the points u and v. Then U ∩ W and V ∩ W
are disjoint open neighborhoods in W , which respectively contain
the points u and v.
(b) Suppose f : S → T is a one-to-one closed function mapping S
onto T . Recall that a one-to-one closed function is also an open
function. (See the corresponding theorem on page 124.) Then
disjoint open neighborhoods U and V of u and v are mapped to
disjoint open neighborhoods of f [U ] and f [V ] of f (u) and f (v).
(c) We are given that {Si }i∈I is a family of Hausdorff topological

spaces. Let {ui }i∈I and {vi }i∈I be distinct points of i∈I Si .
Then, for some j ∈ I, uj = vj . Let Uj and Vj be disjoint open
neighborhoods of uj and vj in Sj . Then πj← [Uj ] and πj← [Vj ] are
disjoint open base elements containing {ui }i∈I and {vi }i∈I . So,

i∈I Si is Hausdorff.
9.3.2 Examples involving the Hausdorff property

Example 6. Consider the space S = {0, 1} equipped with the
discrete topology,
τd = {∅, {0}, {1}, {0, 1}}
and T = {0, 1} equipped with the topology,
τT = {∅, {0}, {0, 1}}
Let f : S → T be a one-to-one onto function defined as f (x) =

x on S. Since S is discrete, each point can serve as it own open
neighborhood and so is Hausdorff. Also, every function is continuous

on a discrete space so f is continuous on S. Use this example to
show that the continuous image of a Hausdorff space need not be
Hausdorff.
Solution: In τT , there is no open neighborhood that contains 1 but

not 0. So, T is not Hausdorff. In fact, T is not even T1 . So continuous
images of Hausdorff spaces need not be Hausdorff.
Example 7. Show that, if a continuous function, f : U → V , maps

U one-to-one into a Hausdorff space V then its domain, U , must also
be Hausdorff.
Solution: Let f : U → V be a one-to-one continuous function map-

ping U into a Hausdorff space, V. Then, since Hausdorff is a hered-
itary property, f [U ] is a Hausdorff subspace of V. Also, since f is
continuous, f ← : f [U ] → U is a one-to-one closed function onto U .
By Theorem 9.7, part (b), the space U must be Hausdorff. This is
what we were required to show.
In the following two examples we show how the Hausdorff char-
acterization in Theorem 9.6, part (d)
[S is Hausdorff] ⇔ [D = {(u, u) : u ∈ S} is a closed subset

of S × S]
can serve as a useful tool for solving certain types of problems.
Example 8. Show that, if f and g are two continuous functions each

mapping a topological space S into a Hausdorff space T , then the
set, U = {u ∈ S : f (u) = g(u)}, is a closed subset of S. That is, the
set on which f and g agree is closed in S.
Solution: Let h : S → T × T be a function defined as h(x) =

(f (x), g(x)), and let U = {u ∈ S : f (u) = g(u)}. By Theorem 9.6,
the statement,
“T Hausdorff” ⇔ “D = {(u, u) : u ∈ T } is a closed subset of T × T ”

Since both f and g are continuous on S, then so is h (see Theorem

7.12). Hence, h← [D] is closed in S. Since
h← [D] = {u ∈ S : h(u) = (f (u), g(u)) ∈ D}

= {u ∈ S : f (u) = g(u)}
=U
the set, U , is closed in S, as required.

Example 9. Show that, if f : S → T is continuous, where T is
Hausdorff then the graph of f ,
G = {(u, f (u)) : u ∈ S} ⊆ S × T
is closed in S × T .
Solution: Let t : S × T → T × T be defined as
t(u, v) = (f (u), v)
Then, since f and the identity map are continuous on S, t is con-

tinuous on S × T . Hence, since T is Hausdorff, by Theorem 9.6,
D = {(u, u) : u ∈ T } is a closed subset of T × T . Thus t← [D] is
closed in S × T . But
t← [D] = {(u, v) ∈ S × T : t(u, v) ∈ D}

= {(u, v) ∈ S × T : (f (u), v) ∈ D}
= {(u, v) ∈ S × T : f (u) = v}
= {(u, f (u)) ∈ S × T : u ∈ S}
=G
So the graph G is closed in S × T .
Theorem 9.8 Let S and T be two spaces where T is Hausdorff.

If D is a dense subset of S and f : S → T and g : S → T are
continuous on S which agree on D, then f = g on S.
Proof. Let D be a dense subset of S such that f (x) = g(x) for all
x ∈ D.
Suppose a ∈ S \D. Then f (a) = g(a) in T . Since T is Hausdorff,
then there exists disjoint basic open sets, Bf (a) and Bg(a) with empty
intersection.
Both f ← [Bf (a) ] and g← [Bg(a) ] are open in S and each contains
the point a. But they should have empty intersection. Contradiction.
So, S \D must be empty. So, D = S.
9.4 Completely Hausdorff Spaces
We will now slightly strength the Hausdorff property to one called

the completely Hausdorff property. So that we understand why this
stronger property is significant we will confirm that there are Haus-
dorff spaces which are not completely Hausdorff.
Definition 9.9 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. We say that a

space is completely Hausdorff if and only if for any pair of points
a and b in S, there exist open neighborhoods U and V of a and b,
respectively, such that
clS U ∩ clS V = ∅
The completely Hausdorff property is also represented by T2 1 . It is

2
also sometimes referred to as a Urysohn space.
Clearly every completely Hausdorff space is Hausdorff. But,
Hausdorff ⇒ completely Hausdorff
as the following example shows. Equivalently, T2 ⇒ T2 1 .

2
Example 10. Let
T = intR2 ( [0, 1] × [0, 1])

and
S = T ∪ {(0, 0), (1, 0)}
The points in T have basic neighborhoods which are the usual

Euclidean open balls. The basic open neighborhoods of the point
(0, 0) are defined to be open rectangles of the form
B(0,0) = {(0, 1/2) × (0, 1/n) ∪ {(0, 0)} : n > 0}
where (0, 1/2) and (0, 1/n) are open intervals. The basic open neigh-
borhoods of the point (1, 0) are defined to be open rectangles of the
form
B(1,0) = {(1/2, 1) × (0, 1/m) ∪ {(1, 0)} : m > 0}
Verify that the basic open neighborhoods of (0, 0) and (1, 0) can
have empty intersection but that their closures will always have a
point of the form (1/2, x) in common. So, the topological space, S,
is Hausdorff but not completely Hausdorff.
9.5 T3 -Spaces and “Regular Spaces”
The separation axioms, T0 , T1 , T2 and T2 1 illustrate four different

2
ways that open sets can separate two sets of points. The completely
Hausdorff (T2 1 -space) space imposes the strongest conditions since
2
T2 1 ⇒ T2 ⇒ T1 ⇒ T0 .
2
We now want to use open sets to separate a non-empty closed set,

F , from a point, x, such that x ∈ S \F . To do this we will define a
T3 -space by using the definition of a T2 -space as a model.
Definition 9.10 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space.

(a) We say that S is a T3 -space if, for any non-empty closed subset,
F and point v ∈ S\F , there exists non-intersecting open subsets,
U and V such that F ⊆ U and v ∈ V .
(b) If (S, τS ) is both T1 and T3 then we will say that S is a regular
space.
Let’s consider the most trivial of topological spaces, the indiscrete

space, (S, τi ), where |S| > 1. There does not exist a “closed F and
x ∈ S\F ” in S and so S is (vacuously) a T3 -space. But distinct points
u and v in S are not contained in disjoint open sets and so, S is not
Hausdorff. So, we have a situation here which needs fixing: T3 ⇒ T2 .
We can avoid this situation by defining “regular space = T1 + T3 ”.
If S is both T1 and T3 and u, v are distinct points then, since S is
T1 , they are both closed, and, since S is T3 , they are, respectively,
contained in disjoint open sets and so S is T2 .
Then “[T3 + T1 ] ⇒ T2 ⇒ T1 ⇒ T0 ”. Equivalently,
Regular ⇒ Hausdorff ⇒ T1 ⇒ T0
In the following example, we produce a topological space which

is Hausdorff but not regular.
Example 11. Let (R, τ ) be the space of real numbers equipped with
the usual topology, τ . Then B = {(a, b) ⊂ R : a < b} denotes the
standard open base of R. Let
S = B ∪ {Q}
the standard open base be increased by one element, {Q}. That is,
the set of all rationals is a subbase element and so is declared to be
an open set. We declare S to be a subbase for some topology τS
on R. Show that the topological space, (R, τS ), is Hausdorff but not
regular.
Solution: Note that Q belongs to τS but is not an element of the
usual topology, τ, and so S = B ∪ {Q} ⊆ τ . Since every element of
B is a base element of τ, then τ ⊂ τS . So τS is strictly stronger then
the usual topology on R. Since (R, τ ) is Hausdorff, then so is (R, τS ).
We now claim that (R, τS ) is not regular. Since R is Hausdorff, R is
T1 . So, we are required to show that the topological space generated
by S is not T3 . Let J = R\Q. Since Q ∈ τS , Q is an open subset
of R with respect to τS . So, J is a closed subset of R with respect
to τS .
Then 1 is a point which does not belong to the closed subset, J,
of R. Suppose U is any open neighborhood of 1. Then there exists
and open interval (a, b) such that 1 ∈ (a, b) ⊆ U . Since (a, b) ∩ J = ∅,
then there can be no pair of disjoint open sets which contain 1 and
J, respectively. So (R, τS ) is not regular.
We now present two useful characterizations of “regular”.
Theorem 9.11 Let (S, τS ) be a T1 topological space. The following

statements about S are equivalent.
(a) The space S is regular.
(b) For every x ∈ S and open neighborhood, U of x, there exists an
open neighborhood, V of x, such that x ∈ clS V ⊆ U .
(c) For every x ∈ S and closed subset F disjoint from {x}, there
exists an open neighborhood, V of x, such that clS V ∩ F = ∅.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) be a T1 topological space.

(a ⇒ b) We are given that S is regular and that U is an open neigh-
borhood of x ∈ S. Then S \U and {x} are disjoint closed subsets of
S. Since S is regular, there exists disjoint open sets, V and W , con-
taining x and S \U , respectively. Then S \W is a closed set, entirely
contains V and is entirely contained in U . So, clS V ⊆ S \W ⊆ U .
(b ⇒ c) We are given that for every x ∈ S and open neighborhood,
U of x, there exists an open neighborhood, V of x, such that x ∈
clS V ⊆ U . Let x ∈ S and F be a closed subset disjoint from {x}.
By hypothesis, there exists an open neighborhood, V , of x such that
clS V ⊆ S \F .
(c ⇒ a) We are given that, for every x ∈ S and closed subset F
disjoint from {x}, there exists an open neighborhood, V of x, such
that clS V ∩ F = ∅. Let x ∈ S and F be a closed subset disjoint from
{x}. By hypothesis, there exists an open neighborhood, V , of x such
that clS V ∩ F = ∅. Then V and S \(clS V ) are disjoint open sets of
containing x and F respectively. So, S is T3 . Since S is Hausdorff, it
is T1 , hence, S is regular.
Example 12. Show that any metrizable space is regular.

Solution: Suppose (S, τρ ) is a metrizable space whose open sets
are generated by a metric, ρ. Metrizable spaces are known to be
Hausdorff and so are T1 .
Let y ∈ S and U be an open neighborhood of y. Then there exists

ε > 0 such that the ball, Bε (y), (center y and radius ε) is entirely
contained in U . Then, if V = Bε/3 (y), clS V = {x : ρ(x, y) ≤ ε/3} ⊆
Bε (x) ⊆ U . By Theorem 9.11, S is regular.
9.5.1 Basic properties of regular spaces

In the following theorems, we confirm that “regular” is a hereditary
property and that it carries over products, in both directions.
Theorem 9.12 Subspaces of regular spaces are regular.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) be a regular topological space and (T, τT ) be a

subspace of S.
Any point, x, in T is a point in S and so is closed in S. Then {x}
is closed in T . We must conclude that T is T1 .
Let {x} and F be disjoint closed subsets of T . Then there exists
a closed subset, F ∗ , of S such that F = F ∗ ∩ T . By hypothesis, there
exists disjoint open subsets, U and V , of S which contain x and F ∗ ,
respectively. Then the disjoint open subsets, U ∩ T and V ∩ T , of T
contain x and F , respectively. We can then conclude that T is regular
and so “regular” is a hereditary topological property.
9.5.2 Semiregular spaces revisited

Recall that an open set, U , is regular open in S, if
U = intS clS U
Also, from Definition 5.15,

a space (S, τ ) is said to be semiregular if the set, Ro(S),
of all regular open subsets of S forms a base for the open
sets of S.
Although it is not explicitly stated in the original definition 5.15,

semiregularity is traditionally defined on spaces which are assumed
to be Hausdorff only. We will adopt this tradition here. We will show
that the “regular” separation axiom on a space, S, forces semiregu-
larity on S.
Theorem 9.13 A regular space is semiregular.

Proof. Let (S, τ ) be a regular space. To prove that S is semiregular
it will suffice, by definition, to show that Ro(S) is a base for the open
sets of S.
Suppose u ∈ S and B is an open neighborhood of u. By Theorem
9.11, there exists an open subset, U , of S such that u ∈ clS U ⊆ B.
Then u ∈ intS clS U ⊆ B. Since intS clS U ∈ Ro(S), then Ro(S) is a
base for open sets of S, as required.
Theorem 9.14 A regular space is completely Hausdorff.

Proof. The proof is straightforward and so is left an exercise.
In Example 10 on page 220, we presented a topological space

which is easily verified to be semiregular but is not completely Haus-
dorff (since the rectangular neighborhoods do not have closures which
separate the points (0, 0) and (1, 0). From this example we can con-
clude that
“semiregular” does not imply “completely Hausdorff.”
We then have the followings diagram of implications,
completely Hausdorff
⇑
regular ⇒ semiregular ⇒ Hausdorff ⇒ T1 ⇒ T0
⇓
completely Hausdorff
Equivalently,
T3 + T1 ⇒ T2 1 ⇒ T2 ⇒ T1 ⇒ T0
2
We will now examine regular separation properties involving

products.
Theorem
9.15 Let {Si }i∈I be a family of topological spaces and
S = i∈I Si be a corresponding product space. Then S is regular if
and only if each factor, Si , is regular.
Proof. In Theorem 9.4, it is shown that the T1 -property carries

over both from products to factors and from factors to products. It
will then suffice to show that this holds true for the T3 property.

We are given that i∈I Si is a T3 -space. We have shown that
(⇒)
i∈I Si contains a homeomorphic copy of each Si . Since “regular” is
a hereditary property, each Si is T3 and so is regular.

(⇐) We are given that S = i∈I Si is a product space and each Si
is T3 .
Let uii∈I ∈ S and W be any open neighborhood of uii∈I . Then
there exists a base element, ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ Ffinite ⊆ I}, of S such that
uii∈I ∈ ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ Ffinite ⊆ I} ⊆ W
Since each Si is regular, there exists open Si -neighborhoods,

{Vi }i∈F ⊆I , such that ui ∈ Vi ⊆ clSi Vi ⊆ Ui for i ∈ Ffinite . Then
uii∈I ∈ ∩{πi← [Vi ] : i ∈ F } ⊆ clS [∩{πi← [Vi ] : i ∈ F }]

= ∩{clS πi← [Vi ] : i ∈ F }
= ∩{πi← [clSi Vi ] : i ∈ F }
⊆ ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F }
⊆W
Since
uii∈I ∈ ∩{πi← [Vi ] : i ∈ F } ⊆ clS [∩{πi← [Vi ] : i ∈ F }] ⊆ W
then, by the characterization theorem above, S is T3 and so is regular.
9.5.3 A few more examples involving the regular

separation axiom
Example 13. Show that the Moore plane is regular. (For a descrip-
tion of the Moore plane, see the example on page 92.)
Solution: Let (S, τS ) denote the Moore plane. The proof that S is
T1 is straightforward and so is left as an exercise. We now show that
S is T3 .
In the Moore plane there are two types of points. Those points,
(x, y), whose basic open neighborhoods are of the form Bε (x, y) and
the points of the form, (x, 0), which have basic open neighborhoods
of the form
Bε (x, y) ∪ {(x, 0)} where ε = y
So, we consider these two cases separately.
Let U be an open base neighborhood, Bε (x, y), of (x, y), y = 0.
Then
(x, y) ∈ clS Bε/3 (x, y) ⊂ U
Let V be an open base neighborhood of (x, 0) of the form, Bε (x, y) ∪
{(x, 0)}, where ε = y. Then
(x, 0) ∈ clS Bε/3 (x, y/3) ∪ {(x, 0)} ⊂ V
We conclude that the Moore plane is T3 . So, S is regular.
Example 14. Recall from Definition 5.16 that a space is said to
be zero-dimensional if it has a base of clopen sets. Show that zero-
dimensional spaces which are T1 are regular spaces.
Solution: Let F be a closed subset of a zero-dimensional T1 -space
S. Then S has a base of clopen subsets. If x ∈ S \F , then there is a
subset, B, which is both open and closed such that x ∈ B ⊆ S \F .
Then B is an open neighborhood of x which is disjoint from the open
neighborhood, S \B of F . So, S is regular.
9.6 T4 -Spaces and Normal Spaces
Our final axiom of separation “by open sets” involves, what we will
call, “T4 -space”. “Normal” spaces will be those T4 -spaces which are
also T1 .
Definition 9.16 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. We say that S

is a T4 -space if, for any pair of non-empty disjoint closed subsets, F
and W , in S, there exists non-intersecting open subsets, U and V
containing F and W , respectively.
Example 15. As our first example of a T4 space we consider the

topological space, (R, τu ), where τu = {(x, ∞) : x ∈ R} ∪ {∅, R}.
Since the closed subsets of R are of the form (−∞, y], disjoint pairs
of non-empty closed sets do not exist in R and so R is vacuously
T4 . Consider the subsets, F = (−∞, 5] and {6}. Any open subset
U which contains F will contain the point 6. So, (R, τu ) is not T3 .
Then, T4 ⇒ T3 .
We would prefer that spaces satisfying our next level of closed set
separation be, at least, regular spaces. We rectify this situation by
defining normal spaces as ones respecting the rule,
“normal” ⇔ T4 + T1
Let us verify why this will work. If S is T1 + T4 and F is a non-

empty closed subset of S, for {u} ⊂ F , we would be guaranteed
the existence of disjoint open subsets, U an V , which, respectively,
contain the closed subsets {u} and F , hence, S would be both T1 and
T3 ; by definition, S would be regular. So we would have the desired
chain of implications,
normal ⇒ regular ⇒ completely Hausdorff ⇒ Hausdorff ⇒ T1 ⇒ T0
We will then proceed with this definition of a normal topological

space.
Definition 9.17 If (S, τS ) is both T1 and T4 then we will say that

S is a normal space.5
So,
T4 + T1 ⇒ T3 + T1 ⇒ T2 1 ⇒ T2 ⇒ T1 ⇒ T0
2
5
Readers may find that, in the literature, many authors invert the definitions
of “T4 ” and “normal” as well as for “T3 ” and “regular”. So, when consulting
other texts we caution the reader to verify carefully which version the particular
author has a preference for. Some writers may feel strongly about their chosen
version. But as long as one is aware of such possible discrepancies, most readers
will easily adapt to a particular version, as long as the author is consistent with
its use throughout the body of the text.
Before we proceed with various examples, we provide a few important

characterizations of those spaces we refer to as being “normal”.
Theorem 9.18 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space. The following

statements about S are equivalent.
(a) The space S is normal.
(b) For every proper closed subset, F in S, and proper open set, U
containing F, there exists an open set, V containing F, such that
F ∈ clS V ⊆ U .
(c) For every pair of disjoint closed sets, F and W in S, there exists
and open subset U such that F ⊆ U and clS U ∩ W = ∅.
(d) For every pair of disjoint closed sets, F and W in S, there exists
disjoint open subsets U and V containing F and W, respectively,
whose closures, clS U and clS V, do not intersect.
Proof. We are given that (S, τS ) be a topological space.
(a ⇒ b) Suppose S is normal. Let F be a proper closed subset of S
and U be a proper open neighborhood of F . Then S \U is a closed
subset of S which does not meet F . Since S is normal, there exists
disjoint open subsets V and W containing F and S\U , respectively.
Then clS V ⊆ S \W , where clS V ∩ S \U = ∅. Hence, F ⊆ clS V ⊆ U .
(b ⇒ c) Suppose that, for every proper closed subset, F in S, and
proper open set, U containing F , there exists an open set, V contain-
ing F , such that F ∈ clS V ⊆ U . Let F and W be a pair of disjoint
closed sets in S. Then S \ W is an open subset which contains F .
By hypothesis, there exists an open set, V containing F , such that
F ∈ clS V ⊆ S \W . Then clS V ∩ W = ∅.
(c ⇒ d) Suppose that for every pair of disjoint closed sets, F and W
in S, there exists and open subset U such that F ⊆ U and clS U ∩
W = ∅. Let F and W be a pair of disjoint closed sets in S. By
hypothesis, there exists and open subset U such that F ⊆ U and
clS U ∩ W = ∅. Again by hypothesis, there exists and open subset V
such that W ⊆ V and clS V ∩ clS U = ∅.
(d ⇒ a) Suppose that for every pair of disjoint closed sets, F and W
in S, there exists disjoint open subsets U and V containing F and W ,
respectively, whose closures, clS U and clS V , do not intersect. Then
there exists disjoint open subsets U and V containing F and W ,

respectively, such that U and V , do not intersect. So, S is normal.
It is useful to know that the class of all normal spaces contains

the class of all metrizable spaces.
Theorem 9.19 Metrizable topological spaces are normal spaces.

Proof. Metrizable spaces are Hausdorff, hence T1 . Let ρ be a metric
on S.
We now show that S is T4 . Let F and W be disjoint closed subsets
of S. If x ∈ F and y ∈ W there exists αx and βy such that Bαx (x) ∩
W = ∅ and Bβy (y) ∩ F = ∅ . Then
U = ∪{Bαx /3 (x) : x ∈ F }
V = ∪{Bβy /3 (y) : y ∈ W }
are open sets containing F and W , respectively.

We claim that U ∩ V = ∅. Suppose not. Suppose q ∈ U ∩ V . Then
there exists some a ∈ F and b ∈ W such that q ∈ Bαa /3 (a)∩Bβb /3 (b).
Suppose, WLOG, αa ≥ βb . Then
ρ(a, b) ≤ ρ(a, q) + ρ(b, q)

< αa /3 + βb /3
≤ 2αa /3
< αa
But αa was chosen so that Bαa (a) ∩ W = ∅. Contradiction. So,

U ∩ V = ∅, as claimed. So, S is T4 . We conclude that S is normal,
as required.
Since, for every n ≥ 1, Rn equipped with the usual topology is

metrizable, then. . .
for every natural number n, Rn is a normal topological space.

In Example 5 on page 162, we showed that the countably infi-

nite product of a metric space is metrizable. Then S = n∈N R is
metrizable; so, S is normal.
Unlike regular spaces normal spaces are not hereditary. But they
are closed-hereditary (that is, closed subsets inherit the normal prop-
erty). Also, unlike regular spaces, the normal property does not gen-
erally carry over from factors to their product space, even when the
product is finite. However, if the product space is normal then so will
be each of its factors.
Theorem 9.20 Let (S, τS ) be a normal topological space.

(a) If the function f : S → f [S] = T is a closed continuous function
onto the space (T, τT ) then T is normal.
(b) If T is aclosed subspace of S then T is normal.
(c) If S = i∈I Si is a normal product space of topological spaces
{Si : i ∈ I}, then each of its factors, Si , is normal.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) be a normal topological space.
(a) Suppose f : S → f [S] = T is a closed continuous function. Since
S is T1 and f is closed, then T is T1 .
Let F and W be two disjoint closed subsets of T . Continuity of
f guarantees that f ← [F ] and f ← [W ] are disjoint closed subsets
of S. Then there exists disjoint open sets U and V containing F
and W , respectively. Let A = T \f [S \U ] and B = T \f [S \V ].
Since f is closed, A and B are disjoint open neighborhoods of
F and W , respectively. It quickly follows that T is T4 . So, T is
normal.
(b) Let T be a closed subspace of S. Then T is T1 . If F and W are
disjoint closed subsets of the closed subspace T , then they are
disjoint closed subsets of S. It quickly follows that T is T4 . So,
T is normal.
(c) We are given that S = i∈I Si is normal. There exists a home-
omorphism, h : Si → S, which embeds each Si in S (Theorem
7.14). Then S \ h[Si ] is easily verified to be open in S and so
h[Si ] is a closed subspace of S. Since closed subspaces of normal
spaces are normal, then h[Si ] is normal and so, Si is normal.
9.6.1 The ordinal spaces [0, ωα ] and [0, ωα )

are normal
We now investigate whether ordinal spaces such as [0, ωα ] or [0, ωα )
satisfy the normal property. The ordinal space has a topology, τω ,
which has an open base whose elements are of the form (α, β]. Also,
since the ordinal space is well-ordered, non-empty sets have an ordi-
nal which is a supremum (infimum) of that set.
Example 16. Let ωα be any ordinal number and let S = [0, ωα ].
Show that the ordinal space (S, τω ) is normal, independent of the
value ωα . The proof that shows [0, ωα ) that is normal is practically
the same. (See the reference to “ordinal space” at Definition 5.14 on
page 110.)
Solution: Verifying that S is T1 is left to the reader. Let F and W
be disjoint non-empty closed subsets of S. If μ ∈ F and μ = 0 let
Sμ = {x ∈ W : x < μ} = [0, μ) ∩ W
If Sμ is empty, let xμ = 0. Then (xμ , μ] is an open neighborhood

of μ ∈ F .
Suppose Sμ is not empty. In this case, let xμ = sup Sμ .6 Since W
is closed, then xμ ∈ W . Then the open set, (xμ , μ] is a basic open
neighborhood of μ ∈ F which does not intersect W .
This is repeated for each element, μ, of F , to obtain, the open
neighborhood
UF = ∪{(xμ , μ] : μ ∈ F }
of F . The set UF clearly contains no elements of W .

By applying precisely the same procedure we obtain an open
neighborhood
UW = ∪{(xα , α] : α ∈ W }
of W , which contains no elements of F .
6
The existence of the supremum can be justified by the fact that the class of
all ordinals is well-ordered. See the related statements from set theory in the
appendix.
We need now only verify that UW ∩UF = ∅. If so, then S is T4 and

hence is normal. The standard approach is to suppose UF ∩ UW = ∅.
Then there exists some μ ∈ F and some α ∈ W , such that (xμ , μ]∩
(xα , α] is non-empty. Without loss of generality, suppose α < μ. But,
this can’t be, since this would force α ∈ (xμ , μ], when we know that
(xμ , μ] ∩ W = ∅.
So, UW ∩ UF = ∅. We conclude that S is T4 hence is normal.
Proceed similarly for S = [0, ωα ).
Example 17. Show that the deleted Tychonoff plank
T = [0, ω1 ] × [0, ω0 ] \ {(ω1 , ω0 )}
is not normal. (See page 167 for a description of this space.)

Solution: Recall that T is topologized as a product space. Consider
U = [0, ω1 ) viewed as a closed interval subset of [0, ω1 ) itself and
consider V = {ω0 }, a singleton set. Then the subset F = U × V
is a closed subset (the top edge) of T with respect to the subspace
topology (since its complement is easily seen to be open). We will
also consider the disjoint closed subset,
K = {ω1 } × [0, ω0 ) ⊆ T
If T is normal then we should be able to separate F from K with a

pair of non-intersecting open sets.
Suppose M is an open set in T which contains K.
A basic neighborhood of u in K which would be entirely contained
in M would be of the form
Wu = (αu , γu ] × (βu , μu ]
If Wu = (αu , γu ] × (βu , μu ] ⊆ M for each u ∈ K
K ⊆ M = ∪{Wu : u ∈ K}
We claim that M ∩ F = ∅. Since there can be at most countably

many u’s in K,
sup {αu : u ∈ K} = ρ < ω1

since the sup of a countable set cannot reach the uncountable ordinal
ω1 . So (ρ, ω1 ) ∩ M = ∅. So, no open neighborhood M of K can miss
F , as claimed.
So, T is not normal.
Example 18. Show that the subspace of a normal space need not
be normal.
Solution: We showed in the examples above that the Tychonoff

plank is normal but that its subspace, the Deleted Tychonoff plank,
is not.
Concept Review
1. What is the formal definition of a T0 -space?

2. Is there a topological space which is not T0 ? If so provide an
example.
3. Show that an infinite second countable T0 -space cannot have a
cardinality larger than 2ℵ0 .
4. What is the formal definition of a T1 -space, emphasizing in the
process how it is different from a T0 -space.
5. Give a characterization of a T1 -space.
6. Does a subspace of a T1 -space necessarily inherit the T1 property?
7. Does a closed function f carry the T1 property of its domain, S,
to its range f [S].
8. Does the T1 property
of all its factors, Si , carry over to the
product
space, i∈I S i ?
9. If i∈I Si possesses the T1 property does each of the factors
necessarily possess the T1 property?
10. Define the Hausdorff property (T2 property) on a topological
space.
11. Provide three different characterizations of the Hausdorff topo-
logical property.
12. Is the Hausdorff property carried over from the domain of a con-
tinuous function, f : S → T , to its range f [S]? What if the
function f was just closed? How about if f was both one-to-one
and closed?
13. If all factors of a product space are Hausdorff, is the product

space in question necessarily Hausdorff?
14. If f : S → T is a function and G = {(u, f (u) : u ∈ S} is the
graph of f in S ×T , give a condition on S or T that will guarantee
that the graph, G, is closed in S × T .
15. Define both a T3 -space and a regular space.
16. Does T3 imply Hausdorff? Does “regular” imply Hausdorff?
17. Give two characterizations of “regular space”.
18. Are metrizable spaces necessarily “regular”? Are regular spaces
always metrizable?
19. Is “regular” a hereditary property?
20. Does the “regular” property always carry over from a product to
its factors? What about, from the factors to the product?
21. Define both a T4 -space and a normal space.
22. Does T4 imply “regular”? Does “normal” imply “regular”?
23. Give three characterizations of “normal space”.
24. Are metrizable spaces necessarily “normal”?
25. What kind of function will always carry a normal property from
its domain to its range?
26. Is the normal property hereditary? If not, what kind of subspace
will inherit the normal property from its superset?
27. Is the product of normal spaces necessarily normal?
28. Are open ordinal spaces [0, ωα ) normal spaces?
29. Is the deleted Tychonoff plank normal?
Exercises
1. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be two topological spaces and f : S →

T and g : T → S be two continuous functions satisfying the
property: (g ◦f )(x) = x for all x in S.
(a) Show that if T is Hausdorff, then S must also be Hausdorff.
(b) Show that f [S] is closed subset of T .
2. Suppose S = {x0 , x1 , . . . , xn } is a finite set equipped with a topol-
ogy, τS , which makes of (S, τS ) a Hausdorff space. Describe all such
topologies on S.
3. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces where S is Hausdorff

and contains a dense subset D. Suppose f : S → T is a continuous
function such that f |S : D → f [D] is a homeomorphism. Show
that f [S \D] ⊆ T \f [D].
4. Suppose (S, τS ) is regular and (T, τT ) is a topological space. Sup-
pose the function f : S → T is a continuous function mapping
S onto T . Show that if f is both an open and closed function as
well, then T is Hausdorff.
5. Suppose (S, τS ) is a topological space and K is a non-empty subset
of S. Suppose τS = {U ⊆ S : K ⊆ U } ∪ {∅, S}. Verify that this is
indeed a valid topology on S. If so, are there any other properties
that must be satisfied if we want S to be regular?
6. Suppose (S, τS ) is a finite regular topological space. Is (S, τS ) nec-
essarily normal? Why?
7. Suppose (S, τS ) is a regular topological space and K is an infinite
subset of S. Show that there exists an infinite family of open
subsets, {Ui ⊆ S : i ∈ N, Ui ∩ K = ∅}, such that, if i = j, then
clS Ui ∩ clS Uj = ∅.
8. Suppose (S, τS ) is a normal topological space and that R is
an equivalence relation on S. Let (S, τθ ) be the quotient space
induced by the natural map θ : S → S/R. Show that, if θ is both
open and closed, then (S, τθ ) is a normal topological space.
9. Let S = [0, 1] and τ denote the usual topology on S. If T =
Q ∩ [0, 1], let τS be the topology on S which is generated by the
subbase, S = τ ∪ P(T ). Show that (S, τS ) is a normal topological
space.
Chapter 10
Separation with Continuous

Functions
Abstract
In this section we will investigate another method for separating closed
sets. A function, f : S → [0, 1], which continuously maps a topological
space, S, onto the closed interval [0, 1] in such a way that f has differ-
ent constant values on a pair of disjoint closed subsets can be used to
separate sets.
10.1 Normal Spaces Revisited
Suppose we are given a space (S, τS ) and a continuous function

f : S → [0, 1]. If, for a pair of disjoint closed subsets A and B of
S, A ⊆ f ← [{0}] and B ⊆ f ← [{1}] then we will say that
f separates A and B.
Suppose that, for a pair of disjoint closed subsets, A and B, there

exists a continuous function, f : S → [0, 1] which separates A and
B, then we can easily generate a pair of disjoint open sets, U =
f ← [[0, 1/2)] and V = f ← [ (1/2, 1] ], which “separate” A and B. If
this holds true for every pair of disjoint closed sets we could conclude
that such a space, S, is a normal topological space. This provides us
with another way of recognizing a normal space.
On the other hand, suppose a space, S, is known to be normal. If
A and B are disjoint closed sets in S, are we guaranteed the existence
237
of a “separating function”, f : S → [0, 1], which will separate A and

B? The answer to this question is not obvious. Proving the existence
of a separating real-valued continuous function on S which serves
this particular purpose is not a trivial task. In fact, it can be quite
hard. The statement,
For each pair of disjoint closed subsets, A and B, of S there
exists a separating function for A and B if and only if S is
normal.
is titled Urysohn’s lemma.1

Its proof invokes the previously proven characterization of the
normal property:
The topological space S is normal if and only if, for every
non-empty closed set F and open neighborhood U of F ,
there exists another open neighborhood V of F such that
clS V ⊆ U .
Constructing the required continuous function on a normal topo-

logical space just from this characterization of normality requires
quite a bit of mathematical prowess. In this chapter, we will care-
fully work our way through this proof.
10.2 Urysohn’s Lemma
The proof of Urysohn’s lemma will be presented in two parts. We

will first discuss a method for constructing a function on a topolog-
ical space and then prove continuity of this function. The proof of
Urysohn’s lemma will follow.
We will begin by highlighting a few properties of a countable
union of subsets, Vn , of [0, 1]. For each n ∈ N\{0}, we define a subset
Vn as
m
Vn = : m = 1, 2, 3, . . . , 2n−1
2n
1
Named after the Russian mathematician Pavel Urysohn (1898–1924). Urysohn
was a gifted mathematician destined to make great contributions to mathematics.
He drowned while on holiday at the young age of 26 years old. The proof of
Urysohn’s lemma is an illustration of his deep insight in a mathematical problem.
Separation with Continuous Functions 239
For example,

V1 = 1/21

1 2 3
V2 = , ,
22 22 22

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
V3 = , , , , , ,
23 23 23 23 23 23 23
..
.

1 2 3 2100 − 1
V100 = , , , . . . ,
2100 2100 2100 2100
..
.
Note that, for each n, Vn ⊂ Vn+1 . So, every Vn contains the elements
of its predecessors and some. Let
J = ∪{Vn : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
The set, J, is referred to as the dyadic rationals in [0, 1]. Then J

is countably infinite, dense2 and linearly ordered in [0, 1]. That is,
[0, 1]\J contains no intervals and, even though J contains neither 0
nor 1, we have 0 = inf (J) and 1 = sup (J). So, J can be used as a
countably infinite indexing set.
With this definition in mind, we are now set to formally state and
prove Urysohn’s lemma. Even though we presented it as a theorem
it is generally referred to, in the literature, as a lemma.
Theorem 10.1 Urysohn’s lemma.3 Let (S, τS ) be a T1 topological

space. The topological space (S, τS ) is normal if and only if given a
pair of disjoint non-empty closed sets, F and W , in S there exists
a continuous function f : S → [0, 1] such that, F ⊆ f ← [{0}] and
W ⊆ f ← [{1}].
2
To see “dense”: For any interval (a, b), 21n < b − a, for some n. Then, 1 <
b2 − a2n implies a2n + 1 < b2n , hence there must exist an integer, m, such that
n
a2n < m < b2n ⇒ a < m/2n < b.

3
This should not be confused with Urysohn’s Extension theorem.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) be a T1 topological space.

(⇐) We are given a pair of disjoint closed sets, F and W . Also, we are
given that there exists a continuous function f : S → [0, 1] such that
F ⊆ f ← [{0}] and W ⊆ f ← [{1}]. Then f ← [ [0, 1/3) ] and f ← [ (2/3, 1] ]
are disjoint open sets containing F and W , respectively. It follows
that S is normal.
(⇒) Suppose S is normal and F and W are disjoint non-empty closed
sets in S. Since S\W is an open neighborhood of F, there exists and
open subset U1/2 such that F ⊆ U1/2 ⊆ clS U1/2 ⊆ S \W . Normality
of S allows us to repeat this step with dyadic rationals, { 212 , 222 , 232 }
as index set, to obtain the chain
F ⊆ U1/4 ⊆ clS U1/4 ⊆ U2/4 ⊆ clS U2/4 ⊆ U3/4 ⊆ clS U3/4 ⊆ S \W
More generally, for each n, let Vn = {U i : i = 1 to 2n − 1} where

2n
F ⊂U 1 ⊆ clS U 1 ⊂ · · · ⊂ U i−1 ⊆ clS U i−1 ⊂ U i ⊂ · · · ⊂ U 2n −1 ⊂ S \W

2n 2n 2n 2n 2n 2n
From Vn we inductively construct Vn+1 with the same properties and

where Vn ⊂ Vn+1 . Let V = ∪{Vn : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}. We obtain the
countably infinite set, {Ui : i ∈ J} where, for all j < i in J,
F ⊂ Uj ⊆ clS Uj ⊆ Ui ⊆ clS Ui ⊂ S \W
W ⊆ S \clS Ui ⊆ S \Ui ⊂ S \Uj ⊆ S \clS Uj ⊂ S \F
Also, for all i, W ⊂ S \clS Ui .

Define
U0 = ∩{Ui : i ∈ J} = ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ J}
U1 = ∩{S \ clS Ui : i ∈ J} = ∩{S \Ui : i ∈ J}
where neither U0 nor U1 is empty. Then
S \U1 = S \∩{S \ clS Ui : i ∈ J} = ∪{clS Ui : i ∈ J}
So, we have the strictly increasing chains of inclusions,
F ⊆ U0 ⊂ · · · ⊂ Ui ⊆ clS Ui ⊂ · · · ⊆ ∪{Ui }i∈J ⊆ ∪{clS Ui }i∈J

= S \U1 ⊂ S \W
W ⊆ U1 = ∩{S \clS Ui }i∈J ⊂ · · · ⊂ S \clS Ui ⊆ S \Ui ⊂ · · ·

⊆ S \U0 ⊆ S \F
Note that for a point x in S
x ∈ U0 ⇔ x ∈ Ui for all i ⇔ x ∈ clS Ui for all i

x ∈ U1 ⇔ x ∈ S \clS Ui for all i ∈ J ⇔ x ∈ S \Ui for all i
So,
x ∈ U0 ∪ U1 ⇔ x ∈ U0 and x ∈ U1
⇔ x ∈ clS Ut and x ∈ S \Uk for some k, t ∈ J
⇔ x ∈ S \clS Ut and x ∈ Uk , for some k, t ∈ J (∗ )
⇔ x ∈ S \clS Ut ∩ Uk , for some k, t ∈ J (∗∗ )
So, if x ∈ U0 ∪ U1 x ∈ S\clS Ut ∩ Uk , an open neighborhood of x in S.

For any given x ∈ S, let
Jx = {i ∈ J : x ∈ Ui }
Jx∗ = {i ∈ J : x ∈ S \Ui }
a proper subset of [0, 1]. See that glbJx = lubJx∗ .

We will define a function, f : S → [0, 1], as follows:

0 If x ∈ Ui for all i ∈ J
f (x) = ∗
glbJx = lubJx otherwise
See that
x ∈ U0 ⇔ x ∈ ∩{Ui : i ∈ J}
⇔ x ∈ Ui for all i
⇔ glb{i : x ∈ Ui } = glb(0, 1] = 0 = f (x)
So, f ← (0) = U0
Also, see that
x ∈ U1 ⇔ x ∈ ∩{S \Ui : i ∈ J}
⇔ x ∈ S \Ui for all i
⇔ lub{i : x ∈ S \Ui } = lub[0, 1) = 1 = lubJx∗ = f (x)
So, f ← (1) = U1 . We then have,
F ⊆ U0 = f ← [{0}]
W ⊆ U1 = f ← [{1}]
Claim 1: For each k ∈ J,
f [clS Uk ] ⊆ [0, k]
Proof of claim: Let x ∈ clS Uk , then for any i > k, x ∈ Ui (since

clS Uk ⊂ Ui ). So, Jx contains (k, 1]. So, glbJx ≤ k. That is, f (x) ≤ k.
So, f [clS Uk ] ⊆ [0, k], as claimed.
So, if f (x) > k then x ∈ clS Uk .
Claim 2: For each k ∈ J,
f [S \Uk ] ⊆ [k, 1]
Proof of claim: Let x ∈ S \ Uk , then for any i < k, x ∈ S \ Ui

(since S \Ui ⊂ S \Uk ). So, Jx∗ contains [0, k). Then lubJx∗ ≥ k. That
is f (x) ≥ k. So, f [S \ Uk ] ⊆ [k, 1], as claimed. So, if x ∈ Uk , then
f (x) > k.
We now prove that f : S → [0, 1] is a continuous function on S.
Let q ∈ S and a, b ∈ [0, 1] such that f (q) ∈ (a, b). Then there exist
r, t ∈ J such that
a < r < f (q) < t < b
Let W = Ut \clS Ur .
Claim 3: W is an open neighborhood of q.
Proof of claim: We are given r < f (q) < t. Since, by Claim 2, if
q ∈ Ut , then f (q) ≥ t, we must then have
q ∈ Ut
Since, by Claim 1, if f (q) ≥ r, then q cannot belong to clS Ur . Then

q ∈ Ut \clS Ur . So, W is an open neighborhood of q in S, as claimed.
Claim 4: That f [W ] ⊆ (a, b).
Proof of claim: Suppose x ∈ Ut \ clS Ur . Then x ∈ clS Ut . So, by
Claim 1, f (x) ∈ [0, t]. Since x ∈ clS Ur , by Claim 2, f (x) ∈ [r, 1]. So,
f (x) ∈ [r, t] ⊆ (a, b).
So, f [W ] ⊂ (a, b), as claimed.
So,
f (q) ∈ f [W ] ⊆ [r, t] ⊂ (a, b)
We conclude f is continuous on S.
Since f [F ] ⊆ f [U0 ] = {0} and f [W ] ⊆ f [U1 ] = {1}, we are done.
Urysohn’s lemma provides another way of recognizing normal
topological spaces.
Definition 10.2 Given a pair of disjoint closed sets, F and W , in

a space S, we will refer to the continuous function, f : S → [0, 1],
introduced in Urysohn’s proof, as a
Urysohn separating function for F and W .
We also say that this function is one which separates the disjoint
closed sets F and W . For future reference, we define these formally.
Definition 10.3 Suppose A and B are disjoint non-empty subsets

of a space S. We will say that A and B are completely separated in S
if and only if there is a continuous function f : S → [0, 1] such that
A ⊆ f ← (0) and B ⊆ f ← (1). In such a case, we say the function, f ,
(completely) separates A and B.4
4
Compare this definition with a similar one provided in Definition 7.16, in
another context, one where we speak of a family of continuous functions, not
necessarily real-valued. Here we speak of a single real-valued continuous function.
The reader is however encouraged to verify that when the family is one of con-
tinuous real-valued functions then the two definitions are equivalent (since R is
completely regular).
We now include the following useful fact.

Fact: Given a real-valued continuous function, f : S → R, we define
a zero-set, Z(f ), of f as
Z(f ) = {x ∈ S : f (x) = 0}
Two sets in S are completely separated if and only if they are con-
tained in disjoint zero-sets in S.
Proof of this fact: For(⇐), suppose A ⊆ Z(f ) and B ⊆ Z(g) where
Z(f ) and Z(g) are disjoint zero-sets in S. Then
|f (x)|
h(x) =
|f (x)| + |g(x)|
is a well-defined continuous function on S. See that h[A] = {0} and

h[B] = {1}. So, A and B are (completely) separated.
For ( ⇒ ), suppose A and B are completely separated. Then
there exists a continuous real-valued function, f : S → [0, 1], such
that f [A] = {0} and f [B] = {1}. Then A ⊆ Z(f ) and B ⊆ Z(f − 1),
Z(f ) and Z(f − 1) are disjoint zero-sets of the functions, f and f − 1,
respectively.
We will say more on zero-sets further down in this chapter.
10.3 Completely Regular Spaces
Note that, if there exists a Urysohn separating function for each

pair of disjoint closed subsets in a normal space, then we can find
a Urysohn function that can separate a point from a closed subset
or separate any pair of points in any T1 space. But there is nothing
in what we have seen that allows us to conclude that a non-normal
regular or Hausdorff space can generate its own Urysohn separating
function like a normal space can. In fact, as we shall soon see, Haus-
dorff and regular spaces cannot, in general, produce, by themselves,
such a function. If we are presented with a regular space in which
it is shown that, for any point and disjoint closed set, there exists
a Urysohn separating function, then this topological space belongs
to a separate class of topological spaces called “completely regular
spaces”. We formally define this class.
Definition 10.4 Suppose (S, τS ) is a T1 -space. If, for any given point
x and a non-empty closed subset F disjoint from {x}, there exists
a continuous function, f : S → [0, 1], such that {x} ⊆ f ← {0} and
F ⊆ f ← {1}, then the space, S, is called a completely regular space,
or a Tychonoff space 5 A completely regular space is often referred to
as a T3 12 -space.
We add a few remarks concerning this definition. In this text, our

definition emphasizes that only T1 spaces are completely regular.
(Some authors may not require the T1 condition.) Obviously, since a
Urysohn separating function separates disjoint closed sets of a normal
space, and since a regular space is T1 , then
normal ⇒ completely regular
Also, if S is completely regular, there exists a Urysohn separating

function, f , such that {x} ⊆ f ← [{0}] and F ⊆ f ← [{1}]. It follows
that {x} ⊆ f ← [[0, 1/3)] and F ⊆ f ← [ (2/3, 1]] where [0, 1/3) and
(2/3, 1] are open in [0, 1]. Then (see implication chart on page 227),
completely regular ⇒ regular ⇒ semiregular ⇒ Hausdorff

regular ⇒ completely Hausdorff ⇒ Hausdorff
There are, however, regular spaces which are not completely regu-
lar. The standard example of a regular non-completely regular space
is called the Tychonoff corkscrew space.6 This space is rather involved
and lengthy to describe. So, we will not describe it in this text. The
Tychonoff corksrew, justifies,
regular ⇒ completely regular
Also, there are completely regular spaces which are not normal.
The Moore plane (Niemytzki’s plane) is such an example. At the
5
Named after the Soviet and Russian mathematician Andreı̈ Tychonoff (1906–
1993).
6
Interested readers will easily find a description of the Tychonoff corkscrew
online.
end of this section (on page 263), we prove that the “Moore plane is
completely regular but not normal”. From which we deduce
completely regular ⇒ normal
This means, a T3 1 -space is strictly in between T3 and T4 (which
2
partially explains the tongue-in-cheek terminology, “T3 1 -space”, used
2
by some authors).
The description of the completely regular property does not sim-
ply refer to the separation of closed sets by open sets. It is defined
in terms of the existence of a continuous function. If we want
to refer to the “completely regular property” as a “topological
property” (or topological invariant) we should prove that it is one
first. Fortunately, the proof is fairly straightforward.
“Completely regular” is a topological property: Suppose S is com-
pletely regular and h : S → T is a homeomorphism mapping S onto
the space T . Suppose the singleton set, {x}, and the closed subset,
F , are disjoint in T . Then there exists a function f : S → [0, 1] such
that h← [{x}] ⊆ f ← [{0}] and h← [F ] ⊆ f ← [{1}]. Let g = f ◦ h← . Then
g[{x}] = {0} and g[F ] = {1}. Then T is also completely regular. So,
“completely regular” is indeed a topological property, as expected.
Readers who deal mostly with metrizable topological spaces will
be glad to know that all such spaces are completely regular. We prove
this as follows.
Theorem 10.5 If (S, τ ) is a metrizable space then it is completely

regular.
Proof. We are given that (S, τ ) is metrizable. Then there is a met-
ric, ρ, such that (S, ρ) and (S, τ ) are equivalent topological spaces.
Let F be a non-empty closed subset of S and x be a point in S \F .
We are required to construct a continuous real-valued function which
separates F from x.
Consider the function, dF : S → R defined as
dF (u) = ρ(u, F ) = inf {ρ(u, y) : y ∈ F }
The real-valued function, dF (u), numerically provides a reason-
able measure of the smallest distance which separates u from F .
Claim: That the function, dF , is a continuous function on S.
Proof of claim: Let u ∈ S. Let ε > 0 and δ = ε/3. It suffices to

show that ρ(x, u) < δ implies |dF (x) − dF (u)| < ε.
Then with the variables, x, u and y, we write the two possible
triangle inequalities with y on one side.
ρ(x, y) ≤ ρ(x, u) + ρ(u, y)

ρ(u, y) ≤ ρ(x, u) + ρ(x, y)
implies
inf {ρ(x, y) : y ∈ F } ≤ ρ(x, u) + inf {ρ(u, y) : y ∈ F }
inf {ρ(u, y) : y ∈ F } ≤ ρ(x, u) + inf {ρ(x, y) : y ∈ F }
implies
dF (x) ≤ δ + dF (u) = ε/3 + dF (u)
dF (u) ≤ δ + dF (x) = ε/3 + dF (x)
implies
−ε < −ε/3 ≤ dF (x) − dF (u) ≤ ε/3 < ε
So, |dF (x) − dF (u)| < ε. Then dF is continuous on S, as claimed.

Clearly F ⊆ d← F (0). We have a fixed point, x in S \ F . Since F
is closed, then x is contained in an open ball Bε (x) disjoint from
F . So dF (x) equals some k ≥ ε > 0. Since x ∈ Z(dF (x) − k) and
F ⊆ Z(dF [F ]), then F and {x} are completely separated (see the
fact proven on page 244). So, S is completely regular.
We conclude that every metrizable space is completely regular.
The following two theorems confirm that completely regular

spaces are hereditary and also carry over from a family of completely
regular factors to their products.7
7
Continuous images of completely regular spaces are not always completely reg-
ular. A standard example of this fact is to produce a continuous function on the
completely regular Moore plane which maps it onto a Hausdorff, but non-regular
space.
Theorem 10.6 Let S be a completely regular space and T be a

subspace of S. Then T is completely regular.
Proof. We are given that S is a completely regular space and T is
a subspace of S.
First note that T is clearly T1 . Let F ∩ T be a closed subset of
T , where F is closed in S, and let u ∈ T \F . Since S is completely
regular, there exists a continuous function f : S → [0, 1] such that
x ∈ f ← [{0}] and F ⊆ f ← [{1}]. Then the function, f |T : T → [0, 1]
separates x and F ∩ T and so T is completely regular.
Theorem 10.7 Let {Si : i ∈ I} be a family of topological spaces

and S = i∈I Si be a product space. Then S is completely regular if
and only if each factor, Si , is completely regular.
Proof. We aregiven that {Si : i ∈ I} is a family of topological
spaces and S = i∈I Si is a product space.

(⇒) Suppose the product space, S = i∈I Si , is completely reg-
ular. By Theorem 7.14, each Si is homeomorphically embedded in
the product space, S. By the preceding theorem, every subspace is
completely regular, so each Si is completely regular.
(⇐) We are given that
each Si is completely regular. Let K be a
closed subset of S = i∈I Si and xii∈I be a point in S \K.
Then
xii∈I ∈ ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F } ⊆ S \K
for some finite F ⊆ I and open Ui ’s in Si , where xi ∈ Ui for i ∈ F .

Then, for each i ∈ F , there exists a continuous function, fi : Si →
[0, 1], such that xi ∈ fi← [{1}] and Si \Ui ⊆ fi← [{0}]. We define h :
S → [0, 1] as
h(xii∈I ) = inf {fi (xi ) : i ∈ F }
Then h = inf {fi ◦πi : i ∈ F } is a continuous function. Note that

h(xii∈I ) = 1 and S \K ⊆ h← (0). So, S is completely regular.
10.4 Topic: On Zero-Sets in Normal Spaces
Recall that, in the proof of Urysohn’s lemma (in Theorem 10.1), we

showed that, for disjoint closed subsets F and W of the normal space,
S, there is a continuous function, f : S → [0, 1], such that
F ⊆ U0 = ∩{Ui }i∈J = f ← (0)
W ⊆ U1 = ∩{S \ clS Ui }i∈J = f ← (1)
The continuous real-valued function, f , on S was referred to as a
Urysohn separating function for the closed subsets F and W .
The set, J, is a countably infinite indexing set so both U0 and U1
are Gδ ’s (countable intersection of open sets). Note that we did not
prove that F and W are equal to U0 and U1 . Usually, they are not.
Although they appear in the proof, neither U0 nor U1 are referred to
in the Urysohn lemma statement itself.
We will briefly continue our discussion of normal spaces (in rela-
tion to U0 and U1 ). First, we need the following definition.
Definition 10.8 A subset of a topological space, S, of the form,

f ← [{0}], for some continuous real-valued function, f , on S is called
a zero-set. Such a set is denoted by, Z(f ).
A cozero-set of S is a set of the form S\Z(f ) = {x ∈ S : f (x) = 0}
for some continuous real-valued function f . The cozero-set of f is
denoted by coz(f ) or Cz(f ).
We note a few interesting facts about zero-sets.

When we speak of a zero-set in a topological space, S, we are
referring to a specific subset, A, of S associated to some function
f : S → R such that A = f ← (0) = Z(f ). A zero-set is sometimes
described as the “fiber” of a continuous real-valued function f : S →
R. To see this, if f (u) = r ∈ R, then u ∈ f ← (r); if g : S → R is the
function defined as g(x) = f (x) − r then
g(u) = f (u) − r
=r−r
=0
so, g is a continuous real-valued function.
Then the fiber, f ← (r), is the zero set, Z(g), which contains the
element u. So the fiber of a continuous real-valued function, f , on S
is a zero-set.
Also see that, for any zero-set, Z(f ) of the continuous function, f ,
Z(f ) = ∩{ f ← [ (−1/n, 1/n)]}n>0
Since f is continuous,
any zero-set, Z(f ), is a Gδ
Countable intersections of zero-sets. We know that any zero-set is a
countable intersection of open sets. What can we say about countable
intersections of zero-sets? We claim: The countable intersection of
zero-sets is a zero-set.
Proof of the claim: Let {Z(fn ) : n ∈ N} be a countable family of
zero-sets with non-empty intersection. We are required to show that
∩{Z(fn ) : n ∈ N} is a zero-set. For each fn , let8
1
hn = |fn | ∧
2n
We see that 0 ≤ hn (x) ≤ 21n on S. Since the series, n∈N 21n , con-
verges, n∈N hn (x) converges uniformly to a continuous function
h(x) on S.9 That is,
hn (x) = h(x)
n∈N
Since convergence is uniform, then h is continuous.

x ∈ ∩{Z(fn ) : n ∈ N} ⇔ fn (x) = 0 for all n
1
⇔ |fn | ∧ (x) = 0 for all n
2n
⇔ hn (x) = 0 for all n
⇔ h(x) = 0
⇔ x ∈ Z(h)
8
(f ∧ g)(x) = min {f (x), g(x)}.
9
By the Weierstrass M -test.
So,
Z(h) = ∩{Z(fn ) : n ∈ N}
as required. So countable intersections of zero-sets are zero-sets, as

claimed.
In the proof of Urysohn’s lemma we showed that F ⊆ f ← (0) and
W ⊆ f ← (1). This means F ⊆ Z(f ) and W ⊆ Z(f − 1). We can
then confidently reformulate one direction of the Urysohn lemma
statement as follows:
If (S, τS ) is a normal topological space and F and W are
disjoint non-empty closed subsets of S, then F and W are
contained in disjoint zero-sets.
The leads to an interesting question: Is the converse of this state-
ment true? That is, does it hold true that “if F and W are respec-
tively contained in disjoint zero-sets then S is normal”? We show
that it is true, in general.
Theorem 10.9 Let S be a T1 topological space. The following are

equivalent.
(a) The space S is a normal space.
(b) If A and B are disjoint closed subsets of S then they are con-
tained in disjoint zero-sets.
(c) If A and B are disjoint closed subsets of S then they are com-
pletely separated.
Proof. We are given that (S, τS ) is normal.
(a ⇒ b) This direction follows immediately from Urysohn’s lemma
stated in the paragraph above.
(b ⇐ a) We are given that disjoint closed subsets F and W are
contained in disjoint zero-sets, Z(f ) and Z(g), respectively. Since
the two zero-sets are disjoint, 0 ∈ f [Z(g)] and 0 ∈ g[Z(f )].10
We are required to show that S is normal. To do this we seek a
Urysohn separating function, h : S → R, for F and W .
10
Since, if 0 ∈ f [Z(g)], there is some u ∈ Z(g) such that f (u) = 0 hence,
u ∈ Z(f ) ∩ Z(g); so Z(f ) ∩ Z(g) is not empty, a contradiction.
Let the function h :→ R be defined as
|f (x)|
h(x) =
|f (x)| + |g(x)|
Then h is continuous and real-valued on S with range in [0, 1].

0
If x ∈ F ⊆ Z(f ) then h(x) = 0+|g(x)| = 0, so F ⊆ Z(f ) ⊆ h← (0).
If x ∈ W ⊆ Z(g) then h(x) = |f|f(x)|+0
(x)|
= 1, so W ⊆ Z(g) ⊆ h← (1).
So, h separates F and W . By Theorem 10.1 S is normal.
(a ⇔ c) Is Urysohn’s lemma 10.1.
(b ⇔ c) Since(a ⇔ b) and (a ⇔ c), then (b ⇒ c) and (c ⇒ b).
From the above theorem we can then say that. . .
if A and B are completely separated and r = k there exist

h ∈ C ∗ (S) such that if h[A] = {r} and h[B] = {k},
by composing the function h with t(x) = (k − r)x + r.
10.5 On C ∗ -Embedded Subsets of Normal Spaces
The following statement refers to the notions of C ∗ -embedded subsets

and C-embedded subsets:
A subset A of a topological space S is said to be a C ∗ -

embedded subset (C-embedded subset) of S if for each g ∈
C ∗ (A) (respectively, g ∈ C(A)) there exists f ∈ C ∗ (S)
(respectively, C(S)) such that f |A = g.
One of the most important theorem in basic point-set topology

is the Urysohn extension theorem. It is often referred to as being
a “deep theorem” since the proof involves innovative mathematical
techniques introduced by Pavel Urysohn. We invoke the Urysohn
extension theorem in the proof of the following result. But its proof
is deferred to Theorem 21.8 on page 490.
Urysohn extension theorem: Let T be a subset of the

completely regular space S. Then T is C ∗ -embedded in S if
and only if pairs of sets which can be completely separated
by some function in C ∗ (T ) can also be separated by some
function in C ∗ (S).
The proof also invokes a statement proven in Theorem 23.2 whose

proof is deferred to that chapter.
Theorem 23.2: Suppose U be C ∗ -embedded in S. The set
U is also C-embedded in S if and only if U is completely
separated from any disjoint zero-set in S.
Theorem 10.10 Let S be a T1 topological space and A and B be

any pair non-empty disjoint closed subsets of S. The following are
equivalent.
(a) The space S is a normal space.

(b) Each closed subset of S is C ∗ -embedded in S.
(c) Each closed subset of S is C-embedded in S.

(a ⇒ b) Suppose S is normal.
Let A be a closed subset of S. We are required to show that A is
C ∗ -embedded in S.
Let B and C be completely separated subsets of A. Then, by 10.9,
part (b) ⇔ part (c), B and C are contained in disjoint zero sets, ZB
and ZC in A. Since A is closed, both ZB and ZC are closed in S. Since
S is normal, by Theorem 10.9, part (a) ⇔ part (c), ZB and ZC are
completely separated in S. Then B and C are completely separated
subsets of S. By Urysohn’s extension theorem stated above, A is
(b ⇒ c) Suppose each closed subset of S is C ∗ -embedded in S.
Let A be a closed subset of S. We are required to show that A is
C-embedded in S.
By hypothesis, since A is closed in S it is C ∗ -embedded in S.
We claim that A is completely separated from any zero-set disjoint
from A. Suppose Z is a zero-set in Z[S] which is disjoint from A. Then
the function, h : A ∪ Z :→ {0, 1}, defined as
h[A] = {1}
h[Z] = {0}
is continuous on A ∪ Z. Then the function h in C(A ∪ Z) completely

separates Z and A. So, A is completely separated from any zero-set
disjoint from A, as claimed.
By Theorem 23.2, A is C-embedded in S.
We mentioned above that zero-sets of a continuous function are

closed Gδ ’s. Can we turn this phrase around and say that “closed
Gδ ’s are zero-sets”? The answer is no. The statement “closed Gδ ’s
are zero-sets” is however true in, at least, one class of topological
spaces, namely, normal spaces (as we will now show).
Theorem 10.11 Suppose F is a non-empty closed subset of the

normal topological space, (S, τ ). Then F is a Gδ if and only if F is
a zero-set produced by some continuous function f : S → [0, 1].

(⇐) This direction is obvious since, if F = Z(f ) ⊆ S where f : S →
[0, 1] is continuous then F = ∩{f ← [ [0, 1/i) ] : i ∈ N\{0} }, a Gδ in S.
(⇒) Suppose F is a closed Gδ in the space S. If F is also open then it
is clopen and so is easily seen to be a zero-set. Suppose the closed Gδ ,
F , is not open. Then, by definition, there exists a countably infinite
family, {Vi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , Vi is open in S } such that F = ∩{Vi }.
Suppose
U1 = V1
U2 = V1 ∩ V2
...
Un = V1 ∩ V2 ∩ . . . ∩ Vn
..
.
Then {Ui : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} ⊂ τS , F ⊆ Ui+1 ⊆ Ui , for all i > 0, and

F = ∩{Ui }.
Normality of S implies that, for each i > 0, there is a continuous
function, fi : S → [0, 1], such that F ⊆ fi← {0} and S \Ui ⊆ fi← [{1}].
So, we have a countable family, {fi : i > 0}, of functions each
mapping S into [0, 1].
Consider the function, f : S → R, defined as
∞
fi (x)
f (x) = (∗)
2i
i=1
fi (x) 1 ∞ 1
See that, since 0 ≤ ≤ on S, and i=1 2i = 1, then, by the
2i 2i
Weierstrass M -test, the series (∗) converges uniformly to the function
f (x) on S. Uniform convergence guarantees continuity of f on S.
Also see that, since F = ∩{Vi }, F = f ← [{0}]. So, the Gδ , F , is the
zero-set, Z(f ), produced by the continuous function, f : S → [0, 1],
described in (∗).
Notation: If C(S) denotes the set of all continuous functions on S,

we let the subsets of S,
Z[S] = {Z(f ) : f ∈ C(S)}
coz[S] = {S \Z(f ) : f ∈ C(S)}
denote the family of all zero-sets and cozero-sets of a space S, respec-
tively. The cozero-set of f is also expressed as Cz(f ). The family of
all zero-sets (cozero-sets) in a completely regular space provides us
with another way of describing a base for closed (open) sets of S.
Theorem 10.12 If (S, τ ) is completely regular then,

(a) The family Z[S] = {Z(f ) : f ∈ C(S)} of all zero-sets forms a
base for the closed sets in its topology.
(b) The family coz[S] = {S \ Z(f ) : f ∈ C(S)} of all cozero-sets
forms a base for the open sets in its topology.
Proof. (a) Let F be a non-empty proper closed subset in S. Given
that S is completely regular, then for every p ∈ S \F , there exists a
function f ∈ C(S) such that F ⊆ Z(f ) and p ∈ Z(f − 1). Then F

is the intersection of zero-sets. So, by definition of “base for closed
sets” (see Definition 5.2) Z[S] forms a base for the closed sets in S.
The proof of part (b) is left as an exercise.
Example 1. Show that, if S is a topological space in which the

family of all zero-sets, Z[S] forms a base for closed sets, then S must
be completely regular.
Solution: Suppose S is a space such that Z[S] forms a base for
closed sets. Suppose F is a closed subset of S and p is a point not
in F .
By hypothesis, the closed set F is the intersection of zero-sets.
Then, for every p ∈ S \ F , there exists a zero-set Z(f ) such that
F ⊆ Z(f ) ⊆ S \{p}. Let h : S → R be defined as
1
h(x) = f (x)
f (p)
Then h is a continuous real-valued function which maps F to {0}

and p to 1. By definition, S is completely regular.
Example 2. Suppose that F is a closed subset of a metric space S.
Show that F is a zero-set of some real-valued function. Show that F
is a Gδ .
Solution: Suppose F is a closed subset of a metric space, (S, ρ).
Define a real-valued function fF : S → R as fF (u) = ρ(u, F ) =
inf {ρ(u, y) : y ∈ F }. Then fF [F ] = {0} and fF (u) = 0 for u ∈ F .
To show that F is a zero-set it now suffices to show that fF is a
continuous function.
Claim: That the function, fF , is a continuous function on S.
Proof of claim: Let ε > 0. It suffices to show that there is a δ > 0
such that f [Bδ (x)] ⊆ Bε (f (x)). Let ρ(x, u) < δ = ε/3.
Since,
ρ(x, y) ≤ ρ(x, u) + ρ(u, y)

ρ(u, y) ≤ ρ(x, u) + ρ(x, y)
then,
inf {ρ(x, y) : y ∈ F } ≤ ρ(x, u) + inf {ρ(u, y) : y ∈ F }

inf {ρ(u, y) : y ∈ F } ≤ ρ(x, u) + inf {ρ(x, y) : y ∈ F }
Hence,
fF (x) ≤ ε/3 + fF (u)

fF (u) ≤ ε/3 + fF (x)
Then
−ε < −ε/3 ≤ fF (x) − fF (u) ≤ ε/3 < ε
So, |fF (x) − fF (u)| < ε. Then fF is continuous on S, as claimed.

So, the closed set F is a zero-set, Z[fF ], of fF .
Since a zero-set is a Gδ , then F is a Gδ .
Example 3. Let S be a completely regular space. Suppose A and B
are two infinitely countable subsets such clS A ∩ B = ∅ = A ∩ clS B.
Then A and B are contained in disjoint cozero-sets.
Solution: We are given that S is completely regular. Then the
family of all cozero-sets on S form a base for open sets in S (by
Theorem 10.12).
Let A = {ai : i ∈ N} and B = {bi : i ∈ N}. Since clS B ∩ A = ∅,
there exists a cozero-set U0 such that a0 ∈ U0 and clS U0 ∩ clS B = ∅.
Since clS A ∩ B = ∅, there exists a cozero-set V0 such that b0 ∈ V0
and
clS V0 ∩ [clS A ∪ clS U0 ] = ∅
Since clS V0 ∩ clS U0 = ∅, U0 ∩ V0 = ∅.

Suppose
{a0 , a1 , . . . , ai } ⊆ U0 ∪ · · · ∪ Ui ⊆ clS U0 ∪ · · · ∪ clS Ui ⊆ S \

[clS B ∪ clS V0 ∪ · · · ∪ clS Vi ]
{b0 , b1 , . . . , bi } ⊆ V0 ∪ · · · ∪ Vi ⊆ clS V0 ∪ · · · ∪ clS Vi ⊆ S \
[clS A ∪ clS U0 ∪ · · · ∪ clS Ui ]
There exists a cozero-sets Ui+1 and Vi+1 such that
ai+1 ∈ Ui+1 ⊆ clS Ui+1 ⊆ S \[clS B ∪ clS V0 ∪ · · · ∪ clS Vi ]

bi+1 ∈ Vi+1 ⊆ clS Vi+1 ⊆ S \[clS A ∪ clS U0 ∪ · · · ∪ clS Ui+1 ]
implies
[U0 ∪ · · · ∪ Ui+1 ] ∩ [V0 ∪ · · · ∪ Vi+1 ] = ∅
By mathematical induction,
∪{Ui : i ∈ N} ∩ ∪{Vi : i ∈ N} = ∅
We know that the countable intersection of zero-sets is a zero-set (as

shown on page 250). So, ∪{Ui : i ∈ N} and ∪{Vi : i ∈ N} are disjoint
cozero-set neighborhoods of A and B. As required.
10.6 Topic: Perfectly Normal Topological Spaces
In Theorem 10.11, we showed that in normal spaces closed Gδ ’s and

zero-sets are one and the same. We should, however, be cautious
and not deduce from this that closed subsets of normal spaces are
necessarily Gδ ’s. We will soon exhibit a normal space which contains
a non-Gδ singleton set. Those normal spaces in which all non-empty
closed subsets are Gδ ’s form a special class of topological spaces which
we will now define.
Definition 10.13 A normal topological space, (S, τS ), is said to be

perfectly normal if and only if every closed subset of S is a Gδ .
To say that every closed subset is a Gδ is equivalent to saying

that every open set is an Fσ (a countable union of closed sets) as we
shall now see.
Suppose F is closed in S and {Ui : i ∈ N} is a family of open sets
in S.
Let U = S \F and Fi = S \Ui for each i.
F = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}, is a closed Gδ ⇔ S \F = S \∩{Ui : i ∈ N}, is open

⇔ U = ∪{S \Ui : i ∈ N}, is open
⇔ U = ∪{Fi : i ∈ N}, is an open Fσ
Example 4. Show that all second countable normal spaces are

perfectly normal spaces.
Solution: Suppose S is a second countable normal space. If x ∈ S,
let Ux denote an open base element of S which contains x. Since S is
second countable, we can choose B = {Ux : x ∈ S} to be countable.
Let F be a closed subset of S and V = S \F . Since S is normal, if
x ∈ V , there exist an open base element, Ux , of x such that
x ∈ clS Ux ⊆ V
Then we can find {clS Ux : x ∈ V }, a countable set of closed subsets

each of which is contained in V. Then
V = ∪{clS Ux : x ∈ V }
an Fσ in S. This implies that F = S \V is a Gδ . So every closed set

is a Gδ . Then S is perfectly normal.
Theorem 10.14 Suppose (S, τS ) is a normal topological space. Then

S is perfectly normal if and only if every non-empty closed subset of
S is a zero-set.
(⇒) We are given that S is perfectly normal. Suppose F is a non-
empty closed subset. By hypothesis, F is a Gδ . By Theorem 10.11,
since F is a Gδ in a normal space then F is a zero-set, Z(f ), for some
continuous f : S → [0, 1].
(⇐) Suppose S is normal and every non-empty closed subset F is
a zero-set. Zero-sets have been shown to be closed Gδ ’s. So, S is
perfectly normal.
We know from Theorem 9.19 that metric spaces are normal. We

raise the bar slightly higher to show that they are even perfectly
normal.
Example 5. Show that a metric space is perfectly normal.
Solution: By Theorem 9.19, a metric space is normal. In an exam-
ple found on page 256, it is shown that closed subsets of a metric
space are zero-sets. By the above theorem a metric space is perfectly
normal.
10.6.1 Normal but not perfect

Are there normal spaces which are not perfectly normal? We have
shown in an example on page 259 that second countable normal
spaces are perfect. If we seek a “non-perfect” normal space we inves-
tigate normal spaces which are not second countable.
Example 6. A normal space which is not perfectly normal. Let ω1
denote the first uncountable ordinal. Show that the ordinal space,
S = [0, ω1 ], (previously discussed on page 110) shown previously to
be normal (on page 234) is not perfectly normal.
Solution: Let (S, τω ) denote the ordinal space [0, ω1 ] where ω1 is
the first uncountable ordinal. It will suffice to show that the closed
singleton subset, {ω1 }, of S is not a Gδ and hence, S is not perfect.
Recall that (μ, ω1 ] is an open neighborhood base element of ω1 .
Suppose
{ω1 } ⊆ ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}
where {Ui : i ∈ N} is a countable family of open neighborhoods each

containing ω1 . We will show that {ω1 } = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}.
For each Ui , there exists μi such that ω1 ∈ (μi , ω1 ] ⊆ Ui . Note that
each μi is a countable ordinal (since μi < ω1 ). Let U = {μi : i ∈ N}
and
γ = sup U ≤ ω1
We consider two cases based on the nature of γ.

Case 1. The ordinal γ is a limit ordinal : Then γ = ∪{μi : i ∈ N},
a countable union of countable ordinals. Countable unions of
countable sets are countable. Hence, γ is a countable ordinal. Since

ω1 is uncountable, γ < ω1 . Then (γ, ω1 ] = {ω1 }.
Case 2. The ordinal γ is not a limit ordinal : Then γ ∈ U = ∪{μi :
i ∈ N}. So again γ is a countable ordinal. That is γ < ω1 . Then
(γ, ω1 ] = {ω1 }.
So in both cases, (γ, ω1 ] = {ω1 }. Also,
(γ, ω1 ] ⊆ ∩{(μi , ω1 ] : i ∈ N} ⊆ ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}
So, {ω1 } = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}. This shows that {ω1 } cannot be a Gδ . So,
S is not perfect, as required.
We provide another example.
Example 7. A normal space which is not perfectly normal. Let S =
R2 and p = (0, 0) and suppose S has a topology defined as follows:
τ = {T ⊆ S : S \T is finite or p ∈ T }
Show that (S, τ ) is normal but not perfectly normal.

Solution: We claim that S is T1 . A set which does not contain p is
declared to be open so the set {p} is closed. Complements of finite
sets are open so, if x = p, since S \ {x} is open then {x} is closed.
So, S is T1 , as claimed.
Claim: That S is T4 . Suppose F and K are disjoint closed subsets
of S. If p ∈ K ∪ F then K and F are both open. So, F and K are
clopen and so separated by open sets. Suppose p ∈ F . Then K is
clopen and finite. Now, S \K is open since K is finite. So, F and K
are contained in the disjoint open sets S\K and K. So, S is normal,
as claimed.
Claim: That S is not perfect. We know that R2 is uncountable. Let
{Ui : i ∈ N} be a countable family of sets in S each containing the
point p. Then each Ui is closed in S and p ∈ ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}. If
each Ui is also open S \Ui if finite. So, each Ui is uncountable. Then
S \∩{Ui : i ∈ N} = ∪{S \Ui : i ∈ N} a countable subset of S. So,
∩{Ui : i ∈ N} is uncountable. So, p = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}. So, p is not
a Gδ . So, S is not perfectly normal, as claimed. The completes the
problem.
So we have, the implications,

normal ⇒ perfectly normal
perfectly normal ⇒ normal ⇒ completely regular
⇒ regular ⇒ semiregular ⇒ Hausdorff
⇓
completely Hausdorff ⇒ Hausdorff
We have a particular characterization of the perfectly normal
property.
Theorem 10.15 Suppose S is a normal topological space. The space

S is perfectly normal if and only if every closed subset of S is a
continuous pre-image of some closed subset of a perfectly normal
space.
Proof. (⇐) Let F be a closed subset of S. Suppose that there exists
a continuous function, f : S → T , mapping S into the perfectly
normal space, T , such that F = f ← [K] for some closed subset K
of T . We are required to show that S is perfectly normal. It will
suffice to show that F is a zero-set. Since K is a closed subset of
a perfectly normal T , then by Theorem 10.14 K is a zero-set in T .
Then K = h← (0), for some continuous function h : T → R. Then
(h◦f )← (0) = f ← (h← (0)) = F . So, F is a zero-set in S. Since F is an
arbitrary closed subset, by Theorem 10.14, S is perfectly normal.
(⇒) Suppose S is perfectly normal and F is closed subset of S. Then
F is a zero-set and so F = f ← ({0}), for some f ∈ C(S). Since R is
a metrizable it is perfectly normal. Let K = {0}, a closed subset of
R. Then F = f ← [K], as required.
10.7 Topic: Example of a “Completely Regular

Non-Normal” Space
Up to now, we have not yet witnessed a completely regular space

which is not normal. The Moore plane is such a space, as we now
show.
Example 8. Show that the Moore plane is completely regular.
Solution: Let (S, τM ) denote the Moore plane. We have already

shown in a previous example (on page 228) that (S, τM ) is regular.
We have also seen on page 92, that if τ is the usual topology on S,
τ ⊂ τM . We know that metrizable spaces are completely regular so
(S, τ ) is completely regular.
We proceed to show that (S, τM ) is completely regular.
For what follows we let F = {(x, 0) ∈ S : x ∈ R} and W = S \ F .
Suppose K is a non-empty closed subset of S and (a, b) is a point
which does not belong to K. We seek a continuous function which
completely separates K and (a, b). We consider two cases.
Case 1: Suppose b = 0.
Now, F is closed with respect to both τ and τM .
Since (S, τ ) is completely regular there exists an open neighbor-
hood V (in τ ) of F such that (a, b) ∈ clS V . Then K ∪ clS V is closed
with respect to both topologies. Then there exists a continuous func-
tion g : S → [0, 1] (with respect to τ ) such that, K ∪ clS V ⊆ g← (0)
and (a, b) ∈ g ← (1). Since g is continuous with respect to τ, it is
continuous with respect to τM . Then the continuous function g with
respect to τM completely separates K and (a, b).
Case 2: We consider the case where (a, b) ∈ F . That is, (a, b) =

(a, 0).
Without loss of generality suppose K ∩ W = ∅. If Bδ = Bδ (a, δ) ∪
{(a, 0)} is a basic open neighborhood of (a, 0) such that Bδ ∩ K = ∅;
then
F ∩ S \Bδ = F \{(a, 0)}
is a closed subset of S. So, K ∪ (F \{(a, 0)}) is a closed subset of S

which misses Bδ and intersects W .
Since (S, τM ) is regular, there exists a neighborhood, Bε =
Bε (a, ε) ∪ {(a, 0)} of the point (a, 0) such that,
Bε ⊆ clS Bε ⊆ Bδ
Then clS Bε is a closed neighborhood of (a, 0) in S contained in

the set Bδ , and K ∪ F \{(a, 0)} ⊆ S \ Bδ . Then
clS Bε ∩ W and W ∩ (S \ Bδ )
are disjoint closed subsets of W .
Since W is metrizable, it is normal (by Theorem 9.19) and so
there exists a Urysohn separating function, g : W → [0, 1], such that
clS Bε ∩ W ⊆ g← [{0}] and W ∩ (S \ Bδ ) ⊆ g← [{1}]
Given g[clS Bε ∩ W ] = {0}, then we can extend g to a continuous
function, gS : S → [0, 1], on S where
gS [clS Bε ] = {0} and gS [S \ Bδ ] = {1}
Since K ⊆ S \Bδ and (a, 0) ∈ clS Bε, then gS completely separates
K and (a, 0).
So, the Moore plane is completely regular.
Example 9. If (S, τM ) denotes the Moore plane and F = {(x, 0) :
x ∈ R} show that every subset of F is closed in (S, τM ).
Solution: We are given that (S, τM ) denotes the Moore plane and
F = {(x, 0) : x ∈ R}. Since S \F is easily seen to be open in S, then
F is closed.
Suppose T ⊂ F and (a, 0) ∈ F \T . Then (a, 0) belongs to some
basic open neighborhood, Ba = Bε (a, ε) ∪ {(a, 0)}. If
UF\T = ∪{Ba : (a, 0) ∈ F \T }
then F \T ⊆ UF\T where UF\T is an open subset of S, and so T =
(S \UF\T ) ∩ F is a closed subset of S. So, T is closed in S.
In the following example, we show that the Moore plane is not
normal. To follow the solution presented, we need to remember that,
if T is a set and P(T ) is its power set (the set of all subsets of T ),
then the cardinality of P(T ) is 2|T | where |T | is the cardinality of
T . Also, it is important to know that if c = |R| and ℵ0 = |N|, then
2c > 2ℵ0 = c.
Example 10. Show that the Moore plane is not a normal space.
Solution: Let (S, τM ) denote the Moore plane. We claim S is not
normal. To show this we will assume S is normal.
Let F = {(x, 0) : x ∈ R} and W = S \ F .

For each (a, 0) ∈ F , a basic open neighborhood of (a, 0) is of the
form
Ba = Bε (a, ε) ∪ {(a, 0)} for some ε
If T is a non-empty subset of F , then, from the previous example,

both T and F \T are closed in S.
Let
D = (Q × Q) ∩ W
a countable dense subset of S.

The cardinality of P(D) is 2|D| = 2ℵ0 = c and the cardinality of
P(F ) is 2|F | = 2c .
The contradiction that we seek is that |P(D)| ≥ |P(F )|.
We supposed that S is normal, so for each non-empty set T of F ,
there exists in τM a pair of disjoint open neighborhoods,
UT = ∪{Ba : (a, 0) ∈ T }
UF\T = ∪{Ba : (a, 0) ∈ F \T }
of T and F \T , respectively.
For each T ∈ P(F ), let
DT = ∪{Ba ∩ D : Ba ⊆ UT } = UT ∩ D ∈ P(D)
DF\T = ∪{Ba ∩ D : Ba ⊆ UF\T } = UF\T ∩ D ∈ P(D)
where UF\T ∩ UT = ∅
Let f : P(F ) → P(D) be defined as
f (T ) = DT , f (F \T ) = DF\T , DF\T ∩ DT = ∅
Claim: That f maps P(F ) one-to-one into P(D):

Suppose T1 and T2 are distinct elements in P(F ). Say, there
exists (b, 0), such that (b, 0) ∈ T2\T1 ⊆ UF\T1 . It suffices to show that
DT2 \DT1 = ∅.
Then Bb ∩ D ⊆ Bb ∩ DT2 ⊆ Bb ∩ UF\T1 . Since DT1 ⊆ UT1 and
UT1 ∩ UF\T1 = ∅, then DT2 \DT1 = ∅. So, DT2 = DT1 .
We conclude that f (T1 ) = f (T2 ), which means that f : P(F ) →

P(D) is one-to-one as claimed.
Then the cardinality of the domain of f , P(F ), is less than or
equal to the cardinality of its codomain, P(D). The cardinality of
P(F ) is 2|F | = 2c while the cardinality of P(D) is 2|D| = 2ℵ0 = c.
Then from the claim we obtain 2c ≤ c. This contradicts the fact that
c < 2c . The source of our contradiction is our supposition that S is
normal.
So, the Moore plane is not normal.
10.8 Topic: The Embedding Theorem Revisited
We remind the reader of the statement in Theorem 7.17, titled, The

Embedding theorem I, presented earlier as an application of Cartesian
products. Assuming that the set, and F = {fi : i ∈ J}, of functions

separates points and closed sets of a space, S, and e : S → i∈J Xi
is an evaluation function with respect to F on S, the Embedding
theorem I states that:
the evaluation map e, with respect to F , embeds

a home-
omorphic copy, e[S], of S in the product space, i∈J Xi
where each of the factors, Xi , of the product is the
codomain of the function, fi , in F .
We now have tools which will allow us to enhance the Embedding

theorem I further. But first, we must do a bit of groundwork with a
preliminary lemma.
In the following lemma, we prove an interesting characterization
of a completely regular space. It shows that the topology of any
completely regular space is precisely the “weak topology” induced by
the family, C ∗ (S), of all real-valued continuous bounded functions.
Lemma 10.16 Suppose (S, τ ) is a T1 topological space and S =

C ∗ (S), represents the set of all continuous bounded real-valued func-
tions on S. The topological space, (S, τ ), is completely regular with
respect to τ if and only if its topology, τ , is the “weak topology”
induced by S .
Proof. We are given that (S, τ ) is a T1 topological space. Recall

that
τS = {f ← [U ] : f ∈ S , U an open subset of R}
is the weak topology generated by S .

(⇒) Suppose (S, τ ) is a completely regular space. To show that τ is
the weak topology induced by S it suffices to show that τS = τ .
Claim 1: τ ⊆ τS : Let x ∈ V ∈ τ . We claim that V ∈ τS . Since S is
completely regular, there exists f : S → [0, 1] such that x ∈ f ← [{0}]
and S\V ⊆ f ← [{1}]. Then f ← [ [0, 1/3) ] ∈ S , an open neighborhood
of x entirely contained in V. Then, V ∈ S ⊆ τS . This means τ ⊆ τS .
As claimed.
Claim 2: τS ⊆ τ : See that τS is the weakest topology induced by
S = C ∗ (S). Let V ∈ τS . Then there exists and open set, U ∈ R,
such that f ← [U ] = V for some f ∈ C ∗ (S). But for every function
f ∈ C ∗ (S), f ← [U ] is open in S with respect to τ . Then f is continuous
on S with respect to τ . So, V ∈ τ . So, τS ⊆ τ , as claimed.
Combining both claims we obtain τS = τ .
So, τ is the smallest topology on S such that every function in S
is continuous on S, as required. We are done with ⇒.
(⇐) Suppose τ is the weak topology on S, induced by the family of
functions, S . That is,
τ = {V ⊆ S : V = f ← [U ], for some open U in R, f ∈ S }
We are required to show that (S, τ ) is a completely regular space.

Let W be a non-empty open subset of S and x ∈ W . To
show complete regularity we must construct a continuous function,
h : S → [0, 1], which separates {x} from S \W .
The following family of open sets
M = {f ← [Z] : some f ∈ S , Z is a subbase element of R}
forms a subbase for τ . (Note that subbase elements for R are of the
form (ai , ∞) or (−∞, ai ).)
Since τ is generated by the subbase M , there exists finitely many

subbase elements, {Vi : i ∈ F = {1, . . . , n}} ⊂ M , such that
x ∈ ∩{Vi : i ∈ F = {1, . . . , n}} ⊆ W (∗)
where Vi = f ← [Ui ], then Ui is of the form (ai , ∞) or (−∞, ai ). To

simplify our expression, note that, if Uj = (−∞, aj ) then
fj← [Uj ] = fj← [(−1)(−aj , ∞)] = (−f )←

j [(−aj , ∞)]
so we can assume that all Ui ’s are of the form Ui = (ai , ∞) after

having made the required adjustments on the functions, fi . So, (∗)
can be expressed as
x ∈ ∩{fi← [(ai , ∞)] : i ∈ F } ⊆ W (∗∗)
For each i in F = {1, . . . , n}, let ti : S → R be defined as:

ti = fi − ai .
See that ti > 0 on fi← [(ai , ∞)]. So x ∈ t←
i [(0, ∞].
Also, see that ti (x) ≤ 0 everywhere else, including on S \W .
For each i in F = {1, . . . , n}, let
t∗i = ti ∨ 011
So, t∗i ≥ 0, and
x ∈ ∩{t∗i ← [(0, ∞)] : i ∈ F } ⊆ W
We define t : S → R, as
t(x) = t∗1 (x)t∗2 (x)t∗3 (x) · · · t∗n (x)
We then have a real-valued function such that x ∈ t← [(0, ∞)] ⊆

W and S\W ⊆ t← (0). We restrict the range of the function: Suppose
t(x) = δ. Then h = (t/δ) ∧ 112 maps S into [0, 1] and x ∈ h← (1). So,
h separates x and S \W .
This allows us to conclude that S is completely regular.
11
(f ∨ 0)(y) = max {f (y), 0(y)}.
12
(t/δ) ∧ 1)(y) = min {(t/δ)(y), 1(y)}.
In the Embedding theorem II statement, we will speak of a “cube”.

When one casually speaks of a “cube” a three dimensional space,
[a, b]3 , comes to mind. In topology, unless it is otherwise specified, the
word “cube” refers more generally to any finite or infinite Cartesian
product,

i∈J [ai , bi ]
of closed intervals, [ai , bi ] in R. Since any closed and bounded interval

[a, b] is homeomorphic tothe closed unit interval, [0, 1], then, by
Theorem 7.13, any cube, i∈J [ai , bi ], is homeomorphic to a product
space, i∈J [0, 1], of the unit interval [0, 1].
Theorem 10.17 (The Embedding Theorem II). Suppose S is

a T1 topological space. A space, S, is completely regular
if and only
if S can be homeomorphically embedded in some cube, i∈J [ai , bi ].
Proof. We are given that (S, τ ) is a T1 topological space.

(⇐) Suppose S is embedded in a cube, i∈J [ai , bi ]. We are required
to show that S is completely regular.
Since each [ai , bi ] is a metric space, then, by Theorem10.5, each
[ai , bi ] is completely regular. By Theorem 10.7, the cube, i∈J [ai , bi ],
is
completely regular. Since S can be viewed as a subspace of
i∈J [ai , bi ], by Theorem 10.6, S is completely regular.
(⇒) Suppose S is completely regular. We are required to show that
S is embedded in a cube.
Two facts follow from S being completely regular.
— By Lemma 10.16, the topology on S, is the weak topology induced
by C ∗ (S).
— Since S is completely regular, C ∗ (S) separates points and closed
sets of S.
So, by the Embedding theorem I, the evaluation map,
e:S→ [ai , bi ]
i∈J
inducedby C ∗ (S), homeomorphically embeds S into the product

space, i∈J Xi where each of the factors, Xi , of the product is the
codomain of the function, fi , in F .
Each function, fi , in C ∗ (S) is bounded and so maps S into some

closed interval, [ai , bi ], of R, so Xi ⊆
[ai , bi ].
So, the evaluation map, e : S → i∈J [ai , bi ], induced by C ∗ (S),
homeomorphically embeds S into the cube, i∈J [ai , bi ].

Since i∈J [ai , bi ] and i∈J [0, 1] are homeomorphic spaces (by

Theorem 7.13), then the compact space, i∈J [0, 1], contains a home-
omorphic copy of S.
Notation: If S is a space and f : S → [0, 1] then f ∈ [0, 1]S =

x∈S [0, 1].
10.9 Topic: On P -Points and P -Spaces
Suppose S is a completely regular space. We know that infinite inter-

sections of open subsets need not be open. We have referred to such
sets as Gδ ’s. In fact some Gδ sets are closed (but not open). Some
Gδ -sets are points while others may have non-empty interior in S.
We will be investigating completely regular spaces in which the fol-
lowing property is satisfied: If G is a Gδ which contains a point p
then p ∈ intS G. For example, R would not be such a space since
{1} = ∩{(1 − 1/n, 1 + 1/n) : n ∈ N \ {0}} and intS {1} = ∅. In
relation to this concept we introduce the following definitions.
Definition 10.18 Let S be a completely regular topological space.

We will say that a point p in S is a P -point in S if, for any Gδ -set
B containing p, p ∈ intS B. If every point in S is a P -point then we
will say that S is a P -space.
We list a few properties by P -spaces.
Theorem 10.19 Completely regular spaces P -spaces are zero-

dimensional spaces.
Proof. Suppose S is a completely regular P -space.

Let x ∈ S and U0 be some open neighborhood of x. Since S is
regular, there exists an open subset, U1 , of S such that
x ∈ U1 ⊆ clS U1 ⊆ U0
We now inductively construct the decreasing family, {Ui : i ∈ N}, of

open neighborhoods of x where x ∈ Ui ⊆ clS Ui ⊆ Ui−1 . Let
B = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N} = ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N}
a closed Gδ -set containing x. Since S is a P -space, then x belongs

to the interior of B. Then, for any x ∈ B, x ∈ intS B. This means
B ⊆ intS B. So, the Gδ , B, is a clopen set containing x which is itself
contained in U0 . Then the set of all clopen subsets of S then forms
a base for the open subsets.
Then S has a base of clopen sets. So, S is zero-dimensional.
Recall that any zero-set of S is a Gδ . So in a completely regular

P -space, every point is in the interior of every zero-set which contains
it. So, as shown in the proof above, every zero-set in such spaces
are clopen. This is the case for all cozero-sets of S, also. As shown
in Theorem 10.12, in a completely regular space, the family of all
cozero-sets form a base for open sets. It follows that in completely
regular P -space all zero-sets form a base for open sets.
On the other hand every clopen set is a Gδ equal to its interior.
So, S would be a P -space.
So,
at least for completely regular spaces, P -spaces are precisely
those spaces for which Z[S] forms a base for open sets.
Theorem 10.20 A pseudocompact P -space is finite.
Proof. The proof is differed to Theorem 23.7, where we will have

at our disposal extra tools.
Concept Review
1. Define “dyadic rationals” used in the proof of Urysohn’s lemma.

2. State Urysohn’s lemma.
3. What are we referring to when we speak of a Urysohn separating
function for two closed sets. Describe such a function.
4. Define a completely regular space (Tychonoff space).
5. How does a completely regular space differ from a T3 1 -space?
2
6. Is a normal space necessarily completely regular? Is a completely
regular space necessarily regular? Why?
7. Define a perfectly normal space.
8. What are we referring to when we speak of a zero-set in a topo-
logical space?
9. It was proven that, in a certain type of space, Gδ ’s and zero-sets
mean the same thing. What type of space did we refer to?
10. Provide an example of a completely regular space that is not
normal.
11. Provide an example of a perfectly normal topological space.
12. Provide an example of a normal space which is not perfectly
normal.
13. Describe the Moore plane and its topology.
14. Describe an ordinal space and its base for open sets.
15. Is the completely
regular property hereditary?
16. Suppose S = i∈J Si . If S is completely regular does it follow
that each Si iscompletely regular?
17. Suppose S = i∈J Si . If each Si is completely regular does it
follow that S is completely regular?
18. The completely regular topology is the weak topology induced
by which family of functions?
19. The evaluation map, e, which is used embed S into a cube is
with respect to which family of functions?
20. Are continuous images of a completely regular space always com-
pletely regular?
Exercises
1. Let (S, τS ) be a normal topological space which contains a subset

T which is an Fσ . Verify whether T is a normal subspace.
2. Are there any normal spaces which are not separable? If so, show
one.
3. Is “perfectly normal” a hereditary property?
4. Is it true that a topological space, (S, τS ), is normal if and only
if any two non-empty disjoint closed subsets have disjoint closed
neighborhoods? Prove it.
5. Let (S, τS ) be a normal topological space which contains the non-
empty closed subset F . If U is an open neighborhood of F , show
that F ⊂ V ⊂ U for some Fσ -set, V.
6. Let (S, τS ) be a countable completely regular space. Show that S
is normal.
7. Let (S, τS ) be a completely regular topological space. Let V be an
open neighborhood of a point x. Show that there exists a Urysohn
separating function, f : S → [0, 1], for {x} and S\V if and only if
x is a Gδ .
8. We showed that closed subspaces of normal spaces are normal.
A topological space (S, τS ) is said to be completely normal if and
only if every one of its subspaces is a normal space. Show that S
is completely normal if and only if, whenever clS U ∩ V = ∅ =
U ∩ clS V , there exists disjoint open neighborhoods for U and V ,
respectively. Note: To prove “⇒” consider S \(clS U ∩ clS V ).
Part IV
Limit Points in Topological Spaces

Chapter 11
Limit Points in First

Countable Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we will investigate whether the notion of limit points and
their sequences can be applied to topological spaces. We know that, in
metric spaces, closed subsets can be characterized by the limit points
they possess. Also, continuous functions can be characterized in terms
of how they act on sequences and their limits. We will show that first
countable topological spaces have sequences and limits points which can
be handled in the usual way.
11.1 Introduction
Limit points of sets play an important role in the study of normed

and metric spaces. In particular, they are involved in characteriza-
tions of closed sets and the sequential definition of continuity. Up
to this point limit points are assumed to be the limit of sets called
sequences, all indexed by countably infinite linearly ordered sets. We
will investigate limit points in a more general context of topological
spaces.
11.2 Sequences and Limit Points in Topological Spaces
We will first start with the formal definition of a sequence of elements

in a topological space. It is analogous to the definitions introduced
in normed vector spaces and metric spaces.
277
Definition 11.1 Let S be any topological space.

(a) Sequence: A sequence in S is a function, f : N → S, map-
ping N into S. It can be denoted as {f (i) : i = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . .},
{x0 , x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn , . . .} where xi = f (i) for each i ∈ N, or,
{xi : i = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . .} or, simply {xi }.
For Tj = {i ∈ N : i ≥ j}, we will say that f [Tj ] = {xi : i ≥ j}
is a “tail end” of the sequence {xi }.
(b) Convergence: A sequence, {xi }, is said to converge to a point p
in S if and only if, for every open neighborhood U of p, there
exists, N , such that, when n > N , xn belongs to U . We also
say “. . . if and only if every open neighborhood of p contains a
tail end of the sequence”.1 The expression, {xi } → p, is used to
indicate that the sequence converges to p.
(c) Limit point of a sequence: If {xi } → p, then p is a limit point of
the sequence {xi }.
(d) Limit point of a set: If F is a non-empty set, we say that p is
a limit point of the set, F , if and only if p is the limit point of
some sequence, {xi }, which is entirely contained in F .
(e) Accumulation point of a sequence: We say that k is an accumu-
lation point of the sequence, A = {f (i)}, if every open neigh-
borhood of k has a non-empty intersection with every tail end,
f [Tj ] = {xi : i ≥ j}, of A.
The reader is no doubt familiar with the following characterization

of “closed set” given in the study of metric spaces:
A non-empty subset, F , of the metric space, (M, ρ), is
closed in M , if and only if, F contains the limit point of
each and every sequence contained in F .
Also, we have another definition which involves sequences, namely
the sequential definition of continuity for functions mapping a metric
space to a metric space.
A function, f , mapping a metric space, M1 , into a metric
space, M2 , is said to be continuous at a point p if and only
if, whenever p is the limit point of a sequence, {xi }, in
1
The expressions “{xi } converges to p if the sequence eventually belongs to every
neighborhood, U of p” is also used.
Limit Points in First Countable Spaces 279
M1 f (p) is the limit point of the corresponding sequence,

{f (xi )}, in M2 .
Can we easily generalize the statements from “metric spaces” to
non-metrizable topological spaces? We will show that the transition
from sequences in metric spaces to sequences in topological spaces
flows fairly smoothly whenever the topological spaces are first count-
able; that is, if every point has a countable neighborhood base.
We begin by providing the following definition.
Definition 11.2 Let S and T be topological spaces.

We say that a function f : S → T is sequentially continuous at
p if and only if, whenever p is limit point of a sequence, {xi }, in S,
then f (p) is the limit point of the corresponding sequence, {f (xi )}
in T .
Theorem 11.3 Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be first countable topological

spaces.
(a) A non-empty subset, F of S, is closed in S if and only if every
limit point of F belongs to F .
(b) A function mapping S into T is continuous on S if and only if
it is sequentially continuous at each point, p, in S.
Proof. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be first countable topological spaces.
(a) (⇒) Suppose F is a closed subset of S and let p be a limit point
of F .
Then, by definition, there is a sequence, {xi } ⊆ F , which con-
verges to p. Suppose p ∈ S \F . Then, if U is any open neighbor-
hood of p, U ∩ (S \F ) contains a tail end of the sequence {xi }.
Since this is impossible, then p ∈ F .
(⇐) Suppose F contains all its limit points.
Suppose there exists a point p ∈ clS F\F . By hypothesis, there
exists, {Ui : i ∈ N}, a countable open neighborhood base of p. If,
for n ∈ N, Vn = U1 ∩U2 ∩· · ·∩Un , then {Vn : n ∈ N} is a countable
neighborhood base of open sets of p, such that Vn+1 ⊆ Vn . Then
{p} = ∩{Vn : n ∈ N}.
Since p is a boundary point of F , we can choose, for each
i ∈ N, xi ∈ Vi ∩ F (Choice function). Since every Vi contains a
tail end of the sequence {xi }, then p is a limit of the sequence in

F ; so it is a limit point of F . By hypothesis, p, being a limit of
F , should belong to F . This contradicts, p ∈ clS F \F . To avoid
the contradiction we must have, clS F \ F = ∅, which implies
F = clS F , and so F is closed.
(b) (⇒) Suppose f : S → T is continuous on S and let p ∈ S. Also,
suppose that p is the limit point of a sequence, {xi }, in S.
If V is an open neighborhood of f (p), then there exists an open
neighborhood U of p such that f [U ] ⊆ V .
Then U contains some tail end, say {xi : i > N }, of the
sequence {xi }. Then {f (xi ) : i > N } ⊆ f [U ] ⊆ V . So, V contains
a tail end of the sequence {f (xi )}. Since V is an arbitrary open
neighborhood of f (p), then {f (xi )} → f (p). This establishes the
proof of (⇒).
(⇐) Suppose f : S → T is such that {xi } → p in S implies
{f (xi )} → f (p).
We are required to prove that f is continuous at p. By hypoth-
esis, there exists, {Ui : i ∈ N}, a countable open neighborhood
base of p, where Ui+1 ⊆ Ui . Then ∩{Ui : i ∈ N} = {p}.
We will proceed by contradiction. That is, suppose f is not
continuous at p. Then there exists an open neighborhood, V , of
f (p) such that, for each i, f (xi )\V = ∅. Then, for each j, there
exists yj ∈ Uj such that f (yj ) ∈ V . Then {yj } → p; but the tail
end of the sequence, {f (yj )}, is excluded from V and so can’t
converge to f (p), a contradiction. So f is continuous at p.
The above theorem allows us to say that, in a first countable

space S, if F is a subset of S, then the closure, clS F , of F is the
set of all the limit points of F . Also, in first countable spaces, to say
that a function, f : S → T , is continuous on S is to say that f is
“sequentially continuous” at each point p in S.
11.3 Subsequences of a Sequence
Sequences in a first countable topological space don’t always converge

to a point. But infinite subsets of a sequence are themselves sequences
and might still “converge”.
Definition 11.4 Let S be a first countable topological space. Let
A = {f (i) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} = {xi }
be a sequence in S. Suppose g : N\{0} → N\{0} is a strictly increasing

function. Then the sequence,
B = {f (g(i)) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} = {xg(i) }
is called a subsequence of the sequence A. By strictly increasing we

mean i > j ⇒ g(i) > g(j).
Note that the notation, xg(i) , means that xg(i) is the element of
the sequence {xi } with the index number g(i). The terms in a subse-
quence always respect the order in which they appear in the sequence.
Example 1. If A = { 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , . . . , n1 , . . .}, where an = 1/n, and
g(n) = 2n, then B = {ag(n) } = {a2n } is the subsequence

1 1 1 1
B= , , ,..., ,...
2 4 6 2n
Every element of a subsequence must always be an element of the
sequence from which it is derived. The key is that the index function
must be strictly increasing. Also, remember that a sequence always
has infinitely many terms (but not necessarily have infinitely many
distinct elements). In this example, the sequence { 12 , 12 , 13 , 13 , 14 , 14 , . . .}
is not a subsequence of the sequence A since the indexing function
used is not strictly increasing.
Example 2. Let
A = {1, 1, 2, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, . . .}
Then B = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, . . .} and C = {1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, . . .} are both

subsequences of A. The subsequence B does not converge and does
not have a subsequence which converges. On the other hand, the
subsequence C of A converges to 1.
So the element, 1, is, by definition, an accumulation point of the
sequence A.
Note that, if we view the sequence A as simply the “set of all

non-zero natural numbers” then 1 is not, by definition, a “cluster
point”1 of the set A even though 1 is an accumulation point of A.
It will be understood in this textbook that “cluster point” refers to
a point in relation to some set. While accumulation point is used in
relation to sequences (or later, to nets).
Note. Some authors use “cluster point” or “accumulation point”
interchangeably, which may cause some confusion in some theorem
proofs. So readers should verify carefully how authors define both
words.
Theorem 11.5 Let A = {f (i) : i ∈ N} = {xi } be a sequence

in a first countable topological space S. Then p is an accumulation
point of the sequence, A, if and only if it is a limit point of some
subsequence, {f (g(i)) : i ∈ N} = {xg(i) }, of A.
Proof. Let A = {f (i) : i ∈ N} = {xi } be a sequence in a first

countable topological space S.
(⇐) Suppose A has a subsequence, T , which converges to the point
p. Then every open neighborhood of p contains a tail end of T , and
so intersects a tail end of A. So p is an accumulation of A.
(⇒) Suppose p is an accumulation point of A. We are required to
find a subsequence of A which converges to p.
Since S is first countable, p has a countable open neighborhood
base,
Bp = {Bi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
such that Bi+1 ⊆ Bi for all i. If Tj = {i : i ≥ j} is a tail end of N,

then for all i and j, f [Tj ] ∩ Bi = ∅.
We inductively construct a subsequence, B, of A which converges
to p. Let g(1) be the smallest number in T1 , such that, f (g(1)) ∈ B1 .
Suppose that, for g(1) < g(2) < · · · < g(j), f (g(i)) ∈ Bi . Let g(j + 1)
be the smallest number in Tg(j+1) such that f (g(j + 1)) ∈ Bj+1 .
1
Reminder: In the chapter on closures on page 62, we defined a cluster point of
a set A as a point p such that any open neighborhood of p contains some other
point x in A.
We thus obtain a subsequence

B = {f (g(i)) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
of A, which converges to p, as required.
We will later see that, if S is not first countable, the statement

above will fail to be true, in general. So we will have to redefine our
notions about “sequence”.
Concept Review
1. If S is a first countable topological space what does it mean to

say that {xi } is a sequence in S?
say that p is limit point of {xi }, a sequence in S?
say that p is a limit of a subset, U , in S?
4. If S is a first countable topological space and the subset, U of S,
contains all its limit points state a topological property possessed
by U .
5. If S is a first countable topological space and F is a closed subset
of S what can we say about the set of all limit points of F ?
6. If S is a first countable topological space define “the closure of
F ” in terms of limit points.
7. Define a subsequence of a sequence in a first countable topolog-
ical space.
8. Define an accumulation point of a sequence in a first countable
topological space.
9. If p is and accumulation point of a sequence is p a limit point of
the sequence? Explain.
Exercise
1. Let (S, τS ) be a first countable topological space. Define the “inte-

rior of the subset F ” in terms of limit points.
Chapter 12
Limit Points of Nets
Abstract
In this section, we will expand the definition of “limit point” so that it
applies to arbitrary topological spaces, including those which are not first
countable. The indexing set of all natural numbers used for sequences
will be substituted by a more general indexing set called “directed set”.
The sets whose elements are ordered by a “directed set” will be called
“nets”. Nets will serve as a tool which will assist in recognizing closed
subsets and continuous functions in arbitrary topological spaces. They
will also, eventually, be used to identify sets which are “compact” once
this concept has been properly defined.
12.1 Directed sets
Suppose “≤” is a partial order relation on a set, S. That is,

— for all x ∈ S, x ≤ x, (reflexive property)
— if x ≤ y and y ≤ x then x = y, (anti-symmetric property)
— if x ≤ y and y ≤ z then x ≤ z (transitive property)
The second condition (referred to as the “anti-symmetric property”)
is not absolutely required in what follows, but it is easier to set
the stage in this way to introduce the notion of a “directed set”
whose definition requires some sort of predefined order relation on a
given set.
285
Definition 12.1 Let D be a non-empty infinite set on which is

defined a partial ordering relation “≤”. Suppose the partially ordered
set, (D, ≤), also satisfies the property:
If x, y ∈ D, there exists z ∈ D such that x ≤ z and y ≤ z

(The directed set property)
Then we refer to (D, ≤) as a directed set.
We already know of a directed set, namely, (N, ≤). Simply see

that, if m, n ∈ N, there exists k ∈ N such that m ≤ k and n ≤ k.
So, a directed set is a generalization of the linearly ordered countable
sets we normally use as indexing sets for sequences. As we can see,
the definition of directed set does not require that its order relation,
“≤”, be linear. It is usually appears in the form of a partial ordering.
Example 1. Given a set, S, its power set, (P(S), ⊆), is partially
ordered by the inclusion relation, ⊆. This order relation can be seen
to satisfy the directed set property. Then (P(S), ⊆) is a directed set
where ∅ ⊆ T for all T ∈ P(S) and T ⊆ S for all T ∈ P(S).
Example 2. Consider the set of all finite partitions, Part , of the
closed interval [0, 10] of real numbers. For example, M = {[0, 4] ∪
[4, 7] ∪ [7, 10]} ∈ Part . We define a partial order on Part as follows:
M ≤ K if and only if K is a finer partition then M . That is, each
closed interval of M is a union of closed intervals in K. For example,
M = {[0, 4]∪[4, 7]∪[7, 10]} ≤ {[0, 2]∪[2, 4]∪[4, 7]∪[7, 9]∪[9, 10]} = K
It is easy to verify that “≤” respects the directed set property on Part .
For example, suppose M = {[0, 5] ∪ [5, 10]} and J = {[0, 2] ∪ [2, 10]}.
If
K = {[0, 2] ∪ [2, 5] ∪ [5, 7] ∪ [7, 10] ∪ [9, 10]}
then M ≤ K and J ≤ K. See that [0, 10] ≤ W for all W ∈ Part .

Then (Part , ≤) is a directed set.
We will now show how directed sets can be used to establish a
direction in arbitrary subsets of a topological space. The definition of
a net, in terms of a function, is similar to the definition of a sequence
Limit Points of Nets 287
except that the index set is not necessarily linear and so can be
“larger” than N.
Definition 12.2 Let S be a set.

(a) A net in S is a function, f : D → S, mapping a directed set,
(D, ≤), into S. It is usually denoted as
{f (i) : i ∈ D} = {f (i)}i∈D = {xi }i∈D
or, simply, by {xi } whenever it is obvious that the index set is

the directed set, D.
(b) Tail-end of N: Let N = {f (i)}i∈D be a net in S, k ∈ D and
Tk = {i ∈ D : i ≥ k}. We will refer to a subset of the form,
f [Tk ] = {f (i) : i ≥ k} as a tail end of the net, N . We can obtain
many tail ends of N by varying the value of k in D.
(c) Convergence: Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space and N =
{xi }i∈D is a net in S, ordered by a directed set, D. The net,
N , is said to converge to a point p in S (with respect to τ and
the given ordering) if and only if every open neighborhood, U
of p, contains some tail end, f [Tk ], of the net N . That is, there
exists k ∈ D such that, whenever j ≥ k, then xj ∈ U . The
expression,
{xi } → p
is used to indicate that this net converges to p.

(d) Limit point: If a net, {xi }i∈D in a topological space, S, converges
to the point p, we say that p is a limit point of the net {xi }i∈D .
(e) Limit point of a set: If F is a non-empty set in a topological
space, S, we say that p is a limit point of the set, F , if and only
if p is the limit point of some net, {xi }i∈D , which is entirely
contained in F .
(f) Accumulation point: Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space. We
will say that y is an accumulation point of the net, N = {f (i)}i∈D
in S, or that A accumulates at y, if for every tail end f [Tk ] =
{f (i) : i ≥ k}, of N and every open neighborhood By of y,
f [Tk ] ∩ By = ∅
Since (N, ≤) is a directed set, then a sequence, {xi : i ∈ N}, is a

particular kind of net.
Example 3. Consider the net (sequence),
N = {n + (−1)n n : n ∈ N\{0}} = {0, 4, 0, 8, 0, 12, . . .}
with directed set N\{0} in R (with the usual topology). This net does
not have a limit point, since a sufficiently small open neighborhood,
(p − ε, p + ε), of any p cannot contain a tail end of N . However,
any neighborhood, (−ε, ε), of the number, 0, intersects every tail
end of the net (since all tail ends of N contain zeroes). So, 0 is an
accumulation point.1
It is important to remember that limit points or convergence of
a net can only be discussed with respect to a particular topology
in mind. Given a net, N = {f (i)}i∈D , in a topological space, if we
change the topology on the set, then we may be altering its conver-
gence properties. However, the directed set, (D, ≤), which indexes
the net elements is not topologized.
By definition, nets are indexed subsets of a topological space. If
N is a net in S we stated that N may have a limit point, p, and may
have an accumulation point, y. If we say that the net, N , “has” a
limit point, p, we do not imply that p ∈ N . Also, by definition, every
neighborhood of a limit point p contains a tail end of N so every
neighborhood of p intersects a tail end of N and so, by definition,
every limit point, p, of N is an accumulation point of N . Of course, an
accumulation point of N need not be a limit point, as the example
above shows. So, accumulation points of a net are of interest only
when the net does not converge to a point in S.
Example 4. Consider the product space, S = [0, ω1 ) × [0, ω1 ) and
S ∗ = [0, ω1 ] × [0, ω1 ] where ω1 is the first uncountable ordinal.
Let p = (ω1 , ω1 ). The set,
B = {(α, ω1 ] × (β, ω1 ] : α < ω1 , β < ω1 }
1
In some texts, authors use the word “cluster of a net” instead of “accumulation
point of a net”. This may lead to confusion since the word “cluster” is already
defined in the context, “cluster point of a set” (see page 62). Note that the net
N in this example, when viewed as a set, (according to definitions) has no cluster
points but does have an accumulation point.
forms a neighborhood base of open sets for the point p ∈ S ∗ . Con-

struct a net in S whose limit point is p.
Solution: We are given B = {(α, ω1 ] × (β, ω1 ] : α < ω1 , β < ω1 }
forms a neighborhood base of open sets for the point p ∈ S ∗ . For
U, V ∈ B we define U ≤ V if and only if V ⊆ U . Then “≤”, thus
defined on B, is a partial ordering that satisfies the directed set
property, and so forms a directed set, (B, ≤).
Let f : B → S be a choice function which maps each U ∈ B to
one point of our choice, say f (U ) = xU in U ∩ S. We thus obtain, by
definition, a net
{f (U ) : U ∈ B} = {xU : U ∈ B}
an uncountable subset of the product space, S = [0, ω1 ) × [0, ω1 ),

with directed set B.
We claim that, p = (ω1 , ω1 ) is a limit point of the set, S. It suffices
to show that, {xU } → p.
Let K = (α, ω1 ] × (β, ω1 ] be an arbitrary open neighborhood of p
in S ∗ . There exists γ, μ such that V = (γ, ω1 ] × (μ, ω1 ] ⊂ K. Then
V ≥ K and so xV ≥ xK . That is, a tail end, f [TK ] = {xU : U ≥ K}
is contained in the open neighborhood, K of p. Hence, the tail end,
f [TK ], of the net, {xU : U ∈ B}, in S is a subset of the open
neighborhood, K, of p. Hence, {xU } → p.
Since S contains a net, {xU : U ∈ B}, which converges to p, then
p is a limit point of the set, S, as claimed.
12.2 Closed Sets and Continuity in Terms of Nets
We now present the results which describe the closure of a set and
the continuity of a function in terms net convergence.
Theorem 12.3 Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces.
(a) Let E be a subset of S. A point p belongs to clS E if and only if

there is a net in E which converges to p.
(b) A function, f : S → T , mapping S into T is continuous at p

in S if and only if whenever p is limit point of a net, {xi }, in
S then f (p) is the limit point of the corresponding net, {f (xi )}
in T .
Proof. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be topological spaces.

(a) (⇒) Suppose E ⊆ S and p belongs to clS E. We can index all open
neighborhoods of p and partially order them by reverse inclusion
to form the directed set D = {U : U is an open neighborhood of
p. Then, for each open neighborhood, U , of p, we can, by a choice
function, choose xU in U ∩ E. We obtain a net, {xU : U ∈ D},
in E, which converges to p.
(⇐) Suppose {xi } is a net in E which converges to p.
Then, by definition of “convergence”, each neighborhood of p
intersects E. Then p cannot belong to the open set S \clS E. So,
p ∈ clS E.
(b) (⇒) Suppose f : S → T is continuous at p ∈ S and p is a limit
point of a net, A = {xi : i ∈ I}. Let U be an open neighborhood
of f (p) in T .
By definition of continuity, f ← [U ] is an open neighborhood of p
in S. Since the net A converges to p, then, by definition, f ← [U ]
contains a tail end, {xi : i ≥ k}, of A. Then f [{xi : i ≥ k}] =
{f (xi ) : i ≥ k} is a tail end of f [A] which belongs to U .
So, f [A] converges to f (p).
(⇐) Left as an exercise for the reader.
The above result shows that, given a subset, F , of a topological

space, S, we can use nets as a tool to determine the closure, clS F , of
the set F .
(a) A set F in a topological space, S, is closed in S if and only if F

contains the limit point of every net which is contained in F .
(b) Equivalently, p is a limit point of a closed subset of S if and only
if every open neighborhood of p intersects F .
We choose sequences or nets depending on the nature of the topo-

logical space considered.
12.3 Subnet of a Net
We know that sequences have special subsets called “subsequences”.

Nets can have proper subsets which are analogous to subsequences.
We formally define this concept in such a way that it generalizes the
concept of a subsequence.
Definition 12.4 Let S be a set and N = {f (i) : i ∈ D} be a net in

S with directed set D.
Suppose Tj = {i : i ≥ j} denotes a tail end of D (with “least”
element j).
(a) Cofinal: Suppose U is a subset of D such that for each d ∈ D
there is an element u ∈ U such that u ≥ d. Then we say that
U is cofinal in D.
Verify that, if U is cofinal in D, then U is also a directed set. By

extension, we will say that M = {f (i) : i ∈ U } is a cofinal net in
N . In this case, M intersects every tail end of N . We can then
say that, “if every neighborhood U of y, U ∩ N is cofinal in N
then y is an accumulation point of N ”.
(b) Subnet of a net: Let D be a directed set (possibly different
from D).
Suppose g : D → D is an increasing function on D (i.e., i ≥ j ⇒
g(i) ≥ g(j)) so that g[D] is cofinal in D; then (f◦g)[D] is cofinal
in N .
Let
B = {f (g(i)) : i ∈ D} = {xg(i) : i ∈ D}
be a cofinal subset of N . Then B is a called a subnet of the net N .
A few remarks on the notion of a subnet. In the above definition

the function g points to a cofinal subset of the directed set D while the
function f associates this subset to a cofinal subset (the subnet) of the
net N . We alert the reader to the fact that, in the usual definition of
a subsequence we require that the function g be “strictly” increasing.
So g chooses not only a cofinal subset of N but a “subsequence” of N.
The definition of “subnet” requires that g be only “increasing”. So,

g may be pointing to a cofinal subset of D, but some of the elements
of this cofinal subset may be repeating.
We verify how this may make a difference. If f (n) = 1/n,
so that the sequence, A = {f (n)} = {1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, . . .}, and
{g(n)} = {1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, . . .}, then we end up with a subnet B =
{f (g(n))} = {1, 1, 1/2, 1/2, 1/3, 1/3, . . .}, a subset of A, but clearly
not a subsequence of A (at least not as we viewed it previously).
So, B is a subnet of A, but B does not satisfy the definition of a
subsequence of A.
Given our experience with subsequences, we expect that, if a net,
N , in the space S, has an accumulation point x in S, the net will
have a subnet B which will converge to it. We confirm that this holds
true in the next theorem.
Theorem 12.5 Let S be a topological space containing a net, N =

{f (i) : i ∈ D} and u ∈ S. Then u is an accumulation point of N if
and only if N has a subnet converging to u.
Proof. Let S be a topological space containing a net N = {f (i) :
i ∈ D} with directed set D.
(⇐) Suppose N = {f (i) : i ∈ D} = {xi } has a subnet B = {f (g(i)) :
i ∈ D} = {xg(i) } which converges to u (where D is a directed set).
We must show that for any open neighborhood Bu of u Bu is cofinal
in N . Let Bu be any open neighborhood of u. Since the subnet, B,
converges to u, then Bu contains a tail end,
f [g[Tr ]] = {f (g(i)) : i ≥ r} = {xg(i) : i ≥ r}
of B, where r ∈ D. Let
f [Tk ] = {f (i) : i ≥ k}
be some tail end of N . By definition, g[D] is cofinal in D. Then

there exist q ∈ D such g(q) > max {k, g(r)}. Then f (g(q)) ∈ f [Tk ] ∩
f [g[Tr ]] ⊆ Bu . So every tail end of N intersects Bu . So, Bu is cofinal
in N . So, by definition, u is an accumulation point of N .
(⇒) Suppose u is an accumulation point of the net N = {f (i) : i ∈
D}. We are required to construct a subnet, B, of N which converges
to u. For every j ∈ D, let Tj = {i ∈ D : i ≥ j}. Let Bu be an open
neighborhood base of u in S. By definition of accumulation point of

N , if U ∈ Bu , U is cofinal in N . (That is, U ∩ f [Tj ] is non-empty,
for all j ∈ D.)
Step 1: Defining the set D. Consider the set
D = {(i, U ) ∈ D × Bu : f (i) ∈ U }
Step 2: Ordering the elements of D. We will order the elements of

D with, “≤”, as follows:
(i, U ) ≤ (j, V ) ⇔ [i ≤ j and V ⊆ U ]
Then (D, ≤) is a partially ordered set.

Step 3: We claim that (D, ≤) is a directed set. Suppose (i, V ),
(j, U ) ∈ D and W = V ∩ U . Since D is directed, there exists k ∈ D
such that i ≤ k and j ≤ k and u ∈ W . Since u is an accumulation
point of N , the tail end, f [Tk ], intersects W and so W contains
some f (q) for q ∈ Tk . Then (q, W ) ∈ D where (i, V ) ≤ (q, W ) and
(j, U ) ≤ (q, W ). We then have a directed set, (D, ≤).
Step 4: Constructing the subnet B. Define g : D → D as g(j, U ) = j,
for each (j, U ) ∈ D. Then g assigns each (i, U ) to i in D such that
f (i) ∈ U .
To show that (f ◦g)[D] is a subnet of N it suffices to show that
it is cofinal in N . Let Tk be a tail end of D. It suffices to show that
g[D] ∩ Tk is non-empty.
Let V be an open neighborhood of u. Since u is an accumulation
point of N , there exists q ∈ Tk such that f (q) ∈ f [Tk ] ∩ V . Then
(q, V ) ∈ D. Then q = g(q, V ) ∈ g[D] ∩ Tk . So, g[D] is cofinal in D,
as claimed.
Then f [ g[D] ] is cofinal in N , so
B = {f (g(i, Uu )) : (i, Uu ) ∈ D}
satisfies the definition of a subnet of N .

Step 5: Claim that the subnet, B, converges to u. Let U ∈ Bu . To
show that the subnet B converges to u we are required to find a tail
end of B which is entirely contained in U . Let Tz be a tail end of D.
Since u is an accumulation point of N , U ∩ f [Tz ] = ∅ so we can
choose f (j) ∈ U ∩ f [Tz ] = ∅. Then (j, U ) ∈ D.
Suppose (j, U ) ≤ (k, V ). Then j ≤ k and f (k) ∈ V ⊆ U . So,

(f ◦g)(k, V ) = f (k) ∈ U . So, the tail end of all elements in B passed
the point (f ◦g)(j, Uu )) belongs to Uu . So, the subnet B converges
to u, as claimed.
Then the subnet B converges to the accumulation point, u, as
required.
Remark. In the above theorem, the net N may be either a sequence

or an uncountable net. The cardinality of N does not play a role in
the proof, so the statement holds true for countable and uncountable
nets.
12.4 A Few Examples
12.4.1 A comment on a few infinite countable ordinals

Ordinals can also serve as an indexing set for a net. Recall that
there are two types of ordinals: Those ordinals, α, which have an
immediate predecessor, say β, where β + 1 = α and limit ordinals,
γ, where γ = sup{α : α < γ} = ∪{α : α ∈ γ} or, equivalently, γ is
an ordinal which does not contain a maximal ordinal. The following
represent countable limit ordinals.
ω0 = {0, 1, 2, 3, . . .} = [0, ω0 )
2ω0 = {0, 1, 2, 3, . . . , ω0 , ω0 + 1, ω0 + 2, . . . , ω0 + n, . . .} = [0, 2ω0 )
3ω0 = {0, 1, 2, . . . , ω0 , ω0 + 1, ω0 + 2, . . . , 2ω0 , 2ω0 + 1, 2ω0 + 2, . . .}
= [0, 3ω0 )
..
.
nω0 = {0, 1, 2, . . . , ω0 , ω0 + 1, ω0 + 2, . . . , (n − 1)ω0 , (n − 1)ω0
+1, . . .} = [0, nω0 )
..
.
ω0 ω0 = [0, ω0 ω0 ) = {0, . . . , ω0 , . . . , 2ω0 , . . . , 99ω0 + 100, . . .}
Those ordinals which are smaller than ω0 are simply the natural
numbers. Ordinals such as {ω0 , 2ω0 , 3ω0 , . . . , nω0 . . .}, are all count-
ably infinite limit ordinals.
With these facts in mind we present a solution for the question
in the following example.
1
Example 5. Consider the set {n + m : n ∈ N, m ∈ N\{0}}. We will
use the set of ordinals, D = [ω0 , ω0 ω0 ), as an index to a subset of
Q ∩ [0, ∞). The set, D, need not be topologized.
Define f : [ω0 , ω0 ω0 ) → Q ∩ [0, ∞) as follows where, for n ≥ 1,
m ≥ 0:
1
f (nω0 + m) = m +
n+1
Then N = {f (i) : i ∈ [ω0 , ω0 ω0 )} is a net in Q ∩ [0, ∞) with
[ω0 , ω0 ω0 ) as directed set.
With this definition, the elements of the net are described as
follows:

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
,1 ,2 ,3 ,..., ,1 ,2 ,3 ,..., ,1 ,2 ,3 ,..., ,
2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 n n n n n+1

1 1 1
1 ,2 ,3 ,...,
n+1 n+1 n+1
Show that each natural number is an accumulation point of the

net N . Then construct a subnet which converges to each natural
number.
Solution: A tail end of [ω0 , ω0 ω0 ) is of the form
Taω0 +b = [aω0 + b, ω0 ω0 ) = {nω0 + m : nω0 + m ≥ aω0 + b}
So, a tail end of N is of the form
f [Taω0 +b ] = {f (nω0 + m) : nω0 + m ≥ aω0 + b}

1
= m+ : nω0 + m ≥ aω0 + b
n+1
Let q be a natural number. We claim that q is an accumulation

point of N .
Proof of claim: To see this, let (q − ε, q + ε) be a small open neigh-

borhood of q.
It suffices to show that f [Taω0 +b ] ∩ (q − ε, q + ε) = ∅.
Then there exists k > a such that q + 1/k ∈ (q − ε, q + ε). Then
kω0 + q > aω0 + b, so f (kω0 + q) ∈ f [Taω0 +b ]. Since f (kω0 + q) =
q + 1/k ∈ (q − ε, q + ε), then f [Taω0 +b ] ∩ (q − ε, q + ε) = ∅. So q is
an accumulation point of N , as claimed.
Since q is an accumulation point of N, then, by the preceding
theorem, N must contain a subnet which converges to q. Define the
function g : [ω0 , ω0 ω0 ) → [ω0 , ω0 ω0 ) as
g(nω0 + m) = nω0 + q (For all m.)
We see that g is increasing (but not strictly increasing) on
[ω0 , ω0 ω0 ), since for any a and b such that a < b,
g(aω0 + m) = aω0 + q < bω0 + q = g(bω0 + m) (So increasing)
g ← (aω0 + q) = {aω0 + m : m ∈ N} (So not strictly increasing)
1
We also have that f (g(nω0 + m)) = f (nω0 + q) = q + n+1 .
Then
1
(f ◦g)[D] = {q + : n ∈ N}
n+1
1
mapping D to a subnet {q + n+1 : n ∈ N} of N which converges to
q as n → ω0 . As required.
In the following example, we witness how in certain circumstances
the theory governing sequences and their subsequences can have
shortcomings.
Example 6. Let S = [0, 1) × [0, 1) = {(a, b) : a, b ∈ [0, 1)}. We will
equip S with the usual topology inherited from R2 . Let
D = {(c, d) : c, d ∈ (0, 1), both c and d are irrationals}
lexicographically ordered, untopologized. By “lexicographically
ordered” we mean that (e, k) ≤ (c, d) if e < c, and, when e = c,
then k ≤ d.2 Then, with this ordering, (D, ≤) will serve as a directed
2
This means, we order the ordered pairs by using the same principle as the one
used to order words in the dictionary.
set for a net in S. The net,
N = {f (c, d) : (c, d) ∈ D}
in the space, S, is defined as follows: f (c, d) = (c, d). Then N linearly

orders the ordered pairs, (c, d), in the space S, where (0, 0) < (c, d) <
(1, 1).
(a) Is the point, p = (1, 1) in S, a limit point of the net, N ?

(b) Is the point, p = (1, 1) in S, an accumulation point of the net, N ?
Solution:
(a) Let Bε (1, 1) be an open neighborhood of the point p = (1, 1) in S.

Suppose T(a,b) is a tail end of D. Then f [T(a,b) ] = T(a,b) is a tail
end of N . Suppose (a, b) ∈ Bε (1, 1). See that (a + 1−a 2 , b − 2ε) >
(a, b) with respect to the lexicographic ordering since b = 1 ⇒
1−a 1−a
2 = 0. But (a + 2 , b − 2ε) does not belong to Bε (1, 1). So
no tail end of the net N = {f (c, d) : (c, d) ∈ D} belongs entirely
in Bε (1, 1). So, p is not a limit point of the net, N .
(b) We claim that p = (1, 1) is an accumulation point of the net, N .
By the theorem above, it suffices to show that N has a subnet
converging to (1, 1).
Let g : N → N be defined as: g(a, b) = (a, a) if a ≥ b and
g(a, b) = (b, b) if a < b. We see that g is an increasing function
with respect to the lexicographic ordering of the ordered pairs.
We claim that g[D] is cofinal in D. For (a, b) ∈ D, if a < b,
(b, b) > (a, b), if b < a, (a, a) > (a, b). Then for any (a, b) in D,
there exists an element in g[D] which is larger than (a, b). So,
g[D] is cofinal in D. So, f ◦g : N → {(a, a) : a ∈ [0, 1)} defines a
subnet of N . If Bε (1, 1) is an open neighborhood of (1, 1) then
(f ◦g)[T(1− ε2 ,1− 2ε ) ] ⊆ Bε (1, 1). So, (f ◦g)[D] converges to (1, 1).
Example 7. Consider the directed set, (Part , ≤), of all finite par-
titions of the closed interval [0, 10] introduced in an example on
page 286. Given two partitions P and Q in Part , P ≤ Q if Q is
a finer partition than P . That is, each closed interval in P is a union
of closed intervals in Q.
Let f : [0, 10] → R be any function on [0, 10]. Let Pαn = {Pi :
i = 1..n} represent a partition of [0, 10]. Let pi be the width of the
ith interval, Pi , of the partition Pαn . Let
Part = {Pαn : Pαn is a partition of [1, 10]}
and (Part , ≤) be its representation as a directed set of partitions.

For a given partition, Pαn , let mi , li denote the two points of the
ith interval, Pi , such that, f (mi ) is maximal at mi ∈ Pi , and f (li ) is
minimal at li ∈ Pi , respectively. Then
n

U (Pαn ) = f (mi )pi = xPαn
i=1
n

L(Pαn ) = f (li )pi = yPαn
i=1
both approximate the area beneath the curve of f on [0, 10]. Then
U : Part → R and L : Part → R define two nets,
NU = {U (Pαn ) : Pαn ∈ Part } = {xPαn : Pαn ∈ Part }

NL = {L(Pαn ) : Pαn ∈ Part } = {yPαn : Pαn ∈ Part }
If the two nets NU and NL have a common limit, say q ∈ R, the

theory of integration confirms that
10
f (x) dx = q
0
Example 8. Let the space, R2 , be equipped with the radial topol-

ogy τr . Recall that (R2 , τr ) is called the radial plane. This topology
is described in Example 2 on page 93. In Example 11 on page 104,
we show that the radial plane is not first countable. Consider the set
S = R2 \(0, 0)
equipped with the subspace topology inherited from τr . Construct a

net which converges to p = (0, 0).
Solution: In what follows, (r, θ), represents the radial coordinates
of a point in R2 . Let D = {(r, θ) : r > 0, θ > 0} be an uncountably
infinite linearly ordered set where
(r1 , θ1 ) = (r2 , θ2 ) if r1 = r2 and θ2 = θ1 + 2nπ
and
⎧
⎨r2 < r1
(r1 , θ1 ) < (r2 , θ2 ) if or
⎩
r1 = r2 and θ1 + 2nπ < θ2 + 2nπ
Then D is a directed set. Suppose f : D → S is defined as f (r, θ) =

( θr , θ). Then
N = {f (r, θ) : (r, θ) ∈ D} = {( θr , θ) : (r, θ) ∈ D}
describes an uncountable net in S.

Claim: That the net, N , accumulates at p = (0, 0).
Proof of claim: Suppose B is an open neighborhood of p, with
respect to τr .
Let (rq , θq ) ∈ D and
T(rq ,θq ) = {(r, θ) : (r, θ) ≥ (rq , θq )}
be a tail end of D. Then
f [T(rq ,θq ) ] = {f (r, θ) : (r, θ) ≥ (rq , θq )} = {( θr , θ) : (r, θ) ≥ (rq , θq )}
is a tail end of N .
By definition of accumulation point it suffices to show that
f [T(rq ,θq ) ] intersects B. If so, then N contains a subnet which con-
verges to p.
Let (rk , θk ) be any point in B. We can choose m such that
rk
rs = < rk
θk + 2mπ
Let θs = θk + 2mπ. See that (rs , θs ) is a point on the ray passing
through (rk , θk ) and so belongs to B. Also (rs , θs ) > (rk , θk ), so
(rs , θs ) ∈ T(rk ,θk ) . Then
rs
f (rs , θs ) = , θs ∈ f [T(rk ,θk ) ] ∩ B
θs
So every neighborhood of p intersects a tail end of N . So, the net

N accumulates at p = (0, 0), as claimed.
Then by the above theorem, the net N has a subnet which con-
verges to p.
Example 9. Let C denote the Cantor set. Recall from its formal
definition 7.18 and its graphic representation given on page 175 that
C = ∩{Ci : i ∈ N} where Ci+1 ⊂ Ci for all i. Also every element
of C is the set of all elements in [0, 1] of the form ∞ mn
i=1 3n where
mn ∈ {0, 2}. Let W = [0, 1] × P([0, 1]) be partially ordered by ≤
defined as
(x, A) ≥ (y, B) ⇔ x∈A⊆B
Then D = {(x, Ci ) : i = 0, 1, 2, . . . , x ∈ Ci } is a partially ordered set.

If m ≥ n and (x, Cm ), (y, Cn ) ∈ D where x ∈ Cm , then (x, Cm ) ≥
(y, Cn ). So, D is a directed set.
Define the function f : D → S as f (x, Ci ) = x. Let
N = {f (x, Ci ) : (x, Ci ) ∈ D}
be a corresponding net in [0, 1]. Show that every element of C is an

accumulation point of the net N .
Solution: Let k ∈ C. Then k ∈ Ci for all i ∈ N. Suppose B is a
basic open neighborhood of k and j ∈ N.
If B ∩ f (x, Ci ) = ∅ for all i ≥ j then
z∈B ⇒ z ∈ {f (x, Ci ) : i ≥ j}
⇒ z ∈ Ci for all i ≥ j
⇒ k ∈ Ci for all i ≥ j
⇒ k∈C
a contradiction. We can only conclude that the open neighborhood

B of k is cofinal in the net N = {f (x, Ci ) : Ci ∈ C}. So, k is an
accumulation point of N .
Remark. In the example immediately above, we have shown that k

is an accumulation point of the net,
N = {f (x, Ci ) : (x, Ci ) ∈ D}
Then N must have a subnet, say
M = {(f ◦g)(x, Ci ) : (x, Ci ) ∈ D}
which converges to k. We will produce such a subnet by defining an

appropriate increasing function g : D → D.
tn m tn
Suppose k = ∞ i=1 3n where tn ∈ {0, 2} and let km = i=1 3n .
Define
g(x, Cm ) = (km , Cm )
for m ∈ N. Then (f ◦g)(x, Cm ) = km . So,
(f ◦g)[D] = [{km : m ∈ N}]
is a subnet which clearly converges to k.
12.5 Convergence of Functions
We will now consider the notion of “convergence to a limit point”

for the particular case of a set, S, whose elements are functions. This
will be considered from a topological point of view. Since convergence
to a limit point depends on the topology defined on the set, our first
step is to decide which topology on S is the most suitable for our
purposes.
Consider, for example, the set,
S = R[0,1]
representing the family of all functions, f : [0, 1] → R, mapping [0, 1]

into R (where the functions are not necessarily continuous). The
standard topology on Cartesian products, i∈I Si , can be described
as being the set of all functions mapping the index set, I = [0, 1],
into ∪i∈I Si . We will examine convergence in i∈[0,1] Ri equipped with
the product topology where each factor, Ri is R. An element of the
product space i∈[0,1] R can be viewed as an element of R[0,1] .
The product topology on S = R[0,1] .

We examine what the product topology on S = R[0,1] when viewed
as i∈[0,1] R looks like.
Suppose f = {yi : i ∈ [0, 1]} = {f (i) : i ∈ [0, 1]} is an element in
S. Then, for f ∈ S and j ∈ [0, 1], πj (f ) = f (j) and, for k ∈ R,
πj← (k) = {f ∈ S : f (j) = k}
With the product topology on S, a basic open neighborhood, Bf ,

of f is of the form
Bf = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ Ffinite ⊆ [0, 1], Ui ⊆ R}
where F is a finite subset of [0, 1] and Ui is an open neighborhood of

yi = f (i) in R. The product topology declares that πi [Bf ] = R for all
i ∈ F and yi ∈ πi [B] = Ui , for all i ∈ F . If g = {xi : i ∈ [0, 1]} ∈ Bf
(where g(i) = xi ) this means that xi ∈ Ui for each i ∈ F and xi is
anything else in R for i ∈ F . This means the element g is “close” to
f if g(i) and f (i) both belong to Ui for i ∈ Ffinite .
The basic open neighborhood, Bf , of f = {yi } establishes restric-
tions on convergence of a net only on finitely many index elements
at a time, not on the whole set {yi : i ∈ [0, 1]} simultaneously. So,
a sequence or a net of functions, {gα : α ∈ J}, will converge to a
limit point, f ∈ S = R[0,1] = i∈[0,1] R provided {gα (i)} → f (i) at
finitely may points i ∈ [0, 1] at a time. We will refer to this type of
function convergence as “point-wise convergence”.
The box topology on S = R[0,1] .
On the other hand, if we equip S = R[0,1] = i∈[0,1] R with the
(stronger) box topology an open neighborhood of f = {yi : i ∈
[0, 1]} = {f (i) : i ∈ [0, 1]} is of the form
Bf = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ [0, 1], Ui ⊆ R}
where Ui is an open neighborhood of yi in R. In this case, g = {xi :

i ∈ [0, 1]} belongs to Bf provided xi = g(i) ∈ Ui for each i ∈ [0, 1].
When equipped with the box topology, convergence in S =
R[0,1] = i∈[0,1] R is referred to as “uniform convergence”.
Note that a topology on [0, 1] is not relevant in the choice of
topology on S. We formally define these in a more general context,
S = T A.
Definition 12.6 Let A be a set and T be a topological space. Let

S = T A represent the set of all functions which map A into the
topological space, T .
(a) Point-wise convergence: Suppose S is expressed as S = i∈A T
and is equipped with the product topology.
In this case a basic open neighborhood of f ∈ S, is of the form
Bf = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ Ffinite ⊆ A, Ui ⊆ T }
Then convergence of a sequence or net, {gα : α ∈ J} to f will occur
if {gα (i)} converges to f (i) at finitely many values of i ∈ A at a
time. Convergence in S = T A , equipped with the product topology,
is called point-wise convergence.
(b) Uniform convergence: Suppose S = T A is equipped with the box
topology.
In this case a basic open neighborhood of f ∈ S, is of the form
Bf = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ A, Ui ⊆ T }
In this case, g is considered to be near f if g(i) ∈ Bf for all i ∈ A.
Then convergence of a sequence or net, {gα : α ∈ J} to f will occur
if {gα (i)} converges to f (i) for all values of i ∈ A simultaneously. In
this case, we say that this sequence or net converges to f uniformly.
(c) Uniform norm topology on C(S): If S is a topological space
it is the custom for analysts to represent the set of all continuous
real-valued functions on S by C(S) (or C(S, R)). The uniform norm
topology is equivalent to topology generated by the sup-norm ∞ :
C(S) → R, defined as
f ∞ = sup |f (x)|
x∈S
It is equivalent to the topology whose open sets are the basic open
sets that are associated to the ones in the box topology.
In the following example, if f is a real-valued function on [0, 1]

(not necessarily continuous), let Z(f ) = f ← (0) and
κ(f ) = |Z(f )| (the cardinality of Z(f ))
with κ(f ) = c if Z(f ) is uncountably large, κ(f ) = ℵ0 = |N| if Z(f )
is countably infinite and κ(f ) ∈ N otherwise.
Example 10. Let S = [0, 1][0,1] be the topological space of all func-
tions mapping [0, 1] into [0, 1] equipped with the product topology
(that is, the topology in which convergence is pointwise). Let
H = {f ∈ S : f [0, 1] ⊆ {0, 1}}
Let z = 0(x) denote the zero-function on [0, 1].

(a) Show that there is a net, N , in the subset, H of S, which accu-
mulates at z = 0(x).
(b) Let D ∗ = {f ∈ H : κ(f ) ∈ N, κ(f ) > 0} (all uncountable strings
of zeroes and ones which contain finitely many zeroes). Show
that no sequence in the uncountable set D ∗ can converge to z.
Solution: We are given that S = [0, 1][0,1] is equipped with the

product topology and
H = {f ∈ S : f [0, 1] ⊆ {0, 1}}
(a) If f ∈ H, κ(f ) represents the“cardinality of Z(f ) = f ← (0)”. Let
D = {f ∈ H : κ(f ) ∈ N}
So, κ(f ) is a natural number for all f ∈ D. Since [0, 1] is uncount-

able, the set of all finite subsets of [0, 1] is uncountable, so D is
an uncountable set of functions which map [0, 1] to finitely many
zeroes. We will define “≤” on D as follows:
f ≤ p if and only if κ(f ) ≤ κ(p)

f = p if and only if κ(p) = κ(f )
If s, t ∈ D are such that κ(s) = m < k = κ(t) then there

exists r ∈ D such that κ(r) = k + 1, so r > s and r > t. So,
D is a directed set. A tail end in D is as follows: If g ∈ D,
Tg = {f : κ(f ) ≥ κ(g), κ(f ) < ℵ0 }.
Let h : D → H be defined as h(f ) = f .
Let
N = {h(f ) : f ∈ D}
be a net in H.
Claim 1: That the net N accumulates at 0(x). Consider an

arbitrary basic open neighborhood B of 0(x). Then, there is
Ffinite ⊂ [0, 1], where |Ffinite | = k,
B= i∈[0,1] Ai
where, for i ∈ Ffinite , Ai = {0}, Ai = {0, 1}, otherwise.

Let g ∈ N such that κ(g) = m. Then
h[Tg ] = {f ∈ N : κ(f ) ≥ κ(g), κ(f ) < ℵ0 }
is a tail end of N .
There exists h ∈ N such that κ(h) > max {m, k}, such that
h(i) = 0 for i ∈ Ffinite . Then h ∈ B. So h[Tg ] ∩ B = ∅. So, 0(x)
is an accumulation point of the net N , as required for Claim 1.
Claim 2: That the net N does not converge to 0(x). Consider
an arbitrary basic open neighborhood B of 0(x). Then, there is
Ffinite ⊂ [0, 1], where |Ffinite | = k,
B= i∈[0,1] Ai
where, for i ∈ Ffinite , Ai = {0}, Ai = {0, 1}, otherwise.

It suffices to show that B does not contain a tail end of N . If
g ∈ B, let h[Tg ] = {f ∈ N : f ≥ g} be a tail end in N . Then for
i ∈ F , g(i) = 0. Suppose F ∗ ⊂ [0, 1] such that |F ∗ | = k + 1 and
F \F ∗ = ∅.
Suppose h ∈ N such that, for i ∈ F ∗ , h(i) = 0 for i ∈ F ∗ and
h(i) = 1 otherwise. Then, since κ(h) > κ(g), h > g, so h ∈ h[Tg ].
But since h(i) = 1 for some i ∈ F \F ∗ then h ∈ B. So B cannot
contain a tail end of N . So, the net, N in H, does not converge
to 0(x), as required. This proves Claim 2.
(b) Let A = {fk : k ∈ N} be a sequence in D. For each k ∈ N, let
Z(fk ) = fk← (0). Since each Z(fk ) is a finite subset of [0, 1], then
U = ∪{Z(fk ) : k ∈ N}
is a countable proper subset of [0, 1]. Let F be a finite non-empty
subset of [0, 1] such that F ∩ U = ∅. Let B = i∈[0,1] Ai where,
for i ∈ F , Ai = {0} and Ai = {0, 1}, otherwise.
Then fk (i) = 1 for all i ∈ F and k ∈ N. Such fk ’s cannot
belong to the basic open neighborhood, B, of 0(x). S, no tail end
of A is contained is contained in B. So, the sequence A cannot
converge to 0(x).
Example 11. Let the set, S = [0, 1][0,1] , of all functions mapping
[0, 1] to [0, 1] be equipped with the product topology. Here, we view
S as i∈[0,1] [0, 1]i . Show that S is not first countable.
Solution: We are given that the space S = [0, 1][0,1] viewed as

i∈[0,1] [0, 1]i .
Suppose S is first countable and let
f = f (i)i∈[0,1] = xii∈[0,1]
be a point in S. Then S has a countable neighborhood base,
Bf = {Bn : n ∈ N}
at f . Then each open base neighborhood, Bn , of f in i∈[0,1] [0, 1]i ,

can be expressed as
xii∈[0,1] ∈ Bn = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ FBn ⊆ [0, 1], Ui ⊆ [0, 1]}
where FBn is finite and Ui is open. Then ∪{FBn : N} is countable

union of finite subsets and so is a countable proper subset of [0, 1].
There must exist k ∈ [0, 1]\∪{FBn : N} such that

πk i∈[0,1] [0, 1]i = πk [ Bn ] = [0, 1]
for all n ∈ N.
Now, let V be a proper open neighborhood of πk (f ) = xk ∈
πk [S] = [0, 1]. Since V is proper in [0, 1], then
xk ∈ πk [Bn ] = [0, 1] ⊆ V
for all Bn ∈ Bf . Then, for any Bn ,
f ∈ πk← (xk )
⊆ Bn
⊆ πk← [V ]
This contradicts that Bf is a countable neighborhood base of f .

So, S is not first countable.
Concept Review
1. Define a directed set.

2. Are the natural numbers a directed set?
3. Show that the set of all finite partitions of a closed interval of
real numbers is a directed set.
4. Define a net of elements in a set.
5. Define a tail end of a net in a set.
6. What does it mean to say that a net converges to a point p in a
topological space?
7. What is a limit point of a net.
8. What does it mean to say that a set is cofinal in a net?
9. What does it mean to say that a set B is a subnet of a net A?
10. If B is a subnet of the sequence A is B necessarily a subsequence
of A?
11. Is it true that a point p belongs to the closure of a set B if and
only if B contains a net which converges to p?
12. Define an accumulation point of a net.
13. If the sequence A has an accumulation p is there necessarily a
subnet which converges to p?
14. If the sequence A has an accumulation p is there necessarily a
subsequence which converges to p?
15. Complete the statement in terms of nets: A function f : S → T
is continuous at p if and only if. . .
16. Complete the statement in terms of subnets: The point u is an
accumulation point of the net A if and only if. . .
17. Describe two topologies used on sets of function T A and describe
the convergence properties with respect to these particular
topologies.
Exercises
1. Show that the subnet of a subnet of a net A is also a subnet of A.

2. Show that a net, {xi : i ∈ D}, in a product space, S = α∈A Sα ,
converges to p if and only if, for any μ ∈ A, the net {πμ (xi ) :
i ∈ D} converges to πμ (p) in Sμ .
3. Let J denote the set of all irrationals in R and let p = (π, π). If
S = J2 \{p} we will define a partial ordering, “≤”, on S as:
a≤b whenever || b − p || ≤ || a − p ||
where “|| ||” refers to the distance between points in J2 .

(a) Verify that the pair, ( S, ≤), forms a directed set in S.
(b) Suppose f : J2 → R is a real-valued function on J2 . Then,
when f is restricted to S, the set, A = { f (x), x ∈ S }, defines
a net in R. Verify that the net, A, converges to a limit L if
and only if limx→p f (x) = L (in the usual sense).
Chapter 13
Limit Points of Filters
Abstract
In this section, we will introduce a form of convergence by sets rather
than the convergence by points. These families of sets are called filters.
The construction of a filter is modeled closely on the structure of a
neighborhood base at a point. We will formally define a “filter of sets”
and explain how to determine whether it has a limit point or not. We
will also define an “accumulation point” which belongs to the closure of
all sets in a filter. Finally, we will introduce “ultrafilters” and a few of
their characterizations; these will help us distinguish them from regular
filters.
13.1 Filters and Some of Their Properties
Recall that a net is essentially a set whose elements are indexed

by either a linearly or partially ordered set. The ordered elements
may or may not converge to a particular element we called a “limit
point”. The type of convergence we will consider in this section is
more topological in nature. Essentially, neighborhood bases serve as
the main inspiration for this type of convergence.
Definition 13.1 Let S be a set. Let F ⊆ P(S). If F satisfies the

two properties:
(1) ∅ ∈ F ,
(2) For every U, V ∈ F , there exists F ∈ F such that F ⊆ U ∩ V .
then we will say that F is a filter base of sets.
309
If F is a filter base which also satisfies the condition:
(3) Whenever U ∈ F and there is V ∈ P(S)\{∅} such that U ⊆ V ,

then V ∈ F .
Then F is called a filter of sets.1
A quick way of describing a filter of sets is to say: “A filter is a

subset of P(S)\{∅} which is closed under finite intersections and
supersets”.2 Note that the notion of a filter is a set-theoretic concept,
not a topological one. Once we want to discuss “convergence” we will
be in the context of a filter in some topological space.
A filter is, itself, a filter base, while a filter base, if not a filter, can
be completed to become a filter. Given a filter base, F , we define
the larger set, F ∗ , as follows:
F ∗ = {U ∈ P(S) : F ⊆ U , for some F ∈ F }
We have simply adjoined to F all its supersets. It is easily verified

that F ∗ is a filter.
We will say that the filter base, F , generates the filter F ∗ .
Example 1. For a topological space, (S, τ ), and a point x ∈ S, a
neighborhood base of open sets, Bx , is clearly a filter base of sets in
S since it satisfies the filter base property:
For any two open neighborhoods U and V of Bx there

exists W ∈ Bx such that x ∈ W ⊆ U ∩ V .
The following proposition states that a filter which is generated

by a filter base is the intersection of all filters which contain the filter
base in question.
1
Not that there can be many types of filters: filters of sets, filters of closed sets,
filters of zero-sets. The definition of “filters of sets” is independent of a topology
on S.
2
If A ⊆ B then we say that B is a “superset” of A. It is worth noting that the
set, P(S), is not a filter. Why?
Limit Points of Filters 311
Proposition 13.2 If F ∗ is a filter generated by the filter base, F

then,
F ∗ = ∩{H : H is a filter and F ⊆ H }
Proof. Let H be a filter which contains the filter base F . It suf-

fices to show that F ∗ ⊆ H . Let A ∈ F ∗ . Then, by definition, there
is a non-empty set U ∈ F such that U ⊆ A. Since U ∈ H and H
is a filter, A ∈ H . Then F ∗ ⊆ H .
Definition 13.3 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and F be a filter

base of sets in P(S).
(a) If ∩{clS F : F ∈ F } = ∅ then we will say that F is fixed in S.
(b) Otherwise, we will say that F is free in S.
Example 2. Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and K be a non-empty

subset of S. Let F ∗ be the set of all subsets, U , of S such that K ⊆
intS U .
(a) Show that F ∗ is a filter of sets in S.
(b) If K = {x}, describe a filter base, F , of F ∗ .
(c) Is the filter base F free or fixed in S?
Solution: We are given F ∗ = {U ∈ P(S) : K ⊆ intS U } for a
fixed K.
Let U, V ∈ F ∗ and M ∈ P(S) such that U ⊆ M .
(a) Since K ⊆ intS ∅, then ∅ ∈ F ∗ .
Since U, V ∈ F ∗ , then K ⊆ intS U and K ⊆ intS V . Then
K ⊆ intS U ∩ intS V = intS (U ∩ V )
So, U ∩ V ∈ F ∗ . Then F ∗ is closed under finite intersections,

which implies that F ∗ is a filter base of sets in P(S).
Since U ∈ F ∗ and U ⊆ M , then K ⊆ intS U ⊆ intS M then
M ∈ F ∗ . So, F ∗ is closed under supersets.
So, F ∗ is a filter of sets.
(b) Suppose K = {x}. Then F is the set, Bx , of all neighborhoods

of x. The set, F , satisfies the property: “If A and B are two
neighborhoods of x in F then there exists a neighborhood C in
F such that x ∈ C ⊆ A ∩ B”. So, the filter base, F = Bx , is a
neighborhood base of x.
(c) Since K ⊆ intS U and intS U ⊆ clS U for all U ∈ F , then K ⊆
∩{clS U : U ∈ F } so F is fixed.
13.2 Limit Points and Accumulation Points of Filters
As we have done for sequences and nets, we define the limit point and
accumulation point of a filter base and of a filter. In what follows,
filters are family of subsets of some topological space.3
Definition 13.4 Let F be a filter base of sets on the topological

space S, and x ∈ S. Let Bx be a neighborhood base at the point x.
(a) We will say that the filter base of sets, F , converges to x if
and only if, for every open neighborhood, B of x, there is some
U ∈ F such that U ⊆ B. This implies that, if Bx is an open
neighborhood base of x, then Bx ⊆ F ∗ , the filter generated
by F . So the filter, F ∗ , is “finer” than Bx . We abbreviate the
“convergence of F to x” by the expression, F → x. In this case,
we will say that
x is a limit point of the filter base F .
(b) We will say that x is an accumulation point for F if and only if

every open neighborhood of x intersects each F ∈ F . That is,
x ∈ clS F for all F ∈ F
(c) The set of all accumulation points of F is called that the adher-
ence of F . The adherence of F is denoted by a(F ). That is,
a(F ) = ∩{clS F : F ∈ F }.
3
Later in the text we will discuss filters whose elements are zero-sets.
It is worth verifying that, if F is a filter base, then a(F ) = a(F ∗ ).

Also note that, by definition, a limit point of a filter base, F , is an
accumulation point of F .
Observe that, for x to be a limit point of a filter base F , x need
not belong to of any of its elements. Witness the following example.
Example 3. Consider the set, F = {(4, 4 + δ] : δ > 0}. See that F
doesn’t contain ∅ and satisfies the filter base property and so qualifies
as a filter base. The element 4 does not belong to any of its elements.
But if we take any open neighborhood of 4, say B = (4 − ε, 4 + μ)
there exists, say U = (4, 4 + μ/4) in B, such that U ⊆ B. So 4 is a
limit point of the filter base F .4
Furthermore, distinct filter bases can converge to the same point.
Witness such a case in the following example.
Example 4. Consider the sets, F1 = {(4, 4 + δ] : δ > 0} and F2 =
{[4 − δ, 4) : δ > 0}. See that both F1 and F2 are filter bases which
converge to the limit point 4.
By definition, any filter base that has an accumulation point is
fixed. Filter bases can have multiple accumulation points.
Example 5. Consider the set, A = {2} ∪ (3, 4] in R, equipped with
the usual topology. Let F = {U ∈ P(R) : A ⊆ U }. Every point, x ∈
A, belongs to every F ∈ F . So every point in A is an accumulation
point of F . But also, every open neighborhood of 3 will intersect
every set which contains A, so 3 is also an accumulation point. The
filter base, F , has no limit point since any open interval of a point in
A with radius less than 1 cannot be contained in a set which contains
all of A.
However, verify that if, F1 = {U ∈ P(R) : 2 ∈ U }, is a fixed
filter where F ⊆ F1 .
13.3 Filters Derived from Nets
Suppose we are given a net in a topological space S. We will show

how a filter can be constructed from this net, simply by gathering
4
However, by definition, the set, B = (4 − ε, 4 + μ), will belong to F ∗ , the filter
generated by F .
together all tail-ends of the net. Eventually, we will show they have
the same limit points.
Theorem 13.5 Let S be a set and D be a directed set. Suppose the

function, f : D → S, defines a net, A = {f (i) : i ∈ D}, in S. If
u ∈ D, let Tu = {i ∈ D : i ≥ u}, a tail end of D. Then,
f [Tu ] = {f (i) : i ≥ u in D}
represents a tail end of the net, N , starting with f (u). Let
Ff = {f [Tu ] : u ∈ D}
be the set of all tail ends of the net, N . Then Ff is a filter base of
sets in S.
Proof. We are given Ff = {f [Tu ] : u ∈ D} where
N = {f (i) : i ∈ D}
is a net in the set S. First note that ∅ ∈ Ff .

We claim that Ff is closed under finite intersection: If j, k ∈ D,
then there exist, h ∈ D, such that j ≤ h and k ≤ h. Then Th ⊆ Tj ∩Tk
and so,
f [Th ] ⊆ f [Tj ] ∩ f [Tk ]
So, Ff is closed under finite intersections, as claimed. So, the set,

Ff , of all tail ends of the net, N , is a filter base of sets in S.
Definition 13.6 Let S be a set and N = {f (i) : i ∈ D} be a net in

S. Let Tu = {i ∈ D : i ≥ u}. The filter base, Ff = {f [Tu ] : u ∈ D},
forming the set of tail ends, of the net, N , in S, is referred to as the
filter base in S which is determined by the net N .
13.4 A Net Derived from a Filter
Having seen how we can construct a filter from a net, we now show
how a net can be constructed given any filter.
Definition 13.7 Let S be a set and F be a filter of sets. We define

the relation, ≤, on the set,
DF = {(u, F ) ∈ S × F : u ∈ F }
as follows: (s, F ) ≤ (u, H) if and only if u ∈ H ⊆ F . Then (DF , ≤)

forms a directed set.
With this directed set in hand, and the function, f : DF → S,
defined as f (u, F ) = u, we define the net
NF = {f (u, F ) : (u, F ) ∈ DF }
in the set, S. The net NF is called a net generated by the filter F .
13.5 Corresponding limit points of a filter and its net
We will now confirm that the limit point or accumulation point of a

net will always be a limit point or accumulation point of the filter
corresponding to this net, and vice-versa.
Theorem 13.8 Let S be a topological space. Suppose F is a filter

base of sets in S and A = {h(i) : i ∈ D} is a net.
(a) Suppose the net, A, is a net generated by F ∗ . The point, u, in

S is a limit point (accumulation point) of F if and only if u is
a limit point (accumulation point) of A.
(b) Suppose the filter base, F , is determined by the net, A. The
point, u, in S is a limit point (accumulation point) of F if and
only if u is a limit point (accumulation point) of A.
Proof. We are given that S is a topological space.

(a) We are given that F is a filter base and the net,
A = {h(u, F ) : (u, F ) ∈ DF , u ∈ F ∈ F }
is one which is generated by filter F ∗ .

(⇒) Case: Limit point. Suppose u is a limit point of the filter base
F . Then u is a limit point of F ∗ . We are required to show that
u is a limit point of the net A. Let U be an open neighborhood of
u. To show that A converges to u we must show that U contains
a tail end of A.
Since u is a limit point of F and U is a neighborhood u, there
exists F ∈ F such that F ⊆ U . Then U belongs to the filter,
F ∗ . We can choose some point v ∈ U , so that the pair, (v, U )
belongs to DF .
We claim that the tail end, h[T(v,U ) ] in A, is contained in U :
Let (x, V ) ∈ DF such that (v, U ) ≤ (x, V ). Then T(x,V ) ∈ T(v,U )
and x ∈ V ⊂ U . Then h(x, V ) = x ∈ U . So neighborhood of u,
U , contains the tail end of h[T(v,U ) ], as claimed. So the net, A,
converges to u.
(⇒) Case: Accumulation point. Suppose u is an accumulation
point of the filter base F and A = {h(u, F ) : (u, F ) ∈ DF },
the net generated by F . We are required to show that u is an
accumulation point of A. Let U be an open neighborhood of u.
By hypothesis, U ∩ F = ∅ for all F ∈ F (equivalently, u ∈ clS F
for each F ∈ F ).
To show that u is an accumulation point of the net, A, we
must show that U intersects each tail end of A. Let h[T(v,K) ] be
a tail end in A and M ∈ F . Then V = M ∩ K is an element of
F which is a subset of K. Then, by hypothesis, there exists
t∈U ∩V ⊆V ⊆K
The expression, t ∈ V ⊆ K, translates to, (v, K) ≤ (t, V ). Hence,
t = h(t, V ) ∈ h[T(v,K) ] ∩ U
So, U intersects the tail-end h[T(v,K) ]. We conclude that u is an

accumulation point of the net corresponding to F .
(⇐) Case: Limit point. Suppose u is a limit point of the net

A. We are required to show that the filter, F , generated by A
converges to u. Let U be an open neighborhood of u. To show
that F converges to u we must show that U contains an element
of F .
By hypothesis, U contains a tail end of A. That is, h[T(s,F ) ] ⊆ U
for some (s, F ). Then h(r, F ) ∈ U for all r ∈ F . But h(r, F ) = r.
So F ⊆ U . Since F belongs to F , then F converges to u.
(⇐) Case: Accumulation point. The proof is left as an exercise

for the reader.
(b) We are given that the filter base, Fh , is determined by the net
A = {h(i) : i ∈ D}. Recall that Fh = {h[Tu ] : i ≥ u} where
Tu = {i ∈ D : i ≥ u}. That is, it is the set of the tail ends of the
net, {h(i) : i ∈ D}.
(⇒) Case: Limit point. Suppose x is a limit point of the filter

base, Fh . We must show that the net A also converges to x.
Suppose U is any open neighborhood of x. Then there is a ∈ D
such that h[Ta ] ⊆ U . Then every open neighborhood contains a
tail end of the net, {h(i) : i ∈ D}. So the net converges to x.
(⇐) Proving the converse of the “Case, limit point”, is left as an

exercise.
(⇒) Case: Accumulation point. Suppose y is an accumulation

point of the filter base, Fh . We must show that y is an accu-
mulation point of the net A. Let U be any open neighborhood
of y. Then U ∩ h[Tu ] = ∅ for all u ∈ D. That is, U contains an
element of all tail ends of the net, {h(i) : i ∈ D}. Then y is an
accumulation point of this net.
(⇐) Proving the converse of the “Case, accumulation point” is

left as an exercise.
13.6 Other Properties of Filters
In the following theorem, we see that “uniqueness of limits of filters

(nets)” characterizes the Hausdorff property on a topological space.
Theorem 13.9 Let S be a topological space. The space S is Haus-

dorff if and only if a convergent filter, F ∗ , has only one limit point.
Proof. We are given that S is a space.
(⇒) Suppose S is Hausdorff. Suppose the points x and p are limits
of the filter base of sets, F , in S. Then neighborhood bases, Bx and
Bp , are subsets of the filter, F ∗ , generated by F . If x = p, then,
by hypothesis, we can choose disjoint open neighborhoods Ux and Vp
which separate p from x. Since F ∗ converges to p and x there exists,
W and M , in F ∗ which are contained in Ux and Vp , respectively.
But then W ∩ M = ∅, contradicting the fact that F ∗ is a filter. So
x = p.
(⇐) We are given that limits of any filter, F ∗ , of sets in S are unique.
Suppose S is not Hausdorff. Then there is a pair of points, x and p,
with open neighborhood bases, Bx and Bp such that, U ∩ V = ∅ for
all U and V in Bx and Bp . It easily follows that F = {U ∩ V : U ∈
Bx and V ∈ Bp } is a filter base of sets in S.
We claim that F ∗ converges to both x and p. Let Wx and Dp be
elements of Bx and Bp , respectively. It suffices to show that there
are elements, F1 and F2 in F ∗ such that F1 ⊆ Wx and F2 ⊆ Dp ,
respectively. This would contradict convergence to a single element.
There exists Ux ∈ Bx and Vp ∈ Bp such that
x ∈ F1 = Ux ∩ Vp ⊆ Wx
and Tp ∈ Bp and Cx ∈ Bx such that,
p ∈ F2 = Tp ∩ Cx ⊆ Dp
By definition of F ∗ both F1 and F2 belong to F ∗ . By definition

of convergence, F ∗ converges to both x and p. This contradicts our
hypothesis. So, S must be Hausdorff.
The statement in the above theorem translates to nets. That is,

limit points of nets in a topological space, S, are unique if and only
if S is Hausdorff.
In the following theorem, we show that, for any accumulation
point, p, of a filter, F , it is possible to increase the size of F to a
larger filter which will converge to p. So every accumulation point of

a filter is the limit point of a larger filter which contains it.
Theorem 13.10 Suppose S is a topological space and p is an accu-

mulation point for a filter base, F , of sets in S. Then p is the limit
point of some filter, H ∗ , which contains F ∗ .
Proof. We are given that S is a space and that p is an accumulation
point of a filter, F .
Let Bp denote the set of all open neighborhoods of p. Since p is
an accumulation point of F , every open neighborhood of p intersects
every element of F . We can then consider the family
H = {U ∩ F : U ∈ Bp , F ∈ F }
itself a filter base. Let H ∗ be the filter generated by H .
We claim that H converges to p. If V is an element of Bp , for
F ∈ F , V ∩ F is non-empty so is an element of H . Since V ∩ F
is a subset of V , by definition of convergence, H converges to p, as
claimed.
Suppose F ∈ F . Since U ∩ F ⊆ F, then F ∈ H ∗ so F ⊆ H ∗ . In
fact, F ∗ ⊆ H ∗ .
We conclude that, if p is accumulation point of F , then it is the
limit point of H ∗ , a filter which contains F ∗ .
Theorem 13.11 Suppose S is a topological space. Suppose F1 and

F2 are two fixed filter bases in S. If F1 and F2 have the same
adherence set then every element of the filter, F1 , intersects every
element of the filter, F2 .
Proof. We are given that F1 and F2 are two fixed filter bases in S.
Suppose a(F1 ) = a(F2 ). Then, if p ∈ a(F1 ), p is an accumula-
tion point of both F1 and of F2 . There exists a filter, H ∗ , which
contains both F1 and of F2 and which converges to p. (Note: There
are some straightforward details involving Theorem 13.10 to work
out for proving this; these are left as an exercise.) Since H ∗ is closed
under finite intersections, every element of F1 intersects every ele-
ment of F2 .
13.7 Filter Bases Describe Closures of Sets

and Continuity
Not surprisingly, given our experience with sequences and nets, the
closure of a set can be described in terms of the limit points of its
filter bases.
Theorem 13.12 Let F be a non-empty subset of a topological

space, S. Then a point u belongs to the closure, clS F , of F if and
only if u is the limit point of some filter base in F .
Proof. We are given that S is a space and F is a non-empty subset
of S.
(⇒) Suppose u ∈ clS F . Let Bu be a neighborhood base of open sets
for u. Then
F = {U ∩ F : U ∈ Bu }
forms a filter base of sets in F which converges to u.
(⇐) Suppose F is a filter base in F converging to some u ∈ S. Let
U be any open neighborhood of u. Then there exists some V ∈ F
such that V ⊆ U . Since V ⊆ F , U intersects F and so u ∈ clS F .
Just as for nets, continuity of a function f : S → T can be

expressed in terms of filters. But first we must determine whether
the continuous image of a filter can itself be seen as a filter.
About the image, f [F ∗ ], of a filter, F ∗ . Given a function f : S →
T and given that F ∗ is a filter of sets in S we define,
f [F ∗ ] = {f [F ] : F ∈ F ∗ }
We claim f [F ∗ ] is a filter base in the range of the function, f . Let
f [U ] and f [V ] be two elements of f [F ∗ ] where U and V are elements
of F ∗ . Then there exists non-empty W ∈ F ∗ such that W ⊆ U ∩ V .
Then f [W ] ⊆ f [U ∩ V ] ⊆ f [U ] ∩ f [V ] = ∅. So. . .
f [F ∗ ]is a filter base which generates the filter f [F ∗ ]∗ .
Theorem 13.13 Let S and T be two topological spaces. Let f :

S → T be a function and u ∈ S. Let F ∗ be a filter. The function f is
continuous at u if and only if whenever u is a limit point of the filter,

F ∗ , then f (u) is a limit point of the filter, f [F ∗ ]∗ .
Proof. We are given that S and T are two topological spaces and
f : S → T is a function.
(⇒) Suppose f is continuous at u ∈ S and F ∗ converges to u. We
are required to show that f [F ∗ ]∗ converges to f (u).
Suppose V is an open neighborhood of f (u). It suffices to show
that an element of f [F ∗ ]∗ is contained in V. Since f is continuous at
u, then there exists an open neighborhood U of u such that f [U ] ⊆ V .
Since F ∗ is a filter, then U belongs to the filter F ∗ . Since f [U ] ∈
f [F ∗ ] and is contained in V , then V ∈ f [F ∗ ]∗ . So, f [F ∗ ]∗ converges
to f (u).
(⇐) Suppose that whenever F ∗ converges to u then f [F ∗ ]∗ con-
verges to f (u). Let F ∗ be the neighborhood filter of u. Since f [F ∗ ]∗
converges to f (u), each neighborhood V of f (u) contains some ele-
ment of f [F ∗ ]∗ . Then for some neighborhood U of u, f [U ] ⊆ V . This
shows that f is continuous at u.
The statement in the following example involves a subspace of

S = [0, 1][0,1] similar to the one found in the example discussed in
the chapter on nets (on page 306).
Example 6. Let S = [0, 1][0,1] , the set of all functions mapping
[0, 1] into [0, 1], be equipped with the product topology. Let H be a
subspace of the subspace, {0, 1}[0,1] of S which is defined as follows:
H = {h ∈ S : h(x) = 0 for finitely many values, otherwise h(x) = 1}
Construct a filter in H, which accumulates at the zero element, z.

Solution: Given S = [0, 1][0,1] , the set of all functions mapping [0, 1]
into [0, 1], equipped with the product topology and
H = {h ∈ S : h← (0) is finite, otherwise h(x) = 1}
a subspace of {0, 1}[0,1] . Let z represent the zero function, 0(x).

Let Tn = {f ∈ H : n ≤ | f ← (0) | < ℵ0 }. Let
F = {Tn : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
where Tn ⊆ H for each n. If f ∈ Tm , f (i) = 0 for m or more values

of i in [0, 1]. So Tm ⊆ Tm−1 . By finite induction, if n > m then
Tn ⊆ Tm . Hence, if m > n then Tm ∩ Tn = Tm = ∅. Since Tn is never
empty, F is then a filter base of sets in S.
Let BF be a basic open neighborhood of z in S where |F | = q,
for some q ∈ N\{0} and f (x) = 0 for the q values of x in F ⊂ [0, 1].
To show z is an accumulation point of F , we must show that,
given Tk ∈ F , BF ∩ Tk = ∅. If k > q, then, for some f ∈ Tk ,
f ∈ BF ∩Tk = ∅. If k < q, since Tq ⊆ Tk then, again, for some f ∈ Tk ,
f ∈ BF ∩ Tk = ∅. So, BF ∩ Tk = ∅. Then z is an accumulation point
of the filter base, F .
13.8 Partial Ordering the Family, F,

of All Filters in P(S)
We will now discuss some properties possessed by families of filters of

sets. The reader can assume that all filters discussed here are subsets
of P(S) for some topological space, S. Let
F = {F ⊆ P(S) : F is a filter of sets of S}
denote the family of all filters on a space S. We will define an ordering
of the elements in F by inclusion, “⊆”.
Given two filters, F and H , in F, if F ⊆ H , we will say that,
H is finer than F or F is coarser than H
For example, the sets F ∗ = {(2 − 1/n, 2 + 1/n) : n ∈ N \{0}}∗
and H ∗ = {(2 − ε, 2 + ε) : ε > 0}∗ are easily verified to be two filters
both converging to 2. We see that since F ∗ ⊆ H ∗ , then H ∗ is finer
than F ∗ . This ordering is a partial ordering.5
13.9 Ultrafilters
We have seen that a filter base can contain an other smaller filter base
and can often be itself contained in some other larger filter of sets.
5
Of course, “⊆” is not a “linear ordering” of F since it is not always the case
that one filter is a subset of another.
Filter bases with large adherence sets can be built up so that they
eventually will converge to at most one of those points. But, as we
shall soon see, at some point, a filter of sets will have attained its
maximum size. We often call such filters, “maximal filters”. Although
the use of the words “maximal filter” are by themselves sufficiently
descriptive, most writers have become accustomed to using the single
term, “ultrafilter”. We will formally define an “ultrafilter” and prove
some of its characterizations. These characterizations will make it
easier to recognize an ultrafilter when we see one. We will then dis-
cuss some ultrafilter properties. Ultrafilters play an important role
in certain branches of general topology.
Definition 13.14 Let S be a topological space and (F, ⊆) denote

the set of all filters in P(S), partially ordered by “⊆”. Suppose F
is an element of F.
We will say that the filter F is an ultrafilter of sets if and only if,
for H ∈ F,
F ⊆H ⇒F =H
That is, F cannot be properly contained in some other distinct filter.
The most commonly used characterizations of ultrafilters of sets

in P(S) are stated and proved below. These are extremely useful. It
is a good exercise to try to prove them before consulting the proposed
proofs.
Theorem 13.15 Let S be a topological space and F be a filter of

sets in P(S). The following statements are equivalent.
(a) The set F is an ultrafilter in P(S).

(b) If U ∈ P(S) is such that it intersects every element of F , then
U ∈ F.
(c) For any U ∈ P(S), if U ∈ F then S \U ∈ F .

(a ⇒ b) We are given that F is an ultrafilter. Suppose U ∈ P(S) is
such that U ∩ F = ∅ for all F ∈ F . We are required to show that
U ∈ F.
Let
H = {U ∩ F : F ∈ F }
The set, H , is easily seen to be a filter base of sets in S. Then the

filter, H ∗ , which is generated by H , contains both U and the set F .
Then, F ⊆ H ∗ . But, since F is a maximal filter, then F = H ∗ .
Then U ∈ F , as required.
(b ⇒ c) Suppose that, whenever a set U meets every element of F ,
then U ∈ F . Suppose U ∈ F . It suffices to show that S \U ∈ F .
Since U ∈ F , then U ∩ F = ∅ for some F ∈ F . Then F ⊆ S \ U .
If F1 ∈ F and F1 = F , then F1 ∩F ⊆ S\F . Since F1 ∩F is non-empty
and is a subset of S\U , then S\U intersects every element of F . By
hypothesis, S \U ∈ F .
(c ⇒ a) We are given that, if U ∈ F then S\ U ∈ F . We claim that
F is an ultrafilter.
Let H ∗ be any filter such that F ⊆ H ∗ . If V ∈ H ∗ such that
V ∈ F then S \ V ∈ F . This means that H ∗ contains both V and
its complement. This would imply that H ∗ is not a filter. Then there
can be no such V. So H ∗ ⊆ F . This means that F is an ultrafilter.
Example 7. Let u be an element of the space S. Let F = {U ∈

P(S) : u ∈ U }. We claim that F is an ultrafilter. To see this, let
U ∈ P(S). If u ∈ U then U ∈ F ; if u ∈ U , then u ∈ S \U ∈ F . So,
by the above theorem, F is an ultrafilter.
We have seen that (F, ⊆) is partially ordered by “⊆”. For every
filter, H , in F does there exist an ultrafilter which contains it? Many
readers see this as an “existence statement”. It suggests that, to prove
it we may have to invoke Zorn’s lemma.6 We remind ourselves what
Zorn’s lemma formally states:
6
Zorn’s lemma is proven to be equivalent to the Axiom of choice. A proof appears
in R. André, Axioms and Set Theory.
If every chain in a partially ordered set, (S, ≤), has a max-

imal element then S has a maximal element.
Theorem 13.16 Let S be a topological space and (F, ⊆), denote the
set of all filters in P(S), partially ordered by inclusion. If F ∈ F,
then there exists an ultrafilter, U , in F which contains F .
Proof. We are given that F ∈ F. We wish to prove the existence
of an ultrafilter which contains F . We set up the problem so that
Zorn’s lemma applies.
For a given F ∈ F, consider the set,
SF = {H ∈ F : F ⊆ H }
of all filters which contain F . We are required to show that some filter
in SF is an ultrafilter (i.e., SF has a maximal element). If SF = {F }
then F is an ultrafilter. Suppose SF contains filters other than F .
Now F can be the filter base element of many chains in SF . In fact,
SF can be viewed as the union of a family of filter-chains,
{Cα : α ∈ J}
each with base element, F . Pick an arbitrary filter-chain, Cγ = {Fi :

i ∈ I} in SF . It looks like,
F ⊆ F1 ⊆ F2 ⊆ F3 ⊆ · · ·
Let T = ∪{Fi : Fi ∈ Cγ }. Quite clearly, Fi ⊆ T for each i.

We claim that the family of sets, T , is itself a filter in the chain Cγ .
If U and V are elements of T , then U and V are elements of some
Fj in the chain, Cγ , so U ∩ V is an element of Fj ; so U ∩ V is also
an element of T . Then T is a filter base of sets which is a maximal
element in the chain Cγ .
So every chain, Cα , in SF has a maximal element. We can invoke
Zorn’s lemma, to conclude from this that SF , must also have a max-
imal filter element, U . Since SF contains every filter which contains
F , then U is the maximal filter which contains F . Then, by defini-
tion, U is the unique ultrafilter which contains F . This proves the
statement.
Example 8. Show that an ultrafilter of sets in a Hausdorff space

can have, at most, one accumulation point.
Solution: If U is a free ultrafilter then, then ∩{clS F : F ∈ U } = ∅,
so U has no accumulation point. Suppose, on the other hand that U
is fixed and u and p are two accumulation points. Then, by Theorem
13.10, there exists a filter, H ∗ , such that U ⊆ H ∗ , H ∗ → p and
H ∗ → u. Since U is an ultrafilter, then U = H ∗ . So U converges
to both u and p. By Theorem 13.9, since S is a Hausdorff space the
limit of a filter is unique. So, u = p. We conclude that an ultrafilter
can have at most one accumulation point.
13.10 Convergence of Filters on Product Spaces

Suppose {Si : i ∈ I} is a family of topological spaces and S = i∈I Si
is a product space.7 Suppose there is a filter, F , in S which converges
to a point, xii∈I . Then, for each i ∈ I,
πi [F ] = {πi [F ] : F ∈ F ∗ } = Fi
is a filter base in Si .8
Since F converges to xii∈I , by continuity of πi , πi [F ] = Fi
will converge to πi (xii∈I ) = xi (by Theorem 13.13).
So if a filter
converges to a particular point in a product space, i∈I Si , then the
corresponding filter in each factor converges to the corresponding
point under πi . The following theorem shows that the converse holds
true.
Theorem 13.17 Let {Si : i ∈ I} be a family of topological

spaces
and p = xii∈I be a point in the product space, S = i∈I Si . Suppose
7
We are assuming that the product space is non-empty. This is a consequence
of Axiom of choice.
8
To see this simply note that if πi [F1 ] and πi [F2 ] belong to Fi then πi [F1 ∩F2 ] ⊆
πi [F1 ] ∩ πi [F2 ] where F1 ∩ F2 = ∅ and πi [F1 ] is never empty.
that F ∗ is a filter of sets in S such that, for each i ∈ I, the filter,
πi [F ∗ ] = {f [F ] : F ∈ F ∗ } = Fi
converges to xi . Then F converges to the point, p = xii∈I.9

Proof. Given: A filter, F ∗ , in the product space, S = i∈I Si , and
that p = xii∈I is a point in S. For each i, the filter, πi [F ∗ ] = Fi ,
converges to xi . We are required to show that F ∗ converges to p.
Let F be a finite subset of I. For each i ∈ F , let Ui be an open
neighborhood of xi ∈ Si . Then
B = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F }
forms a basic open neighborhood of p = xii∈I ∈ S. To show that F ∗

converges to p we must find an element, A of F ∗ which is contained
in B.
Since Fi converges to xi , Ui ∈ Fi (since Fi is a filter), so πi← [Ui ] ∈
F . For each i ∈ F , since πi is continuous there exists an open neigh-
borhood, Ai , of p, in F such that xi ∈ πi [Ai ] ⊆ Ui . By the filter base
property, there exists A ∈ F such that p ∈ A ⊆ ∩{Ai : i ∈ F }. Now,
for each i ∈ F ,
πi [A] ⊆ πi [∩{Ai }]
⊆ ∩{πi [Ai ]}
⊆ πi [Ai ]
⊆ Ui
So, we have found A ∈ F such that p ∈ A ⊆ ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F }. So,

F converges to p = xii∈I , as required.
Corollary 13.18 Let {Sj : j ∈ J} be a family of topological spaces

and

S = j∈J Sj
9
This result will be useful to show that the product of compact spaces is compact
in the Section 13.11.
be a corresponding product space. Let B = {β(i) : i ∈ N} be a

sequence in S, where β(i) = βj (i)j∈J . For each j ∈ J, let
πj (β(i)) = πj (βj (i)j∈J ) = βj (i)
Then, for each j ∈ J,
πj [B] = {βj (i) : i ∈ N}
the corresponding sequence in Sj .

Suppose that, for each j ∈ J, the sequence {βj (i) : i ∈ N} con-
verges to pj in Sj .
Then the sequence {β(i) : i ∈ N} converges to pjj∈J in S.

Proof. We are given the product space, S = j∈J Sj , and a
sequence, B = {β(i) : i ∈ N} in S. Also, for each j ∈ J,
πj [{β(i) : i ∈ N}] = {βj (i) : i ∈ N}
Suppose that, for each j ∈ J, {βj (i) : i ∈ N} → pj ∈ Sj .

Let F be the filter base generated by the sequence B and, for
each j ∈ J, Fj = πj [F ].
Then, by Theorem 13.8, the filter, Fj , in Sj generated by the
sequence {βj (i) : i ∈ N} converges to pj .
By Theorem 13.17, the filter F converges to p = pjj∈J ∈
j∈J S j . Then the sequence, {β(i) : i ∈ N}, in j∈J Sj , converges
to p = pjj∈J , as required.
13.11 Ultranets: A Close Relative of Ultrafilters
We will now formally define what is also known as maximal nets.
Definition 13.19 Let S be a topological space and A = {f (i)}i∈D

be a net in S. We will say that A is an ultranet if, for any subset, B,
in S, a tail end of A either belongs to B and, if not, belongs to its
complement, S \B.
A net which is constant on its tail end, is an example of an ultra-

net. It is not immediately obvious from this definition that non-
constant ultranets exist. We will be able to address this question
below.
Theorem 13.20 Let A = {f (i) : i ∈ D} be an ultranet in a space S.

If E is a subnet of A then E is a also an ultranet.
Proof. Let S be a topological space which contains an ultranet,
A = {f (i) : i ∈ D}.
Suppose E is a subnet of A. Let B be a non-empty subset of S.
Then B or S \B contains a tail end of A. Suppose, without loss of
generality, that B contains a tail end of A. Then B must contain the
tail end of any subnet of A. Then every tail end of E belongs to B.
By definition of “ultranet” E is an ultranet.
For what follows recall, from Definition 13.19, that “ultranets are
those nets, {xi }, such that, for each B ∈ P(S), either B or S \ B
contains a tail end of {xi }”.
Example 9. Let S be a topological space. Suppose A = {f (i) : i ∈
D} is a net in S and F is a filter of sets in S.
(a) Show that, if A is an ultranet and F is the filter generated by
A, then F is an ultrafilter.
(b) Show that, if x ∈ S is the limit point of the ultranet A, then a
tail end of A is constant. So a convergent ultranet must have a
constant tail end.
(c) Show that, if F is an ultrafilter and A is a net determined by
F , then A is an ultranet.
(d) Show that a non-constant ultranet exists.
Solution: We are given that S is a topological space and A = {f (i) :
i ∈ D} is a net in S. Also, F is a filter of sets in S.
(a) Suppose A is an ultranet and F = {f [Tu ] : u ∈ D}, where
Tu = {i ∈ D : i ≥ u}, is the filter generated by the net A. We
are required to show that F is an ultrafilter.
Let B ∈ P(S)\∅. By Theorem 13.15, either B or S\B belongs
to an ultrafilter of sets. Suppose S \ B does not belong to F .
Then S \ B does not contain a tail end, say f [Tj ], of A (for, if

it did, then S \ B would belong to F ). Then, by definition of
“ultranet”, f [Tj ] ⊆ B. Since F is a filter, then B ∈ F . So F is
an ultrafilter.
(b) We are given that the ultranet, A, converges to x and that F =
{f [Tu ] : u ∈ D} is the ultrafilter generated by A. Then F must
also converge to x.
We are required to show that some tail end of A is constant.
Suppose no tail end of A is constant. Then, for k ∈ D, there exists
two non-empty non-intersecting cofinal sets, C and E of D, such
that f [Dk ] = C ∪ E and both C and E converge to the net limit
point x. Since F is an ultrafilter, either C or S\C belongs to F .
Suppose C ∈ F . Then S\C does not belong to F . Since F is an
ultrafilter, S \C does not intersect some element F of F . Then,
since S\C contains E, the cofinal set, E, does not intersect some
F ∈ F , that is some tail end of the ultranet, A. But this can’t
be since E is cofinal in A. So, A must be constant on a tail end.
Since x is a limit point of A, then the constant is x.
(c) We are given that F is an ultrafilter and A = {f (y, F ) : F ∈ F
and y ∈ F } is the net determined by F . Recall that (u, F ) ≤
(v, H) if and only if v ∈ H ⊆ F and f (u, F ) = u. We are required
to show that A is an ultranet.
Let B ∈ P(S) \ {0}. Then B ∈ F or S \ B ∈ F . Suppose
s ∈ B ∈ F . Suppose (u, H) ∈ DF such that (u, H) ≥ (s, B).
Then u ∈ H ⊆ B. Then f (u, H) = u ∈ B. Then the tail end,
{f (y, F ) : (y, F ) ≥ (s, B)}, of A belongs to B. By definition, A is
an ultranet.
(d) Since convergent ultranets have a constant tail end, we will only
investigate non-converging ultranets. We begin with a free ultra-
filter. Let F be a free ultrafilter of sets in S. Let κ : F → S
be a choice function defined as κ(F ) = xF , where xF ∈ F . Let
A = {f (xF , F ) : F ∈ F } be the free ultranet determined by F .
Since A is free, it cannot be constant on any tail end, otherwise it
would converge to that constant element. So, A is a free ultranet
with no constant tail end. As required.
Theorem 13.21 Let A = {f (i) : i ∈ D} be a net in a topological

space, S. Then A has a subnet U which is an ultranet.
Proof. We are given that A = {f (i) : i ∈ D} is a net in a space, S.

Let F = {f [Tu ] : u ∈ D} be the filter generated by the net A, where
Tu = {i ∈ D : i ≥ u} and f [Tu ] = {f (i) : i ∈ Tu }. Then there exists
an ultrafilter, U , which contains the filter F .
We now construct a net derived from the ultrafilter, U . Let
(DU , ≤) = {(i, F ) ∈ D × U : xi ∈ F }
where (i, F ) ≤ (j, H) if and only if j ≥ i and xj ∈ H ⊆ F . So, DU

is a set directed by ≤.
We define the function, g : DU → D, as g(j, F ) = j if xj ∈ F .
Then (f ◦ g)(j, F ) = f (j) ∈ A where i ≥ j implies (f ◦ g)(i, F ) =
f (i) ≥ f (j). So, (f ◦ g) maps DU in A, respecting the order, and
AU = (f ◦ g)[DU ] is cofinal. We have shown above that the net,
AU = {(f ◦ g)(u, F ) : (u, F ) ∈ DU }
generated by an ultrafilter is an ultranet. So, AU is an ultranet which

is a subnet of A.
Concepts Review
1. Define filter base and filter.

2. How does a filter base generate a filter?
3. What does it mean to say that a filter base is fixed? When is it
free?
4. If A is a net describe a filter base of sets determined by the
net, A.
5. What does it mean to say that a filter base of sets converges to
a point x?
6. How do we define an accumulation point of a filter base of sets?
7. Given a filter base, F , how do we define the adherence of F ?
8. In what kind of topological space do convergent filter bases have
precisely one limit point?
9. If a filter base, F , has a non-limit accumulation point, p, describe
a filter which contains F and converges to p.
10. How do we recognize the points in the closure, clS F , of a set, F ,
in terms of filters?
11. Give a characterization of a continuous function, f : S → T , at

a point in terms of filters.
12. What does it mean to say that the filter, F , is finer than the
filter, H ?
13. Define an ultrafilter of sets, in P(S).
14. Give two characterizations of an ultrafilter of sets.
15. If S is a Hausdorff space, how many accumulation points can an
ultrafilter in P(S) have?
16. Define an ultranet.
Exercises
1. Suppose H is a filter base of sets which is finer than the filter

base F . If F converges to p does H necessarily converge to p?
2. Suppose p is an accumulation point of the ultrafilter of sets, U .
Does U necessarily converge to p?
3. Let f : S → T be a function mapping the topological space S onto
the topological space T . If F is an ultrafilter of sets in P(S) and
f [F ] = {f [F ] : F ∈ F } is f [F ] necessarily a filter?
4. If V is a non-empty open subset of the topological space S and the
filter of sets, F , converges to some point p ∈ V , does V necessarily
belong to F ?
5. Suppose U is a non-empty subset of the space S. Suppose U
belongs to every filter, F , which converges to a point p of U ,
is U necessarily open in S?
6. Let u be a point in a topological space S. Let F = {F ∈ P(S) :
u ∈ F and S \F is finite}.
(a) Show that F is a filter of sets in P(S).
(b) Show that F is a neighborhood system of u.
7. Let S be a topological space and F and H be two filters in P(S).
Let
F × H = {F × H : F ∈ F and H ∈ H }
Is F × H a filter base?
8. Let S be a topological space an F is a filter of sets in P(S).

Let a(F ) be the adherence set of F . Show that a(F ) is a closed
subset of S.
9. Suppose U is an ultrafilter in P(S). If U and V are disjoint non-
empty subsets of S such that U ∪V belongs to U show that either
U or V belongs to U .
Part V
Compact Spaces and Relatives

Chapter 14
Compactness: Definition and

Basic Properties
Abstract
In this section we define and describe properties of compactness in a
topological space. The concept of compactness is a generalization of the
“closed and bounded” property in the Euclidean space R. It was intro-
duced by Pavel Urysohn in 1929. We give the most general definition of
compactness in terms of covers and subcovers. The few characterizations
given for this property will simplify the task of determining whether a
space is compact. These characterizations also provide a deeper under-
standing of what it means for a set to be “compact”. We also show
that the compact property is carried over from one topological space
to another by continuous functions. Furthermore, the compact property
carries over from the factors of a product space to the product space
itself. Subsets of a compact space, S, will be seen to be closed only
if S is Hausdorff. But closed subsets of any compact space are always
compact.
14.1 Introduction
Many readers may already be familiar with the notion of

“compactness”. It is often encountered early in a course of real
analysis, in a form that is somewhat different from the one we will
encounter here. Initially, some readers will wonder whether we are
talking about the same property. If viewed in this context a possible
definition could have been: “A subset, F , of Rn is compact if and
only if every sequence in F has a convergent subsequence with its
337
limit point inside F ”. Or, in the context of normed vector spaces, the
reader may have encountered a theorem which states: “If V is a finite
dimensional vector space, the compact subsets of V are precisely the
closed and bounded subsets”. One of many reasons the notion of
compactness would have been introduced in a previous course is to
access a statement commonly called the “extreme value theorem”
(EVT) which says: “Given that f : V → R is a continuous function
mapping a normed vector into R, if F is a compact subset of V , then
f attains a maximum value and a minimum value on F ”. We will be
studying precisely the same notion of compactness in the more gen-
eral context of a topological space. Compact spaces are encountered
in numerous other fields of mathematics. In general, most students
will feel that spaces which are both compact and Hausdorff are more
intuitive; they seem to be “well-behaved” since they come with many
useful tools that can be used to solve various problems.
In what follows, we will be referring to an “open cover” of a subset
F of a space, S. We say that U = {Ui : i ∈ I} is an open cover of
F if each Ui is an open subset of S and F = ∪{Ui : i ∈ I}. A “finite
subcover”, {Ui : i ∈ K}, is a finite subset of an open cover, U , of F ,
which also covers F .
Definition 14.1 Let F be any non-empty subspace of the topolog-

ical space, S. We say that F is compact if and only if every S-open
cover of F has a finite subcover.
Since the reader may have encountered other definitions of “com-

pact”, we will refer to 14.1 above as the topological definition of com-
pactness. We provide a few examples of compact and non-compact
spaces to help the reader develop a better feeling for what “every
open cover has an a finite subcover” means.
Example 1. Note that the cover, V = {(i − 2/3, i + 2/3) : i ∈ Z},
forms an open cover of each of the four spaces, R, Q, J, (the irra-
tionals) Z with the usual topology. But removing just one set from
V will leave a point which is not covered by the other sets in V . So
V has no finite subcover. So none of these four spaces are compact.
Example 2. Consider the set, F = { 1/n : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} ∪ {0}
with the subspace topology inherited from R. Let V be an R-open
Compactness: Definition and Basic Properties 339
cover of F . There exists U ∈ V such that 0 ∈ U . Then there are at

most finitely many points in F \U . For each of these points we can
choose precisely one set from V which contains it. The set U along
with each one of these sets covers F . So F is compact. If we remove
the point, 0, from F then the resulting space is not compact. (Verify
this!)
It will be useful to remember the particular technique exhibited
in the following example, since it will be called upon to help solve
various questions in the next few chapters.
Example 3. Consider the bounded closed interval, S = [3, 7], viewed
as a subspace of R. Let V = {Vi : i ∈ I} be an open covering of S.
Let
U = {u ∈ [3, 7] : where [3, u] is covered by finitely many sets from V }
Let k = sup {u : u ∈ U }. Then 3 ≤ k ≤ 7 and [3, 3] ⊆ [3, k] ⊆

[3, 7].
There exists Vj ∈ V such that k ∈ Vj .
Suppose k < 7. Then there exists ε > 0 such that k ∈ (k − ε,
k + ε) ⊆ Vj ⊆ [3, 7]. By definition of k, [3, k − 2ε ] has a finite subcover,
say VF . Then VF ∪ {Vj } is a finite subcover of [3, k]. Also, [3, k + 2ε ]
has a finite subcover, VF ∪ {Vj }. This contradicts the definition of
k. The source of our contradiction is our supposition that k < 7. So,
k = 7. Hence, S has a finite subcover so S is compact.
14.2 Characterizations of the Compact Property
We will be needing a few efficient ways of determining whether a

subspace is compact (or not). The following characterizations will be
useful.
But first we should develop some familiarity with the following
concept. It is often abbreviated by the acronym, FIP.
A family, F , of sets is said to satisfy the finite intersection
property if “every finite subfamily of F has non-empty
intersection”.
A “filter of sets” is a prime example of a family of sets which

satisfies the finite intersection property.
We present the following various ways of recognizing a compact

set.1
Theorem 14.2 Let S be a topological space. The following are equiv-

alent.
(a) The space S is compact.
(b) Any family, F , of closed subsets of S which satisfies the finite
intersection property has non-empty intersection.
(c) Every filter of sets in S has an accumulation point.
(d) Every ultrafilter of sets in S has a limit point.
(e) Every net in S has an accumulation point.
(f) Every ultranet in S has a limit point.
(a ⇒ b) Let S be a compact topological space. Suppose the family,
F , of closed subsets of S satisfies the finite intersection property.
That is, for every finite subset, W , of F , ∩{F : F ∈ W } = ∅.
We are required to show that ∩{F : F ∈ F } = ∅.
Suppose ∩{F : F ∈ F } = ∅. Then, {S \F : F ∈ F } is an open
cover of S. Then, by hypothesis, there exists a finite subset, W , of F ,
such that S = ∪{S \F : F ∈ W }. Equivalently, ∩{F : F ∈ W } = ∅,
contradicting the given fact that F satisfies the finite intersection
property. So, ∩{F : F ∈ F } = ∅, as required.
(b ⇒ a) Suppose that, whenever a family, F , of closed sets satisfies
the finite intersection property, then ∩{F : F ∈ F } = ∅. Let U be
an open cover of S. If, for any finite W of U , ∪{F : F ∈ W } = S,
then the set {S\F : F ∈ U } satisfies the finite intersection property,
and so ∩{S\F : F ∈ U } = ∅. This can only mean that, U is not an
open cover of S, a contradiction. So, U has a finite subcover of S.
(b ⇒ c) We are given that if a family of closed sets satisfies the FIP
then it has non-empty intersection. Let F be a filter base of subsets
in S. We are required to show that F has an accumulation point.
1
Those readers who have skipped studying the chapters on nets, will find prop-
erties (b), (d) the most useful. These are the characterizations that are the most
often called upon, in future proofs.
That is, there is a point x such that x ∈ clS F for all F ∈ F . Then, by
definition of filter base, F satisfies the finite intersection property.
Then, if G is a finite subset, of F , ∩{F : F ∈ G } = ∅. Then ∩{clS F :
F ∈ G } = ∅. By hypothesis, there exists x ∈ ∩{clS F : F ∈ F } = ∅.
Then F has an accumulation point.
(c ⇒ d) Suppose every filter of sets has an accumulation point. Let
U be an ultrafilter of sets in P(S). We must show that U has a limit
point. By hypothesis, U must have an accumulation point, say p. By
Theorem 13.10, p is a limit point of some filter, H ∗ containing U .
Since U is a maximal filter, then U = H ∗ . So, p is a limit point
of U .
(d ⇒ c) We are given that every ultrafilter has a limit point. We
must show that every filter of sets has an accumulation point. Let
F be a filter base. Then, by Theorem 13.16, F is contained in some
ultrafilter, U . Let p be the limit point of U . Then, for any open
neighborhood, U ∈ Bp , of p, there is F ∈ U such that F ⊆ U . This
means every open neighborhood of p intersects every F ∈ U . Then
p ∈ ∩{clS F : F ∈ F }. So, p is an accumulation point of F .
(c ⇒ b) We are given that every filter base in P(S) has an accumu-
lation point.
Suppose the family, F , of closed subsets of S satisfies the finite
intersection property. By hypothesis, F has an accumulation point,
say p.
We are required to show that ∩{F : F ∈ F } = ∅.
Note that, F , satisfies the main filter base property and so F a
“filter base of closed sets” which has an accumulation point, p. Then,
by definition, p ∈ ∩{clS F : F ∈ F } = ∅. Since each F is closed in
S, p ∈ ∩{F : F ∈ F } = ∅, as required.
(f ⇔ d) By Theorem 13.8 and the example on page 331, an ultrafilter
has limit point p if and only if its corresponding ultranet has limit p.
(e ⇔ c) By Theorem 13.8, a filter has accumulation point p if and
only if its corresponding net has accumulation limit p. By Theorem
12.5, if a net has an accumulation point p then it has a subnet which
converges to p.
The reader will soon discover that, compact spaces are more intu-
itive and richer in interesting properties when equipped with the
Hausdorff separation axiom. It is often assumed that “compact sets

are always closed” since, in many books, to remove clutter from the
main body of the text, a blanket assumption is initially made that all
spaces are hypothesized to be Hausdorff. But a compact space may
not be closed if the space is not Hausdorff. When referring to various
texts, readers should keep this in mind, and check at the begin of the
text to see if any blanket assumptions are made.
14.3 Properties of Compact Subsets
We will now verify whether the compactness property is carried over

by continuous functions from its domain to its codomain. Also, we
will show that closed subspaces of compact spaces are compact. These
results will be familiar to readers with some experience in real anal-
ysis. The proofs confirm that these properties generalize nicely, from
Rn to topological spaces.
Theorem 14.3 Let S and T be topological spaces.
(a) Suppose f : S → T is a continuous function mapping S into

T . If F is a compact subset of S then f [F ] is compact in T . So
continuous images of compact sets are compact.
(b) Suppose S is compact. If H is a closed subset of S, then H is
compact.
(c) The union of a finite collection of compact sets is compact.
(d) Suppose S is Hausdorff.
(i) If H is a compact subset of S then H is closed in S.

(ii) If S is also compact then S is regular.
(iii) If S is also compact then S is normal.
(iv) The intersection of any collection of compact subsets is
compact. (Note: The Hausdorff property is required in the
proof of this statement.)
(a) We are given that the function, f : S → T , is continuous and

that F is a compact subset of S.
Let U be an open cover of f [F ]. Then {f ← [U ]∩ F : U ∈ U } is
an open cover of F . Since F is compact, there is a finite subcover,
{f ← [U ] ∩ F : U ∈ F }, of open subsets of F . Since,
F ⊆ ∪{f ← [U ]∩F : U ∈ F } ⇒ f [F ] ⊆ f [∪{f ← [U ] ∩ F : U ∈ F }]
then,
f [F ] ⊆ ∪{f [{f ← [U ] ∩ F ] : U ∈ F }
⊆ ∪{f [{f ← [U ]] ∩ f [F ] : U ∈ F }
= ∪{U ∩ f [F ] : U ∈ F }
So, {U ∩f [F ] : U ∈ F } is a finite subcover of f [F ]. So continuous

images of compact sets are compact.
(b) Suppose S is a compact space. We are given that H is a closed
subset of S. Let F = {Fi : i ∈ I} be a family of closed subsets
in the subspace, H, such that F satisfies the finite intersection
property. Note that, since H is closed, then clS Fi = Fi for all
i ∈ I. So that F is a family of closed subsets of S such that F
satisfies the FIP. Since S is compact, there is a point p ∈ ∩{F :
F ∈ F }. Since p ∈ F ⊆ H, ∩{F : F ∈ F } is a non-empty subset
of H. So, H is compact.2
(c) Let {K1 , K2 , . . . , Kn } represent a finite collection of compact
subsets of a space, S. Let K = ∪i=1 to n Ki . Let U = {Uα :
α ∈ A} be an open cover of K. Then for each i, Ki has a finite
subcover {Uαi : αi ∈ Fi }. Then ∪i=1to n [∪αi∈Fi Uαi ] forms a finite
subcover of K. So, K is compact.
(d) For what follows, suppose S is Hausdorff.
(i) Let H be a compact subset of S (where S need not be com-
pact). We are required to show that H is closed in S. It
will suffice to show that S \H is open in S. Let u ∈ S \H.
2
Note that the Hausdorff property for S is not required for this to hold true.
That is, closed subsets of compact spaces are always compact.
Since S is Hausdorff, then for each x ∈ H, there exists

disjoint open neighborhoods, Ux and Vux , of x and u respec-
tively. Since H is compact, the open cover, {Ux : x ∈ H},
will have a finite subcover, say {Uxi : i ∈ F } and finite open
neighborhoods of u, say {Vxui : i ∈ F }, where Uxi ∩ Vxui = ∅,
for i ∈ F . Then, for each i ∈ F ,
Uxi ∩ [∩{Vxui : i ∈ F }] = ∅
Let Wu = ∪{Uxi : i ∈ F } and Mu = ∩{Vxui : i ∈ F }.

Then Wu ∩ Mu = ∅. So Mu ∩ H = ∅. Then Mu ∩ H = ∅
holds true for any choice of u ∈ S \H. We have then shown
that every point, u, in S \ H has an open neighborhood,
Mu , which has empty intersection with H. So S \H is open;
hence, H is closed. (Note how the Hausdorff property plays
a role in the proof.)
(ii) We are given that S is compact Hausdorff. We are required
to show that S is regular. Let H be closed and u ∈ S \H.
Then, since S is compact, H is compact. In part (ii) we
constructed disjoint open neighborhoods, Wu and Mu , of H
and {u}, respectively. So, S is regular.
(iii) We are given that S is compact Hausdorff. Let H and K
be disjoint closed subsets of S. Then, since S is compact, H
and K are compact. Let u ∈ K. We showed in part (ii) that
S is regular and so there exists disjoint open neighborhoods,
Wu and Mu of H and {u}, respectively. Then {Mu : u ∈ K}
forms an open cover of K which has a finite subcover, say
{Mui : i ∈ F }. Then ∩{Wui : i ∈ F } and ∩{Mui : i ∈ F }
form disjoint open neighborhoods of H and K. So, S is
normal.
(iv) Let {Kα : α ∈ A} be a collection of compact subsets of a
Hausdorff space, S. Let K = ∩α∈A Kα . Since S is Hausdorff
and each Kα is closed, then so is K. Let αi ∈ A. Since,
by hypothesis, Kαi is compact and K ⊆ Kαi , then K is
compact.
Some readers may find it useful to “think” of (or manipulate)

compact subsets of Hausdorff spaces as if they are “points”.
Example 4. Construct a topological space, S, with two compact

subspaces, A and B, such that A ∩ B is non-compact.
Solution: Given Theorem 14.3, part (d) we need only consider spaces
which are not Hausdorff. Consider the set, N, equipped with topology
generated by the base,
B = {∅, N, N\{0}, N\{1} } ∪ { {n} : n ≥ 2 }
Let A = N\{0} and B = N\{1}. Let UA be an open cover of A. Then

the only element of B which will cover {1} is A = N\{0}. So A is
compact. Similarly, B is compact. But any cover of A ∩ B contains
infinitely many isolated points. So even though both A and B are
compact, A ∩ B is not compact.
Example 5. Let F be a compact subset of a topological space S.
Suppose f : S → T is a continuous one-to-one function mapping F
into a Hausdorff space, T . Show that f [F ] is a homeomorphic copy
of F .
Solution: By Theorem 6.9, it will suffice to show that f : F → T is
a closed function on F . Let K be a closed subset of F . Then, by the
above theorem, K is compact. Then f [K] is compact in T . Since T
is Hausdorff, then f [F ] is Hausdorff. Since f [K] is a compact subset
of f [F ], then it is closed. Then f is a closed mapping on F . So,
f : F → f [F ] is homeomorphism.
The following very important theorem titled the Tychonoff the-
orem will often be referred to in the proofs that will follow. It is
surprising how often this theorem is invoked in proofs of topology
and real analysis. It shows that the Cartesian product of any num-
ber of compact spaces is compact.
Theorem 14.4 The Tychonoff theorem. Let {Si : i ∈ I} be a family

of topological spaces.
Then the product space, S = i∈I Si , is compact if and only if Si
is compact for each i ∈ I.
Proof. Let {Si : i ∈ I} be a family of topological spaces.

(⇒) We are given that S = i∈I Si is compact. Then, since the
projection map, πi : S → Si , is continuous for each i ∈ I, and
continuous images of compact sets are compact, then πi [S] = Si is

compact, for each i ∈ I.
(⇐) We are given that Si is compact for each i ∈ I.
Let
U = {πi← [U ] : U open in Si , i ∈ I}
be a cover of open subbase sets of S. Let
Ui = {U : U ⊆ Si , πi← [U ] ∈ U }
be an open cover of Si corresponding to U .
Let
UF = {πi← [U ] : finitely many open U ’s in each Si , i ∈ F }
be a finite subset of U . For each i ∈ F , let Ui∗ be a finite subset of
Ui which covers Si .
Then
UF∗ = {πi← [U ] : U ∈ Ui∗ , i ∈ F }
is a finite subset of U .
If U doesn’t not have a finite subcover for S then there must be
a point p = xii∈I ∈ S such that p ∈ πj← [U ] for all j ∈ F and all
U ∈ Uj∗ . This means xj ∈ U ∈ Uj∗ for all j ∈ F . This contradicts
that Ui∗ covers Si for each i ∈ F . So U has a finite subcover for S.
The proof for the case where U is a cover of basic open sets mimics
the one provided above for the case of the cover of open subbase sets
of S.
Alternate approach for the proof of ( ⇐ ). We are giventhat Si is
compact for each i ∈ I. Let U be an ultrafilter in S = i∈I Si . By
Theorem 14.2, compact spaces are precisely those spaces in which
every ultrafilter of sets converges to a point in that set. So, it will
suffice to show that U has a limit point in S. Then
Ui = πi [U ] = {πi [U ] : U ∈ U }
is a filter base in Si .3
3
Let πi [U ] and πi [V ] be two elements of πi [U ] where U and V are elements of
U . Then there exists non-empty W ∈ U such that W ⊆ U ∩ V . Then πi [W ] ⊆
f [U ∩ V ] ⊆ f [U ] ∩ f [V ] = ∅. So, πi [U ] is a filter base.
Since U is a maximal filter, then Ui = πi [U ] must be a maximal

filter for each i ∈ I.4
Since Si is compact, each Ui converges to a point xi . By Theo-
rem 13.17, U converges to xii∈I . Then every ultrafilter of sets in S
converges to a point of S. So, the product space S is compact.
We will now see that, in Euclidean spaces, Rn , the compact sub-

sets are precisely the “closed and bounded” subsets of Rn .
In the following theorem, we consider the Euclidean topological
space Rn . We will say that a subset, U , is bounded in Rn if there
exists k ∈ R+ such that
U ⊆ [−k, k]n ⊆ Rn
The following theorem states that. . .
in Rn , compactness is equivalent to the closed and bounded
properties combined.
Theorem 14.5 Let Rn be the topological space equipped with the

product topology. The non-empty subset, T of Rn , is a compact subset
if and only if T is both closed and bounded in Rn .
Proof. When we invoke the Tychonoff theorem, the proof is
straightforward and so is assigned as an exercise question.
Theorem 14.6 Let F be a compact subset of a topological space, S.

If f is a continuous real-valued function on F then f attains its
maximum and minimum values inside F .
Proof. We are given that F is compact in S and f [F ] is the con-
tinuous image of F in R. Then f [F ] is compact in R (by 14.3) and so
is closed and bounded (by 14.5). Then boundedness of f [F ] guaran-
tees that f [F ] ⊆ [−k, k], for some k. Since f [F ] is closed in R, then
4
To see this, suppose Ui is a subset of Si which intersects every element of
πi [U ]. Then πi ← [Ui ] intersects every element of U . Since U is an ultrafilter,
πi ← [Ui ] ∈ U . Then πi [πi ← [Ui ]] = Ui ∈ πi [U ].
sup f [F ] and inf f [F ] must both belong to f [F ]. So, f attains both

its maximum and minimum values on F .
Example 6. Suppose S and T are topological spaces. We know that

projection maps on product spaces are open maps. (See theorem on
page 149.)
Show that, in the case where the space S is Hausdorff and the
space T is compact then the projection map, π1 : S × T → S, is a
closed map.
Solution: Let K be a closed subset of S × T . We are required to
show that π1 [K] is closed. It then suffices to show that S \π1 [K] is
open in S.
Let u ∈ S \π1 [K]. Then ({u} × T ) ∩ K = ∅. Since T is compact,
then we easily see that {u} × T is compact. Since S is Hausdorff, for
each (u, x) ∈ {u}× T, there is an open neighborhood, Vux × Ux , which
does not meet K. In this way we obtain an open cover
{Vux × Ux : x ∈ T }
of {u} × T which then has a finite subcover
{Vuxi × Uxi : xi ∈ F ⊆ T }
Then ∩{Vuxi × Uxi : xi ∈ F ⊆ T } forms an open neighborhood of u

which does not intersect π1 [K]. So, S\π1 [K] is open in S, as claimed.
We conclude that π1 : S × T → S is a closed projection map.
Example 7. For the Hausdorff topological space, S, and the compact
space, T , let f : S → T be a function mapping S into T . The set, G,
will represent the graph of f , defined as
G = {(x, f (x)) : x ∈ S} ⊆ S × T
Show that, if G is a closed subspace of the product space, S × T ,

then f : S → T must be a continuous function.
Solution: Given: S is Hausdorff and T is compact. Also, we are given
that G = {(x, f (x)) : x ∈ S} is a closed subset of S × T . Let K be
a closed subset of T . To show continuity of f , it will suffice to show
that f ← [K] is a closed subset of S.
By the result stated in the example immediately above, π1 : S ×

T → S is a closed map. See that π2← [K] ∩ G is the intersection of two
closed sets and so is a closed subset of S × T . Since
π2← [K] ∩ G = {(x, f (x)) : f (x) ∈ K}
then π1 [π2← [K] ∩ G] = f ← [K].

Since π1 is a closed map, f ← [K] is closed. We have shown that f
pulls back closed sets to closed sets; so f is continuous.
14.4 Topic : The Embedding Theorem III
Recall the statement of the Embedding theorem II (Theorem 10.16)

which says that a space S is completely regular if and only if the
evaluation map with respect to C ∗ (S) embeds S inside a cube, T =

i∈I [ai , bi ].
Now, we know something else about cubes: Since they are the
product of compact sets,the Tychonoff theorem guarantees that
they are compact. Since i∈I [ai , bi ] and i∈I [0, 1]
are homeomor-
phic, then S can be embedded in the compact space, i∈I [0, 1]. With
this in mind, we promote the Embedding theorem II to Embedding
theorem III, in the form of the following theorem.
Theorem 14.7 (Embedding theorem III). If a topological space

S is completely regular then S can be densely embedded in a compact
Hausdorff space.
Proof. We are given a completely regular topological space S.

Then, by Theorem 10.16, the evaluation
map with respect to
C ∗ (S) embeds S into a cube, T = i∈I [ai , bi ]. Each factor of the
product T is Hausdorff. Since a product of Hausdorff spaces was
shown to be Hausdorff, T is Hausdorff. By the Tychonoff theorem,
T is a compact Hausdorff space.
Since clT e[S] is a closed subset of a Hausdorff compact space T ,
it is Hausdorff compact. Then the homeomorphic image, e[S], of S
is dense in clT e[S], a Hausdorff compact set, as required.
Theorem 14.8 Let S be a topological space. Then S is completely

regular if and only if S is a subspace of a Hausdorff compact space.
Proof. We are given that S is any topological space.
(⇒) Suppose S is a subspace of a compact Hausdorff space, T . By

Urysohn’s lemma, there is a continuous bounded function which sep-
arates any two closed subsets (so one that separates a point and a
closed set). So, T is completely regular. By Theorem 10.5, since S is
a subspace of a completely regular space, it is completely regular, as
required.
(⇐) Suppose S is completely regular. Then, by Theorem 14.7, S

is densely embedded in a compact Hausdorff space T . That is, a
topological copy of S is a subspace of T . So, S is a subspace T .
14.5 Topic: Completely Normal Spaces
With the few results involving compact spaces behind us we can now
delve a bit deeper on the topic of complete separation of sets. We
first remind ourselves of some previously proven results.
— The Cartesian product (equipped with the product topology) of

compact spaces is compact. (Tychonoff theorem 14.4)
— Any compact Hausdorff space is normal. (Theorem 14.3(c))
— Metrizable spaces are normal. (Theorem 9.19)
— Since subspaces of metrizable spaces are metrizable (Example on
page 107), those normal spaces which are metrizable have normal
subspaces.
We have never proven that subspaces of normal spaces are always

normal. The main reason is that it is impossible to do so. The Embed-
ding theorem III (Theorem 14.7) confirms that every completely reg-
ular space can be (densely) embedded in a compact Hausdorff space.
We know, however, that there are completely regular spaces which
are not normal. The Moore plane is such an example. (See the Moore
plane on page 265). Then. . .
the Moore plane is a non-normal subspace of the compact
(normal) space in which it is embedded.
Those normal spaces whose subspaces are normal form a partic-

ular class of topological spaces.
Definition 14.9 A completely normal space is a space in which

every subspace is normal.
Then every metrizable space is completely normal.

By the given definition, since a topological space is a subspace of
itself,
completely normal spaces are normal spaces.
Recall that a perfectly normal space is a normal space whose closed
subsets are Gδ ’s. We investigate how “completely normal” spaces
compare with “perfectly normal” spaces.
Suppose S is perfectly normal. We claim that S must then be
completely normal. Then, by definition, S is normal. Let T be a
subspace of S. To show that S is completely normal it suffices to
show that T is a normal subspace. Let F be a closed subset of T .
Then F = F ∗ ∩T for some closed subset, F ∗ , of S. Since S is perfectly
normal, F ∗ is a Gδ in S, then F is a Gδ of T . So, T is perfectly normal
and so is a normal subspace of S. We can then say that a perfectly
normal space, S, is completely normal. So we have the chain,
perfectly normal ⇒ completely normal ⇒ normal
⇒ completely regular
In the next example, we have a characterization of a completely
normal space.
Example 8. Show that S is completely normal if and only if for any
pair of subsets A and B such that A ∩ clS B = ∅ = clS A ∩ B there
exists disjoint open subsets U and V such that A ⊆ U and B ⊆ V .5
5
This is an exercise question which appears in 15B of S. Willard’s General Topol-
ogy (1970).
Solution: (⇐) Let S be a topological space. Suppose that for any

pair of subsets A and B such that A ∩ clS B = ∅ = clS A ∩ B there
exists disjoint open subsets U and V such that A ⊆ U and B ⊆ V .
If C and D are disjoint closed subsets of S then C ∩ clS D = ∅ =
clS C ∩ D. Then, by hypothesis, there exists disjoint open subsets U
and V such that C ⊆ U and D ⊆ V . So, S is normal.
We now claim that S is completely normal. Let T be a subspace
of S. It suffices to show that T is normal. Suppose F and K are
disjoint non-empty closed subsets of T . Then it suffices to show that
F and K are contained in disjoint open sets. Let F ∗ and K ∗ are
closed subsets of S such that F = F ∗ ∩ T and K = K ∗ ∩ T . Then
F ∗ ∩ clS K ∗ = ∅ = clS F ∗ ∩ K ∗ . By hypothesis, there exists disjoint
open subsets of S, U ∗ and V ∗ , such that F ∗ ⊆ U ∗ and K ∗ ⊆ V ∗ .
Then F ⊆ U ∗ ∩ T and K ⊆ V ∗ ∩ T . Then T must be normal. We can
conclude that, by definition, S is completely normal.
The direction (⇒) is left as an exercise.
A normal space which is not perfectly normal. The following
example illustrates a completely normal space which is not perfectly
normal.
Example 9. Suppose S is an uncountable set and p ∈ S. We equip
S with a topology, τ , defined as follows:
τ = {T ⊆ S : S \T is finite or p ∈ T }
Show that S is completely normal but not perfectly normal.

Solution: We claim that S is T1 . The set {p} is closed and if x = p
then S \{x} is open so {x} is closed. So, S is T1 , as claimed.
We claim that S is completely normal. Suppose F and K are
disjoint closed subsets of S. If p ∈ K ∪ F then K and F are both
open. So, F and K are clopen and so F ∩ clS K = ∅ = clS F ∩ K.
Suppose p ∈ F . Then K is clopen and finite. That is K = clS K
is open. Now S \ K is open since K is finite. So, clS F and K are
contained disjoint open sets, S \ K and K as well as F and clS K.
So, by the statement proven in example immediately above, S is
completely normal, as claimed.
We claim that S is not perfectly normal. Let {Ui : i ∈ N} be a
countable family of sets in S each containing the point p. Then each
Ui is closed in S and p ∈ ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}. If each Ui is also open S \Ui
if finite. So each Ui is uncountable. Then S\∩{Ui : i ∈ N} = ∪{S\Ui :

i ∈ N}, a countable subset of S. So, ∩{Ui : i ∈ N} is uncountable. So,
p = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}. So, p is not a Gδ . So, S is not perfectly normal,
as claimed.
So, we can confidently state that
completely normal ⇒ perfectly normal
14.6 Topic: Compactness in Terms of Filters

of Zero-Sets
For a given topological space, (S, τ ), the symbols C(S) and C ∗ (S)
denote the set of all real-valued continuous functions and the set
of real-valued continuous bounded functions, respectively, on S. We
recall a few concepts presented in an earlier chapter on separation of
closed subsets with functions.
— If S is a topological space and f ∈ C(S) then Z(f ) = f ← (0) is
referred to as a “zero-set” in S. We represent the family of all
zero-sets in S by
Z[S] = {Z(f ) : f ∈ C(S)}
— Recall that zero-sets are closed Gδ ’s.
— On the other hand, given a closed Gδ , F , of S, F need not nec-
essarily be a zero-set.
— However, we have shown that, in a normal space, S, every closed
Gδ is a zero-set in S.
Even though Z[S] is just a particular type of subset of P(S), the
expression Z[S] makes sense only if S is a known topological space.
After all, by definition, Z(f ) is the zero-set associated to a continuous
real-valued function on S.
We would like to discuss subfamilies of Z[S] which are “filters”.
To distinguish a filter in Z[S] from a filter of sets in P(S) we refer
to filters restricted to Z[S] as
z-filters.
Even though z-filters are, in most ways, analogous to filters of sets,
for the sake of completeness, we include the following definitions.
Definition 14.10 Let S be a topological space. Let F ⊆ Z[S].

If F satisfies the two properties:
(1) ∅ ∈ F .
(2) For every U, V ∈ F , there exists F ∈ F such that F ⊆ U ∩ V .
then we will say that F is a z-filter base.
If F is a z-filter base which also satisfies the condition:
(3) Whenever U ∈ F and there is V ∈ Z[S]\{∅} such that U ⊆ V ,
then V ∈ F .
Then F is called a z-filter.
(4) If F is a z-filter which is not contained in any other strictly
larger z-filter then we say that F is a maximal z-filter or, more
commonly, a z-ultrafilter.
A quick way of describing a z-filter is to say:

A z-filter is a subset of Z[S] \ {∅} which is closed under
finite intersections and supersets both in Z[S].
Suppose F = {Z(f ) : f ∈ U } is known to be a z-filter where f

and g both belong to U . Then, by definition of z-filter, Z(f ) ∩ Z(g)
and Z(f ) ∪ Z(g) must be zero-sets which belong to F . We must then
assume that both Z(f ) ∩ Z(g) and Z(f ) ∪ Z(g) are zero-sets. This
should nevertheless be verified. Verify that
Z(f 2 + g2 ) = Z(f ) ∩ Z(g)

Z(f g) = Z(f ) ∪ Z(g)
A z-filter is, itself, a z-filter base, while a z-filter base, if not a

z-filter, can be completed to become a z-filter. Given a z-filter base,
F , we define the larger set, F ∗ , as follows:
F ∗ = {U ∈ Z[S] : F ⊆ U , for some F ∈ F }
We have simply adjoined to F all its supersets which belong to Z[S].

It is easily verified that F ∗ is a z-filter. We will say that the z-filter
base, F , generates the z-filter F ∗ .
Every z-filter is usually expected to be a proper subfamily of a

filter of sets. In the event that every subset is a zero-set (such as in
a discrete space, for example) a z-filter is simply a filter of sets.
The use of the notation, Z(f ), for the zero-set generated by f
suggests that Z can be viewed as a function
Z : C(S) → Z[S]
where C(S) is the algebraic ring, (C(S), +, ·), of continuous func-

tions on S, and Z[S] is a subset of P(S). So, Z maps f to Z(f ) =
f ← (0).
A subset (U, +, ·) of C(S) which is also a ring is called a subring.
Those subrings, (U, +, ·), of C(S) satisfying the property,
For every f ∈ U , gf ∈ U , for all g ∈ C(S)
are called
ideals in C(S).
For obvious reasons we tend to represent an ideal in P(C(S)) by I.6

If J is an ideal in C(S) such that for any ideal I, J ⊆ I implies
I = J we say that J is a maximal ideal in C(S). Ideals in C(S)
are relevant in our study since the image Z[I] of an ideal I under
the map Z : C(S) → Z[S], will be seen to be z-filters. Also, the
function Z will pull back a z-filter, U , in Z[S] to a corresponding
ideal, I = Z ← [U ].7
The following theorem formally describes the association between
ideals in the ring of continuous functions, C(S), and the z-filters in
the family of all zero-sets, Z[S], of the topological space, S.
Theorem 14.11 Suppose S is a topological space. Let I be an ideal

in C(S) and F be a z-filter in Z[S] (where Z : C(S) → Z[S] is
viewed as a function mapping f in C(S) to Z(f ) in Z[S]).
(a) Then the subset, Z[I], of Z[S] is a z-filter.
6
When we will say that I is an ideal in C(S), we will always mean a “proper
ideal”.
7
Note that (C ∗ (S), +, ·) also constitutes a ring, and so we can speak of ideals
and maximal ideals in C ∗ (S) also.
(b) Then the subset, Z ← [F ], of C(S) is an ideal in C(S).

(c) If J is a maximal ideal then Z[J] is a z-ultrafilter. Conversely,
if F is a z-ultrafilter then Z ← [F ] is maximal ideal.
(d) If M is the set of all maximal ideals in P(C(S)) and Z is the
set of all z-ultrafilters in P(Z[S]), then Z : M → Z is one-
to-one and onto.
(e) If Z = Z[M ] is a z-ultrafilter in P(Z[S]) and Z(f ) is a zero-set
which meets every member of Z then Z(f ) ∈ Z .
Proof. We are given that I is a (proper) ideal in C(S) and F is a
z-filter in Z[S].
(a) Given: I is a proper ideal. We are required to show that Z[I] is
a z-filter.
Since I is proper, then the unit function 1 is not an element
of I. Then the empty-set, in the form of Z(1), is not in Z[I].
Suppose Z(f ) and Z(g) belong to Z[I]. Since f, g ∈ I and I is
an ideal, f 2 + g2 ∈ I and so
Z(f 2 + g2 ) = Z(f ) ∩ Z(g) ∈ Z[I]
Suppose f ∈ I and Z(g) ∈ Z[S] such that Z(f ) ⊆ Z(g). It

suffices to show that Z(g) ∈ Z[I]. Then gf ∈ I (since I is an
ideal). See that
Z(g) = Z(f ) ∪ Z(g) = Z(f g) ∈ Z[I]
So, Z[I] is a z-filter, as claimed.

(b) Given: F is a z-filter. We consider Z ← [F ]. We claim that Z ← [F ]
is an ideal.
Since ∅ ∈ F , the unit function 1 is not in Z ← [F ]. Suppose
f and g belong to Z ← [F ]. To show that Z ← [F ] is an ideal we
must show it is closed under addition and f k ∈ Z ← [F ] for all
k ∈ C(S).
Then Z(f ), Z(g) and Z(−g) belong to F . So, Z(f ) ∩ Z(−g) ∈
F . Now, if u ∈ Z(f ) ∩ Z(−g), then f (u) = 0 = −g(u) then
(f + g)(u) = 0, so Z(f ) ∩ Z(g) ⊆ Z(f + g). Since F is a z-filter,
then Z(f + g) ∈ F . This implies f + g ∈ Z ← [F ]. So, Z ← [F ] is
closed under addition.
Let k ∈ C(S). Since Z(f ) ⊆ Z(f k), then Z(f k) ∈ F so f k ∈
Z ← [F ]. So, Z ← [F ] is an ideal, as claimed.
(c) Suppose J is a maximal ideal. Then Z[J] is a z-filter (by part a).
We are required to show that Z[J] is a z-ultrafilter. Suppose
F is a z-filter such that Z[J] ⊆ F . It suffices to show that
F = Z[J].
Z[J] ⊆ F ⇒ J ⊆ Z ← [Z[J]] ⊆ Z ← [F ]
⇒ J ⊆ Z ← [F ] (where J is maximal ideal)
⇒ J = Z ← [F ] (Since Z ← [F ] is an ideal (by part b))
⇒ Z[J] = Z[Z ← [F ]] = F
So, Z[J] is a z-ultrafilter, as claimed.

On the other hand, if F is a z-ultrafilter, then Z ← [F ] is an
ideal (by part b). We are required to show that Z ← [F ] is a
maximal ideal. Suppose K is an ideal such that Z ← [F ] ⊆ K. It
will suffice to show that K ⊆ Z ← [F ].
See that F = Z[Z ← [F ]] ⊆ Z[K]. Then Z[K] = F (since Z[K]
is a z-filter and F is a maximal z-filter). So, K ⊆ Z ← [Z[K]] =
Z ← [F ]. Then K ⊆ Z ← [F ]. So Z ← [F ] is a maximal ideal.
(d) The result follows immediately from the definition of “maximal”.
(e) The proof is analogous to the similar statement referring to an
ultrafilter of sets proven Theorem 13.15.
In the following theorem, we guarantee that, given any z-filter,

F , in Z[S] there exists in Z[S] a z-ultrafilter which contains it.
Theorem 14.12 Let S be a topological space and (Z, ⊆), denote

the set of all z-filters in P(S), partially ordered by inclusion. If F
is any z-filter belonging to Z then there exists a z-ultrafilter, U , in
Z which contains F .
Proof. We are given that F ∈ Z. We wish to prove the existence
of a z-ultrafilter which contains F . We set up the problem so that
Zorn’s lemma applies.
For a given F ∈ Z, consider the set SF = {H ∈ Z : F ⊆ H }
of all z-filters which contain F . We are required to show that some
z-filter in SF is a z-ultrafilter (i.e., SF has a maximal element).
If SF = {F } then F is a z-ultrafilter. Suppose SF contains other

filters. Now, F can be the base element of many chains in SF .
In fact, SF can be viewed as the union of a family of filter-chains,
{Cα : α ∈ J}, each with base element, F . Pick an arbitrary filter-
chain, Cγ = {Fi : i ∈ I} in SF . It looks like,
F ⊆ F1 ⊆ F2 ⊆ F3 ⊆ · · ·
Let T = ∪{Fi : Fi ∈ Cγ }. Quite clearly, Fi ⊆ T for each i.

We claim that the family of sets, T , is itself a z-filter in the chain
Cγ . If U and V are elements of T , then U and V are elements of
some Fj in the chain, Cγ , so U ∩ V is an element of Fj ; so U ∩ V
is also an element of T . Then T is a z-filter base of sets which is a
maximal element in the chain Cγ .
So every chain, Cα , in SF has a maximal element. We can invoke
Zorn’s lemma, to conclude from this that SF , must also have a max-
imal z-filter element, U . Since SF contains every z-filter which con-
tains F , then U is the maximal z-filter which contains F . Then, by
definition, U is the unique z-ultrafilter which contains F .
Definition 14.13 Let S be a topological space. Let I be an ideal

in C(S) or C ∗ (S) and F = Z[I] be the corresponding z-filter.
(a) If ∩{Z(f ) : f ∈ I} = ∅ then we will say that F is a fixed z-filter
and that I is a fixed ideal.
(b) Otherwise, we will say that F is a free z-filter and I is a free
ideal.
Theorem 14.14 Suppose S is a completely regular topological space.

Then the following are equivalent.
(a) The space S is a compact space.
(b) Every z-filter in Z[S] is fixed. Every ideal in C(S) is fixed. Every
ideal in C ∗ (S) is fixed.
(c) Every z-ultrafilter is fixed. Every maximal ideal in C(S) is fixed.
Every maximal ideal in C ∗ (S) is fixed.
Proof. We are given that S is a completely regular topological
space.
(a ⇒ b) Suppose S is compact. Since S is compact, then every

function in C(S) is bounded; so C(S) = C ∗ (S). Suppose
F = {Z(f ) : f ∈ I} is a z-filter in Z[S] corresponding to
an ideal I in C(S).
Since S is compact and F satisfies the finite intersection
property, then ∩{Z(f ) : f ∈ I} is non-empty. So by defini-
tion, F is fixed. Equivalently I is a fixed ideal in C(S).
(b ⇒ a) Suppose every z-filter in Z[S] is fixed. We are required to
show that S is compact. Suppose F is a family of closed
subsets with the FIP. It suffices to show that F has non-
empty intersection.
If F ∈ F and p ∈ S\F then, since S is completely regular,
there exists f ∈ C(S) such that F ⊆ Z(f ) and p ∈ f ← (1).
Then the set F = ∩{Z(f ) : f ∈ U }, the intersection of
zero-sets. Then
∩{F : F ∈ F } = ∩{Z : Z ∈ G ⊆ Z[S]}
the intersection of zero-sets in Z[S]. Since {Z : Z ∈ G ⊆
Z[S]} is a fixed z-filter, then ∩{F : F ∈ F } is non-empty
so S is compact.
(b ⇒ c) Suppose every z-filter in Z[S] is fixed. Then every
z-ultrafilter in Z[S] is fixed. As well every ideal is fixed
and so every maximal ideal is fixed.
(c ⇒ b) Suppose every z-ultrafilter in Z[S] is fixed. Then every max-
imal ideal is fixed. Suppose F is a z-filter in Z[S]. Then,
by Theorem 14.12, F is contained some z-ultrafilter, G . By
hypothesis, G is fixed, so there exists p ∈ ∩{F : F ∈ G }.
Then p ∈ ∩{F : F ∈ F }. So, F is fixed. Also every corre-
sponding ideal in C(S) is fixed.
Concepts Review
1. Define an open cover of a space. What does it mean to say that

it has a finite subcover?
2. State the formal topological definition of compact subspace.
3. What does it mean to say that a family of sets satisfies the “finite
intersection property”?
4. State a characterization of compact space involving the “finite

intersection property”.
5. What kind of properties do nets in a compact space satisfy?
6. What kind of properties do filters in a compact space satisfy?
7. What can we say about ultrafilters of sets in a compact set?
8. What can we say about continuous images of compact sets?
9. What can we say about closed subsets of compact sets?
10. Under what conditions on S does the statement “Compact sub-
sets of S are closed” hold true, in general?
11. Complete the statement: A one-to-one continuous function, f :
F → T , mapping a compact space, F , into a Hausdorff space, T ,
is. . .
12. Suppose S = i∈I Si is a product space with compact factors,
Si . Is this statement true or false? “The product space S maybe
compact but it depends on the size of the index I”.
13. What separation axioms will compact Hausdorff spaces satisfy?
14. Define the separation property referred to as completely normal.
15. Give a characterization of “completely normal”.
16. How does a completely normal space compare with a normal
space and a perfectly normal space.
17. Define a z-filter base and a z-filter.
18. Define a z-ultrafilter.
19. Define an ideal and a maximal ideal in C ∗ (S).
20. Describe a relationship between ideals in C ∗ (S) and z-filters.
21. Define a fixed filter and a free filter. How are they recognized?
22. Give a characterization of a compact space in terms of z-filters.
Exercises
1. Show that a closed and bounded subset of R is compact.

2. Show that disjoint compact sets in a Hausdorff space are respec-
tively contained in disjoint open subsets.
3. Let F and H be disjoint closed subsets of [0, 5]n . Show that they
are contained in disjoint open neighborhoods.
4. Suppose g : S → T is a function mapping the topological space
S into the compact Hausdorff space T . Show that g is continuous
on S if and only if the graph of g, {(x, g(x)) : x ∈ S} is a closed

subset of S × T .
5. Show that the finite union of compact subsets of a topological
space is compact.
6. The set T is a compact subset of Rn if and only if T is both closed
and bounded in Rn .
7. Suppose {Fi : i ∈ I} is a family of compact sets in a Hausdorff
space. Show that ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} is compact.
Chapter 15
Countably Compact Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we discuss a slightly weaker version of the compactness
property called “countable compactness”. We formally define it and dis-
cuss its properties. We will see that there are countably compact spaces
which are not compact spaces. We also show that, in some topologi-
cal spaces (such as metric spaces) the countably compact and compact
properties are equivalent.
15.1 The Countably Compact Property
The compact property imposes strong restrictions on a topologi-

cal space. Sometimes, a weaker version of, “Every open cover has
a finite subcover” will suit our purposes. A slightly weaker version,
can be expressed as “Every countable open cover has a finite sub-
cover”. We will investigate properties which are specific to countable
compactness.
Definition 15.1 Let F be any non-empty subset of the topological

space, S. We say that F is countably compact if and only if every
countable open cover of F has a finite subcover.
Just as for compact subsets, it will be useful to obtain various

ways of recognizing those spaces which are countably compact. It will
363
also allow us to better see how countably compact spaces distinguish

themselves from those which satisfy the compact property. Recall
that p is said to be a “cluster point of the set A if every open neigh-
borhood of p contains some other point of A”.
Theorem 15.2 Let S be a topological space and T be a non-empty

subset of S. Then the following are equivalent.
(a) The space S is a countably compact set.
(b) If T is a countably infinite subset of S, then T has at least one
cluster point.
(c) If A = {xi : i ∈ N} is a sequence with an infinite number of
distinct points, then A has at least one accumulation point.
(d) A countable family, F = {Fi : i ∈ N}, of closed sets in S satis-
fying the finite intersection property has non-empty intersection
in S.
Proof. Given: S is a topological space.
(a ⇒ b) Given: S is countably compact and T is countably infinite
subset of S.
We are required to show that T has a cluster point. Suppose T
has no cluster point.
Claim 1: That T = clS T . If not, T ⊂ clS T . Then there is a point,
p, in clS T ∩ (S \T ). So, p is a boundary point of T . This would mean
that every open neighborhood of p intersects T\{p}; this would make
of p a cluster point,a contradiction. So, T = clS T , as claimed.
By Claim 1, we can say that S \ T is open in S. Since T has
no cluster point, then every point x in T is contained in an open
neighborhood Vx of S which does not intersect T\{x}. Then Vx ∩ T =
{x}. Then {Vx : x ∈ T } is a countably infinite family of open subsets
of S which covers T . Clearly, it has no finite subset which covers T .
Then,
{(S \T )} ∪ {Vx : x ∈ T }
is a countably infinite open cover of S with no finite subcover, con-

tradicting the fact that S is countably compact. So, T must have a
cluster point.
Countably Compact Spaces 365
(b ⇒ c) We are given that, a countably infinite subset of S must

have a cluster point. Let A = {f (i) : i ∈ N} be an infinite sequence.
We are required to show that the sequence, A, has an accumulation
point.
By hypothesis, A has a cluster point, say z, in T . Then, for any
neighborhood, Bz , of z, Bz ∩ A contains infinitely many distinct
points. So, Bz ∩ {f (i) : i > q} is non-empty for all q ∈ N. This
means that any neighborhood of z intersects a tail end of A. So by
definition, z is an accumulation point of the sequence, A.
(c ⇒ a) Suppose that any sequence in any subset, T , of S has an accu-
mulation point. Recall that p is an accumulation point of a sequence if
every open neighborhood of p intersects the tail end of the sequence.
We are required to show that S is countably compact.
Let U = {Ui : i ∈ N} be a countable family of open sets which
covers S. We are required to show that U has a finite subcover.
Suppose U has no finite subcover. Then, for every n, it is possible
to choose,
f (n) ∈ T \∪{Ui : i = 1 to n}
Then {f (n) : n ∈ N\{0}} forms a sequence in T .
Then, for each k,
f [ [k, ∞) ] ⊆ T \∪{Ui : i = 1 to k}
So no element of U can intersect a tail end of the sequence, {f (n)},
in T . This contradicts our hypothesis stating that every sequence in
T has an accumulation point. So, U must have a finite subcover.
(a ⇒ d) We are given that S is countably compact. Let F = {Fi : i ∈
N} be countable family of closed sets in S with the finite intersection
property. We are required to show that ∩{Fi : i ∈ N} = ∅.
Suppose ∩{Fi : i ∈ N} is empty. Then {S \Fi : i ∈ N} forms an
open cover of S with no finite subcover, contradicting the property
of countable compactness on S.
(d ⇒ a) We are given that, if F is a countable family of closed sets
in S with the finite intersection property, then ∩F is not empty. We
are required to show that S is countably compact.
Suppose U = {Ui : i ∈ N} is an open cover of S. We are required
to show that U contains a finite subcover of S. Suppose U has no
finite subcover. Then {S \Ui : i ∈ N} forms a family of closed sets sat-

isfying the finite intersection property which has empty intersection.
This contradicts our hypothesis. So, S is countably compact.
15.2 Bolzano–Weierstrass Property
We will examine a bit more closely the countable compactness char-

acterization given in part (c) of the characterization theorem stated
above. It states that, in countably compact spaces:
The space S is countably compact if and only if every

sequence,
A = {xi : i ∈ N}
in S has an accumulation point, p, in S.
The statement is quite similar to the one found in the compactness

characterization theorem 14.2:
A space S is compact if and only if every net in S has an

accumulation point, p, in S.
By Theorem 12.5, “p is an accumulation point of a net N if and

only if N has a subnet converging to p”. We can then say:
The space S is a compact space if and only if every net N

in S has a subnet which converges to some accumulation
point, p, of N .
And,
the space S is a countably compact space if and only if
every sequence A in S has a subnet which converges to
some accumulation point, p, of A.
To some readers, this may be reminiscent of a real analysis state-

ment called the Bolzano–Weierstrass theorem (BWT). It states that
every bounded sequence in R has a convergent subsequence.

There is, however, a fundamental difference between the state-

ment of BWT and this particular characterization of the countable
compactness. We see that the BWT refers only to R, not an arbitrary
topological space, and only to those sequences which are “bounded”.
(Note that the property of “boundedness” has not yet been defined
for arbitrary topological spaces.)
For future reference we will formally provide a name for the
property described in the above countably compact characterization
theorem.
Definition 15.3 A topological space, S, is said to satisfy the
Bolzano–Weierstrass property
(BWP) if and only if every sequence, A = {xi : i ∈ N}, in S has an

accumulation point in S.
By the characterization theorem above, countably compact topo-

logical spaces are precisely those spaces which satisfy the Bolzano–
Weierstrass property.
15.3 Properties of Countably Compact Spaces
Before presenting some examples, it will help to list a few proper-

ties of countably compact spaces. The first statement says that a
countably compact space is “closed-hereditary”.
Theorem 15.4 Closed subspaces of countably compact spaces are

countably compact.
Proof. Given: The space, S, is a countably compact topological

space and F is a non-empty closed subset of S.
Suppose F is a countable family of closed subsets of F which
satisfies the finite intersection property. It suffices to show that F
has non-empty intersection. Then every set in F is also a closed
subset in S. Since S is countably compact, the family of sets in F

has non-empty intersection inside F . So, F is also countably compact.
We know that continuous images of compact sets are compact.

The following theorem shows that an analogous statement for count-
ably compact spaces holds true.
Theorem 15.5 Suppose S is countably compact and the continuous

function, f : S → T , maps S into the topological space, T . Then f [S]
is a countably compact subspace of T .
Proof. Given: The space S is countably compact and T is a topo-
logical spaces. Suppose f : S → T is continuous.
Let U = {Ui : i ∈ N} be a countable open cover of f [S]. Then
V = {f ← [Ui ] : i ∈ N} is a countable open cover of S. Since S is
countably compact, V has a finite subcover VF = {f ← [Ui ] : i ∈ F }
of S. Then
f [S] ⊆ f [∪{f ← [Ui ] : i ∈ F }]
= ∪{f [f ← [Ui ]] : i ∈ F ]}
= {Ui : i ∈ F }
So, U has a finite subcover UF = {Ui : i ∈ F } of f [S]. So, f [S] is
also countably compact.
We now consider how the countable compactness property carries

over products.
Theorem 15.6 Let {Sj : j ∈ N} be a family of topological

spaces.
We consider the corresponding product space, S = j∈N Sj , with
countably many factors.
(a) If the product space, S, is countably compact then so is each one
of its Sj factors.
(b) If each Sj factor of the product space, S, is both countably com-
pact and first countable then the infinite product space, S, is
countably compact.

Proof. Given: The set, S = j∈N Sj , is a product space.
(a) Suppose the product space, S, is countably compact. Since each

projection map, πj , is continuous, then, for each factor Sj , Sj =
πj [S], the continuous image of a countably compact space. So
by Theorem 15.5 each factor, Sj , is countably compact. We are
done with part (a).
(b) We are given that {Sj : j ∈ N} is a family of first countable and
countablycompact topological spaces. We are required to show
that S = j∈N Sj is countably compact.
Let B = {β(i) : i ∈ N} be a sequence in S. To show that S is
countably compact it suffices to show that B has an accumulation
point.
Step 0: Since π0 (β(i)) = π0 ( βj (i) j∈N ) = β0 (i), then
π0 [B] = {β0 (i) : i ∈ N}
is a sequence in S0 . Since S0 is countably compact, then, by The-
orem 15.2, π0 [B] has an accumulation point, say p0 . By Theorem
11.5, since S0 is first countable, π0 [B] has a subsequence,
{β0 (g0 (i)) : i ∈ N}
in S0 converging to p0 .
Let
B0 = {β(g0 (i)) : i ∈ N}

Then B0 is a subsequence of B in S = j∈N Sj .
Step 1: We consider the sequence π1 [B0 ] in S1 where
π1 (β(g0 (i))) = π1 ( βj (g0 (i)) j∈N ) = β1 (g0 (i))
Then
π1 [B0 ] = {β1 (i) : i ∈ N}
is a sequence in S1 .
Since S1 is first countable, π1 [B0 ] has a subsequence,
{β1 (g1 (g0 (i))) : i ∈ N}
in S1 converging to p1 .
= {β(g1 (g0 (i))) : i ∈ N}. Then B1 is a subsequence of

Let B1
B in S = j∈N Sj .
Step n: Eventually we obtain a sequence {βn (gn (· · · (g0 (i)))· · ·)):
i ∈ N} in Sn , converging to pn ∈ Sn .
From this, we obtain the subsequence
Bn = {β(gn (gn−1 (· · · (g0 (i))) · · · ) : i ∈ N}
of B.
Let γ : N → B be defined as
γ(n) = β(gn (gn−1 (· · · (g0 (n))) · · · )
That is,
γ(0) = β(g0 (0))

γ(1) = β(g1 (g0 (1)))
γ(2) = β(g2 (g1 (g0 (2))))
..
.
γ(n) = β(gn (gn−1 (· · · (g0 (n))) · · · )
..
.
Then A = {γ(i) : i ∈ N} is a subsequence of B.

We claim that the subsequence, A, converges to p = pj j∈N .
See that, for each j ∈ N, {πj (γ(i)) : i ∈ N} converges to pj .
By Corollary 13.18,

{γ(i) : i ∈ N} ⊂ B ⊂ S = j∈N Sj
converges to p = pj j∈N , as claimed.

Since B has a converging subsequence, A = {γ(i) : i ∈ N},
then B has an accumulation point and so the product space, S,
is countably compact. As required.
15.4 Examples
Example 1. Consider the set S = [0, ω1 ], of all countable ordinals

union the singleton set, {ω1 }, where ω1 is the first uncountable ordi-
nal. The Hausdorff topology on S is generated by the base, B, for
open sets defined as
B = {(α, β] : α < β}
(a) Show that S = [0, ω1 ] is a compact space.

(b) Show that the subspace, T = [0, ω1 ), of S is not compact but is,
nevertheless, countably compact.
Solution: Given: S = [0, ω1 ] and T = [0, ω1 ).
(a) We will use the formal definition of compactness. The technique

mimics the one used to show that closed and bounded intervals
of R are compact. Let U = {Bi : i ∈ I} be an open cover of S.
It suffices to show that S has a finite subcover.
Let V = {u : [0, u] has a finite subcover}.1 Suppose ω1 ∈ V .
Since the ordinal space, S, is well-ordered, every non-empty sub-
set has a least element. Let k be the least element in S\V . Then
[0, k] does not have a finite subcover. There is some element,
Bj ∈ U , which contains k. Then there exists some m ∈ S such
that the basic open neighborhood of k, (m, k] ⊆ Bj . But [0, m]
has a finite subcover, say UF ⊂ U . Then UF ∪ {Bj } is a finite
subcover of [0, k]. This is a contradiction. So, V = S. Hence,
S = [0, ω1 ] has a finite subcover and so is compact.
(b) Consider T = [0, ω1 ), a subspace of compact S. It is not closed
seeing that it does not contain the boundary point, ω1 (since
every basic open neighborhood of ω1 intersects T ). Since compact
subsets of Hausdorff spaces are closed, then T = [0, ω1 ) is not
compact.
We claim that T is countably compact. Suppose A =
{xi : i ∈ N} is a sequence in T . By a characterization of “count-
ably compact” it suffices to show that the sequence A has an
accumulation point.
1
The set S is well-ordered by ≤.
As explained on page 108, if sup A = ω1 , then ω1 = ∪{xi :

i ∈ N}. Then ω1 would be the countable union of countable
ordinals and so would be countable, a contradiction. So, sup A <
ω1 . Then there must exist k ∈ T such that A ⊆ [0, k]. Since [0, k]
is a closed subset of the compact space, [0, ω1 ], then [0, k] is itself
compact. We know that, since [0, k] is compact, every net in [0, k]
has an accumulation point in [0, k] (this is a characterization
of the compact property). Then the sequence A must have an
accumulation point, say p in [0, k]. Since p ∈ [0, k] ⊂ [0, ω1 ), then
every sequence in T has an accumulation point in T . Then T is
countably compact.
15.5 On Countably Compact Spaces

Which Are Compact
In the following results, we see how the countably compact property

compares with the compact property in certain spaces. Recall that
second countable spaces are those spaces which have a countable base
for open sets.
Theorem 15.7 Suppose S is a second countable topological space.

Then S is compact if and only if S is countably compact.
Proof. Given: The space S is a second countable topological space.
(⇒) It is always true that, if S is compact then S is countably com-
pact.
(⇐) Suppose S is countably compact. Let U be an open cover of S.
It suffices to show that U has a finite subcover.
Since S is second countable, then S has a countable open base, B.
Let x be a point in S. Since U is an open cover, there exist
Ux ∈ U which contains x. Since B is a base for open sets, there
exists in B, at least one Bx such that x ∈ Bx ⊆ Ux . For each p ∈ S,
let
Ap = {Bp ∈ B : p ∈ Bp ⊆ Up }
Let A = ∪{Ap : p ∈ S}. Then A ⊆ B.

Since S is second countable, then A is a countable set of open

neighborhoods, say {Bi : i ∈ N\{0}}. For each i ∈ N\{0}, p ∈ Bi ⊆ Up ,
for some p. For each i, choose exactly one Upi such that Bi ⊆ Upi .
Then V = {Upi : i ∈ N\{0}} forms a countable subcover of S.
Since S is countably compact, then V contains a finite subcover
W = {Upi : i ∈ F } of S. We have shown that U contains a finite sub-
cover, W , of S. So, the second countable property combined with the
countably compact property on S implies S is compact. As required.
Theorem 15.8 Those metric spaces which are countably compact

are compact metric spaces.
Proof. Suppose (S, ρ) is a countably compact metric space. It suf-

fices to show that S is separable since, by Theorem 5.11, this implies
S is second countable and, by Theorem 15.7, second countable count-
ably compact spaces are compact.
Let ε > 0. Recall that since S is countably compact every infinite
subset V has a cluster point.
Claim 1: There exists a finite set {xi : i ∈ F } ⊆ S such that
S ⊆ ∪{Bε (xi ) : i ∈ F }.
Proof of claim: Suppose not. Then there is some δ > 0 such that
S ⊆ ∪{Bδ (xi ) : i ∈ F } for all finite sets F . Suppose y0 ∈ S. If Bδ (y0 )
does not cover S, then there is y1 ∈ S such that ρ(y0 , y1 ) ≥ δ. Induc-
tively, suppose {yi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , k} are such that S ⊆ ∪{Bδ (yi ) :
i = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . , k}. then there exists
yk+1 ∈ S \∪{Bδ (yi ) : i = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . , k}
Then, we can construct in this way, the infinite subset, V = {yi :

i ∈ N}, of S. Then V has no cluster point, contradicting the countable
compactness property. This establishes the claim.
Claim 2: The metric space (S, ρ) is separable.
Proof of claim: Let n ∈ N\{0}. By Claim 1, for this value, n, we
can construct, {y(i,n) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , kn } such that, if S ⊆ Bn =
∪{B1/n (y(i,n) ) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , kn }. By constructing in this way the
sets, {Bn : n ∈ N\{0}}, we extract the subset,
D = {y(i,n) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . kn , n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
where S ⊆ Bn for each n = 1, 2, 3, . . .. Then D is easily seen to be

dense in S. So, S is separable, as claimed.
By Theorems 15.7 and 5.10, S is compact.
Example 2. Show that the space S = [0, ω1 ) is non-metrizable.

Solution: We have shown in the previous example that [0, ω1 ) is
countably compact. By Theorem 15.8, if S was metrizable it would
be compact. But we showed in the example that S is not compact.
So, S = [0, ω1 ) is a non-metrizable topological space.
Many of the results above allow us to confirm that the real line,
equipped with the usual topology, is not countably compact. One of
the characterization states that any sequence will have an accumula-
tion point. We already mentioned that the sequence constructed from
the natural numbers has no accumulation point. One could also raise
the argument that, since R is known to be second countable, then, if
R was countably compact, it would have to be compact. In Theorem
15.9, we show that continuous real-valued functions on countably
compact spaces are bounded functions. If R was countably compact,
then every real-valued continuous function on R would have to be
bounded, which is not the case.
Theorem 15.9 Let S be a countably compact topological space. If

f is a real-valued continuous function on S, then f [S] is compact.2
Proof. Given: The space S is a countably compact topological
space and f [S] is the continuous image of S in R, equipped with
the usual topology.
Then, by Theorem 15.5, f [S] is countably compact in R. In the
example on page 103, it is shown that the real line, R, equipped with
2
Later in the text, we will refer to those spaces, S, in which all continuous real-
valued functions are bounded on S as being pseudocompact spaces. This theorem
can then correctly be paraphrased as “All countably compact Hausdorff spaces
are pseudocompact”.
the usual topology is second countable. In Theorem 5.13, it is shown

that the second countable property is hereditary. So, f [S] is second
countable in R. Then by Theorem 15.7, f [S] is compact.
Concepts Review
1. Define a countably compact space.

2. Give three characterizations of the countable compactness
property.
3. State the Bolzano–Weierstrass property.
4. Are closed subsets of countably compact spaces necessarily count-
ably compact?
5. What can we say about continuous images of countably compact
spaces?
6. Suppose S is the product of countably compact spaces. If we want
some guarantee that S be countably compact, what conditions
must be satisfied?
7. Give an example of a space which is countably compact but not
compact.
8. Identify topological spaces in which the compact property is equiv-
alent to the countable compactness property.
9. What can we say about continuous real-valued functions on a
countably compact space.
Exercises
1. Show that a space S is countably compact if and only if whenever

a family, F = {Fi : i ∈ N} of closed non-empty sets in S, is such
that Fi+1 ⊆ Fi for all i, then ∩{Fi : i ∈ N} is non-empty.
2. Suppose f : S → T is a one-to-one continuous function mapping
a countably compact space, S, onto a first countable space, T .
Show that T is a homeomorphic image of S.
Chapter 16
Lindelöf Spaces
Abstract
We will now investigate a property which can be seen as a weak rela-
tive of the compact property. It is called the Lindelöf property. We will
formally define it and study its characterizations and basic properties.
We compare its characteristics to those of the countable compactness
property. Finally, we will provide a few examples.
16.1 Introduction
There are various ways to weaken the “open cover. . . finite subcover”
property used to described compactness of a space. The “countably
compact” property, for example, refers to those spaces for which
every countable open cover has a finite subcover. There is another
approach we can use to weaken the compactness property. We can
require that arbitrarily large open covers have a countable subcover
(rather than the stricter “finite subcover”). This property is referred
to as the Lindelöf property. Although, some readers may not nec-
essarily view the Lindelöf property as a relative of compactness, we
included it in this part of the text since it often appears in the liter-
ature combined with other weaker compact properties. Furthermore,
it shares with the “compact relatives” a property which allows for
the reduction of a “large” open cover to one of a “smaller” size. We
will see that this property may be of interest when combined with
the properties of other non-compact topological spaces.
377
16.2 The Definition
The following definition applies to arbitrary topological spaces. Some

text define the Lindelöf property only for regular spaces, possibly
because it is in such spaces that the Lindelöf property is most com-
monly studied.
Definition 16.1 A topological space, S, is said to be Lindelöf, or

satisfies the Lindelöf property, if every open cover of S has a countable
subcover.1
Obviously, since finite sets are by definition countable, if an open

cover has a finite subcover then this cover has a countable subcover;
so we can say that
every compact space is Lindelöf.
Also, by combining the Lindelöf property with the countably com-
pact property, we see that the Lindelöf property reduces an open
cover to a countable one, and the countable compact property reduces
the countable open cover to a finite one. So,
every countably compact Lindelöf space is a compact space.
There are other properties which guarantee that an open cover
will have a countable subcover.
Theorem 16.2 If S is second countable then S must be Lindelöf.

Proof. Given: We are given that S is a second countable space and
that U is an open cover on S.
If p ∈ S, there exist Vp ∈ U which contains p. By hypothesis, S
has a countable open base, B, for S. Then, we can choose, from B,
at least one Bp such that p ∈ Bp ⊆ Vp . Let
Ap = {Bp ∈ B : p ∈ Bp ⊆ Vp }
Let A = ∪{Ap : p ∈ S}.
1
Named after the Finnish mathematician Ernst Lindelöf (1870–1946). He made
contributions to the fields of real analysis, complex analysis, and general topology.
Lindelöf Spaces 379
Since S is second countable, then A can be reduced to a countable

subfamily, A ∗ , say A ∗ = {Bi : i ∈ N\{0}}, without sacrificing its
open base property. For each i ∈ N\{0}, p ∈ Bi ⊆ Vp , for some p.
For each i, choose exactly one Vpi such that Bi ⊆ Vpi . Then V =
{Vpi : i ∈ N\{0}} forms a countable subcover of S. So, if S is second
countable, then S must be Lindelöf.
16.3 Characterizations
Those who only work with metrizable topological spaces will soon
notice that the Lindelöf property provides nothing new in their topo-
logical region of the universe. This is due to the fact that, in metric
spaces, the Lindelöf property is equivalent to the second countable
property. We will say that the family of subsets, F , of a space S sat-
isfies the countable intersection property (CIP) if, for any countable
subfamily, FN , of F ,
∩{F : F ∈ FN } = ∅
Theorem 16.3 Let S be a topological space.

(a) The space, S, is Lindelöf if and only if each filter of closed
sets with the countable intersection property has non-empty
intersection.
(b) Suppose (S, ρ) is a metric space. Then the following are
equivalent.
(i) The space S is Lindelöf.
(ii) The space S is second countable.
(iii) The space S is separable.
(c) Suppose S is a regular space. Then the following are equivalent.
(i) The space S is Lindelöf.
(ii) If each open cover, U = {Ui : i ∈ I}, of S has a subfamily,
{Uij : j ∈ N}, such that {clS Uij : j ∈ N} covers S, then
{Uij : j ∈ N} covers S.
(iii) Every filter of open sets in S with the countable intersection
property has an accumulation point.

(a) We are given that F = {Fi : i ∈ I} represents a filter of closed
sets in the space S.
(⇒) Suppose S is Lindelöf and F satisfies the CIP. That is,
countable subfamilies of F have non-empty intersection. We are
required to show that ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} = ∅.
Suppose not. That is, suppose ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} = ∅. Then {S \Fi :
i ∈ I} is an open cover of S. Since S is Lindelöf, {S\Fij : j ∈ N}
forms a countable subcover. This means, ∩{Fij : j ∈ N} = ∅.
This contradicts the fact that F satisfies the CIP.
So, ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} = ∅, as required.
(⇐) Given: Every filter of closed sets with the countable inter-
section property has non-empty intersection. Suppose U = {Ui :
i ∈ I} is an open cover of S.
We are required to show that U has a countable subcover.
Suppose not. That is, suppose that, for any countable subfam-
ily, {Uij : j ∈ N}, ∩{S \Uij : j ∈ N} = ∅. Then F satisfies the
CIP. Then ∩{S \Ui : i ∈ I} = ∅. This contradicts that U is an
open cover. So, U has a countable subcover. This means that S
is Lindelöf.
(b) We are given that S a metric space.
(i ⇐ ii) Given that S is second countable. By Theorem 16.2,
second countable spaces are Lindelöf spaces, always. So S is Lin-
delöf. We are done with (i ⇐ ii).
(i ⇒ ii) Suppose the metric space, S, is a Lindelöf space. We are
required to show that S has a countable base for open sets.
For each i ∈ N \ {0}, we construct an open cover, Ui =
{B1/i (u) : u ∈ S}, of S. By hypothesis, each Ui has a count-
able subcover, say
Bi = {B1/i (uij ) : uij ∈ S, j ∈ N}
Claim: That the countable family of open sets, B = ∪{Bi : i ∈

N\{0}}, is a base for open sets of S. That is, every open subset
is the union of elements from B.
Proof of claim: Suppose U is an open neighborhood of p ∈ S.
We are required to show that p belongs to some element, B, of
B such that B ⊆ U . Then there exists some natural number, k,

such that B1/k (p) ⊆ U . Now, B3k has been hypothesized to be an
open cover of S. So, there is some v ∈ S, such that p ∈ B1/3k (v).
Then
2 1
x ∈ B1/3k (v) ⇒ ρ(x, p) < <
3k k
So, x ∈ B1/k (p) ⊆ U . Then p ∈ B1/3k (v) ⊆ U where B1/3k (v) is

an element of B. Then B is a countable base for open sets, as
claimed.
So, S is second countable, as required. We are done with
(i ⇒ ii).
(ii ⇐ iii) If S a separable metric space, by Theorem 5.11, S is
second countable.
(ii ⇒ iii) Suppose S is second countable. Then, by Theorem 5.10,
S is separable, always.
(c) We are given that S is a regular topological space.
(i ⇒ ii) Suppose S is Lindelöf. Then S has a countable subcover,
{Uij : j ∈ N} and so {clS Uij : j ∈ N} is a countable subcover.
So, (ii) holds true.
(i ⇐ ii) We are given that, if V = {Ui : i ∈ I} is an open cover,
then {clS Uij : j ∈ N} covers S for some countable subfamily,
{Uij : j ∈ N}, of V .
We claim that {Uij : j ∈ N} must also be a subcover.
Proof of claim: Let y ∈ S. Then there exist Uy in the open
cover, V , which contains y. By regularity, there exists an open
neighborhood, By , of y such that y ∈ By ⊆ clS By ⊆ Uy . Then
{By : y ∈ S} forms an open cover of S. By hypothesis, we have
{clS Byj : j ∈ N} covers S. Since clS Byj ⊆ Uyj for each j, then
{Uyj : j ∈ N} covers S, as claimed.
We conclude that S is Lindelöf. We are done for ⇐.
(i ⇒ iii) Suppose S is Lindelöf.
Let U = {Ui : i ∈ I} be a filter base of open sets in S which
satisfies the countable intersection property.
We are required to show that ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ I} is non-empty.
Consider the family V = {clS Ui : i ∈ I}. Since U satisfies

the countable intersection property, then so does V . Then V
is a filter of closed sets in S. Since S is Lindelöf, by part (a),
∩{clS Ui : i ∈ I} is non-empty. If p ∈ ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ I}, then
by definition, p is an accumulation point of the filter of open
sets, U .
(i ⇐ iii) We are given that filters of open sets in S which satisfy
the countable intersection property have an accumulation point.
Suppose U = {Ui : i ∈ I} is an open cover of S. We are required
to show that U has a countable subcover, {Uij : j ∈ N}.
To obtain a contradiction, let us suppose U does not have a
countable subcover.
Let x ∈ S. Then there exists Ux in U such that x ∈ Ux . By
regularity, there exists Wx such that x ∈ Wx ⊆ clS Wx ⊆ Ux .
Then W = {Wx : x ∈ S} as well as
W ∗ = {clS Wx : x ∈ S}
cover S. Then, for any countable subfamily, {clS Wxj : j ∈ N}, of

W ∗,
∩{S \clS Wxj : j ∈ N}
is non-empty. Then, {S \clS Wx : x ∈ S} is a family of open sets

which satisfies the countable intersection property. By hypoth-
esis, it must have an accumulation point p. This means p ∈
∩{clS [S \ clS Wx ] : x ∈ S}. But clS [S \ clS Wx ] = S \ Wx . Then
p ∈ ∩{S \Wx ] : x ∈ S}. Then p is not in any Wx , contradicting
that {Wx : x ∈ S} is an open cover of S. The source of the con-
tradiction is the assumption that U does not have a countable
subcover.
So, U has a countable subcover. We conclude that S is
Lindelöf.
Example 1. We have shown in Chapter 5 (page 103) that the metriz-

able set of all real numbers, equipped with the usual topology, is
second countable and so is separable. Then, by part (b) of the above
characterization theorem, R is a Lindelöf space.
Example 2. We have seen that the real numbers, (R, τS ), equipped

with the upper limit topology (Sorgenfrey line) is not second count-
able (see page 102). Show that it is Lindelöf.
Solution: Let U be an open cover of R. We will fix n ∈ N. Let

Sn = {[u, n] : [u, n] has a countable subcover}.
Let kn = inf {u : [u, n] ∈ Sn }. We claim that kn ∈ R. Suppose
kn ∈ R. Then [kn , n] has a countable subcover, Un = {Ui ∈ U : i ∈ N}.
This means that kn ∈ Uj , for some j ∈ N. Since Uj is open, there is
some ε > 0 such that kn ∈ (kn − ε, kn ] ⊆ Uj . Then [kn − ε/2, n] has
a countable subcover contradicting the definition of kn . So, (−∞, n]
has a countable subcover, Un , as claimed. This is independent of
the value of n. Then ∪{Un : n ∈ N} is a countable subcover of
∪{(−∞, n] : n ∈ N} = R. So R is Lindelöf.
Note that (R, τS ) has been found to be Lindelöf in spite of it not
being second countable. Does this contradict Theorem 16.3, part (b)?
The answer is “No it doesn’t”. It simply guarantees that (R, τS ) is
not metrizable.
Example 3. In the example on page 373, we showed that the ordinal

space, S = [0, ω1 ), is countably compact but not compact. Then
it cannot be Lindelöf, for, if it was both countably compact and
Lindelöf, it would have to be compact.
16.4 Two Invariance Theorems for the Lindelöf Property
Arbitrary subspaces generally do not inherit the Lindelöf property

from its superset. Also, products of Lindelöf spaces need not be Lin-
delöf. But closed subspaces do inherit the Lindelöf property from its
superset.
We will also show that the Lindelöf property is carried over by
continuous functions.
Theorem 16.4 If S is Lindelöf and F is a closed subset of S then

F is Lindelöf.
Proof. Given: That S is Lindelöf and F is closed in S.

Let U = {Ui : i ∈ I} be a family of open sets in S which covers F .
Then U ∗ = U ∪ {S \F } covers S. Since S is Lindelöf, then U ∗ has
a countable subcover {Uij : j ∈ N} ∪ {S\F }. Then {Uij : j ∈ N} is a
countable subcover of F . So, F is Lindelöf.
Theorem 16.5 If S is Lindelöf and f : S → T is continuous and

onto T , then T is Lindelöf.
Proof. Given: That S is Lindelöf and f : S → T is continuous and
onto T .
Let U = {Ui : i ∈ I} be a family of open sets which covers
T . Then V = {f ← [Ui ] : i ∈ I} covers S. Then V has a countable
subcover, {f ← [Uij ] : j ∈ N}, of S. Then {f [f ← [Uij ]] : j ∈ N} = {Uij :
j ∈ N} is a countable subcover of T . So, T is Lindelöf.
16.5 Regular Lindelöf Spaces are normal
We now show that regular spaces that are equipped with the Lindelöf
property are in fact normal spaces.
Theorem 16.6 If S is both regular and Lindelöf then it is normal.

Proof. Given: That S is regular and Lindelöf.
Let F and K be disjoint closed sets. If x ∈ F and y ∈ K, then,
by regularity, there exists an open Bx such that clS Bx ∩ K = ∅ and
open Dy such that clS Dy ∩ F = ∅. Then
BF = {Bx : x ∈ F }
DK = {Dy : y ∈ K}
form open covers of F and K, respectively. Since S is Lindelöf, then
so are the closed subsets F and K. So, we can obtain
BF ∗ = {Bxi : i ∈ N}
DK ∗ = {Dyi : i ∈ N}
as countable subcovers of F and K, respectively.
We now inductively construct disjoint open neighborhoods of F

and K:
For F1 = Bx1 let K1 = Dy1 \clS F1
For i ∈ N if Fi = Bxi \clS (K1 ∪ · · · ∪ Ki−1 ) let Ki = Dyi \clS (F1 ∪ · · · ∪ Fi )
Then ∪{Fi : i ∈ N} and ∪{Ki : i ∈ N} form disjoint open neighbor-

hoods of F and K, respectively. So, S is normal.
Concept Review
1. Define the Lindelöf property on a topological space.

2. What kind of space is obtained if we combine countable com-
pactness with the Lindelöf property?
3. How does a space with the second countable property compare
with a Lindelöf space?
4. Give a characterization of the Lindelöf property in terms of a
filter of closed sets.
5. In a metric space, state two properties each of which is equivalent
to the Lindelöf property.
6. In a regular space, state two properties which are equivalent to
the Lindelöf property.
7. Is there a quick argument you can use to conclude that R is
Lindelöf, based on the theory developed in the chapter.
8. What can you say about subspaces of Lindelöf spaces?
9. What about continuous images of Lindelöf spaces.
10. In what way does the Lindelöf property enhance a regular space?
11. Provide examples of Lindelöf and non-Lindelöf spaces.
Exercises
1. Suppose that the space S is such that it can be expressed as a

countable union of compact spaces. Show that S is Lindelöf.
2. Suppose S is a topological space. We say that the open cover,
U = {Ui : i ∈ I}, refines (or is a refinement of) the open cover,
V = {Vi : i ∈ I}, if for every Vi there is some Uj such that Uj ⊆ Vi .
Show that S is Lindelöf if and only if every open cover of S has a

countable refinement.
3. Recall that a T1 -space, S, is perfectly normal if and only if, for any
pair of non-empty disjoint close subsets, F and K, there exists a
continuous function f : S → [0, 1] such that F = f ← (0) and
K = f ← (1). Suppose S is a regular space such that each of its
open subsets is Lindelöf. Show that S is perfectly normal.
Chapter 17
Sequentially and Feebly

Compact Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we define the sequentially compact property and deter-
mine in which precise circumstances it is just another way of referring
to the compactness property. At the same time, we outline conditions
under which a compact space is not sequentially compact. To illustrate
this, we provide various examples. We also introduce two closely related
classes of spaces: feebly compact and pseudocompact spaces.
17.1 Sequentially Compact Spaces
For many readers, sequentially compact is just another way of saying

“compact” in two words instead of one. In many cases, this is fine. As
long as we keep in mind that the two properties are, in general, not
equivalent. We will begin with a formal definition and then exam-
ine specific cases where the sequential compact spaces are equivalent
to compact ones. Based on our experience with countably compact
spaces we expect that countability properties will, somehow, be rel-
evant in many arguments.
Definition 17.1 Let S be a topological space. We say that a sub-

space, T , of S is sequentially compact if and only if every sequence
in T has a subsequence which converges to a point in T .
387
Theorem 17.2 Let S be a topological space.

(a) If S is second countable, then the following are equivalent.
(i) The space S is compact.
(ii) The space S is countably compact.
(iii) The space S is sequentially compact.
(b) If S is metric, then the following are equivalent.
(i) The space S is compact.
(ii) The space S is countably compact.
(iii) The space S is sequentially compact.
(c) If T ⊆ S = Rn the following are equivalent.
(i) The subspace T is compact.
(ii) The subspace T is closed and bounded.
(iii) The subspace T is sequentially compact.
(a) We are given that S is second countable.
(i ⇔ ii) In second countable spaces, the equivalence of compact-
ness and countable compactness is proved in Theorem 15.7.
(ii ⇔ iii) We must show “countably compact if and only if sequen-
tially compact”.
Recall that second countable spaces are first countable, always.
S ctbly cpct ⇔ every seq in S has an accum’tion pt. (Theorem 15.2)
In a first countable space S,
p = accum’tion point of a seq ⇔ p = limit point of a subseq. (Theorem 11.5)
So in a second countable space,

S → sequentially compact ⇔ S → countably compact
(b) We are given that S is a metric space.
(i ⇔ ii) In Theorem 15.8, it is shown that in a metric space,
compactness and countable compactness are equivalent.
(ii ⇔ iii) Recall that metric spaces are first countable. As shown
in (ii ⇔ iii) of part (a), in first countable spaces, countable com-
pactness and sequential compactness are equivalent.
Sequentially and Feebly Compact Spaces 389
(c) We are given that T ⊆ S = Rn with the usual topology.

(i ⇔ iii) Since S is a metric space, S is compact if and only if S
is sequentially compact. (By part (b).)
(i ⇔ ii) For ⇒. We are given that T is compact. Since S is
Hausdorff, compact subspaces are closed in S, so T is closed
in S.
We now show boundedness of T . For u ∈ T , let f : T → R
be defined as f (x) = distance(u, x) (known to be continuous,
see page 258). Since f is continuous on the compact set T , f
attains a maximum value, k, at some element v ∈ T , so k =
dist(u, v) ≥ dist(u, x) independently of the choice of x in T . So,
for any a, b ∈ T , dist(a, b) ≤ dist (a, u)+ dist(u, b) ≤ k + k = 2k.
So, T is bounded, as required.
For ⇐. We are given that T is closed and bounded in Rn . Since
T is bounded in Rn , there exists k ∈ R+ such that T n
n⊆ [−k, k] .
Since [−k, k] is compact then so is its product, i=1 [−k, k]i .
Then, since T is a closed subset of a compact space, T is compact.
Many readers may already be familiar with the following result

about compact subsets of metric spaces.
Theorem 17.3 If S is a metric space and T is compact in S, then

T is closed and bounded.
Proof. The proof is left as an exercise for the reader.

Note: The converse fails. Consider an infinite discrete space with
metric ρ(a, b) = 1 if a = b.
Theorem 17.4 If S is a sequentially compact space then it must

necessarily be countably compact.
Proof. We are given that S is a sequentially compact space. Then

every sequence in S has a subsequence which converges to a point
in S. We are required to show that it is countably compact.
Suppose S is not a countably compact space. Then S has a count-

able open cover, U = {Ui : i ∈ N}, with no finite subcover. For each
n ∈ N, we can then choose
pn ∈ S \∪{Ui : i = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . , n}
Let p ∈ S. We claim that p cannot be the limit of a subsequence
of A = {pi : i ∈ N}. Since U covers S, then p ∈ Uk for some k ∈ N.
If m > k then
pm ∈ ∪{Ui : i = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . , m}
Then the tail end, {pi : i ≥ k}, of A, does not intersect the open
neighborhood, Uk , of p. Then p cannot be the limit of a subsequence
of A, as claimed.
This contradicts the fact that S is sequentially compact. So spaces
which are sequentially compact are countably compact.
We now verify that sequential compactness is preserved by con-

tinuous functions.
Theorem 17.5 Let S be a topological space and T be a Hausdorff

topological space. If f : S → T is a continuous function and S is
sequentially compact then f [S] is sequentially compact in T .
Proof. We are given that S is a sequentially compact space, T is
Hausdorff and f : S → T is continuous. We are required to show
that f [T ] is sequentially compact.
The proof follows directly from the definition of sequentially com-
pact. The details are left as an exercise.
17.2 Example of a Compact Space Which Is Not

Sequentially Compact
We have seen that, if S is either second countable or is metrizable

then
S sequential compactness ⇔ S countable compactness
We have seen in 15.2 that “countably compact spaces are precisely

those spaces in which every sequence has an accumulation point”.
We can then also say:
If S is either second countable or is metrizable then
Every sequence in S has a convergent subsequence in S

⇔
Every sequence in S has a convergent subnet in S
This leads us to wonder whether there are any spaces in

which sequences have a convergent subnet but not a convergent
subsequence.
We studied convergence properties of S = [0, 1][0,1] on page 306. In
that example, we saw that S is a compact space in which a sequence
has an accumulation point but no subsequence converging to that
point. We will revisit the example, S = [0, 1][0,1] , to show that a
compact space need not be sequentially compact.
Example 1. Let S = [0, [0,1] be equipped with the product topology.

1]
That is, we view S as i∈[0,1] [0, 1]i . Show that S is compact, hence,
countably compact.
(a) Show that S is compact, hence, countably compact.

(b) Show that, in spite of its compactness, S is not sequentially
compact.
Solution: We are given that the space S = [0, 1][0,1] viewed as

i∈[0,1] [0, 1]i is equipped with the product topology.
(a) Since [0, 1] is compact and the any product spaceof compact
sets is compact (by Tychonoff theorem), then S = i∈[0,1] [0, 1]i
is compact. Since any compact set is countably compact, then S
is also countably compact.
(b) We are given that S = [0, 1][0,1]is equipped with the product
topology. That is, we view S as i∈[0,1] [0, 1]i . We will construct
a sequence in S which has no converging subsequence. Suppose
each element, x, of [0, 1] is expressed in its binary expansion
form. For each n ∈ N \ {0} we define the one-to-one function
fn : [0, 1] → {0, 1} as
fn (x) = “the nth digit in the binary expansion of x”
For example, f3 (0.10101010 . . .) = 1.1 This allows us to view S

as an uncountable family,
T = {{fn (x) : n = 1, 2, 3,. . .} : x ∈ [0, 1]}
of sequences of 0’s and 1’s.

We define a sequence {xk : k = 1, 2, 3, . . .} in S, such that
N = {{fn (xk ) : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} : xk ∈ S}
where fk (xk ) = 1 for all values of k, and fn (xk ) = 0 if n = k.

That is, the diagonal of N in T is made only of 1’s and all other
entries are 0’s.
We claim that N cannot have a convergent subsequence. To
see why, suppose N has a convergent subsequence, say
M = {{fn (xkn ) : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} : xkn ∈ {xk : k = 1, 2, 3, . . .}}
Then every column of M is constant on a tail end and so must

converge (to zero). If so, what can we say about the point (1, 0)?
This particular point becomes a limit point of a sequence of both
a string of 0’s (above it) and a string of 1’s (on the diagonal). A
contradiction. The source of the contradiction is our supposition
that M converges.
Since M was an arbitrary subsequence of N , N cannot have a
convergent subsequence. So, S cannot be sequentially compact.
The example does not contradict Theorem 17.2. It simply
shows that S is not metrizable.
17.3 Topic: A Compact Characterization for

Metric Spaces
Completeness is a concept which is defined only in the context of

metric spaces.
1
One-to-one if we avoid infinite tail ends of zeroes. For example, 0.1111111 . . . =
1.000000 . . .
A sequence {xn : n ∈ N} in a metric space (M, ρ) is said to be a

Cauchy sequence if, for any ε > 0, there exists N such that, when-
ever n, m > N , ρ(xn , xm ) < ε. If every Cauchy sequence in (M, ρ)
converges to a point in M , then (M, ρ) it is said to be a complete
metric space.
For example the metric space, Rn , is known to be complete. But
we can still associate completeness in a metric space to the topolog-
ical notion of compactness. For example, it is not difficult to show
that all compact metric spaces are complete metric spaces, as shown
below.
Example 2. Verify that a compact metric space is a complete metric
space.
Solution: Suppose (M, ρ) is a compact metric space and S =
{xn : n ∈ N} is a Cauchy sequence in M . Then, for any k ∈ N\{0}
there exists Nk such that, if {xn : n > Nk } ⊆ B1/k (xn ) = ∅. So
for every 1/k, there is some n such that B1/k (xn ) contains a tail-end
{xn , xn + 1, . . .} of S. Then the set of closed subsets,

F = { clM B1/k (xn ) ∩ {xn : n > Nk } : k ∈ N\{0}}
of M satisfies the FIP. Since M is compact, ∩F is non-empty and
so contains a point, say z ∈ M . Since every open neighborhood of
z will intersect every element of F . Then every open neighborhood
of z contains a tail-end of S. It follows that z is the limit point of
the sequence, S. So, the Cauchy sequence, S, converges. Then M is
complete.
Since the metric space, R, is known to be complete and
non-compact, the converse obviously does not hold true. A com-
pact metric space would also have to satisfy some other property.
We introduce the following notion for metric spaces:
Definition 17.6 A metric space, (M, ρ), is said to be totally bounded

if for any ε > 0 there exists a finite subset F of M such that {Bε (x)
: x ∈ F } which covers M .
Theorem 17.7 A metric space is compact if and only if it is both

complete and totally bounded.
Proof. Suppose (M, ρ) is a metric space.
(⇒) We have already shown that compact metric spaces are com-
plete. To show totally bounded, let U = {Bε (x) : x ∈ I} be an open
cover of M . Since M is compact, U has a finite subcover and so M
is totally bounded.
(⇐) Suppose (M, ρ) is both a complete and totally bounded metric

space. We are required to show that M is compact.
To show compactness of M it suffices to show sequential com-
pactness of M . That is, that any sequence must have a convergent
subsequence.
Let κ0 = {xi : i ∈ J0 } be a sequence in M . Since M is complete,
it will suffice to show that κ0 has a subsequence which is Cauchy.
Suppose M1 is an open cover of M made only of balls of radius
1. Since M is totally bounded, M1 has a finite covering, F1 . Let
B1 be an element of F1 which contains infinitely many points, say
κ1 = {xi : i ∈ J1 } ⊆ κ0 , for some countable J1 ⊆ J0 .
Suppose M2 is an open cover of M made only of balls of radius
1/2. Since M is totally bounded, M2 has a finite covering, F2 . Let
B2 be an element of F2 which contains infinitely many points, say
κ2 = {xi : i ∈ J2 } ⊆ κ1 , for some countable J2 ⊆ J1 .
More generally, suppose we are given κn = {xi : i ∈ Jn } ⊆ κn−1
and suppose Mn+1 is an open cover of M made only of balls of
radius 1/(n + 1). Then Mn+1 has a finite subcover, Fn+1 , of M . Let
Bn+1 be an element of Fn+1 which contains infinitely many points
κn+1 = {xi : i ∈ Jn+1 } ⊆ κn of M where Jn+1 ⊆ Jn .
Applying this process, we have a nested family of sequences {κn :
n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} where κn+1 ⊆ κn . Then we can choose xj ∈ κj for
each j ∈ N to form a subsequence κ = {xj : j ∈ N} of κ0 where for
any ε > 0, κ has a tail-end contained in a ball of radius ε. So, κ is
Cauchy.
By hypothesis, M is complete so κ converges to, say, a point
y ∈ M . Then every sequence has a convergent subsequence. That is,
M is sequentially compact. So, M is compact.
17.4 Feebly Compact Spaces
We introduce a new class of spaces called feebly compact spaces. Fee-

bly compact spaces have a few very interesting characterizations.
We will see that they form a proper subclass of the all pseudocom-
pact spaces (those spaces for which C ∗ (S) = C(S)). We will also
see that, for completely regular spaces (Tychonoff spaces), pseudo-
compact spaces are always feebly compact. The definition refers to
“locally finite collections of open subsets”.
Definition 17.8 A locally finite collection, C , of subsets of a topo-

Definition 17.9 Let S be a topological space. A space S for which

there can be no infinite locally finite collection of open sets is called
a feebly compact space.
The formal definition is not particularly enlightening. The fol-

lowing characterizations will provide different perspectives on this
property.
Theorem 17.10 Let S be any topological space. Then the following

are equivalent.
(1) Any locally finite collection of pairwise disjoint open subsets of
S is finite.
(2) The space S is feebly compact.
(3) For any decreasing collection, {Ui : i ∈ N} of open subsets of S,
∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅
(4) Any countable open cover, {Ui : i ∈ N}, of open subsets of S has
a finite subcollection, {Ui : i ∈ F }, such that ∪{Ui : i ∈ F } is
dense in S.

(1 ⇒ 2) Suppose any locally finite collection of pairwise disjoint
open subsets of S is finite. We are required to show that S is feebly
compact.
Suppose S is not feebly compact. Then there exists an infinite
locally finite collection of open sets. Let U = {Ui : i ∈ N} be such a
collection. Choose x0 ∈ U0 . There exists an open neighborhood, V0
of x0 which intersects at most finitely many elements of U . Then
there is a n1 ∈ N that if n ≥ n1 , Un ∩ V0 = ∅.
We proceed inductively. Let {ni : i = 0 . . . m} be a strictly increas-
ing set of natural numbers, and let {Vi : i = 0 . . . m−1} be a sequence
of open sets such that Uni ∩Vi = ∅ but, for i < j implies Vi ∩Unj = ∅.
We can then choose xm ∈ Unm for which we can find an open set Vm
and a natural number nm+1 > nm such that xm ∈ Unm ∩ Vm and
Vm ∩ Uj = ∅ whenever j ≥ nm+1 .
Then {Vi ∩ Uni : i ∈ N} forms and infinite pairwise disjoint locally
finite collection of open sets in S. This is contrary to our hypothesis.
So, S must be feebly compact.
(2 ⇒ 3) Suppose S is feebly compact. Then any locally finite collec-
tion of open subsets of S is finite. Suppose U = {Ui : i ∈ N} is a
collection of non-empty open subsets of S such that Ui+1 ⊆ Ui for
all i.
We are required to show that ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅.
Suppose ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅. Then, if x ∈ S there exists some
kx such that x ∈ clS Vi for all i ≥ kx . Then, if i ≥ kx , S \ clS Vi
is an open neighborhood of x which intersects only finitely many
elements of {Ui : i ∈ N}. So, U is an infinite locally finite collection
of open sets contrary to our hypothesis about the properties of U .
So, ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅.
(3 ⇒ 4) Suppose S is a space which satisfies the property: Whenever
U = {Ui : i ∈ N} is a collection of non-empty open subsets of S such
that Ui+1 ⊆ Ui for all i, then ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅.
Let V = {Vi : i ∈ N} be any countable open cover of S. We are
required to show that V has a subfamily whose union is dense in S.
For each n ∈ N we define
Bn = S \clS [∪{Vi : i ∈ {0, n}}]

Suppose Bn is non-empty for all n ∈ N. Then {Bn : n ∈ N} is a

collection of non-empty open sets such that Bn+1 ⊆ Bn .
By hypothesis, ∩{clS Bn : n ∈ N} = ∅. But we also have,
∩{clS Bn : n ∈ N} ⊆ S \∪{clS Vi : n ∈ N} = ∅
We have a situation where ∩{clS Bn : n ∈ N} is both empty and

non-empty. The fact that ∩{clS Bn : n ∈ N} = ∅ followed from our
assumption that Bn is non-empty for all n ∈ N. So, this assumption
is not valid. There must be some k ∈ N such that Bk = ∅. So
∪{clS Vi : i ∈ {0, k}} = clS ∪ {Vi : i ∈ i ∈ {0, k}} = S. Then
∪{Vi : i ∈ i ∈ {0, k}} is dense in S.
(4 ⇒ 1) Suppose that, if V = {Vi : i ∈ N} be a countable open cover
of S, then V has a subfamily whose union is dense in S. We are
required to show that all locally finite families of pairwise disjoint
open subsets are finite.
We will suppose that an infinite locally finite family, U = {Ui :
i ∈ N}, of pairwise disjoint open subsets exists. For each x ∈ S, let
Mx be an open neighborhood of x and Fx be a finite subset of N
such that Mx ∩ Ui = ∅ for i ∈ Fx . Then {Mx : x ∈ S} forms an open
cover of S.
Let F = {F : F is a finite subset of N}. Note that F is a
countably infinite subset of P(N).2
Let W : F → S be defined as
W (F ) = ∪{Mx : x ∈ S, F = Fx }
See that, for each F , W (F ) is a non-empty open neighborhood of x

in S. Since S ⊆ ∪{W (F ) : F ∈ F },
W = {W (F ) : F ∈ F } is an open cover of S
Since F is countable, then so is the open cover, W .
2
The number of finite subsets of N is countable: For each n ∈ N, let Un =
{A ∈ P(N) : max A ≤ n}, the set of all subsets of {0, 1, 2, . . . , n}. Then, for each
n, |Un | = 2n+1 . The countable union of countable sets is countable (see 19.3 of
Appendix A.2), so ∪n∈N {Un } is countable. If F is a finite subset of N, F ∈ Um
for some m. Then ∪n∈N {Un } contains all finite subsets of N. Then the number of
finite subsets of N is countable.
We will show that no finite subfamily of W can be dense in S.

To see this, suppose {W (Fi ) : Fi ∈ {F1 , F2 , . . . , Fn }} is any finite
subfamily of W .
Choose any Fk ∈ W \{Fi : i ∈ {0, n}}.
We claim that Uk ∩ ∪{W (Fi ) : Fi ∈ {F1 , F2 , . . . , Fn }} = ∅.
For, if there is a y in ∪{W (Fi ) : i ∈ {0, n}} ∩ Uk , then y ∈ My
and Fy = Fk . Since Fk ∈ {Fi : i ∈ {0, n}}, we have a contradiction.
The source of the contradiction is our supposition that ∪{W (Fi ) :
i ∈ {0, n}} ∩ Uk contains an element y.
So, Uk ∩ ∪{W (Fi ) : Fi ∈ {F1 , F2 , . . . , Fn }} = ∅, as claimed.
Then we can conclude that for any finite collection {W (Fi ) : Fi ∈
{F1 , F2 , . . . , Fn }} ⊆ W , S\∪{W (Fi ) : Fi ∈ {F1 , F2 , . . . , Fn }} contains
a non-empty open set. So, no finite subfamily of W can be dense in
S. This contradicts our hypothesis.
The assumption that there is an infinite locally finite family, U =
{Ui : i ∈ N}, of pairwise disjoint open subsets cannot possibly hold
true. So, U must be finite. We are done with (4 ⇒ 1).
The fourth statement in the above characterization theorem

confirms for us that compact spaces are most certainly feebly
compact.
Example 3. Let S = [0, 1] (the closed unit interval). Let B = {Ui :
i ∈ N} denote a partition of S where each Ui is a dense subset of S
(with respect to the usual topology).
We show that such a partition of S exists. Suppose we represent
each element of S in its binary expansion form, 0.x1 x2 x3 · · · xn · · · .
Let the function f : S → R be defined as
f (x) = f (0.x1 x2 x3 · · · xn · · · )
x1 + x2 + x3 + · · · + xm
= lim sup
n→∞ m≥n m

x1 + x2 + x3 + · · · + xm
= lim sup :m>n :n≥0
n→∞ m
Then f is well-defined and the set of fibers, {f ← [{y}] : y ∈ R}, of

f forms a partition of S.
x1 +x2 +x3 +···+xm

If sm = m
, the terms of the sequence,
{sup {sm : m > n}}n∈N
decrease to the value f (x) as n increases.

Let u ∈ R. We claim thatf ← [{u}] is dense in S.
There exists z = 0.z1 z2 z3 · · · zn · · · ∈ f ← (u).
See that,
u = f (z)
z1 + z2 + z3 + · · · + zm
= lim sup
n→∞ m>n m

z1 + z2 + z3 + · · · + zn zn+1 + zn+2 + · · · + zm
= lim sup +
n→∞ m>n m m

zn+1 + zn+2 + · · · + zm
= 0 + lim sup (∗ )3
n→∞ m>n m

zn+1 + zn+2 + · · · + zm
= lim sup
n→∞ m>n m
= f (0.zn+1 zn+2 zn+3 · · · )
Suppose
y = 0.y1 y2 y3 · · · yn (in binary expansion form)
and ε > 0. We claim that there exists q = 0.q1 q2 q3 · · · ∈ f ← (u) such

that |y − q| < ε.
There exists N1 > 0 so that, for n > N1 , for q =
0.y1 y2 · · · yn qn+1 qn+2 · · · ,
|q − y| = |0.y1 y2 · · · yn qn+1 qn+2 · · · − 0.y1 y2 · · · yn yn+1 yn+2 · · · | < ε
We can choose
q = 0.y1 y2 y3 · · · yn zn+1 zn+2 zn+3 · · ·
3
The step (∗ ) is an application of the rule: If {am } converges to a then
lim sup (am + bm ) = a + lim sup (bm )
n→∞ m>n n→∞ m>n
Then f (q) = f (0.zn+1 zn+2 zn+3 · · · ) = f (z) = u. So, q ∈ f ← (u) as

claimed. So, q ∈ Bε (y). Then f ← (u) is dense in S.
So, the closed unit interval S = [0, 1] can be partitioned into a
countably infinite family,
B = {Ui : i ∈ N\{0}}
of dense subsets.
Suppose τ denotes the usual topology on S.
For each i ∈ N\{0}, let
Vi = U2i−1 ∪ U2i ∪ U2i+1
So, {Vi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} covers S.

Define the collection γ of subsets of S as
γ = {U2i−1 : i ∈ N\{0}} ∪ {Vi : i ∈ N\{0}}†2
The subset
S =τ ∪γ
of P(S) generates a topology on S, denote it by σ, for which it is a

subbase. The topology σ is stronger than the usual topology, τ .
Since τ ⊆ σ and (S, τ ) is Hausdorff, then (S, σ) is Hausdorff.
In what follows we show that (a) (S, σ) is not regular and (b)
(S, σ) is not feebly compact.
(a) We will now prove that (S, σ) is not regular.
Proof. Let x ∈ S. Then x ∈ Uj for some j. Suppose j is odd.
Say, for example, that the point x belongs to U3 . The set U3 is a
subbase element and so is an open subset in (S, σ). Then the set U4
is a closed subset of S with respect to σ, disjoint from U3 .
For any τ -basic open neighborhood, (r, s), of x,
(r, s) ∩ U3
is a σ-basic open neighborhood of x.
2
The set γ is, γ = {U1 , U3 , U5 , . . . , } ∪ {U1 ∪ U2 ∪ U3 , U3 ∪ U4 ∪ U5 , U5 ∪ U6 ∪
U7 , . . .}.
Claim: We claim that every σ-open neighborhood of U4 intersects

the σ-basic open neighborhood, (r, s) ∩ U3 , of x. Note that V2 =
U3 ∪ U4 ∪ U5 is a σ-basic open neighborhood of U4 .
Proof of claim: Since U4 is dense in S with respect to τ , then the
τ -basic open neighborhood, (r, s) of x in U3 must intersect U4 . Say
q ∈ (r, s)∩U4 . Let (w, z) be any τ -basic open neighborhood of q. Then
(w, z) ∩ (r, s) is an open interval containing q. Since U3 is dense in S
with respect to τ , (w, z)∩ (r, s) intersects U3 . So, [(w, z)∩ (r, s)] ∩ U3
is non-empty. To prove the claim, it suffices to show that
[(w, z) ∩ V2 ] ∩ [(r, s) ∩ U3 ] = ∅
See that
[(w, z) ∩ (r, s)] ∩ U3 = [(w, z) ∩ (r, s)] ∩ [U3 ∪ U4 ∪ U5 ] ∩ U3

= [(w, z) ∩ V2 ] ∩ [(r, s) ∩ U3 ]
Then [(w, z) ∩ V2 ] ∩ [(r, s) ∩ U3 ] = ∅. So every σ-open neighborhood

of U4 will intersect (r, s) ∩ U3 . This establishes claim A.
So, (S, σ) is not a regular space.
(b) We now claim that (S, σ) is not feebly compact.
Proof. Let
A1 = {U3 ∪ U5 ∪ U7 ∪ · · · }
A2 = {U5 ∪ U7 ∪ U9 ∪ · · · }
A3 = {U7 ∪ U9 ∪ U11 ∪ · · · }
..
.
An = {U2n+1 ∪ U2n+3 ∪ U2n+5 ∪ · · · }
..
.
Then, for {An : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .},
An+1 ⊆ An and clS An+1 ⊆ clS An

Also,
clS A2 ⊆ S \(U1 ∪ U2 ∪ U3 ) = S \V1

clS A3 ⊆ S \(U1 ∪ U2 ∪ U3 ∪ U4 ∪ U5 ) = S \(V1 ∪ V2 )
..
.
clS An ⊆ S \(V1 ∪ V2 ∪ · · · ∪ Vn−1 )
..
.
Then
∩{cls An : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} ⊆ ∩{S \(V1 ∪ V2 ∪ · · · ∪ Vn−1 ) : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}

= S \∪{Vn : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
= S \S
=∅
By Theorem 17.10, (S, σ) is not feebly compact.
17.4.1 On pseudocompact and feebly compactness

Feebly compact and countably compact spaces share a common prop-
erty. It is that neither topological space admits unbounded continu-
ous real-valued function. The next theorem confirms that. . .
every feebly compact space is pseudocompact.
But there are spaces which are pseudocompact but not feebly com-
pact. (Such a space would have to be non-“completely regular”.)
Theorem 17.11 Let S be a feebly compact topological space. Then

every continuous real-valued function on S is bounded. (So every
feebly compact space is a pseudocompact space.)
Proof. We are given that S is a feebly compact topological space.
We are required to show that any continuous real-valued function on
S is bounded. Suppose f ∈ C(S)\C ∗ (S). Note that we can assume,
without loss of generality, that f ≥ 0. We can then construct in f [S]
a sequence, {xn : n ∈ N}, of real numbers where xn+1 ≥ xn + 1. See

that
U = {f ← [(xn − 13 , xn + 13 )] : n ∈ N}
is an infinite locally finite collection of open subsets of S. So, S cannot

be feebly compact, a contradiction of our hypothesis.
17.5 Pseudocompact Spaces
We know that the continuous image of a compact space is always

compact. This means that continuous real-valued functions on a com-
pact space are always bounded. However, a space S in which the
property “all real-valued continuous functions are bounded on S”
need not be compact. A countably compact space is an example. A
space which satisfies this property is said to be pseudocompact. We
formally define this concept.
Definition 17.12 Let S be a topological space. If every continuous

real-valued function on S is bounded in R then S is pseudocompact.
Using the newly introduced terminology above, we can say that

all compact spaces are pseudocompact spaces. The set of all real
numbers, R, is, of course, not pseudocompact (as witnessed by f (x) =
x3 on R). We have seen in Theorem 15.9, that
every continuous real-valued function on a countably com-

pact space, S, is bounded on S.
So countably compact spaces are pseudocompact.

What about sequentially compact spaces? Consider a continuous
real-valued function, f : S → R, on a sequentially compact space
S. By Theorem 17.4, S must also be countably compact. We have
seen in Theorem 15.9 that f must be bounded on S. So, sequentially
compact spaces are pseudocompact.
We have already encountered an example of a space which is pseu-

docompact but not compact. We saw that the ordinal space,
S = [0, ω1 )
is countably compact and not compact. So S = [0, ω1 ) is pseudocom-
pact but not compact.
The next theorem illustrates how closely related the feebly com-
pact and pseudocompact properties are. We see that, in the partic-
ular case where a space is completely regular, the pseudocompact
property and the feebly compact property simply different ways of
representing the same topological property.
Various characterizations of the pseudocompact property will be

discussed in chapters to come. But we can present immediately char-
acterizations of the pseudocompact property for completely regular
spaces.
The following theorem also confirms that if we seek
a pseudocompact space which is not feebly compact,
we only need investigate those spaces which are not completely reg-
ular.
So, we know that pseudocompact spaces are not feebly compact.
But, under the right conditions, they are equivalent.
Theorem 17.13 Let S be a completely regular space. Then the fol-

lowing are equivalent.
(1) The space S is pseudocompact.
(2) If {Ui : i ∈ N} is a nested collection of non-empty open sets in
S (i.e., Ui+1 ⊂ Ui for all i ∈ N) then
∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅
(3) The space S is feebly compact.
Proof. We are given that S is a completely regular space.
(1 ⇒ 2) Suppose S is pseudocompact. Let {Ui : i ∈ N} be a collection
of non-empty open subsets in S such that U0 ⊃ U1 ⊃ U2 ⊃ · · · . We
are required to show that ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅.
Suppose ∩{clS Un : n ∈ N} = ∅.
For each n, choose a point xn ∈ Un to form a closed infinite
sequence {xn : n ∈ N}. For each xn we can inductively choose a
closed neighborhood, Vn , of xn such that Vn ⊆ Un and Vm ∩ Vn = ∅
whenever m = n.
Since S is completely regular, there is, for each n, a continuous
function gn : S → [0, 1] such that gn (xn ) = 1 and gn [S \Vn ] = {0}.
Let fn = ngn . Then fn maps S into [0, n]. We define the function,
h(x) = fn (x)
n∈N
on S.
We investigate properties of this function carefully. First see that
h is an unbounded function.
Also see that, for any u ∈ S, then fn (u) = 0 for no more than
one n. Then h(u) = fm (u), for some m.
We now proceed to show that h is a continuous function. Let
u ∈ S. We claim that u has an open neighborhood Wu which inter-
sects at most a single Vn .
Proof of claim: Suppose every open neighborhood in h[S] of u
intersects infinitely many Vn ’s. Then u would belong to ∩{clS Un :
n ∈ N} which has been hypothesized to be empty. So u has an
open neighborhood, say W , which intersects finitely many Vn ’s, say
{Vn1 , Vn2 , . . . , Vnk }. Since each Vni is closed, u has an open neighbor-
hood Wu which intersects only Vn1 , as claimed.
Then, for some m, h agrees with fm on a neighborhood Wu of u.
Let h(y) ∈ h[S] and U be an open neighborhood of h(y) in R.
Then h(y) = fm (y) for precisely one m ∈ N. We have shown that
h = fm on some open neighborhood, Wy , of y in S. Since fm is
continuous on Wy , then there exists an open neighborhood B of
y such that h(x) = fm (x) on B and fm [B] ⊆ U So h[B] ⊆ U .
We conclude that h is continuous at each point y ∈ S. Then h is
continuous on S, as desired.
Since h is unbounded, we have a contradiction. So ∩{clS Ui : i ∈
N} = ∅.
(2 ⇒ 3) Follows from 2 ⇔ 3 of Theorem 17.10.
(3 ⇒ 1) This follows from Theorem 17.11. This does not require
complete regularity.
Concept Review
1. Define a sequentially compact space.

2. If S is a second countable or metrizable topological spaces which
satisfies the sequentially compact property, name two other prop-
erties which are equivalent properties in such spaces.
3. Describe a topological space in which sequentially compact sub-
sets are precisely the closed and bounded ones.
4. Is it true that, in all metric spaces, the compact subsets are
always closed and bounded?
5. Is it true that, in all metric spaces, the the closed and bounded
subsets are always compact?
6. Given a sequentially compact property and the countably com-
pact property, one always implies the other. Which one? Provide
a counter example for the one that doesn’t.
7. Define a “pseudocompact space”.
8. Is a sequentially compact space pseudocompact?
9. Is a countably compact space necessarily pseudocompact?
10. Are there any spaces which are pseudocompact and not compact?
If so, give an example.
11. Are there any spaces which are compact and not pseudocompact?
If so, give an example.
Exercises
1. Show that, if F is a non-empty closed subset of a sequentially

compact space, then F is sequentially compact.
2. Let f : S → T denote a function mapping S into a Hausdorff
space T . Show that, if f is continuous on S and S is a sequentially
compact space, then f [S] is sequentially compact.
3. Suppose f : S → R is a continuous function mapping the sequen-
tially compact space into R, equipped with the usual topology.
Can the function f be “onto” R?
Chapter 18
Locally Compact Spaces
Abstract
We will discuss another way of weakening the compact property without
sacrificing many of the properties we find desirable in a topological space.
It is called the “locally compact” property. Rather than have the compact
property assigned to the whole space, we assign it on the elements of a
certain neighborhood base of each point. After defining this property
formally we examine what are its main characteristics. Even though
local compactness is usually seen combined with the Hausdorff property
our formal definition will be in its most general form. We have seen that
all Hausdorff compact spaces are normal. But locally compact Hausdorff
spaces will be proven to be only completely regular. All metrizable spaces
will also be seen to be locally compact and Hausdorff. These concepts
will set the stage for the future study of “compactifications of locally
compact Hausdorff spaces”.
18.1 The Locally Compact Property
We now present a formal definition of the locally compact property.

We define this property for arbitrary topological spaces. We alert
the reader to the fact that many authors define local compactness
for Hausdorff spaces only, probably because it simplifies its definition,
and, more often then not, it is mostly referred to in the context of
Hausdorff spaces. We prefer to define it in its most general form.
407
Definition 18.1 Let S be a topological space. We say that S is

locally compact if, for every point, x, in S there is a compact set, K,
such that x ∈ intS K ⊆ K.
When a particular topological property is applied only to some

unspecified neighborhood of each point of a space rather than on the
whole space, we traditionally precede the name of this property with
the adverb “locally”. In this particular case, we are referring to a
compact neighborhood.
18.2 A Characterization of Local Compactness
Note that, in the above definition, in the particular case where the
space S is not Hausdorff, it may occur that the compact neighbor-
hood is not a closed subset of S. The following characterization refer-
ring specifically to locally compact spaces which are also Hausdorff
allows us to say, “there is an open set U with compact closure such
that x ∈ U ⊆ clS U ”.
Theorem 18.2 Let S be a Hausdorff topological space. The space,

S, is locally compact if and only if each point, x, in S has an open
neighborhood base, Bx = {Bi : i ∈ I}, such that clS Bi is compact.

(⇐) If B is an open neighborhood of a point, x in S, such that clS B
is compact then, by definition, x has a compact neighborhood. So, S
is locally compact.
(⇒) We are given that S is locally compact and Hausdorff. Let p ∈
S and U be an open neighborhood of p and K be any compact
neighborhood of p. Then p ∈ (intS K) ∩ U ⊆ K. Since K is compact
and S is Hausdorff, then, by Theorem 14.3(b) (iii), K is a regular
subspace. This means that there exists an open set V such that
p ∈ V ⊆ clK V ⊆ (intS K) ∩ U ⊆ K
Locally Compact Spaces 409
Since clK V is closed in the compact set K, it must be compact. So,

p ∈ intS clK V ⊆ clK V ⊆ U . We can conclude that each point of S has
an open neighborhood base whose elements have a compact closure.
In the proof of the above theorem, note why the Hausdorff prop-
erty on S is required.
The above characterization of local compactness on Hausdorff
spaces allows us to quickly see that every compact Hausdorff space,
S, is locally compact: Since compact Hausdorff spaces are regular,
we can construct a compact neighborhood of a point, p, inside any
open neighborhood of p.
Example 1. Consider the space R with its usual topology. Show
that R is locally compact.
Solution: Let Bp = {(a, b) : a < p < b} be an open neighborhood
base for the point p. For each (a, b) ∈ Bp , there exists ε > 0, such
that,
ε ε ε ε
p ∈ p− , p+ ⊆ p− , p+ ⊆ (p − ε, p + ε) ⊆ (a, b)
3 3 3 3
Since the closed interval in this chain of containments is the closure
of the first interval and is compact, then R, with the usual topology,
is locally compact.
The space R2 is locally compact. Note that R2 is also locally compact
since, for (a, b) ∈ R2 , [a + ε, a − ε] × [b + ε, b − ε] is compact and
(a, b) ∈ intR2 [a + ε, a − ε] × [b + ε, b − ε]
= (a + ε, a − ε) × (b + ε, b − ε)
Example 2. Consider the space, Z, of all integers with the discrete

topology. Show that Z is locally compact.
Solution: If n ∈ Z, and U is an open set containing n, clZ {n} is a
compact neighborhood of n, so,
n ∈ {n} = intZ {n} = clZ {n} = {n} ⊆ U
Then Z, with the discrete topology, is locally compact. In fact, every

discrete space is locally compact.
18.3 Some Basic Properties of Local Compactness
We now examine some invariance properties. A subset of a locally

compact space does not always inherit the locally compact property
from its superset, as we shall soon see. The locally compact prop-
erty is carried over from the domain of a continuous function to its
range provided the function is an open mapping. For a product space,
the locally compact property is carried over from the factors to the
product, provided all factors are locally compact and at most finitely
many of those factors are not compact. We now immediately prove
these facts.
Theorem 18.3 Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff topological

space.
(a) If F is a closed subspace of S, then F is locally compact. So
a closed subspace inherits the locally compact property from its
Hausdorff superset.
(b) If U is an open subspace of S, then U is locally compact. So
an open subspace inherits the locally compact property from its
Hausdorff superset.
(c) In any Hausdorff topological space, the intersection of two locally
compact subspaces of S is locally compact. In particular, if S is
locally compact and Hausdorff, any subset which is the intersec-
tion of an open set and a closed one is a locally compact subspace.
(d) Let S be any Hausdorff topological space which contains a non-
empty subspace, W . If W is locally compact, then W is the inter-
section of an open subset with a closed subset of S.
(a) We are given that F is a closed subset of the locally compact
Hausdorff space S. Let x ∈ F and V be an open neighborhood
of x in S. Since S is locally compact and Hausdorff, there exist
an open neighborhood U of x such that x ∈ U ⊆ clS U ⊆ V .
Then x ∈ U ∩F ⊆ clS U ∩F ⊆ V ∩F , where clS U ∩F is a closed
subset of the compact set clS U , hence is a compact neighborhood
of x in F . So, F is locally compact.
(b) Let V be an open subset of the locally compact Hausdorff space
S and U be an open neighborhood of x ∈ V . Then U ∩ V is
an open neighborhood of x in S. Since S is locally compact

and Hausdorff, there exist an open neighborhood, W , such that
x ∈ W ⊆ clS W ⊆ U ∩ V , where clS W is compact in V. So, V is
locally compact, as required.
(c) We are given that S is a Hausdorff space containing the two
locally compact subspaces U and V with non-empty intersection.
Since S is Hausdorff, so are U , V, and U ∩ V . Let x ∈ U ∩ V and
Z be an open subset of S such that x ∈ Z. Then there exists an
open subset, A, in U such that
x ∈ A ⊆ clU A ⊆ Z ∩ U ⊆ U
and an open subset, B, in V such that
x ∈ B ⊆ clV B ⊆ Z ∩ V ⊆ V
where clU A and clV B are compact; because of the Hausdorff

property, they are closed. Then U ∩ V is locally compact, as
required.
Combining parts a, b, and c the second part of the statement
quickly follows.
(d) Suppose W is a subset of a Hausdorff topological space. Suppose
W is locally compact. We are required to show that W is the
intersection of an open set and a closed set in S. If we can show
that W is open in S then W = W ∩ clS W , an intersection of an
open and closed subset of S, and we will be done. To show W
is open we will prove that every point in W belongs to an open
subset of S, contained in W .
Let x ∈ W . Since W is locally compact and Hausdorff, S
contains an open neighborhood, A, of x such that
x ∈ A ∩ W ⊆ clW (A ∩ W ) = clS (A ∩ W ) ∩ W
where clW (A ∩ W ) is a closed and compact set in W and so

clS (A ∩ W ) ∩ W is also closed and compact in S. Since A ∩ W is
contained in the closed set, clS (A ∩ W ) ∩ W , it must follow that
clS (A ∩ W ) ⊆ clS (A ∩ W ) ∩ W , and so, clS (A ∩ W ) ⊆ W . So, x ∈
intS (clS (A ∩ W )) ⊆ W . Then each point of W is contained in an
open neighborhood of S and W is open. So, W = W ∩ clS W , as
required.
Corollary 18.4 Let S be a compact Hausdorff topological space and

D be a dense subset of S. Then the subset, D, of S is locally compact
if and only if D is an open subset of S.
Proof. We are given that S is a compact Hausdorff topological
space and D is a dense subset of S.
(⇒) Suppose the dense subset, D, is a locally compact subspace of S.
Then, by Corollary 18.4, D is an open subset of clS D = S. So, D is
open in S.
(⇐) Suppose D is a an open dense subset of the compact space, S.
Since S is compact, it is locally compact. As shown in Theorem 18.3,
open subsets of locally compact sets are locally compact. So, D is
locally compact. We are done.
Example 3. Determine whether the set, Q, of all rationals is locally

compact or not.
Solution: Suppose Q is locally compact. We know that Q is Haus-
dorff. Suppose x, y ∈ Q where x < y. Then (x, y)∩Q is open in Q. Let
a ∈ Q where x < a < y. Then there exists a compact neighborhood
F of a such that
a ∈ (c, d) ∩ Q ⊆ F ⊆ (x, y) ∩ Q
Let r be an irrational such that c < r < d. Then there is a sequence

in (c, d) ∩ Q which converges to r ∈ F . Then F is not closed in Q
and so cannot be compact. Then Q cannot be locally compact.
We know that the compact property is carried over from the
domain to the codomain of a continuous function. A similar result
holds for the locally compact property but only if the function is both
continuous and open.
Theorem 18.5 Let S be a locally compact topological space and

suppose T is any topological space. If f : S → T is a continuous open
function mapping S into T then f [S] is locally compact.
Proof. We are given that S is a locally compact topological space
and f : S → T is a continuous open function.
We are required to show that f [S] is locally compact. Let u ∈ f [S]

and U be any open neighborhood of u. Suppose v ∈ f ← [{u}] ⊆
f ← [U ]. Then, by hypothesis, v has a compact neighborhood, say K,
such that v ∈ intS K ⊆ K ⊆ f ← [U ]. Since f is open and continuous
and
u = f (v) ∈ f [intS K] ⊆ f [K] ⊆ f [f ← [U ]] = U
where f [intS K] is open and f [K] is compact, then every point in

f [S] has a compact neighborhood. So, f [S] is locally compact.
Note that the Hausdorff property is not required in the above

statement.
Example 4. Show that the closed continuous image of a locally
compact space need not be locally compact.
Solution: Recall that in the usual topology, R2 is locally compact.
Let A = {(x, 0) : x ∈ R}. Let D denote the decomposition of R2 ,
D = {A} ∪ { {(x, y)} : y = 0 }
Given the quotient map, q : R2 → D, D is equipped with the quotient

topology induced by q.
Claim 1: We claim that function q is a closed map. Suppose B is a
closed subset of R2 . Case 1: Suppose B ∩ A = ∅. Then q ← [q[B]] = B.
So, q ← [D \ q[B]] = R2 \ q ← [q[B]] = R2 \B which is open in R2 . Thus,
D \q[B] is open in D with respect to the quotient topology. So, q[B]
is closed. Case 2: Suppose B ∩ A = ∅. Then q ← [q[B]] = A ∪ B. So,
q ← [D \q[B]] = R2 \q ← [q[B]] = R2 \(A ∪ B)
an open subset of R2 . Then D \q ← [B] is open in D (by definition of

quotient topology); so q[B] is closed. Claim 1 is proved.
Claim 2: We claim that D is not locally compact. Suppose S
is an open neighborhood of A. It suffices to show that clD S
is not compact. Then V = q ← [S ] is an open subset of R2 .
q[clR2 V ] = q[clR2 q ← [S ]]
= clD (q[q ← [S ]])
= clD S
Consider the open neighborhood, V ∪ {(x, y) ∈ R2 : −n < x < n}\A,

of A in R2 .
Then q V ∪ {(x, y) ∈ R2 : −n < x < n}\A is an open neighbor-
hood of A in D, for each n ∈ N.
Then the collection

q V ∪ {(x, y) ∈ R2 : −n < x < n}\A : n ∈ N
forms an open cover of clD S , with no finite subcover. So clD S , is

not compact. We conclude that D is not locally compact.
In the following statement, we show that finite products of locally
compact spaces are locally compact, but one has to be cautious when
considering infinite products of locally compact spaces.

and S = i∈I Si be a product space. Then S is locally compact if and
only if every factor, Si , is locally compact and at most, finitely many
of the factors are not compact.
Proof. We are given that {Si : i ∈ I} is a family of topological
spaces and S = i∈I Si is a product space.
(⇒) Suppose S = i∈I Si is locally compact. Since every projection
map is open (see page 149), then, by Theorem 18.5, every factor is
locally compact. We now claim that, at most, finitely many of the
factors are not compact spaces.
If u ∈ S, then, since S is locally compact, there exists a compact
set K in S, such that u ∈ intS K ⊆ K. Then there exists a finite
subset, F , of I such that
u ∈ U = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F } ⊆ intS K
where Ui is an open subset of Si . We claim that, if i ∈ F then Si is

compact. Consider i ∈ F : Then πi [U ] = Si ⊆ πi [K] (since U ⊆ K).
So Si = πi [K]. Since πi is continuous and K is compact, then Si is

compact, for all i ∈ F , as claimed. Done.
(⇐) Suppose every factor, Si , is locally compact and at most finitely
many are not compact. We are required to show that the product
space, S, is locally compact.
Let xi i∈I ∈ S = i∈I Si and U = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F } be a basic
open neighborhood of xi i∈I . Suppose Fc is the largest subset of I,
such that, if i ∈ Fc , Si is not compact. Then, by hypothesis, Fc is
finite. Let F1 = F ∪ Fc . Then F1 is finite. Let U1 = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈
F1 } ⊆ U .
We claim that xi i∈I has a compact neighborhood, K, which is
contained in U1 .
Given that, for each i ∈ F1 , Si is locally compact, there must be
a compact set, Ki , such that xi ∈ intSi Ki ⊆ Ki ⊆ Ui .
Then
xi i∈I ∈ ∩{πi← [intS Ki ] : i ∈ F1 } ⊆ ∩{πi← [Ki ] : i ∈ F1 } = K ⊆ U1
where K is a neighborhood of xi i∈I . See that, for each i ∈ F1 , Xi is

a compact factor of K, and, for each i ∈ F , Ki , is a compact factor
of K. So, K is a compact neighborhood of xi i∈I , as claimed. So, S
is locally compact.
18.4 More on the Hausdorff Locally Compact Property
In the Embedding theorem part III, we arrived at the conclusion

that “any completely regular space can be densely embedded in a
Hausdorff compact space”. We would like to state a similar result
involving Hausdorff locally compact spaces. That is, we will show
that “any locally compact Hausdorff space, S, can be embedded in
a Hausdorff compact space”.
But in this particular context the compact space in question is
not the product of closed intervals of R, as one might expect. This
compact space, denoted by, Sω , is constructed by adding a single
point to S and then defining an appropriate topology on it so that
it is compact.
Theorem 18.7 Let (S, τ ) be a Hausdorff topological space and let

ω be a point which does not belong to S. The set ωS is defined as
ωS = S ∪ {ω}
The topology, τω , on ωS is defined as follows: Firstly, τ ⊆ τω .

Secondly, if ω ∈ U ⊆ ωS and ωS \ U is a compact subset of S,
then U ∈ τω .
(a) Then the family of sets, τω , thus defined, is a valid topology
on ωS.
(b) The topological space, (ωS, τω ), is a compact space.
(c) The compact space, (ωS, τω ), densely contains a homeomorphic
copy of S.
(d) The compact space, (ωS, τω ), is Hausdorff if and only if S is
locally compact.
Proof. We are given that (S, τ ) is a Hausdorff topological space
and that ω is a point which does not belong to S. Also, ωS = S ∪{ω}.
(a) The proof is routine and so is left as an exercise.
(b) We are given (ωS, τω ). Let U = {Ui : i ∈ I} be an open cover of
ωS.
By hypothesis, there exists, Uk , such that ω ∈ Uk and S\Uk is
compact. Then S \Uk has a finite subcover, {Ui : i ∈ F }. Then
{Ui : i ∈ F } ∪ {Uk } is a finite subcover of ωS and so ωS is
compact.
(c) The identity map, i : S → S ∪ {ω}, is easily seen to be a contin-
uous one-to-one open map onto i[S] = S.
(d) We are given that ωS is compact.
(⇒) Suppose ωS is Hausdorff. Then S is a Hausdorff subspace
(since the Hausdorff property is hereditary). Also, for any x ∈ S,
there exists disjoint open neighborhoods U and V such that ω ∈
U and x ∈ V . Then S is open and dense in ωS. By Corollary
18.4, S is locally compact.
(⇐) We are given that S is a Hausdorff locally compact dense
subspace of the compact space, ωS. We are required to show
that ωS is Hausdorff. It follows immediately that distinct pairs
of points in S are contained in disjoint open neighborhoods of ωS.
Suppose p ∈ S. Since S is Hausdorff and locally compact, there

exists an open neighborhood U of p such that p ∈ U ⊆ clS U ⊆
S, where clS U is a compact neighborhood of p. By hypothesis,
S\clS U is an open neighborhood of ω disjoint from U . So, ωS is
Hausdorff, as required.
We now show that the local compactness property on a space S,

when combined with the Hausdorff property satisfies the completely
regular separation property.
Theorem 18.8 A locally compact Hausdorff space is completely

regular.
Proof. We are given that S is a Hausdorff locally compact topolog-

ical space. Then S is embedded in the compact Hausdorff topological
space ωS = S ∪ {ω}. Then by Theorem 14.3, ωS is normal and so
is completely regular. The completely regular property is hereditary,
so S is completely regular.
From the above result we again argue that if S is locally compact

and Hausdorff it can be densely embedded in at least two essentially
different Hausdorff compact spaces.
We now know that S is embedded in ωS = S ∪ {ω}; secondly,
from the Embedding theorem 14.7, we know that. . .
a locally compact Hausdorff space, S, can be densely embed-

ded in a compact Hausdorff subspace of a cube.
18.5 On Spaces Which are σ-Compact
Some spaces can be described as being the union of a countably

infinite number of compact sets. Such spaces need not be compact
but still have properties that are worth discussing. In particular, we
will see that a locally compact Hausdorff space which is a countable
union of compact sets is a Lindelöf Hausdorff space.
Definition 18.9 Let S be a topological space. We say that S is

σ-compact if S is the union of countably many compact sets.
Theorem 18.10 Suppose S is a locally compact Hausdorff space.

Then S is σ-compact if and only if S is Lindelöf.
Proof. We are given that S is a locally compact Hausdorff topo-
logical space.
(⇐) Suppose S is Lindelöf. We are required to show that S is
σ-compact. Since S is locally compact and Hausdorff, we can con-
struct an open covering of
B = {Ux : x ∈ S}
of sets with compact closures,
B ∗ = {clS Ux : x ∈ S}
Let {Uxi : i ∈ N} be a countable subcover of B. Then
S = ∪{Uxi : i ∈ N} ⊆ ∪{clS Uxi : i ∈ N}
So, S is σ-compact, as required.

(⇒) Suppose S is σ-compact. We are required to show that S is
Lindelöf.
Then S = ∪{Ci : i ∈ N, Ci is compact}, a countable union of
compact sets.
Consider the compact subset, C0 .
Claim: That there is an open neighborhood, U0 , with compact clo-
sure, clS U0 , such that C0 ⊆ U0 ⊆ clS U0 .
Proof of claim: Since S is locally compact and Hausdorff and C0 is
compact, any open cover, U , of C0 has a finite cover {Vi : i = 1. . .k},
such that each clS Vi is compact for i = 1 to k. Let U0 = ∪{Vi : i =
1. . .k}. Then
C0 ⊆ U0 ⊆ clS U0 = ∪{clS Vi : i = 1. . .k}
is compact in S, as claimed.
We can inductively construct {Ui : i ∈ N}, such that each closure,

clS Ui , is compact where
C0 ⊆ U0 ⊆ clS U0
C1 ∪ clS U0 ⊆ U1 ⊆ clS U1
C2 ∪ clS U1 ⊆ U2 ⊆ clS U2
.. ..
. .
Ci ∪ clS Ui−1 ⊆ Ui ⊆ clS Ui
.. ..
. .
Set
Ki = clS Ui ⊆ Ui+1 ⊆ clS Ui+1 = Ki+1
we obtain a family of compact sets, {Ki : i ∈ N} where Ki−1 ⊆ Ki

and S = ∪{Ki : i ∈ N}.
Suppose V = {Vj : j ∈ J} is an open cover of S. To show Lindelöf
it suffices to show that V has a countable subcover.
Since each Ki is compact, there exist a finite subset, Fi ⊆ J such
that
Ki ⊆ ∪{Vjk : k ∈ Fi }
Then V ∗ = {Vjk : k ∈ Fi , i ∈ N} is a countable subfamily of V .

Since S = ∪i,k {Vjk : k ∈ Fi , i ∈ N}, V ∗ is a countable subcover
of S. So, S is Lindelöf, as required.
Example 5. Verify if the Moore plan (Niemytzki’s plane), Γ, is

locally compact or not.
Solution: The Moore plane, Γ, has {(x, y) ∈ R2 : y ≥ 0} as underly-
ing set. Basic neighborhoods of points in R2 , and, if z = (x, 0), then
{z} ∪ A is a basic neighborhood of z in R2 where A is an open disc
tangent to the x-axis at z.
We claim that the Moore plane is not locally compact. If it was,

then (0, 0) would have a compact basic open neighborhood with com-
pact closure. If
V = {(0, 0)} ∪ {(x, y) : x2 + (y − δ2 ) < δ2 }
is such a basic neighborhood then
clΓ V = {(x, y) : x2 + (y − δ2 ) ≤ δ2 }
We claim that clΓ V is not compact. To see this consider the open
cover
{V } ∪ { {(x, y) ∈ Γ : y > 1/n} : n ∈ N, n > 0 }
of clΓ V . It has no finite subcollection which covers clΓ V .

Example 6. Is the set R line equipped with the lower limit topology,
(R, τS ), locally compact?
Solution: The answer is no. Recall that an open base for τS , is
B = {[a, b) : a < b}. Let r ∈ R. Suppose there is a δ > 0, such that
clR [r, r + δ) is a compact neighborhood of r. See that
R\[r, r + δ) = ∪∞
r=1 [r − n, r) ∪ [r + δ, r + δ + n]
is open, so clR [r, r + δ) = [r, r + δ). But [r, r + δ) is not compact since
{[r, r + δ − 1/n) : n ∈ N, n > 0}
is an open cover of [r, r + δ) with no finite subcover.
Concept Review
1. Define the locally compact property on a topological space.

2. State a characterization of Hausdorff locally compact spaces.
3. If S is locally compact and Hausdorff what kind of subsets are
guaranteed to inherit the locally compact property?
4. If T is a locally compact subspace of the Hausdorff space, S,

what property does T satisfy?
5. If D is a dense subset of a compact Hausdorff space, S, what can
we say about D?
6. Provide an easy example of a non-locally compact space.
7. Are continuous images of locally compact spaces necessarily
locally compact? Explain.
8. If S is a product space which is locally compact. What can say
about its factors?
9. What conditions must be satisfied if we want the locally compact
factors to be carried over to their product.
10. Describe the Hausdorff compact space, ωS, which contains
a dense homeomorphic copy of a locally compact Hausdorff
space, S.
11. If S is a Hausdorff locally compact space, what other separation
axiom does it satisfy?
12. If S is a Hausdorff locally compact space, is there another com-
pact space, other than ωS, which contains a dense copy of S?
13. Define a σ-compact space.
14. If S is locally compact and Hausdorff. In such a case provide a
characterization of the σ-compact property.
Exercises
1. Suppose f : S → T is a continuous open function mapping a

locally compact space, S, onto a space T . Show that any compact
subspace, K, of T is the image under f of some compact subspace,
F , of S.
2. Show that the real numbers equipped with the upper limit topol-
ogy (Sorgenfrey line) is not locally compact.
3. A perfect function, f : S → T , is a continuous closed and onto
function which pulls back each point in T to a compact set in
S. Suppose S is Hausdorff and T is locally compact. Show that
f : S → T is a perfect function if and only if f pulls back compact
sets in T to compact sets in S.
4. Let S be a locally compact regular space and K be a closed and

compact subset of S. Suppose K is a subset of an open set, U ,
in S. Show that there is some compact set V , such that F ⊆
intS V ⊆ V ⊆ U .
5. Show that the Moore plane is not locally compact.
6. Suppose S is a Hausdorff space which contains a dense subset, D.
Suppose x ∈ D. Show that, if V is compact neighborhood of x in
D, then V is a neighborhood of x in S.
Chapter 19
Paracompact Topological Spaces
Abstract
We will develop in this section some familiarity with the paracompact
property. After giving a formal definition, we provide a few examples
and discuss its invariance properties. Finally we show that all metrizable
spaces are paracompact.
19.1 Paracompact Topological Spaces
We now introduce a last important class of topological spaces closely

related to the family of compact spaces. Its importance was discov-
ered in the role it played in characterizations of metrizable spaces. We
begin by introducing some new terminology. Note that some of what
we present here may appear somewhat familiar since we have already
(informally) introduced the concept of a “locally finite” family of sets
before (on page 136). For convenience we formally reintroduce the
concept here along with associated terms.
Definition 19.1 Let S be a topological space.

(a) Let U = {Ui : i ∈ I} be a family of subsets of S. We say
that U is a locally finite family of sets if each point in S has a
neighborhood which intersects only finitely elements of U .1
1
The word “neighborhood-finite” is sometimes used instead of “locally finite”.
423
(b) We say that V = {Vj : j ∈ J} is a refinement of, (or refines) the

family, U = {Ui : i ∈ I}, if every element of V is contained in
some element of U . If the elements of V are open, then we will
more specifically say that V is an open refinement of U .
(c) Let U be a family of subsets of the topological space S. We say
that U has a locally finite open refinement if there is a family,
V , of open subsets in S which both refines U and satisfies the
locally finite property in S.
Whether a family of sets is locally finite or not in the space, S,

depends on the topology of S (since the definition refers to neigh-
borhoods of S). Whether V refines U or not refers to a set-
theoretic property which characterizes a particular relationship
between between the elements of V and those of U . Open refine-
ment adds a particular topological characteristic to the elements of
the refinement.
Note that if, for any open cover U of a space S, there is a finite
subfamily, F , of U which covers the space S, then by definition, F
refines U and, again by definition, F is locally finite in S.
We can then say that. . .
if S is compact and U is an open cover then U has a
locally finite open refinement V .
In the particular case described above, V simply turns out to be a

finite subfamily of U . We now define the main subject of this section.
Definition 19.2 Let S be a topological space. The space S is said

to be a paracompact space if, for any open cover U of S, there exists
a locally finite open cover, V , of S which refines U .2
We alert the reader to the fact that, in some books, the Hausdorff
property is incorporated into the formal definition of the paracom-
pact property, in the sense that, for these authors, all paracompact
2
Note that V satisfies four conditions: (1) V ’s elements must be open sets, (2)
V must refine U , (3) V must be locally finite, (4) V covers S.
Paracompact Topological Spaces 425
spaces are hypothesized to be Hausdorff. In this book, a paracompact

space is Hausdorff only when we explicitly state it as such.
Theorem 19.3 Any compact space is a paracompact space.

Proof. This statement has been proven in the paragraph immedi-
ately preceding the definition above.
Since all compact spaces are paracompact, we then know of a large

family of topological spaces which are paracompact. We consider the
following example of a non-compact paracompact space.
Example 1. Let S be an infinite space equipped with the discrete
topology. Since V = {{x} : x ∈ S} is an open cover with no sub-
cover, the space, S, is not compact. Show that S is, nevertheless,
paracompact.
Solution: Let U = {Ui : i ∈ I} be an arbitrary open cover of S. To
show that S is paracompact it suffices to show that U has a locally
finite open refinement. From the definition, the family V = {{x} :
x ∈ S} is an open refinement of U (since every one of its elements,
{x}, is a subset of some set, Ui , in U ). It then suffices to show that
V is a locally finite family of sets. Let x ∈ S. Consider the open
neighborhood, B = {x}, of x. The neighborhood B intersects only
one element, {x} ∈ V . So, V is a locally finite family of sets in S.
So, V is a locally finite open refinement of U . We can conclude
that S is paracompact.
Example 2. Consider the space S = R equipped with the usual
topology. We know that this metrizable space is unbounded and so
is not compact. Show that S is paracompact.
Solution: Suppose we have an open cover, U = {Ui : i ∈ I}, of S.
We are required to construct an open refinement of U which is locally
finite.
Firstly, we will first construct an open refinement, V , of U which
covers S.
For each n ∈ N\{0}, let (−n, n) denote an open interval centered
at 0 of radius n. Since, for each n, [−n, n] is closed and bounded, it is
a compact subset of S. So, for each n, [−n, n] has a finite open cover,
say, Un = {Ui : i ∈ Fn } ⊆ U . That is, [−n, n] ⊆ ∪Un = ∪{Ui : i ∈

Fn }. For each i ∈ Fn , let
Vi = Ui \[−n + 1, n − 1] ⊆ Ui
and let
Vn = {Vi : i ∈ Fn }
So each Vi in Vn is open in S and is contained in some Uj . Then, for

each n, Vn is an open cover of [−n, n] \[−n + 1, n − 1]. So,
V = ∪{Vn : n ∈ N\{0}}
is an open refinement of U which covers all of S, as required.

Secondly, we will show that V is locally finite in S. If p ∈ S,
then p ∈ [−m, m] \ [−m + 1, m − 1], for some m, and so p has a
neighborhood which intersects at most finitely elements of Vm ⊆ V .
So, V is locally finite.
We have constructed the family, V , which is both an open refine-
ment of the open cover, U , and is locally finite. So, S = R is para-
compact. We are done.
Example 3. Consider the space S = Rn equipped with the usual
topology. We know that, for any n, this metrizable space is not com-
pact. Show that S is paracompact.
Solution: To solve this we mimic the procedure in the previous
example, replacing the interval (−n, n) with the open ball, Bn (0),
centered at 0.
We know that Hausdorff compact spaces are normal. We have a
similar result for Hausdorff paracompact spaces. We prove that Haus-
dorff paracompact spaces are guaranteed to be “normal” topological
spaces.
In the proof of the following theorem, we invoke a lemma (6.16
on page 136) which we restate here, for convenience.
If U = {Vi : i ∈ I} is a locally finite collection of sets in
S then U ∗ = {clS Vi : i ∈ I} is also locally finite. Further-
more,
clS [∪{Vi : i ∈ I}] = ∪{clS Vi : i ∈ I}

Theorem 19.4 Let S be a Hausdorff paracompact topological space.

(a) The space, S, is a regular space.
(b) The space, S, is a normal space.
Proof. We are given that S is a Hausdorff paracompact topological

space.
(a) We are required to show that S is regular.
Suppose H is a closed subset of S and u ∈ S\H. It suffices to
show that there is an open set, W , such that H ⊆ W ⊆ clS W ⊆
S \{u}.
Since S is Hausdorff and H is closed, then, for each x ∈ H,
there exists an open neighborhood, Ux , of x such that u ∈ clS Ux .
Now,
U = {Ux : x ∈ H} ∪ {S \H}
forms an open cover of S. Since S is paracompact and U is an

open cover of S, there exists a locally finite collection of open
sets
V = {Vi : i ∈ I} ∪ {V }
which covers S and refines the open cover, U (where each Vi ⊆

Uyi , for some yi ∈ H, and V ⊆ S \H).
Then, for each i,
Vi ⊆ clS Vi ⊆ clS Uyi ⊆ S \{u} (for some yi ∈ H)
Let W = ∪{Vi : i ∈ I}. Then by Lemma 6.16,
clS W = ∪{clS Vi : i ∈ I}
It follows that
H ⊆ W = ∪{Vi : i ∈ I} ⊆ clS W = ∪{clS Vi : i ∈ I} ⊆ S \{u}
So, S is regular. As required.

(b) We are now required to prove that S is a normal space. Let H

be a closed set in S. To prove the normal property holds we
replace the point u in the proof of part (a) with a closed set,
F , and invoke the regular property and mimic the steps in the
proof above. Suppose H is a closed subset of S and F is a closed
subset such that F ∈ S\H. For each x ∈ H, there exists an open
neighborhood, Ux such that F ∩ clS Ux = ∅ (since we have shown
that S satisfies the regular property).
Now,
U = {Ux : x ∈ H} ∪ {S \H}
forms an open cover of S (with F ⊆ S\H). By hypothesis, there

exists a locally finite collection of open sets
V = {Vi : i ∈ I} ∪ {V }
which refines U , where each Vi is a subset of some Ux and V ⊆

S \H.
Then, for each i,
Vi ⊆ clS Vi ⊆ clS Ux ⊆ S \F (for some x ∈ H)
Again, by Lemma 6.16, ∪{clS Vi : i ∈ I} = clS (∪{Vi : i ∈ I}).

Since clS (∪{Vi : i ∈ I}) = ∪{clS Vi : i ∈ I} ⊆ (∪{clS Ux : x ∈
H}) ⊆ S \F , S is normal, the desired property.
We know that the compact property is carried over from the

domain to the codomain by arbitrary continuous functions. This is
not the case for the paracompact property. But, if the function is one
which is closed and continuous, it does, as the following result shows.
Theorem 19.5 Let S be a paracompact topological space and T be

any space. If f : S → T is a closed and continuous function then
f [S] is a paracompact subspace of T .
Proof. The proof is lengthy and involved. A reasonably complete
proof is found in [Engelking].
Theorem 19.6 Let S be a paracompact topological space and F be a

closed subset of S. Then F inherits the paracompact property from S.
Proof. We are given that S is a paracompact topological space and
F is closed in S. We are required to show that F is also paracompact.
Let U = {Ui : i ∈ I} be an open cover of F . Then, for each i,
Ui = Vi ∩ F , for some open subset Vi of S. We then obtain an open
cover, V = {Vi : i ∈ I} ∪ {S \F } of S. Since S is paracompact, then
there is a locally finite open refinement, W = {Wi : i ∈ I}, of V .
The family {Wi ∩ F : Wi ∩ F = ∅} forms a locally finite open
refinement of U . Then F is paracompact.
19.2 A Non-Paracompact Space
We now present an example of a space which is not paracompact.

Example 4. A standard, non-trivial, example of a non-paracompact
space is the deleted Tychonoff plank, S = [0, ω1 ] × [0, ω0 ]\{(ω1 , ω0 )}.
On page 235, we showed that the space S is not normal. Since para-
compact spaces have been shown to be normal, then S cannot be
paracompact.
Also, the Moore plane was shown to be completely regular but
not normal. So, this is another example of a non-paracompact space.
19.3 Topic: Metrizability and Paracompactness
Any result which can bring us a step closer to a characterization of

metrizable spaces is considered to be important and worth the effort
required to study the proofs of related statements. The following
definitions and technical results will lead to the threshold of a proof
of the statement, “Metrizable spaces are paracompact spaces”.
Definition 19.7 Let S be a topological space and U be a subfamily

of P(S). If
U = ∪{Un : n ∈ N}
where each Un is a locally finite subset of P(S) then we say that U

is σ-locally finite.
Lemma 19.8 Suppose S is a metrizable space and U is an open

cover of S. Then there is an open cover, E , which both refines U
and is σ-locally finite.3
Proof. Let S be a metrizable topological space. Then there is a
metric, ρ, which allows us to express S as a metric space, (S, ρ).
Suppose U is an open cover of S.
We will construct a subfamily, E , of P(S) such that
(1) E is an open cover of S,
(2) E refines U ,
(3) E = ∪{En : n ∈ N\{0}} where each En is a locally finite collection
of open sets.
We will index the elements of the open cover, U , with ordinals Ω:
U = {Uα : α ∈ Ω}. That is,
U = {U0 , U1 , . . . , Uω0 , Uω0 +1 . . ., Uω1 , Uω1 +1 , Uω1 +2 , . . .}4
Step 1: Construction of the collection of sets, E .

For each Uγ ∈ U and a fixed n in N\{0} let
Sn (Uγ ) = {x ∈ S : B1/n (x) ⊆ Uγ }
Let
Tn (Uγ ) = Sn (Uγ )\∪{Uα : α < γ}
Now, see that Tn (Uγ ) ⊆ Uγ .5 If we repeat this for each element, Uα ,

of U , then
Tn = {Tn (Uα ) : α ∈ Ω}
is a refinement of U .
3
Note that E is “σ-locally finite” (not locally finite) so we cannot conclude
immediately that metrizable spaces are paracompact. This will come later.
4
Here we are invoking the Well-ordering theorem which permits such an ordering.
It is a statement which is equivalent to the Axiom of choice.
5
For, if x ∈ Tn (Uγ ), then x ∈ B1/n (x) ⊆ Uγ .
We claim that the elements of Tn are pairwise disjoint.

Proof of claim: Consider Tn (Uβ ) and Tn (Uγ ) where β < γ. Choose
element c ∈ Tn (Uγ ). Then for any point b ∈ Tn (Uβ ), b ∈ Sn (Uβ ).
So, b ∈ B1/n (b) ⊆ Uβ . Since c ∈ Tn (Uγ ) and β < γ, c ∈ Uβ . So,
c ∈ B1/n (b). So, c ∈ Tn (Uβ ). We have shown that,
b ∈ Tn (Uβ ) and c ∈ Tn (Uγ ) ⇒ c ∈ B1/n (b) (∗)
So the elements of Tn are pairwise disjoint, as claimed.
Even if Tn is a refinement of U , its elements may not be open,
so we have more work to do.
We will construct an open set En (Uγ ) such that
Tn (Uγ ) ⊆ En (Uγ ) ⊆ Uγ
To construct En (Uγ ), let
En (Uγ ) = ∪{B1/3n (x) : x ∈ Tn (Uγ )}
We repeat this for each element, Uα , of U , to form the collection of
sets,
En = {En (Uα ) : α ∈ Ω}
Step 2: Proof that the family of sets,
E = ∪{En : n ∈ N\{0}}
satisfies all the required properties.
(1) The collection E is an open refinement of U :
Each En (Uα ) is easily seen to be open so, for each n, En is a
family of open sets, the same then holds true for E .
We claim that En refines U .
u ∈ En (Uγ ) ⇒ u ∈ B1/3n (c) for some c ∈ Tn (Uγ )
Tn (Uγ ) = Sn (Uγ )\∪{Uα : α < γ} ⇒ c ∈ Sn (Uγ )
Sn (Uγ ) = {x ∈ S : B1/n (x) ⊆ Uγ } ⇒ B1/n (c) ⊆ Uγ
u ∈ B1/3n (c) ⊆ B1/n (c) ⇒ u ∈ Uγ
Then En (Uγ ) ⊆ Uγ . Hence, En is an open refinement of U , as

claimed.
This satisfies one of the required properties of E .
(2) The collection E is σ-locally finite. That is, E is the countable

union of locally finite families of sets:
Claim 1: We first claim that the elements of En = {En (Uα ) :
α ∈ Ω} are pairwise disjoint.
Proof of claim: Consider the pair En (Uβ ) and En (Uγ ) where
β < γ. Let v ∈ En (Uγ ) and u be any element in En (Uβ ). We will
show that v = u.
u ∈ En (Uβ ) = ∪{B1/3n (x) : x ∈ Tn (Uβ )} ⇒ u ∈ B1/3n (b) for some b ∈ Tn (Uβ )
v ∈ En (Uγ ) = ∪{B1/3n (x) : x ∈ Tn (Uγ )} ⇒ v ∈ B1/3n (c) for some c ∈ Tn (Uγ )
b ∈ Tn (Uβ ) and c ∈ Tn (Uγ ) ⇒ c ∈ B1/n (b) (By (∗ ).)
Then
1/n ≤ ρ(b, c)
≤ ρ(b, v) + ρ(c, v)
< [ρ(b, u) + ρ(u, v)] + 1/3n
< 1/3n + ρ(u, v) + 1/3n
= ρ(u, v) + 2/3n
implies ρ(u, v) > 1/3n (∗∗)
So, v ∈ B1/3n (u).

We have shown that,
u ∈ En (Uβ ) and v ∈ En (Uγ ) ⇒ v ∈ B1/3n (u) (∗ ∗ ∗)
So, v = u and u ∈ En (Uβ ) then v ∈ En (Uβ ). We conclude, if

β < γ, En (Uβ ) ∩ En (Uγ ) = ∅; this proves Claim 1.
Claim 2: We now claim that each En is locally finite.
Proof of claim: Let z ∈ S. By Claim 1, z belongs to at most
one element of En , say En (Uγ ) = ∪{B1/3n (x) : x ∈ Tn (Uγ )}. Say
z ∈ B1/3n (y). By (**) the distance between points in different
sets in En is larger than 1/3n. So, the ball B1/6n (z) intersects
only En (Uγ ). Then En is locally finite, as claimed.
We are done with the second property.
(3) The collection E is an open cover of S : Let y be any point in S.

We must show that y must belong to some member, Em (Uμ ) ∈
Em , of E .
Let μ be the least ordinal such that y ∈ Uμ ∈ U .6 Since
Uμ is open, we can choose a natural number m such that
B1/m (y) ⊆ Uμ . Then y ∈ Sm (Uμ ) = {x ∈ S : B1/m (x) ⊆ Uμ }.
Since μ is the least ordinal such that y ∈ Uμ , then y ∈ Tm (Uμ ) =
Sm (Uμ )\∪{Uα : α < μ}. By definition, B1/3m (y) ⊆ Em (Uμ ) =
∪{B1/3m (x) : x ∈ Tn (Uμ )}, so y ∈ Em (Uμ ) ∈ Em ⊆ E . Then each
element of S belongs to some element of E . So, E is an open
cover of S.
So, E is the countable union of locally finite collections of open
sets which both covers S and refines U .
We are done.
In the next theorem, takes us a step closer to the statement “Metriz-

able spaces are paracompact spaces”. The reader will recognize the
use of techniques similar to the ones used in the proof of Lemma 19.8.
Theorem 19.9 Suppose the space S is metrizable and U is an open

cover of S. Then U has a refinement, C , which both covers S and
is locally finite.7
Proof. Suppose S is a metrizable space and U is an open cover of
S. By Lemma 19.8 there is an open cover, E , which both refines U
and is σ-locally finite. Let
E = ∪{En : n ∈ N\{0}}
be such an open cover where each En = {En(i) : i ∈ In } is a locally

finite collection of open sets which refines U . For each m ∈ N\{0},
let
Vm = ∪{Em(i) : i ∈ Im } = ∪ Em
6
The ordinal μ exists since the ordinals are “well-ordered”.
7
Note that we are not hypothesizing that the members of C are open in S.
For n ∈ N\{0}, and i ∈ In let
Sn (En(i) ) = En(i) \∪{Vm : m < n}

= En(i) \∪ ∪{Em(i) : i ∈ Im } : m < n
We are required to construct a collection of sets, C , which covers S,

refines E and is locally finite. (Note that the members of C need not
be open.)
Let
Cn = {Sn (En(i) ) : i ∈ In }
Since Sn (En(i) ) ⊆ En(i) ∈ En , then Cn refines En .

Let
C = ∪{Cn : n ∈ N\{0}}
Since each Cn refines En and each En refines U , then C is a

refinement of U .
Claim 1: It is claimed that C covers S.
Proof of claim: Let p ∈ S. We know that E = ∪{En : n ∈
N \ {0}} is an open cover of S. Let k = min{n : p belongs to
some element of En }. Let j be such that p ∈ Ek(j) ∈ Ek . Then
p ∈ Sk (Ek(j) ) ∈ Ck ⊆ C . Then p belongs to some element of C .
So, C covers S. This establishes Claim 1.
Claim 2: It is claimed that for p ∈ S, p belongs to a neighborhood
B ⊆ Ek(j) which meets at most finitely many elements of C . That
is, C is a locally finite collection of sets in S.
Proof of claim: Let p ∈ S and k = min {n : p belongs to
some element of En } (as defined in the proof of Claim 1. Then
p ∈ Sk (Ek(i) ) ⊆ Ek(i) , for some i ∈ Ik .
Recall that, for each n, En is locally finite. So, for each n, there
exists a neighborhood, Bn , of p which intersects only finitely many
elements in En = {En(i) : i ∈ In }.
Because of this, this Bn can only intersect finitely may elements of
Cn = {S(En(i) ) : i ∈ In } for, whenever it intersects S(En(i) ) ⊆ En(i) ,
it intersects En(i) . Also, if n > k, Ek(j) ∩ Sn (En(i) ) = ∅ (by definition
of Sn (En(i) )).
Let B = ∩{Bn : n ∈ {1, 2, . . . , k}}. Then p ∈ B and so B ∩ Ek(i)

is an open neighborhood of p which meets at most finitely many
elements of C (these are in ∪{C1 , C2 , . . . , Ck }). So, C is locally finite.
Then the collection, C , refines U , is locally finite and covers S.
As required.
Lemma 19.10 Suppose the space S is metrizable and U is an open

cover of S. Then U has a refinement of closed sets which both covers
S and is locally finite.
S. Since metrizable spaces are regular (by Theorem 9.19), then S is
regular.
Then, for each U ∈ U and for each x ∈ S, there is some open
neighborhood, Bx , of x such that clS Bx ⊆ U . Then B = {Bx :
x ∈ S} is an open cover of S which refines U where Bx ⊆ U implies
clS Bx ⊆ U .
By Theorem 19.9, there is a collection of sets, C = {C : C ∈ C },
which refines B, covers S and is locally finite. By Lemma 6.16, if C
locally finite then C ∗ = {clS C : C ∈ C } is also locally finite. Then
the family C ∗ covers S (since C covers S) and is a refinement of U
(since C refines U ).
So, C ∗ is the desired refinement of U whose members are closed
and which covers S.
Example 5. Suppose F is a locally finite collection of closed subsets

in P(S). Show that ∪{F : F ∈ F } is a closed subset of S.
Solution: We are given that each F ∈ F is closed where F is
locally finite. Let M = ∪{F : F ∈ F }. From Lemma 6.16, we know
that, if F is locally finite, {clS F : F ∈ F } is locally finite and
clS M = ∪{clS F : F ∈ F }. Since
∪{clS F : F ∈ F } = ∪{F : F ∈ F }
then M = clS M . So, M is closed in S.
We are finally set for the main result of this section.

Theorem 19.11 If a space is metrizable then it is paracompact.

S. By Theorem 19.9, there exists a family of sets, H = {H : H ∈
H }, which refines U , covers S and is locally finite.
Since H is locally finite, for each x ∈ S we can find open a neigh-
borhood, Vx , of x which intersects at most finitely many elements of
H . Let
V = {Vx : x ∈ S}
be the collection of all such sets.
Since V is an open cover of S, Lemma 19.10 applies: There is a
collection of closed sets,
C = {C : C ∈ C }
which refines V , covers S and is locally finite.
For each C ∈ C ,
C intersects with finitely many elements of H (∗ )
(since for each C, C ⊆ Vx , for some x, and Vx itself intersects with
finitely many elements of H ).
Since H refines the open cover, U , for each H ∈ H , we can
choose an element, UH , in U , such that
H ⊆ UH ∈ U
For each H ∈ H . let
EH = S \∪{C ∈ C : C ⊆ S \H}
See that EH is open, since C is locally finite, ∪C is closed (see
the example immediately preceding this theorem). We claim that
H ⊆ EH . For, if y ∈ H, we can argue,
y ∈ EH ⇒ y ∈ ∪{C ∈ C : C ⊆ S \H}
⇒ y ∈ C, for some C ∈ C such that C ∩ H = ∅
⇒ y ∈ H
So, H ⊆ EH , as claimed.
Then H is a subset of the open subset, EH ∩ UH . Then we define
D = {EH ∩ UH : H ∈ H }
Then,
(1) D is an open cover of S: Since H covers S, and H ⊆ EH ∩ UH .

(2) D refines U : Since, [y ∈ EH0 ∩ UH0 some H0 ] ⇒ [y = UH0 ∈ U ].
(3) D is locally finite. (If so, D is the family of sets we seek.)
Proof of (3): Let p ∈ S. Since C is locally finite, p has a neigh-

borhood, B, which intersects finitely many elements, {Ci : i =
1, . . . , k} ⊆ C . Since C is a cover of S, then
B ⊆ ∪{Ci : i = 1, . . . , k}
It suffices to show that each element of C intersects EH ∩ UH for,

at most, finitely many H; for, if so, B intersects only finitely many
elements of D.
Suppose that, for some j, Cj intersects EH1 ∩ UH1 ; say, y ∈ Cj ∩
[EH1 ∩ UH1 ]. Then y ∈ Cj ⊆ UH1 ∈ U . Also,
y ∈ Cj ∩ EH1 ⇒ y ∈ Cj ∩ S \∪{C ∈ C : C ∩ H1 = ∅}
⇒ y ∈ ∪{C ∈ C : C ∩ H1 = ∅}
⇒ y belongs to Cj such that Cj ∩ H1 = ∅
⇒ Cj intersects some UH1 ∈ U
Recall that C in C can intersect at most finitely many H’s in H

(see (*)). Then each Cj can intersect at most finitely many elements
of D.
We conclude that B intersects at most finitely many elements
of D.
We conclude that D is locally finite. This proves statement (3).
We conclude that D is an open refinement of U which both
covers S and is locally finite in S. So, the metrizable space, S, is
paracompact.
Concepts Review
1. What does it mean to say that U is a locally finite family of

subsets of a space S?
2. What does it mean to say that the family of subsets, V , is an
open refinement of the family U ?
3. What does it mean to say that the family of subsets, V , is a
locally finite open refinement of the family U ?
4. Define the paracompact property of a topological space.
5. What class of topological spaces has elements which are guaran-
teed to be paracompact?
6. Provide an example of a paracompact space and briefly summa-
rize arguments which confirms your answer.
7. Provide an example of a non-paracompact space.
8. If a paracompact space is Hausdorff what other separation
axioms does it satisfy?
9. If f : S → T is a function mapping the paracompact space S into
T , what properties must be satisfied by f if we want to guarantee
that f [S] is paracompact?
10. If S is a paracompact space what kind of subsets of S will share
this property?
Exercises
1. Show that, if a paracompact space S is countably compact, then

S is compact.
2. Suppose S is a Lindelöf space and U is a family of subsets of S.
Show that U is a countable family of subsets.
3. Suppose S is a regular space and U = {Fi : i ∈ I} is a family of
paracompact closed subsets of S. Show that if U is locally finite
then ∪{Fi : i ∈ I} is paracompact.
4. Let S be a perfectly normal paracompact space. Show that any
non-empty subspace is also paracompact.
Part VI
The Connected Property

Chapter 20
Connected Spaces and Properties
Abstract
In this section, we formally define the topological property of connected-
ness while providing a few examples of connected spaces, and of spaces
which are not. Continuous images of connected spaces are proven to
be connected. Arbitrary unions of families of connected sets are proven
to be connected provided they have at least one point in common. If
the set A is connected and is dense in a set, B, then B is shown to
be connected. In particular, closures of connected sets are connected.
The connected property will be seen to be invariant over arbitrary prod-
ucts of connected spaces, without conditions on the number of factors.
A connected component is defined as being the largest connected sub-
space containing a given point. Components will be seen to be closed,
but not necessarily open. Properties of spaces that have an open base
of connected neighborhoods will be briefly discussed. We will also define
the pathwise connected property; we will see that sets which satisfy this
property are connected. But the converse does not hold true. Finally, we
will introduce the totally disconnected property.
20.1 Definition
The property of connectedness is one that is, more or less, indepen-

dent of the topological properties that we have studied until now, in
the sense that we cannot characterize this property with some com-
bination of the other properties. It is fairly easy to construct mental
images of “connected spaces”.
A good way to start is to think of a single string and ask your-
self “Is this string connected?” to which you would answer, “. . . of
441
course!”. Then take a pair of scissors and cut it, and ask, “what
about now?” to which you would intuitively answer “well no, not
anymore”. A bystander might add: “Both represent the same string,
but the second one differs topologically from the the first”.
All this is stated based on an intuitive understanding of the word
“connected”. But intuition, as a guiding tool, precedes the process
of providing a rigourous mathematical definition. That is, producing
a definition which can be interpreted in only one way while simulta-
neously satisfying our intuitive understanding of this property.
A rigourous definition should allow us to answer more difficult
questions about objects which possess this property but whose com-
plexity defies our imagination.
Definition 20.1 A topological space S is said to be connected if it

is not the disjoint union of two non-empty open sets.
Recall that, in this book, those subsets of a space that are both open
and closed are referred to as being clopen. So, if S is the disjoint
union of two open sets A and B if and only if both A and B are
complements of an open sets and so are also closed. So, we can say
that a space
S is not connected if and only if S contains a proper non-empty

clopen subset.
Example 1. The topological space, R, with the usual topology is

connected since no non-empty proper subset in R is clopen. However,
the subspace of all rationals, Q, is not connected since Q the disjoint
union of the two open sets,
U = (−∞, π) ∩ Q and Q\U = (π, ∞) ∩ Q
So, the connected property is not hereditary.

It is not difficult to prove that the only proper non-empty subsets
of R which are connected subspaces are those subsets which are either
a single element or those which are intervals (either open, closed or
half open).
Connected Spaces and Properties 443
Example 2. The topological space R with the upper limit topology

is not connected since R is the disjoint union of U = (−∞, 3] and
R\U = (3, ∞) both of which are open in this topology. (Verify this.)
20.2 Properties of Connected Spaces
We now investigate some invariance properties for connectedness.
Theorem 20.2 The continuous image of a connected space is

connected.
Proof. We are given that S and T are topological spaces, that S
is connected and the function, f : S → T , is continuous. We are
required to show that f [S] is connected.
Suppose U is clopen subset of f [S] where U = f [S]. We claim
that U must be empty.
To see this suppose,
h : f [S] → {0, 1}
is defined as h[U ] = {0} and h[ f [S]\U ] = {1}. Then h[f [S]] ⊆ {0, 1},
so h is continuous on f [S]. Since f is continuous on S,
h◦f : S → {0, 1}
is also continuous on S. Now, {0} and {1} are clopen subsets of

h[f [S]], hence,
(h◦f )← [{0}] = f ← [h← (0)] = f ← [U ] = S (Since U = f [S].)
where f ← [U ] must be a clopen subset of S (but not equal to S).

Since S is connected, the only clopen subset in S other than S itself
is ∅. So f ← [U ] = ∅ which implies
U = f [f ← [U ]] = f [∅] = ∅
So U = ∅, as claimed. So the continuous image, f [S], contains no

non-empty proper clopen set. So, f [S] must be connected.
Example 3. Suppose (R, τ ) is the set of reals equipped with the

usual topology and (R, τs ) is the set of reals with the upper limit
topology. Show that the identity map
i : (R, τ ) → (R, τs )
is not continuous.
Solution: We have seen that (R, τ ) is connected and that (R, τs ) is
not. Since the continuous image of a connected set is connected, then
i : (R, τ ) → (R, τs ) cannot be continuous, as required.
Does the union of connected sets preserve the connected prop-
erty? Our instinct states that they must, a least, have non-empty
intersection. We should check this out.
Suppose
S = ∩{Ui : i ∈ I}
where each Ui is connected in S. Suppose q ∈ ∩{Ui : i ∈ I}.

If there exists a function, h : ∪{Ui : i ∈ I} = {0, 1}, which is
continuous on S then, since each Ui is connected, h must be constant
on each Ui . There is no other option. It must then follow that, for
each i, h(q) and h[Ui ] have the same value. So, h must be constant
on the union of these sets. So, ∪{Ui : i ∈ I} cannot be the union of
two non-empty clopen sets and so must be connected.
It is worth recording this as a theorem, for future reference.
Theorem 20.3 The arbitrary union of a family of connected sets

which have at least one point in common is connected.
Proof. The statement is proved in the paragraph above.
Example 4. Suppose S = R2 equipped with the usual topology.

Show that S is a connected space.
Solution: For each point x ∈ S, let Lx denote the infinite line con-
taining both x and 0.
Then S = ∪{Lx : x ∈ S}. For each x ∈ S, Lx is homeomorphic to
R (previously shown to be connected) and contains (0, 0); hence, S is
the union of a family of connected spaces which contain one point in

common. Then S is connected.
In the following theorem, we see that the closure operation pre-
serves connectedness. We then verify that arbitrarily large products
preserve connectedness, provided every factor is connected. Also that
connected product spaces must have connected factors.
Theorem 20.4 The closure of a connected set is connected.

Furthermore, any space, S, which has a connected dense subset is
connected.
Proof. We are given that T is a connected subspace of the topo-
logical space S.
We are required to show that clS T is connected. Suppose h :
clS T → {0, 1} is a continuous function. To show that clS T is con-
nected it suffices to show that h is constant on clS T . Since h is con-
tinuous, then h must be constant on the connected set T . Suppose
q ∈ clS T\T . If h(q) = h[T ], then h← [h(q)] is the pull-back of a clopen
set in {0, 1} and so must intersect T , contradicting the fact that h is
constant on T . So, h must be constant on clS T and so is connected.
By applying a similar reasoning, if S has a connected dense subset
then S is connected.

and S = i∈I Si be a product space. Then S is connected if and only
if each Si is connected.

Proof. We are given that S = i∈I Si is a product space.
(⇒) If the product space, S, is connected then each factor, Si , is the

continuous image of S under the projection map, πi : S → Si ,
and so is connected.
(⇐) Suppose Si is connected for each i ∈ I.
Let’s first consider the case where S has only two connected
factors, S1 and S2 .
We claim that S1 ×S2 is connected. Suppose (q1 , q2 ) is a fixed point

in S1 × S2 and let (x, y) be any other point. Then (q1 , q2 ) ∈ S1 × {q2 }
and (x, y) ∈ {x} × S2 . Then the set,
M(x,y) = (S1 × {q2 }) ∪ ({x} × S2 )
is the union of two connected. Hence, M(x,y) is connected and con-

tains the fixed point (q1 , q2 ), for any choice of (x, y). More generally,
every element of {M(x,y) : (x, y) ∈ S1 × S2 } is a connected set and
contains (q1 , q2 ). So, ∪{M(x,y) : (x, y) ∈ S1 × S2 } is connected. Since
S1 × S2 = ∪{M(x,y) : (x, y) ∈ S1 × S2 }, then S1 × S2 is connected, as
claimed.
By finite induction, the product space of finitely many connected
factors is connected.
Let F denote the family of all finite subsets of the index set, I.
Suppose q = qi i∈I is an element of the product space, S, and let
F ∈ F . Let
Ti = Si if i ∈ F
Ti = {qi } otherwise

Let KF = i∈I Ti . By the claim established above, KF is a connected
subspace of the product space, S. Hence, {KF : F ∈ F } is a family
of connected subspaces of S, where
{q} = { qi i∈I } = ∩{KF : F ∈ F }
By Theorem 20.3, V = ∪{KF : F ∈ F } is a connected subset of S.

We claim that V is dense in S. Let u = ui i∈I ∈ S. Let U =
i∈I Ui be a basic open neighborhood of u. Then there is a finite
subset, F ∗ of I, such that, Ui = πi← [U ] for i ∈ F ∗ and equals Si ,
otherwise.
It suffices to show that, U ∩ V = ∅. See that KF ∗ ∩ U =
V
i∈I i such that, Vi = Ui for i ∈ F ∗ and Vi = {qi }, otherwise. So
KF ∗ ∩ U is non-empty. Hence, V ∩ U is non-empty. So, V is dense in
S. Since V is dense and connected, then, by Theorem 20.4, so is S.
Given a function f : T → T , the point x in T is called a fixed point

of f if f (x) = x. If T ⊆ S and f : S → T is a continuous function on
S such that every point of T is a fixed point of f , then we say that
T is retract of f . The following theorem shows that connectedness of
[a, b] guarantees that a continuous function f : [a, b] → [a, b] on [a, b]
will have at least one fixed point of f . This well-known statement is

commonly referred to as the Brouwer’s fixed point theorem.
Theorem 20.6 For a closed interval [a, b] in R a continuous func-

tion f : [a, b] → [a, b] mapping [a, b] onto [a, b] will have at least one
fixed point.
Proof. We are given that f : [a, b] → [a, b] is continuous. Let
f (x) − x
h(x) =
|f (x) − x|
Suppose f has no fixed points in [a, b].

See that the function h(x) is well-defined and continuous on [a, b].
Then h(x) maps [a, b] into {1, −1}. Since f is continuous on the
connected set [a, b], h[a, b] is connected. So, h is constant on it’s
domain.
This leaves two possibilities: Either h[a, b] = {1} or h[a, b] =
{−1}.
If h(x) = 1, then |f (x) − x| = f (x) − x for each x ∈ [a, b]. Then
f (x) − x ≥ 0. This implies that f (x) ≥ x on [a, b]. Since f has no
fixed point in [a, b], f (x) > x on [a, b] So, f (b) > b. Since f maps
[a, b] into [a, b], we have a contradiction. So, h[a, b] = {1}.
If h[a, b] = {−1}, by a similar reasoning, we deduce that f (a) < a.
This is also impossible.
We then must conclude that, if f : [a, b] → [a, b] is continuous, it
has at least one fixed point in [a, b].
20.3 The Connected Components of a Topological Space
A topological space, S, which is not connected can always be parti-

tioned in a family of subspaces which are connected. A trivial exam-
ple could be the partitioning of S = {{x} : x ∈ S}, into singleton
sets, since each singleton set is connected. However, a point x may
be contained in a larger connected subspace of S which contains it.
One might want to partition S as
S = ∪{Cx : x ∈ S}
where Cx denotes “the largest connected subspace of S which con-

tains x”. To remove any ambiguity about what we mean by “Cx is
the largest connected set in S,” we might prefer to say “Cx is the
union of all the connected subspaces of S which contain x”. This
leads us to the following definition.
Definition 20.7 If S is a topological space and u ∈ S, then we

define the connected component of u in S as being the union of all
connected subspaces of S that contain the point u.1
Clearly, the only component of a connected space is the space itself.

The definition confirms our perception that the component of
a point u in S, is the unique largest connected subset of S which
contains the point u. Also, two components, C1 and C2 , in S cannot
intersect, for if z ∈ C1 ∩ C2 , then C1 ∪ C2 is connected; hence, neither
C1 nor C2 could be components of z. Since every point of a space S
belongs to precisely one connected component, then the family of all
components partitions the space, S.
If C is a “connected component” in S, we mean that C is a con-
nected as a subspace of S. That is, C cannot contain a non-empty
clopen sets in C. This means that,
— if U and V are both open in S such that
(U ∩ C) ∩ (V ∩ C) = ∅ and (U ∩ C) ∪ (V ∩ C) = C
then one (U ∩ C) or (V ∩ C) must be empty.

— if x ∈ S\C, and Cx is the component containing x and T = C ∪Cx
then T cannot be a connected subspace of S, and so T must
contain a non-empty clopen subset of T , say B. Since C and Cx
are connected in T , C ⊆ B or C ⊆ T \ B. Then C and Cx are
clopen in T .
1
When there can be (by context) no confusion we often drop the adjective “con-
nected” and only say “component”.
Example 5. Consider the subspace, T = B1 (0, 0) ∪ B1 (0, 2), the

union of two open balls of radius one in R2 with center (0, 0) and
(0, 2), respectively. Since T is the union of two open disjoint subsets
of T , then, by definition, T is not a connected space. The space, T ,
has precisely two components, B1 (0, 0) and B1 (0, 2).
Example 6. Let U = B1 (0, 0), V = B1 (0, 2) in R2 . Consider the
subspace,
T ∗ = U ∪ V ∪ {(0, 1)}
of R2 (see Figure 20.1). It is clearly the case that T ∗ is the union

of three non-intersecting connected subsets, the two connected sets
U and V and the connected set {(0, 1)}. But we cannot conclude
from this that T ∗ is not connected. We can view T ∗ as the union of
the two connected sets, U ∪ {(0, 1} and V ∪ {0, 1)} with non-empty
intersection, {(0, 1)}. So, T ∗ is a connected set with itself as the only
component.
Figure 20.1. Example 6: B1 (0, 0) ∪ B1 (0, 2) ∪ {(0, 1)} a connected set.

In the following theorem, we will verify that the connected com-

ponents of a topological space are always closed subsets.
Theorem 20.8 Suppose C is a component of a space, S. Then C

is a closed subset of S.
Proof. We are given that C is a component of the topological
space S.
Since C is, by definition, connected, then clS C is also connected.
Since C is the largest connected set containing one of its points, then
clS C = C. So, C is closed.
The definition of the “connected space” may lead one to surmise

that components in S must also be open in S. If the reader is tempted
by this assertion, the following example may incite this reader to
reconsider.
Example 7. Consider the subspace, Q with the subspace topology.
The subset {5} is a connected closed subset of Q. We claim that the
component, C5 , of 5 is {5}.
Suppose (u, v) is an interval in Q which contains 5. Let i be an
irrational number in (u, v). Then (u, v) = [(u, i)∪(i, v)]∩Q represents
the union of two clopen sets in Q which contains 5. Then (u, v) cannot
be a component of 5. So, C5 = {5}.
We claim that C5 is not open. Consider the sequence T = {5 +
1/n : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}. Since T is in Q\C5 but does not converge in
Q\C5 , C5 is not open in Q.
Example8. Let {Si : i ∈ I} be a family of topological spaces
and S = i∈I Si be the corresponding product space. Suppose that
u = ui i∈I ∈ S. For each i ∈ I, let Ci be the unique connected

component in Si which contains the point ui . Suppose C = i∈I Ci .
Show that C is the component in S which contains the point u.

Solution: We are given u = ui i∈I ∈ S = i∈I Si . If ui ∈ Ci for

each i ∈ I, then u ∈ C = i∈I Ci . By Theorem 20.5 (which states
that products of connected spaces are connected) C is a connected
subset of S containing u. We claim that C is a component in S.
Suppose not. Suppose D is the component in S which contains u
and suppose v = vi i∈I ∈ D\C. Then there must be some j ∈ I such

that vj ∈ Cj . Since πj : S → Sj is continuous, it must be that πj [D]
is a connected subset of Sj where Cj ∪ {vj } ⊆ πj [D]. Since Cj is
the largest connected set in Sj which contains uj , then πj [D] cannot
be connected. We have a contradiction due to our supposition that
D \C is non-empty. So, C is the component in S which contains u,
as claimed.
The previous example shows that
the product of connected components is a connected com-

ponent of the product.
Example 9. Let {Si : i ∈ I} be an infinite family of discrete topolog-

ical spaces, none of which contain only one point. Then
the connected
components of each Si must be singleton sets. Let S = i∈I Si be the
corresponding product space. Show that the connected components
of S are also singleton sets. Show that the product space, S, is not a
discrete space.
Solution: Let u = ui i∈I ∈ S. Since Si is discrete, Ci = {ui } is a

connected component, for each i. Then, by the example above (where
it is shown that the product of connected components is a connected
component),

C= i∈I Ci = i∈I {ui } = {u}
is the connected component in S containing u. So the connected

components of S are singleton sets, as required.
Are sets whose components are singletons discrete? If S is the
disjoint union of components each of which
is a singleton set, S need
not be a discrete space. Consider S = i∈I Si and u = ui i∈I ∈
S, as in the above example (where S is equipped with the product
topology). Consider a basic open neighborhood,
B = ∩{πi← (ui ) : i ∈ F }
of u where F is finite in I. Suppose each Si is discrete. Then Cu = {u}

is a connected component in S. Since B cannot be contained in {u},
Cu is not open.
Hence,
the product of discrete spaces need not be a discrete space.
Example 10. Show that the components of the Cantor set are all
singleton sets.
Solution: Recall that, in Example 2 of page 174 and Theorem 7.19,
the
Cantor set was defined as being the image of the infinite product,
n∈Z+ {0, 2},
of the discrete space, {0, 2}, under the homeomorphism
function ϕ : n∈Z+ {0, 2} → [0, 1]. By the above example, the com-
ponents of n∈Z+ {0, 2} are singleton sets. The homeomorphic image
of a component must be a component. So, the components of the
Cantor set are singleton sets.
Example 11. Decomposition of a compact space into components.
Let S be a compact Hausdorff topological space which is not con-
nected. We will partition the space S by its connected components.
That is,
DS = {Cx : x ∈ S, Cx a component containing x}
denotes the family of all connected components of S where x ∈ Cx .

Let θ : S → DS be defined such that θ(u) = Cu if u ∈ Cu in DS .
Then we obtain a decomposition space (DS , τ ) where U is open in
DS if and only if θ ← [U ] is open in S and is the union of connected
components of S.
Show that the only connected components of DS are points.2
Solution: We are given that S is compact Hausdorff and the function
θ : S → DS
defined as
θ(u) = Cu if u ∈ Cu
Let p, q ∈ S, contained in distinct components of S. Then θ(p) and

θ(q) are distinct points in DS .
2
We will later refer to such spaces as being totally disconnected.
Each connected component, θ ←(Cx ), of S has been shown to be

closed in S. Since S is compact, then θ ← (Cx ) is compact. Now “com-
pact and Hausdorff” ⇒ “normal”, so, for each x = p in S, there exists
a pair of disjoint open sets, Vx and Px , such that θ ← (Cx ) ⊆ Vx and
θ ← (Cp ) ⊆ Px . Then the family open sets,
V = {Vx : x ∈ S, x = p} ∪ {Px : x ∈ S, x = p}
forms an open cover of S. Since S is compact, then V has a finite

subcover (of S)
F = {Vxi : xi ∈ S, xi = p, i ∈ F } ∪ {Pxi : xi ∈ S, xi = p, i ∈ F }
where F is a finite indexing set and Vxi ∩ Pxi = ∅. Then S is the

disjoint union of the two open subsets,
V = ∪{Vxi : xi ∈ S, xi = p, i ∈ F }
P = ∩{Pxi : xi ∈ S, xi = p, i ∈ F }
where θ ← (Cq ) ⊆ V and θ ←(Cp ) ⊆ P . Since P and V are both open

and disjoint such that S = P ∪ V , then V and S \V = P are clopen
in S and so are both compact. So, DS is the disjoint union of the
compact sets θ[V ] and θ[P ]. Each of these must then be clopen in
DS . Given that the set, θ[V ], is clopen, then
θ(q) = Cq ⊆ θ[V ] ⊆ S \θ(p)
as claimed.
It follows that no two points in DS belong to the same connected
component and so the only connected components of DS are its
points.
20.4 Locally Connected: Spaces with an Open Base

of Connected Sets
Even when a space is not connected it may have a base for open
sets whose elements are connected subspaces. For example, any dis-
crete space, S, can easily be seen to have an open base of connected
subspaces, B = {{x} : x ∈ S}. So does the connected space of
real numbers, R, with the usual topology since it has an open base,
B = {(a, b) : a, b ∈ R, a < b}.
We formally define this particular notion.
Definition 20.9 We say that the space S is locally connected if it

has an open base, B = {Bi : i ∈ I}, where each element, Bi , is a
connected subspace.
What would a non-locally connected space look like? We construct

a connected subspace of R2 which is not locally connected.
Example 12. For each n ∈ N\{0}, let
π
sin ( 4n )
gn (x) = π x
cos ( 4n )
For each n, let Ln denote the line,
Ln = {(x, yn ) : yn = gn (x), x ≥ 0}
Let
T = ∪{Ln : n ∈ N\{0}} ∪ {(1, 0)}
be a subspace of R2 with the usual topology. Show that T is a con-

nected subspace which is not locally connected.
Solution: For each n ∈ N\{0}, Ln is a line in R2 which is homeomor-
phic to R+ and so is connected. Since each Ln contains the point,
(0, 0), then ∪{Ln : n ∈ N \ {0}} is connected. The connected set
∪{Ln : n ∈ N\{0}} is dense in T and so T is connected.
Consider the open neighborhood base,
B = {B1/k (1, 0) ∩ T : k ≥ 2}
of the point (1, 0) ∈ T . For each k, the open “ball”, B = B1/k (1, 0) ∩
T , in T contains countably many line segments (belonging to the
Ln ’s). If j = m there is a line L∗ whose slope is strictly in between
the slopes of Lj and Lm , so the line of L∗ does not appear in T . Then
B is disconnected at the line L∗ . So, T is not locally connected at
the point (1, 0).
20.5 Which Spaces Have Clopen Connected

Components?
Suppose S is a locally connected space and U is an open subspace

of S. Then S has an open base (Figure 20.2),
B = {Bi : i ∈ I}
of connected subsets. If u ∈ U , let Cu denote a connected component

of the subspace, U , which contains u. We have already proven that
Cu must be closed in U .
We claim that Cu must be a clopen subset in U . To see this simply
note that there is some connected Bj in B such that u ∈ Bj ⊆ U .
Since u ∈ Cu and Bj is connected and intersects Cu , then Bj ∪ Cu
is connected so u ∈ Bj ⊆ Cu . Since Bj and U are open in S, Bj is
open in U and so Cu is open in U and so is clopen in U , as claimed.
This leads to an interesting characterization of the locally con-
nected property on a space.
1.4
1.2
L1
(0.1)
L2
0.6
L3
0.4
0.2
(0.0) 0.5 1 1.5 2

(1.0)
Figure 20.2. A connected but not locally connected subspace of R2 .

Theorem 20.10 Suppose S is a topological space.

(a) The space S is a locally connected space if and only if every open
subspace of S (including S itself) has clopen components.
(b) If the space S is both locally connected and compact then it has
at most finitely many connected components.
Proof. For part (a): The direction (⇒) of part (a) is proven in the
paragraph above.
We prove the direction (⇐): Suppose that every open subspace
of S has clopen components. We are required to show that S has an
open base of connected sets.
Let V be an open neighborhood of a point x in S. Let Cx be a
connected component of V which contains x.
We claim that Cx is a connected subset of S. If not, then there
is a clopen subset, U , of S which intersects only a part of Cx . Then
U ∩ V is a clopen subset of V which intersects only a part of Cx ,
contradicting the fact that Cx is a connected subset of V. So, Cx is
connected in S, as claimed.
By hypothesis, Cx is an open subset of V. So, Cx is an open
neighborhood of x in S. So, Cx is an open connected neighborhood
of x in S which is contained in V. So every open neighborhood V of
x contains an open connected set Cx in S such that x ∈ Cx ⊆ V .
This implies that S is a locally connected space.
For part (b): Suppose S is compact and locally connected. Then
its components are clopen. Suppose it has infinitely many compo-
nents then its components will form an open cover of S with no finite
subcover, a contradiction. So a locally connected compact space can
have at most finitely many components.
Example 13. Let gn (x) = [sin (π/4n)/(cos (π/4n)]x and Ln =

{(x, yn ) : yn = gn (x)} where n ∈ N\{0}. Consider the space S defined
as
S = ∪{Ln : n ∈ N\{0}} \ {(0, 0)}
The subspace S of R2 is the infinite union of disjoint straight lines
in R2 . Each point has a neighborhood base of connected sets (line
segments).
Consider any two distinct sets Sj = Lj \{(0, 0)} and Sk = Lk \

{(0, 0)} of slope sj and sk , respectively, in S. These can easily seen
to be separable by two disjoint open subsets of R2 and so can be seen
as four disjoint open subsets of S. It can also be shown that each Si
is a connected component of S and so is closed in S. (Note that the
closure of S in R2 adds the line 0(x) = 0 to S. So, S is the union of
infinitely many clopen components of S.)
This does not contradict part (b) of the previous theorem since S
is not a compact subspace of R2 .

and S = i∈I Si be the corresponding product space. Then S is locally
connected if and only if every factor, Si , is locally connected and, at
most, finitely many of the factors are not connected.
Proof. We aregiven that {Si : i ∈ I} is a family of topological
spaces and S = i∈I S
i is a product space.
(⇒) Suppose S = i∈I Si is locally connected.
Claim 1: That all but finitely many of the factors are connected
spaces. Let u ∈ S. Since S is locally connected, then, by Theo-
rem 20.10, u ∈ C for some clopen connected component, C, of S.
Let U be a basic open neighborhood of u in S such that u ∈ U ⊆ C.
That is, for a finite subset, F , of I,
u ∈ U = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F } ⊆ C
where Ui is an open subset of Si .

Consider i ∈ F . Then πi [U ] = Si ⊆ πi [C] (since U ⊆ C). So,
πi [U ] = Si = πi [C]. Since C is a connected component of S and πi is
continuous, Si is connected for all i’s except possibly the ones in F .
This establishes the Claim 1.
Claim 2: That each Si is locally connected. For i ∈ I let vi ∈ Si . Let
W be an open neighborhood of vi in Si and v ∈ S such that πi (v) =
vi . It suffices to show that there is a connected open neighborhood
of vi which is entirely contained in W .
Since S is locally connected, and πi← [W ] is an open neighborhood
of v in S, there exists an open connected subspace, V , in S such that
v ∈ V ⊆ πi← [W ]. Since πi is both continuous and open, then πi [V ]
is a connected open neighborhood of vi contained in W . So, vi has

a connected neighborhood base. Then Si is locally connected. This
establishes Claim 2.
We are done with this direction.
(⇐) Suppose every factor, Si , is locally connected and at most
finitely many of these factors are not connected. We are required to
show that the product space, S, is locally connected.
Suppose Fc is the largest subset of the indexing set, I, such that,
if i ∈ Fc , Si is not connected. Then, by hypothesis, Fc is finite.
Let

x = xi i∈I ∈ S = i∈I Si
and let V = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F } be any open base element contain-
ing x. Let F1 = F ∪ Fc and
U1 = ∩{πi← [Ui ] : i ∈ F1 }
Clearly, since F ⊆ F1 , then U1 ⊆ V .
We claim that the point, x, has a connected neighborhood, W ,
which is contained in U1 .
Given that every Si is locally connected, for each i ∈ F1 , there
must be an open connected set, Ci in Si , such that xi ∈ Ci ⊆ Ui .
Then
x ∈ ∩{πi← [Ci ] : i ∈ F1 } = W ⊆ U1 ⊆ V
exhibits an open neighborhood, W , of x in S which is contained in V.
If j ∈ F1 , the jth factor of W is the connected space, Sj . If j ∈ F1 ,
the jth factor of W is the connected, Cj . By Theorem 20.5, W a
connected subspace in S.
So, x has a connected open neighborhood, W , contained in U1 , as
claimed. Since U1 ⊆ V , S is locally connected, as required.
20.6 Pathwise Connected Spaces
There are different ways of perceiving the connected property on a

set. The formal definition of the connected space given earlier was
“. . . a space that is not the union of two disjoint open sets” appeals
to its proponents because of its simplicity. It is a clear and unam-

biguous definition. However, some critics might have argued that this
definitions sounds to much like “a connected space is one that is not
disconnected; and we all know what disconnected means”. The for-
mal definition, along with a few examples, and some discussion of the
properties derived from it, allowed users to develop a better under-
standing of what a connected space is. But, in spite of this, the space,
T , described in the example found on page 454, may not appear to
be connected, by some participants of a random survey. We define
below, the
pathwise connected property,
a slightly stronger definition than that of the connected property in

the sense that pathwise connected spaces are always connected, but
not conversely. To some, it is a more appealing form of connectedness
even though it is sightly more difficult to work with.
Definition 20.12 Let S be a topological space. A path in S is a

continuous function, f : [0, 1] → S, mapping the closed unit interval
into S. If, for a path, f : [0, 1] → S, a = f (0) and b = f (1), we say
that. . .
f is a path from a to b in S
where a is referred to as being the initial point of the path f and b

is called the terminal point of the path f . These terms prescribe a
direction for the image, f [0, 1], of f .
The space, S, is said to be a
pathwise connected space
if, for any pair of points, a and b in S, there is a path, f : [0, 1] → S,

joining a = f (0) to b = f (1) (Figure 20.3).3
3
If the continuous function, f , from a = f (0) to b = f (1) is a homeomorphism
then f is called an arc. If every path on S is a homeomorphism then the space is
said to be arcwise connected.
Figure 20.3. A pathwise connected space with a path f [0, 1] in S.
Since [0, 1] is connected in R and f is continuous on [0, 1], then the

image f [0, 1] is a connected subspace of S. The set of all real numbers,
R, is of course pathwise connected since for any a and b in R
f (x) = (b − a)x + a
is a path connecting a = f (0) to b = f (1). This particular perception
of “connected” is also quite intuitive. It suggests that if one can draw
a curve joining any two points in S, without lifting the pencil off the
page, then the space is connected. The following theorem guarantees
that the pathwise connected spaces are connected as described by
the formal definition.
Theorem 20.13 If the topological space, S, is pathwise connected

then it is connected.
Proof. Suppose S is pathwise connected. If a ∈ S, then, for any
b ∈ S, there is a path, fb : [0, 1] → S, such that a = fb (0) is its initial
point and b = fb (1) is its terminal point.
Since fb is continuous, then fb [0, 1] is connected. Then, given the
point a, the family of subsets of S,
C = {fb [0, 1] : b ∈ S, b = a}
is a family of connected sets which entirely covers S each of which
contains the point a as initial point.
Since S is the union of connected subsets of S each containing a

common element, then S is connected.
We have then confirmed that

“Pathwise connected space” ⇒ “Connected space”
It is worth noting that, if there is a path, f , from the point a to the
point b in a space S, then there is a path, g : [0, 1] → S, defined as
g(x) = f (1 − x) which goes in the opposite direction, from b to a.
20.6.1 A connected space which is not pathwise connected

Example 14. We reconsider the example presented earlier described
as follows: For each n ∈ N\{0}, let Ln ⊆ R2 denote the set,
π
sin ( 4n )
Ln = (x, yn ) : yn = gn (x) = π x, x ≥ 0
cos ( 4n )
Let
T = ∪{Ln : n ∈ N\{0}} ∪ {(1, 0)}
be a subspace of R2 with the usual topology. We have shown (in
an example on page 454) that T is a connected subspace but is not
locally connected. Show that T is not pathwise connected.
Solution: Suppose there is a path joining the point a = (1, 0) in T
to a point, b = (u, v) = a in T \{(0, 0)}. That is, suppose there is a
continuous function f : [0, 1] → T , such that
f (0) = (1, 0)
f (1) = b = (u, v)
Note that, any natural number > 0 the family {Ln\{(0, 0)} : n > m}∪
{(1, 0)} is the union of an infinite family of connected components of
T \{(0, 0)}.
Continuity of f : [0, 1] → T guarantees that
0 < ε < 1/10 ⇒ f [0, δ) ⊆ Bε (1, 0) for some δ > 0
Since f is continuous and [0, δ) is connected, then f [0, δ) is connected.
Suppose q ∈ Lk ∩f [0, δ) for some k ∈ N\{0}. Then f [0, δ) intersects

the two components, Lk\{(0, 0)} and {(1, 0)}, of T\{(0, 0)}; so f [0, δ)
cannot be connected, contradicting continuity of f . Then f [0, δ) =
{(1, 0)}.
So continuity of f holds true only for b = (1, 0). So, T is not
pathwise connected.
In the following theorem, we confirm that pathwise connectedness
is carried over by continuous functions.
Theorem 20.14 If g : S → T is a continuous function mapping

a pathwise connected space S to a space T , then g[S] is a pathwise
connected subspace of T .
Proof. Suppose S is a pathwise connected space. Then if u and v
are distinct points in S there is a continuous function f : [0, 1] → S
such that f (0) = u and f (1) = v.
Suppose now that g : S → T is a continuous function mapping S
onto g[S] ⊆ T . We claim that g[S] is pathwise connected. To see this
let a and b be distinct points in g[S]. Then, we can choose distinct
points, x ∈ g← (a) and y ∈ g← (b). Since S is pathwise connected,
there is a continuous function f : [0, 1] → S such that f (0) = x and
f (1) = y. Then the continuous function, g◦f : [0, 1] → g[S], maps 0
to a and 1 to b.
So, g◦f is a path from a to b.
We conclude that g[S] is pathwise connected, as required.
We now consider invariance of the pathwise connected property

with respect to products.
Theorem 20.15 Let {Si : i ∈I} be a family of topological spaces.

Then the product space, S = i∈I Si , is pathwise connected if and
only if every factor, Si , is pathwise connected.
Proof. We are given that {Si : i ∈ I} is a family of topological
spaces and that S = i∈I Si is the corresponding product space.
For (⇒), if S is pathwise connected, since each projection map,
πi , is continuous, then each Si is pathwise connected.
For (⇐), suppose Si is pathwise connected for each i ∈ I.

Let ai i∈I and bi i∈I be distinct points in S. Since each Si is path-
wise connected, then, for each i ∈ I, there is a continuous function,
fi : [0, 1] → Si , such that fi (0) = ai and fi (1) = bi . Let f : [0, 1] → S
be defined as
f (u) = fi (u) i∈I
Then fi (u) = (πi ◦f )(u). By Lemma 7.11, the function, f : [0, 1] → S,
is continuous on [ 0, 1 ] if and only if each fi is continuous on [ 0, 1 ].
Since each fi maps 0 to ai and 1 to bi , then
f (0) = fi (0) ı∈I = ai i∈I
f (1) = fi (1) i∈I = bi i∈I
So, S is pathwise connected, as required.
Example 15. It follows from the previous theorem that the space,
S = RR , equipped with the product topology is pathwise connected
since each factor, R, is pathwise connected.
Example 16. Let u be a point in a topological space, S. Show that
S is pathwise connected if and only if there is a path joining each
point, x ∈ S, to u (Figure 20.4).
Figure 20.4. A pathwise connected theorem with fA , fB , and g.

Solution: For the direction (⇒) the statement is obviously true.

For the direction (⇐), we are given that every point in S can be
joined by a path to u. Suppose a and b are distinct points in S. We
are required to show that there is a path linking a to b.
By hypothesis, there are two paths, fA : I → S and fB : I → S
such that
fA (0) = a
fA (1) = u
fB (1) = b
fB (0) = u
Consider the function

fA (2x) if x ∈ [0, 1/2]
g(x) =
fB (2x − 1) if x ∈ [1/2, 1]
Then g is continuous on [0, 1] where
g(0) = a
g(1/2) = fA (1) = u
g(1/2) = fB (0) = u
g(1) = b
So, g : [0, 1] → S forms a path from a to b. Then S is pathwise

connected.
Theorem 20.16 Let {Si : i ∈ I} be a family of pathwise connected

topological spaces which have the point u in common. Then space
S = ∪{Si : i ∈ I}, is pathwise connected.
Proof. The statement follows immediately from the argument pre-

sented in the previous example.
Definition 20.17 If S is a topological space and u ∈ S, then we

define the
pathwise component of u
as being the union of all pathwise connected spaces that contain the
point u. Hence, if C is the pathwise component containing u, it is
the largest subspace containing u which is pathwise connected.
Example 17. Consider the subspace, T = ∪{Ln : n ∈ N \ {0}} ∪

{(1, 0)} of R2 as presented in the example on page 461 where we
showed that T is connected but not pathwise connected. Show that
a pathwise component in T need not be closed.
Solution: Consider the subspace, S = T \{(1, 0)}. The space, S, is
an infinite union of straight lines in R2 each of which is pathwise
connected and contains the point (0, 0). From this we deduce that S
is pathwise connected. It can also be seen to be a pathwise component
of T . But since S is missing the limit point (1, 0) in T , it is not closed
in T . So a pathwise components of a space need not be closed.
Under particular conditions, it does occur that a pathwise compo-
nent is a clopen subset. This condition is described in the following
theorem.
Theorem 20.18 Let S be a topological space. The pathwise compo-

nents of S are clopen if and only if every point in S has a pathwise
connected neighborhood.
(⇒) Suppose each pathwise component is clopen. Let x ∈ S. Then
there exists be a pathwise component C containing x. We are
required to show that C is a neighborhood of x. This follows
immediately from our hypothesis.
(⇐) Let x ∈ S and C be the (unique) pathwise component contain-
ing x. By hypothesis, C is a neighborhood of x. We are required
to show that C is clopen.
Then since C is the largest pathwise connected neighborhood
which contains x, then x ∈ intS U ⊆ C. So, C is open. We claim
it is also closed: Since the components partition the space S, then C

is the complement of the union of all other open components of S
and so is also closed. So all pathwise components are clopen.
The equivalent conditions, “pathwise components are clopen” and

“every point in S has a pathwise connected neighborhood” described
in the above theorem, when combined to the connected property
characterizes pathwise connectedness, as shown in the next theorem.
Theorem 20.19 Let S be a topological space. The space, S, is path-

wise connected if and only if S is both connected and each of its
points, has a pathwise connected neighborhood.
(⇒) We are given that S is a pathwise connected space. The fact that
S is a connected space follows from Theorem 20.13. That every
point has a pathwise connected neighborhood follows from the
the fact that the pathwise connected space is a neighborhood
of every point in S.
(⇐) Suppose S is connected and every one of its points has a path-
wise connected neighborhood. We are required to show that S
is pathwise connected.
Let x ∈ S. By hypothesis, x has a pathwise connected neighbor-

hood, C. Then, by Theorem 20.18, C is clopen. Since pathwise con-
nected spaces are connected, the clopen set, C, cannot be a proper
subset. So, the pathwise component, C, must be S itself. So, S is
pathwise connected.
In Rn , any connected open subspace is a pathwise connected subspace

as the following theorem shows.
Theorem 20.20 Let Rn be equipped with the usual topology. An

open subspace, U , of Rn is connected if and only if U is a pathwise
connected subspace of Rn .
Proof. The space Rn be equipped with the usual topology and U

is an open subspace of Rn .
(⇒) Suppose U is a connected subspace of Rn . We are required

to show that U is a pathwise connected subspace. By Theo-
rem 20.19 it suffices to show that each point in U has a pathwise
connected neighborhood.
Let x ∈ U . Since U is open in Rn , there is an ε > 0 such
that x ∈ Bε (x) ⊆ U . Let a = ai i=1...n and b = bi i=1...n be
distinct points in Bε (x). If f (x) = (b − a)(x) + a then f [ 0, 1 ] is
a line segment entirely contained in Bε (x). So, Bε (x) is pathwise
connected. From this we can conclude that every point in U has
a pathwise connected neighborhood, so by the above theorem,
U is pathwise connected, as required.
(⇐) Suppose U is pathwise connected. By Theorem 20.13, U is a
connected subspace. Done.
20.7 Totally Disconnected Spaces
For many spaces, the only connected subspaces are singleton sets.
We briefly discuss some basic properties of these types of spaces.
Definition 20.21 A topological space, S, is said to be totally dis-

connected if and only if the only connected components of S are its
points.
Discrete spaces, the subspace Q, the Cantor set (viewed as a sub-

space of [0, 1]) and R\Q all previously discussed sets in this chapter
are standard examples of totally disconnected spaces.
We verify that the totally disconnected property is preserved over
arbitrary products.
Theorem 20.22 The product space of totally disconnected spaces

is itself totally disconnected.
Proof. Let {Si : i ∈ I} be a family of totally disconnected spaces

and S = i∈I Si be the corresponding Cartesian product space. We
are required to show that S is totally disconnected.
Let C be a connected component in S. It suffices to show that
C is a singleton set. Suppose a = ai i∈I and b = bi i∈I are two
points in C. If a = b then aj = bj for some j. Then {aj , bj } ⊆ πj [C],
a continuous image of the connected set, C, in S. Since the only
connected sets in Sj are singleton sets, then aj = bj . So, a = b in C.
So, C is a singleton set. So, S is totally disconnected, as required.
Example 18. Show that if S is totally disconnected and f : S → T

is continuous then f [S] need not be totally disconnected.
Solution: In Theorem 7.20, we showed that there is a function
ψ : C → [0, 1] which maps the totally disconnected Cantor set C
onto the connected set, [0, 1]. So the continuous image of a totally
disconnected set need not by totally disconnected.
Total disconnectedness versus the zero-dimensional property.
Recall from Definition 5.16 that zero-dimensional spaces are those
spaces that have an open base of clopen sets. Equivalently, each point
has a neighborhood base of clopen sets. We know that a non-empty
clopen set allows us to express a space as a union of two open sets.
So, we surmise that zero-dimensional spaces and totally disconnected
spaces are similar in many ways. For certain types of topological
spaces they may even be equivalent, as we shall soon see.
Example 19. Show that a T1 zero-dimensional space, S, is totally
disconnected.
Solution: Since S is T1 , any point in S is closed. Given distinct
points p and y the set S \ {y} is an open set containing p. Since p
has a neighborhood base of clopen sets, then there exists a clopen
set U such that p ∈ U ⊂ S \{y}. So, p and y cannot belong to the
same component. So the only connected component which contains
p is {p}. This means that S is totally disconnected.
Example 20. Suppose S is a compact T2 space satisfying the prop-
erty: “For distinct pairs of points, p and x, there is a clopen set
Ux such that x ∈ Ux ⊂ S \ {p}”. Show that S must then be zero-
dimensional.
Solution: Given: S is a compact T2 space. Suppose V is a proper

open subset containing the point p. It suffices to show that there is
a clopen set W such that p ∈ W ⊆ V .
By hypothesis, for each x ∈ S \V , there is a clopen set Ux such
that x ∈ Ux ⊂ S\{p}. Now, S\V is closed and so is a compact subset
of S. Then
U = {Ux : x ∈ S \V }
covers S \V with clopen sets each of which misses p. Let
UF = {Uxi : i ∈ F }
be a finite subfamily of U which covers S\V . If M = ∪{Uxi : i ∈ F }
and W = S\M , W is a clopen subset of S such that p ∈ W ⊆ V . So,
S is zero-dimensional, as required.
Lemma 20.23 Let S be a compact Hausdorff space, x ∈ S and

Cx be a connected component containing x. Then Cx = ∩{D : D is
clopen in S, x ∈ D} (Figure 20.5).
Proof. Given: That S is compact Hausdorff and Cx is a connected
component which contains x. If U is a clopen neighborhood of x then
Cx ⊆ U (since Cx is connected).
Let
D = {D : D is clopen in S, x ∈ D}
and let
M = ∩{D : D is clopen in S, x ∈ D}
Then Cx is a subset of M , a closed subset of the compact space, S.
Claim: We claim that M is connected in S.
Proof of claim: Suppose A and B are subsets of M , such that
M = A ∪ B. To show that M is connected it suffices to show that
either A or B is empty. Since A and B are closed in M and M is
closed in S, then A and B are closed in S; so they are both compact.
Since S is Hausdorff, there exists disjoint open subsets U and V
of S which contain A and B, respectively. Then
M =A∪B ⊆U ∪V
Figure 20.5. On a connected component Cx in a compact T2 space: M = Cx .
Without loss of generality suppose x ∈ A ⊆ U . Then D contains a

finite subset, {Di : Di ∈ D, i ∈ F }, such that
M ⊆ MF = ∩{Di : Di ∈ D, i ∈ F } ⊆ U ∪ V
for, if (S \ D) ∩ [S \ (U ∪ V )] = ∅ for all D ∈ D, given that S is

compact, M would intersect S \(U ∪ V ).
See that MF is a clopen neighborhood of M = A ∪ B.
Then MF ∩ U and MF ∩ V are (disjoint) open subsets of S.
Since MF ∩ V = MF ∩ S \V is closed in S and
MF \V = MF ∩ U
the subset, MF ∩ U , is also closed in S, so MF ∩ U is a clopen subset

of S.
Since x ∈ A ⊆ MF ∩ U , MF ∩ U is a clopen neighborhood of x
and so MF ∩ U belongs to D.
Then, by definition of M (which is the disjoint union of A and B),
M ⊆ MF ∩ U . Since B ⊆ MF ∩ V and U ∩ V = ∅, then B = ∅. So,
M must be connected, as claimed.
Since Cx is the largest connected set containing x, then Cx = M .
We are done.
Theorem 20.24 A locally compact Hausdorff space is totally dis-

connected if and only if it is zero-dimensional.
Proof. (⇐) We have shown in the example above that T1 zero-
dimensional spaces are totally disconnected. Since Hausdorff spaces
are T1 , we are done.
(⇒) Suppose S is a locally compact Hausdorff totally discon-
nected space.
Let p ∈ S and V be an open neighborhood of p in S. Then
Cp = {p}. We are required to show that S is zero-dimensional. To
do this it suffices to show the existence of a clopen neighborhood D,
in S such that p ∈ D ⊆ V .
Since S is locally compact, there is an open subset M whose
closure, clS M , is compact such that
p ∈ M ⊆ clS M ⊆ V
Let
D = {D ∈ S : D is clopen in S, p ∈ D}
By the above lemma, Cp = ∩D.

Since clS M is compact, there exists a finite subset, DF , of D such
that
Cp ⊆ ∩DF ⊆ clS M ⊆ V
Then ∩DF is a clopen neighborhood of p which is contained in V.

We conclude that S is zero-dimensional.
Example 21. Show that a subspace of a locally compact totally

disconnected Hausdorff space is also totally disconnected.
Solution: Suppose T is a subspace of a totally disconnected locally
compact Hausdorff space S. Then S is zero-dimensional (by Theo-
rem 20.24). Let C be a connected component of T . To show that T
is totally disconnected it suffices to show that C is a singleton set.
If a and b are points in C then, since S is zero-dimensional Haus-
dorff, there exists a clopen neighborhood U (in S) of a which does
not contain b. So, the clopen subset U ∩ T (of T ) separates a and b
and so, if a = b, C cannot be connected. So, a = b. Then connected

components of T are singleton sets. So, T is totally disconnected.
Example 22. Let S be a compact Hausdorff topological space which
is not connected. We showed in an example on page 452, that if we
collapse the connected components of S to points by the quotient
map θ : S → θ[S] we obtain a decomposition space θ[S] whose points
are connected components. This means that the compact space θ[S]
is totally disconnected and hence zero-dimensional.
Concepts Review
1. What does it mean to say that a topological space is connected?

2. Is the connected property invariant with respect to the continu-
ous functions?
3. Under what conditions, if any, are unions of connected sets
connected?
4. If U is a connected dense subset of V what can say about V?
5. Under what conditions, if any, is the product space, S = i∈I Si ,
of connected, Si ’s, connected?
6. Define a connected component of a topological space.
7. Briefly argue that a connected component of a topological space
is closed.
8. Provide a simple example which illustrates that a connected com-
ponent need not be open.
9. Describe the connected components of a discrete space.
10. Describe the connected components of an infinite product of dis-
crete spaces all of which have more than one point.
11. Is an infinite product of discrete spaces (all of which have more
than one point) discrete?
12. Define a locally connected space.
13. What kind of locally connected spaces are guaranteed to have
clopen connected components.
14. Describe the conditions under which the locally connected prop-
erty carries over on a product space, in both directions.
15. Suppose a locally connected space is shown to be compact. What
can we say about its connected components?
16. If a person speaks of a path joining a point, a, to a point, b, in

a space S, what is this person talking about?
17. If you are familiar with the notion of a “curve” in a space S, is
there a subtle difference between a curve and a path?
18. What does it mean to say that a space S is pathwise connected?
19. When is a connected space a pathwise connected space?
20. Are continuous images of pathwise connected spaces necessarily
pathwise connected?
21. Under what conditions is the pathwise connected property car-
ried over products in both directions?
22. Under what conditions, if any, are unions of pathwise connected
spaces pathwise connected?
23. Define the pathwise component of a point in a space S.
24. Are pathwise components necessarily closed?
25. Describe a particular condition under which a pathwise compo-
nent is clopen.
26. Describe a condition under which connected spaces are pathwise
connected.
27. Define the property called totally disconnected.
28. Give a characterization of the totally disconnected property and
describe the conditions under which it holds true.
29. What can we say about the product of totally disconnected
spaces?
30. What can we say about the subspace of a totally disconnected
space?
Exercises
1. Suppose U is subset of R which is not connected and V ⊆ U . Is

it possible for V to be connected?
2. Let (S, τS ) and (T, τT ) be two topological spaces where T is con-
nected. If T has a strictly stronger topology then S, determine
whether S is necessarily connected.
3. Consider the subset
T = {(x sin (1/x)) : x ∈ [0, 2π]} ∪ {(0, 0)}
of R2 . Is T a connected set?
4. Is the set T described in the previous question locally connected?

5. Is the set T described in the previous question pathwise con-
nected?
6. Let {Si : i ∈ I} be an infinite family of connected sets. Suppose
that, if i = k, then Si ∩ Sk = ∅. Determine whether the space
S = ∪{Si : i ∈ I} is connected or not.
7. Let S be an infinite set equipped with the cofinite topology (i.e.,
{∅} union the family of all sets with a finite complement). Deter-
mine whether S is a connected set or not.
8. Suppose the space (S, τ ) is the topological space where
τ = {{∅} ∪ {U : S \U is finite }}
Let the function, f : [0, 1] → S, be continuous. Show that

f [ [0, 1] ] in S is a singleton set.
9. Let S = Rn be the space equipped with the usual topology. Sup-
pose U is a non-empty open subspace of S. How many connected
components can S have? If the possible cardinality of all compo-
nents is infinite, is it countable or uncountable?
10. Are open subspaces of locally connected spaces necessarily locally
connected?
11. Suppose S is a T1 -space which has, at each point, a neighborhood
base of clopen sets. Show that the connected components of S
are all singleton sets.
Part VII
Topics
Chapter 21
Compactifications of Completely
Regular Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we discuss those spaces, S, which can be densely embed-
ded in a compact Hausdorff space. Only completely regular spaces can
possess this property. The process by which we determine such a compact
space, αS, for S, is called compactifying S. The space, αS, is called the
compactification of S. The family of all compactifications of a completely
regular space can be partially ordered. The maximal compactification of
S with respect to the chosen partial ordering is called the Stone–Čech
compactification. We discuss methods for its construction. We will show
that only locally compact spaces have a minimal compactification with
respect to the chosen partial ordering. It is called the one-point com-
pactification.
21.1 Compactifying a Space
In this section, we will briefly talk about methods for “compactifying

a space (S, τS )”. This essentially means adding a set, F , of points to
S, to obtain a larger set, T = S ∪ F , and topologizing T so that
(T, τT ) is a compact Hausdorff space in which a homeomorphic copy
of S appears as a dense subspace of T .
With certain bounded subspaces of Rn , this can, sometimes, be
quite easy to do. For example, if S = [−1, 3) ∪ (3, 7) is equipped with
the subspace topology, then by simply adding the points {3, 7} to S
we obtain the set T = S ∪{3, 7} = [−1, 7] which, when equipped with
477
the subspace topology, is a compact Hausdorff space which densely

contains a homeomorphic copy of S. In such a case, we will say that
T is a compactification of S. A compactification of a bounded subset
of Rn can always be obtained by taking its closure. This does not
mean, however, that there are not others. If we are given a space
such as N or Q, it is not at all obvious how one would go about
compactifying such spaces. We will show techniques which allow us
to achieve this objective.
For what follows, recall that the evaluation map e : S →
[a , b ] induced by C ∗ (S) (the set of all continuous bounded
i∈J i i
real-valued functions on S) is defined as

e(x) = fi (x)i∈J ∈ i∈J [ai , bi ]
where fi ∈ C ∗ (S) and fi [S] ⊆ [ai , bi ].
Definition 21.1 Let (S, τS ) be a topological space and (T, τT ) be

a compact Hausdorff space. We will say that T is a compactification
of S if S is densely embedded in T .1
If S is a compact Hausdorff space, then S can be viewed as being a

compactification of itself. Recall that a compact Hausdorff space is
normal, and so is completely regular. Since subspaces of completely
regular spaces are completely regular, then. . .
only a completely regular space can have a compactification.
In Theorem 14.7, we showed how any completely regular space can

be compactified. In the proof of that theorem, we witnessed how an
evaluation map, e : S → T , induced by C ∗ (S) embeds S into a cube,

T = i∈J [ai , bi ]
There may be different ways of describing this type of compactifica-

tion of S. Since each interval [ai , bi ] is homeomorphic to [0, 1], then
1
When we say “compactification of S” we always mean a Hausdorff compactifi-
cation.
Compactifications of Completely Regular Spaces 479

thereis a homeomorphism, h : T → i∈J [0, 1], which maps T onto
P = i∈J [0, 1]. By Tychonoff’s theorem, P is guaranteed to be com-
pact.So the function, q : S → P , defined as, q = h ◦ e, embeds S
into i∈J [0, 1]. Hence, clP q[S] is a compact subspace of the product
space, P , which densely contains the homeomorphic image, q[S], of
S.2 So, even common topological spaces such at R, Q, and N have at
least the compactification obtained by the method just described.
21.2 The Stone–Čech Compactification
We have described only one of the various ways to obtain a homeo-

morphic copy of the compactification, clT e[S], of S. This particular
compactification has a special name.
Definition 21.2 Let (S, τS ) be a completely regular topological

space. Let

e:S→ i∈I [ai , bi ]
be the evaluation map ∗

induced by C (S) which embeds S in the
product space, T = i∈I [ai , bi ].
The subspace,
clT e[S]
is called the Stone–Čech compactification of S. The Stone–Čech com-

pactification of S is uniquely (and universally) denoted by, βS.
So we see that a non-compact completely regular space, S, always

has at least one compactification, namely, it’s Stone–Čech compact-
ification, βS. We will soon see that there can be more than one
compactification, for the same space.
2
This is just one small example which shows why the Tychonoff theorem deserves
to be titled and why it is such an important theorem in topology.
21.2.1 Equivalent compactifications

Given a completely regular space S, there is nothing stated up to
now which would lead us to conclude that S has only one com-
pactification. In fact most spaces we will consider will have many
compactifications. Suppose we are given two compactifications for a
space, S, say αS and γS. If there is a homeomorphism
h : αS → γS
mapping αS onto γS such that h(x) = x for all x ∈ S, then αS and
γS will be considered to be equivalent compactifications of S. Two
compactifications of the same space which have been determined to
be “equivalent” in this way will be assumed to be the same compact-
ification, topologically speaking. This equivalence is often expressed
by the symbol, αS ≡ γS. For convenience, it is sometimes expressed
by, αS = γS, even though, strictly speaking, αS and γS may not
necessarily be equal sets.
21.2.2 The outgrowth of a topological space

Given a topological space, S, and a compactification, αS, the set
αS \S
is referred to as being the outgrowth of S with respect to this par-
ticular compactification or as the remainder of αS. Equivalent com-
pactifications will be considered to have the same outgrowth. We
will sometimes be interested in determining whether an outgrowth
satisfies certain topological properties.
Example 1. Compactifications of R. Construct two compactifica-
tions of the space, R, one whose outgrowth contains a single point
and another one whose outgrowth contains two points. We will refer
to these as a “one-point compactification” and “two-point compact-
ification” of R.
Solution: A two-point compactification of R. We know that arctan:
R → (−π/2, π/2) maps R homeomorphically onto (−π/2, π/2).
Hence, R is embedded in the compact space
γR = clR arctan[R] = clR (−π/2, π/2) = [−π/2, π/2]
with outgrowth {−π/2, π/2}.
A one-point compactification of R. We know that there is a home-

omorphism h : R → (0, 2π) which maps R onto (0, 2π). The function,
h(x) = 2[arctan(x) + π/2]
is an example. Define the homeomorphic function f : (0, 2π) → R2

as
f (x) = (sin(x), cos(x))
Then f ◦h : R → R2 densely embeds R into the (closed and bounded)

compact set
αR = K = {(sin(x), cos(x)) : x ∈ (0, 2π)} ∪ {(1, 0)}
with the single point, {(1, 0)}, in its outgrowth.

Example 2. Let R+ = {x ∈ R : x ≥ 0}. Is there a two-point
compactification of R+ ?
Solution: No. Suppose αR+ = R+ ∪ {a, b}. Then, since αR+ is
Hausdorff, there must be disjoint open neighborhoods Ba and Bb in
αR+ of a and b, respectively. Then αR+\R+ ⊆ Ba ∪Bb . Since Ba ∪Bb
is open in αR+ containing αR+ \R+ , then
K = αR\(Ba ∪ Bb )
is a compact subset of R+ . Then there exists k ∈ R+ such that

K ⊆ [0, k]. Then [k, ∞) = [(Ba ∪ Bb ) ∩ R+ ] \ [0, k). We see that
[k, ∞) is a connected subspace of R+ while [(Ba ∪ Bb ) ∩ R+ ]\[0, k)
is not. So, we have a contradiction. So, R+ cannot have a two-point
compactification.
Example 3. There is no three-point compactification of R. Prove
this statement.
Solution: Suppose that
αR = R ∪ {a, b, c}
represents a compactification of R with outgrowth αR\R = {a, b, c}.

Let R+ = {x ∈ R : x ≥ 0} and R− = {x ∈ R : x ≤ 0}. Then
αR = clαR R
= clαR (R+ ∪ R− )
= clαR R+ ∪ clαR R−
= R+ ∪ R− ∪ {a, b, c}
By the previous example neither R+ nor R− can have a two-point

(nor a three-point) outgrowth. So, there is no three-point compacti-
fication of R.
We can easily generalize the statement in the previous example to
“If the compactification αR has a finite outgrowth then αR\R must
be either a singleton set or a doubleton set”.
21.3 A Partial Ordering of Hausdorff Compactifications

of a Space
Let’s gather together all compactifications of a completely regular

space, S, as follows:
C = {αi S : i ∈ I}
We will partially order the family, C , by defining “” in the following

way:
If αi S and αj S belong to C , we will write
αi S αj S
if and only if there is a continuous function f : αj S → αi S,

mapping αj S \S onto αi S \S which fixes the points of S.
Notation: Suppose two compactifications αS and γS are such that

αS γS, then by definition, there is a continuous function f : γS →
αS, mapping γS \S onto αS \S which fixes the points of S. We will
represent this continuous function f as
πγ→α : γS → αS
The function πγ→α explicitly expresses which compactification is

larger than (or equal to) the other. Note that a pair of compacti-
fications need not necessarily be comparable in the sense that one
need not necessarily by “less than” the other.
21.4 On C ∗ -Embedded Subsets of a Topological Space
Given a subset T of a topological space, S, and a continuous bounded

real-valued function f : T → R, it is not guaranteed that there is a
bounded continuous function g : S → R such that g|T = f on T . If
there is, then we will say that
g is a continuous extension of f from T to S.
This motivates the following definition.
Definition 21.3 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and U be a proper

non-empty subset of S. We say that U is C ∗ -embedded in S if every
real-valued bounded function, f ∈ C ∗ (U ), extends to a function,
g ∈ C ∗ (S), in the sense that g|U = f .3 In this case we will say
that. . .
g : S → R is a continuous extension of f : U → R from U to S
The notion of “C ∗ -embedding” is closely related to completely regu-

lar spaces and their Stone–Čech compactification. For this reason, we
will discuss this property in depth now (even though C ∗ -embeddings
may be discussed in other contexts). The following theorem shows
that, for any completely regular space S, S is C ∗ -embedded in its
Stone–Čech compactification, βS. That is,
every function, f ∈ C ∗ (S), extends continuously to a function,

f β ∈ C(βS).
3
There is an analogous definition for “C-embedded” studied later: We say that U
is C-embedded in S if every real-valued function, f ∈ C(U ), continuously extends
to a function, f ∗ ∈ C(S).
Theorem 21.4 Let S be a completely regular space. Then S is C ∗ -

embedded in βS.
Proof. If f ∈ C ∗ (S), let If be the range of f . Let

T = f ∈C ∗ (S) clR If
Then the evaluation map, e : S → T embeds S in T . Recall that, by

definition,

βS = clT e[S] ⊆ f ∈C ∗ (S) clR If
Suppose g ∈ C ∗ (S).
We are required to show that g : S → R extends continuously to
some function, gβ : βS → R.
If πg is the gth-projection map then

πg : f ∈C ∗ (S) clR If → clR Ig
where βS = clT e[S] and so,
πg |βS : βS → clR Ig
maps βS into clR Ig . Let gβ = πg |βS . Then gβ [βS] = gβ [clT e[S]] =

clR g[S] ⊆ clR Ig .
It follows that g β : βS → clR Ig and, since g[S] ⊆ Ig , for x ∈ S,
β
g |S (x) = g(x).
So, gβ is a continuous extension of g from S to βS.
Note that, in the case where S is a compact space, e[S] is a compact

space densely embedded in βS and so βS \S = ∅. Then S and βS
are homeomorphic.
The above theorem guarantees that every real-valued continuous
bounded function, f , on a completely regular space, S, extends to a
continuous function f β : βS → R. The function f β is the extension of
f from S to βS. Recall (from Theorem 9.8) that continuity guaran-
tees that two continuous functions which agree on a dense subset D
of a Hausdorff space, S, must agree on all of S. So, there can only
be one extension, f β , of f from S to βS.
We will soon show (in Theorem 21.9) that, if αS is a compact-

ification of S and S is C ∗ -embedded in αS then αS must be the
compactification, βS. That is,
βS is the only compactification in which S is C ∗ -embedded.
21.4.1 A generalization of the extension, f → f β

The above theorem can be generalized a step further. Suppose
C(S, K) denotes all continuous functions mapping S into a com-
pact set K. We show that every function f in C(S, K) extends to
a function f β(K) ∈ C(βS, K). Note that neither f or f β(K) need be
real-valued. The space, K, represents any compact set which contains
the image of S under f .
Theorem 21.5 Let S be a completely regular (non-compact) space

and g : S → K be a continuous function mapping S into a com-
pact Hausdorff space, K. Then g extends uniquely to a continuous
function, gβ(K) : βS → K.
Proof. We are given that g : S → K continuously maps the com-

pletely regular space, S, into the compact Hausdorff space K. We
are required to show that g extends to gβ(K) : βS → K.
Since K is compact Hausdorff, it is completely regular; hence,
there exists a function
(the evaluation map) which embeds the com-
pact set K in V = i∈J [0, 1]. Since V contains a topological copy
of K, let us view K as a subset of V.
Since g : S → K, then, for every x ∈ S, g(x) = gi (x)i∈J ∈ K ⊆
[0, 1]J .
Since S is C ∗ -embedded in βS, then, for each i ∈ J, gi : S → [0, 1]
extends to giβ : βS → [0, 1].
We define the function g β(K) : βS → V as

g β(K) (x) = gi (x)i∈J ∈ V = i∈J [0, 1]

Since giβ is continuous on βS, for each i, then g β(K) : βS → i∈J [0, 1]
is continuous on βS.
See that gβ(K) [βS] = gβ(K) [clβS (S)] = clV (g[S]) ⊆ clV (K) = K.
Since g β(K) |S = g, then g : S → K continuously extends to
g β(K) : βS → K on βS. As required.

Given a completely regular topological space S, and T = i∈I [ai , bi ]
we now see that the evaluation function eC ∗ (S) : S → i∈I [ai , bi ]
(which homeomorphically embeds a copy of S into T ) then continu-
ously extends to βS as follows:
eβC ∗ (S) [βS] = eβC ∗ (S) [clβS S]
= clT eC ∗ (S) [S]
where
eβC ∗ (S) (x) = f β (x)f ∈C ∗ (S)
So, we can represent the Stone–Čech compactification, βS, of S as

being equivalent to
eβC ∗ (S) [βS]
21.4.2 The maximal compactification, βS

Suppose αS is any compactification of S possibly distinct from βS.
We will now show that, in the partially ordered family, C , of all
compactifications of S, αS βS. Showing this requires that we
produce a continuous function πβ→α : βS → αS such that πβ→α (x) =
x, for all x ∈ S. If we can prove this, then we will have shown that
βS is the unique maximal compactification of a completely regular
space, S.
Theorem 21.6 If αS is a compactification of S, then αS βS.

Proof. By Theorem 21.5, the identity map i : S → αS, extends to
a continuous function,
i∗ : βS → αS
Then S ⊆ i∗ [βS] ⊆ αS, where i∗ [βS] is compact, hence, closed in αS.
Since S is dense in αS, then the open set αS\i∗ [βS] must be empty.
So, the continuous function,
i∗ [βS] = i∗ [clβS S] = clαS i∗ [S] = clαS S = αS
maps βS onto αS. So, αS βS, as required.
Then for any compactification αS, there is the continuous function
πβ→α : βS → αS
which maps βS onto αS where πβ→α fixes the points of S.
21.4.3 More on C ∗ -embedded subsets of a space S

We present a miscellany of results which will help us more easily
recognize a C ∗ -embedded subset, T of a space S. We will return to
our discussion of compactification immediately following this.
The simplest example of a C ∗ -embedded subset of R is a compact
subset of R.
Theorem 21.7 If K is a compact subset of R then K is C ∗ -

embedded in R.
Proof. Let K be a compact subset of R and f : K → R be a con-
tinuous function on K. Since every continuous real-valued function
is bounded on a compact subset, then f ∈ C ∗ (K) = C(K). Suppose
u = sup {K} and v = inf {K}
Since K is closed and bounded in R, then u and v belong to K.

Suppose g : R → R is a function such that
g = f on K
g(x) = f (u), if x ≥ u
g(x) = f (v), if x ≤ v
It is easily verified that g is a continuous extension of f from K to R.

Then K is C ∗ -embedded in R.
Example 4. The set N is C*-embedded in R. One way of visualizing

this is to plot the points of {(n, f (n)) : n ∈ N} of a function f ∈
C ∗ (N) in the Cartesian plane R2 and join every pair of successive
points (n, f (n)) and (n + 1, f (n + 1) ) by a straight line. This results
in a continuous curve representing a continuous function g on R which
extends f .
21.4.4 Urysohn’s extension theorem

The following theorem often referred to as Urysohn’s extension
theorem provides an important and useful tool for recognizing
C ∗ -embedded sets.4
Theorem 21.8 Urysohn’s extension theorem: Let T be a subset

of the completely regular space S. Then T is C ∗ -embedded in S
if and only if pairs of sets which can be completely separated by
some function in C ∗ (T ) can also be separated by some function
in C ∗ (S).
Proof. (⇒) Suppose T is C ∗ -embedded in S and U and V are

completely separated subsets of T . Then there exists f ∈ C ∗ (T ) such
that U ⊆ f ← (0) and V ⊆ f ← (1). Then by hypothesis f extends to
f ∗ ∈ C ∗ (S). Then U ⊆ f ←∗ (0) and V ⊆ f ←∗ (1). So, U and V are
completely separated in S.
(⇐) Suppose that pairs of sets which can be completely separated
by some function in C ∗ (T ) can also be separated by some function
in C ∗ (S).
Let f1 be a function in C ∗ (T ). We are required to show that there
exists a function g ∈ C ∗ (S) such that g|T = f1 .
4
Urysohn’s extension theorem should not be confused with Urysohn’s lemma.
Urysohn’s lemma states that “The topological space (S, τS ) is normal if and
only if given a pair of disjoint non-empty closed sets, F and W , in S there
exists a continuous function f : S → [0, 1] such that, F ⊆ f ← [{0}] and
W ⊆ f ← [{1}]”.
Since f1 is bounded on T, then there exists, k ∈ R, such that

1
|f1 (x)| ≤ k for all x ∈ T . Then f1 ≤ k = 3r1 = 3 · k2 · 23 =k
1
(where r1 = k2 · 23 ).
We now inductively define a sequence of functions {fn } ⊆ C ∗ (T ).
For n = 1, 2, 3, . . ., there exists fn ∈ C ∗ (T ) such that −3rn ≤ fn (x) ≤
3rn where,
n n−1
k 2 2 n
3rn = 3 · · =k· (where rn = k2 · 23 )
2 3 3
For this n, let Un = f ← n [ [−3rn , −rn ] ] and Vn = f ← n [ [rn , 3rn ] ].
We see that Un and Vn are completely separated in T .5
By hypothesis, Un and Vn are completely separated in S. This
means there exists gn ∈ C ∗ (S) such that, gn[S] ⊆ [−rn , rn ], gn [Un ] =
n
{−rn } and gn [Vn ] = {rn } (where rn = k2 · 23 ). So the sequence,
{gn : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}, thus constructed is well-defined in C ∗ (S).
We now inductively define the sequence {hn } ⊆ C ∗ (T ) initiating
the process with h1 = f1 and continuing with
hn+1 = hn − gn |T
Then for each n,

n n+1
k 2 k 2
|hn+1 | ≤ 2r1 = 2 · · =3· · = 3rn+1
2 3 2 3
So, gn |T = hn − hn+1 . Define g : S → R as the series
g(x) = gn (x)
n∈N\{0}
n
See that g(x) is continuous on S: Since |gn (x)| ≤ k2 23 , and

k 2 n

n∈N\{0} 2 3 is a converging geometric series, then n∈N\{0} gn (x)
converges uniformly to g(x). Since each gn (x) is continuous on S, then
g ∈ C ∗ (S). So, g is a continuous on S.
5
To see this, the function hn = (−rn ∨ fn ) ∧ rn ) has Un ⊆ Z(hn − (−rn ) ) and
Vn ⊆ Z(hn − rn ).
Also see that, g|T = f1 :

m
g|T (x) = lim gn |T (x)
m→∞
n=1
= lim (h1 (x) − h2 (x)) + (h2 (x) − h3 (x)) + · · ·

m→∞
+ (hm (x) − hm+1 (x))

= lim h1 (x) − hm+1 (x)
m→∞
= h1 (x) = f1 (x) (Since limm→∞ 3rm+1 = 0)
Then, g|T = f1 so f1 extends continuously from T to S. We are done.
Example 5. Use Urysohn’s extension lemma to show that any com-

pact subset, K, of a completely regular space, S, is C*-embedded
in S.
Solution: Let U and V be disjoint subsets of the compact set, K,
which are completely separated in K. Then there is a function f ∈
C(K) such that U ⊆ A = f ← [{0}] and V ⊆ B = f ← [{1}]. Both A
and B are disjoint closed subsets of compact K and so are compact
sets. Then A and B are compact in the completely regular space,
S. Then A and B are completely separated in S. So, U and V are
completely separated in S. By Urysohn’s extension lemma, K is C ∗ -
embedded in S. We conclude that. . .
any compact subset, K, of a completely regular space, S,
is C*-embedded in S.
21.4.5 Uniqueness of βS
We are now able to prove that, up to equivalence, the Stone–Čech
compactification of S is the only compactification in which S is
C ∗ -embedded. By this we mean that, if S is C ∗ -embedded in the
compactification, γS, of S, then γS is equivalent to βS. So the sym-
bol, βS, is strictly reserved for the Stone–Čech compactification of S.
Theorem 21.9 The completely regular space S is C ∗ -embedded in

the compactification, γS, if and only if γS ≡ βS.
Proof. We are given that S is completely regular.

(⇐) Suppose γS ≡ βS. Then there is a homeomorphism, h :
γS → βS, mapping γS onto βS such that h(x) = x, for all x ∈ S.
We are required to show that S is C ∗ -embedded in γS.
If f ∈ C ∗ (S) then f extends to f β : βS → R. Then f β ◦h : γS →
R. Define f γ = f β ◦h. We see that f γ : γS → R is the continuous
extension of f from S to γS. Then S is C ∗ -embedded in γS.
(⇒) Suppose S is C ∗ -embedded in γS. We are required to show
that γS and βS are equivalent compactifications.
Let i : S → S be the identity map. Then, by Theorem 21.5,
i extends to i∗ : βS → γS. Also, just as shown in the proof of
Theorem 21.5, i← extends to i← ˆ : γS → βS. Then i← ◦i and i◦i←
are both identity maps on S and, since S is dense in both βS and γS,
respectively, then i∗ ◦i← ˆ and i← ˆ◦i∗ are identity maps on γS and on
βS, respectively. Then both i∗ and i← ˆ are homeomorphisms. Hence,
γS and βS are equivalent compactifications.
Example 6. Show that if F is a closed subset of a metric space S

then F is C ∗ -embedded in S.
Solution: Let F be a closed subset of the metric space S. We will
set up the solution so that we can invoke the Urysohn extension
theorem.
Let A and B be completely separated in F . Then, by definition,
there is a function f in C ∗ (F ) such that A ⊆ Z(f ) and B ⊆ Z(f −1).
Then clF A ⊆ Z(f ) and clF B ⊆ Z(f − 1). Since F is closed in S, then
so are the disjoint sets clF A and clF B. It is shown on page 258 that in
metric spaces closed subsets are the same as zero-sets. So, clF A and
clF B are disjoint zero-sets in S, say clF A = Z(k) and clF B = Z(g)
in S. If
|k|
h=
|k| + |g|
on S, clF A = Z(h) and clF B = Z(h − 1) in S. So, A and B are com-
pletely separated in S. By Urysohn’s extension lemma every closed
subset of a metric space is C ∗ -embedded.
Because of this, it is useful to remember that
any closed subset of R is C ∗ -embedded in R.

21.5 Associating Compactifications to Subalgebras

of C ∗ (S)
To each compactification αS we can associate a subset, Cα (S), of

C ∗ (S) defined as
Cα (S) = {f |S ∈ C ∗ (S) : f ∈ C(αS)}
That is, f ∈ Cα (S) if and only if f extends to f α ∈ C(αS). If αS and

γS are two compactifications of S such that αS γS it is normal to
wonder how Cα (S) compares to Cγ (S) in C ∗ (S).
Theorem 21.10 Let αS and γS be two compactifications of S such

that αS γS. Let Cα (S) denote the set of all real-valued continuous
bounded functions on S that extend to αS. Let Cγ (S) denote the set
of all real-valued continuous bounded functions on S that extend to
γS. Then Cα (S) ⊆ Cγ (S).
Proof. We are given that αS γS. Then there is a continuous

function πγ→α : γS → αS such that πγ→α (x) = x on S.
Suppose t ∈ Cα (S). It suffices to show that t ∈ Cγ (S). Then there
a function tα : αS → R is such that tα |S = t. Define the function
g : γS → R as
g = tα ◦πγ→α
Since πγ→α : γS → αS and tα : αS → R are both continuous, then

g is continuous on γS and
g|S (x) = (t◦πγ→α )(x) = t(x)
So, t = g|S ∈ Cγ (S). Hence,
αS γS ⇒ Cα (S) ⊆ Cγ (S)
as required.
21.5.1 Equivalent functions in C ∗ (S)

In what follows we will refer to pairs of functions in C ∗ (S) which are
“equivalent”.
We define a particular subset, Cω (S) , of C ∗ (S) as follows:
Cω (S) = {f ∈ C ∗ (S) : f β is constant on βS \S}
The subset Cω (S) is easily seen to be closed under addition, multi-

plication, scalar multiplication and contains all constant functions.
We say that it is a subalgebra of C ∗ (S).
We will say that two functions f and g in C ∗ (S) are equivalent
functions in C ∗ (S) if
f − g ∈ Cω (S)
Equivalent functions f and g are sometimes expressed by the notation
f∼
=g
The next theorem shows that there are as many compactifications of

S as there are subalgebras of C ∗ (S) of a certain type.
Suppose (S, τ ) is a completely regular space and F is a subalgebra
of C ∗ (S) which contains Cω (S) and separates points and closed sets.
We can invoke Theorems 7.17 and 10.16 to obtain a compactification,
αS = eβF [βS] = clT eF [S]
of S, generated by F . We can associate to the compactification αS,

the set Cα (S) ⊆ C ∗ (S) of real-valued continuous functions. In the
following theorem, we show conditions that F must satisfy to guar-
antee that F = Cα (S).
Theorem 21.11 Let (S, τ ) be a completely regular space and F be

a subalgebra of C ∗ (S) which separates points and closed sets in S.
Suppose F generates the compactification
αS = eβF [βS] = clT eF [S]

If F satisfies the properties:

(1) F contains Cω (S),
(2) every f ∈ Cα (S) is equivalent to some function g ∈ F ,
then F = Cα (S).
Proof. We are given that F separates points and closed sets of S
and Cω (S) ⊆ F . Then
eβF [βS] = clT eF [S] = αS
is a compactification of S (generated by F ) where Cα (S) = {f |S :

f ∈ C(αS)}.
We are also given that every function in Cα (S) is equivalent to
some function in F .
We are required to show that F = Cα (S).
Claim 1: F ⊆ Cα (S). Note that eβF ← : αS → βS. Let f ∈ F . We
define the real-valued function f α : αS → R as
f α = f β ◦ eβF ←
We see that f α ∈ C(αS) and so is a continuous extension of f ∈ F .

We then conclude that F ⊆ Cα (S), as claimed.
Claim 2: Cα (S) ⊆ F . Suppose g ∈ Cα (S). Then, by hypothesis,
there is a function f ∈ F such that g − f = h ∈ Cω (S). Then
g = f + h. Since both f and h belong to the subalgebra F , then
g ∈ F . We can then conclude that Cα (S) ⊆ F , as claimed.
Then Cα (S) = F , as required.
The converse is easily seen to be true. That is, if F = Cα (S), then

F satisfies the two given properties.
The reader can expect to encounter, a bit later, similar theorem
statements, one of which is called the Stone–Weierstrass theorem in
Theorem 30.3, the other is Theorem 30.4.6
6
The Stone–Weierstrass theorem states: “Let S be a compact topological space.
Let F be a complete subring of C ∗ (S) which contains the constant functions. If
F separates the points of S then F = C ∗ (S)”.
Suppose γS is a compactification of S and Cγ (S) = {f |S ∈ C(S) :

f ∈ C(γS)}. That is, Cγ (S) is the set of all function, f , in C ∗ (S)
which extend to f γ : γS → R. We have shown that γS βS and
Cγ (S) is a subalgebra of C ∗ (S). We have also seen that there is a
continuous map πβ→γ : βS → γS which fixes the points of S.
In the following lemma, we show that we can express the function
πβ→γ : βS → γS in a form which better describes the mechanism
behind the function itself.
Lemma 21.12 Let γS be a compactification of the space S. Let

G = Cγ (S). Then
πβ→γ = eGγ ← ◦eG β
where eG is the evaluation map generated by G .

Proof. If f ∈ Cγ (S), for x ∈ βS, f β (x) = (f γ ◦πβ→γ )(x). Then, for
x ∈ βS,
eG β (x) = f β (x)f ∈Cγ (S)

= (f γ ◦πβ→γ )(x)f ∈Cγ (S)
= f γ (πβ→γ (x))f ∈Cγ (S)
= eG γ (πβ→γ (x))
= (eG γ ◦πβ→γ )(x)
Then eG β = (eG γ ◦πβ→γ ) on βS. Then πβ→γ = eGγ ← ◦eG β .
21.6 Limits of z-Ultrafilters in βS
For what follows, recall the definitions of terms related to z-filters in

14.10.
A consequence of the Stone–Weierstrass statement is Theorem 30.4 which roughly

states that: “If the set, C ∗ (S) contains a subring, F , which is complete and
contains Cω (S) then F = Cα (S) for some compactification, αS, of S”.
Suppose Z = {Z(f ) : f ∈ M ⊆ C ∗ (S)} is a free z-ultrafilter in

the locally compact Hausdorff space S, where M is the corresponding
free maximal ideal in C ∗ (S). Let
Z ∗ = {clβS Z(f ) : f ∈ M }
denote a family of closures of the elements in Z . Since βS is com-

pact Hausdorff and Z is a filter, Z ∗ satisfies the finite intersection
property. Then Z ∗ must have non-empty intersection in βS. Then
it is fixed and so must have a unique limit point,
{p} = ∩{clβS Z(f ) : f ∈ M }
in βS\S. We clearly have clβS Z(f ) ⊆ Z(f β ) for each f ∈ M ⊆ C ∗ (S).

Since f β |Z(f ) agrees with f β on clβS Z(f ), then its extension to Z(f β )
agrees with f β on Z(f β ). So,
clβS Z(f ) = Z(f β ) (∗ )
So,
for any free z-ultrafilter, Z = {Z(f ) : f ∈ M ⊆ C ∗ (S)} in
Z[S], we can write,
{p} = ∩{clβS Z(f ) : f ∈ M } = ∩{Z(f β ) : p ∈ Z(f β )}
where p ∈ βS \S. So the points in βS \S are precisely the

unique limits of a unique free z-ultrafilter in Z[S].
Of course, if Z is a fixed z-ultrafilter in Z[S] then
{p} = ∩{Z(f ) : f ∈ M }
for some p in S.
Theorem 21.13 Suppose T is a dense subset of the completely

regular space S. Then the following are equivalent:
(a) The subset, T , is C ∗ -embedded in the space S.
(b) Disjoint zero-sets in T have disjoint closures in S.
(c) Every point of S is the limit of a unique z-ultrafilter on T .
Proof. We are given that S is completely regular.

(a ⇒ b) Suppose T is a C ∗ -embedded dense subset of S. Let
h, g ∈ C ∗ (T ) be such that Z(h) and Z(g) are disjoint zero-sets of T .
Then Z(h) and Z(g) are completely separated in T .7
By Urysohn’s extension theorem, Z(h) and Z(g) are completely
separated in S. Then there exists t ∈ C ∗ (S) such that Z(h) ⊆ Z(t)
and Z(g) ⊆ Z(t − 1). Then clS Z(h) ⊆ Z(t) and clS Z(g) ⊆ Z(t − 1).
We can then conclude that clS Z(h) ∩ clS Z(g) = ∅, as required.
(b ⇒ c) Suppose that disjoint zero-sets in T have disjoint closures
in S. Let Z1 and Z2 be disjoint zero-sets in T .
Claim 1: We claim that clS (Z1 ∩ Z2 ) = clS Z1 ∩ clS Z2 .
Proof of claim: Of course, LHS ⊆ RHS is always true. Suppose,
on the other hand, that x ∈ clS Z1 ∩ clS Z2 .
We are required to show that x ∈ clS (Z1 ∩ Z2 ). For any zero-set
neighborhood, Z, of x, Z ∩ Z1 is dense in Z ∩ clS Z1 so
x ∈ clS (Z ∩ Z1 ) ∩ clS (Z ∩ Z2 ) = ∅ (∗)
Now both Z ∩ Z1 and Z ∩ Z2 are zero-sets so, by hypothesis, (Z ∩

Z1 ) ∩ (Z ∩ Z2 ) cannot be empty. So, Z ∩ (Z1 ∩ Z2 ) = ∅. Since Z is
any zero-set neighborhood of x, this means that x ∈ clS (Z1 ∩ Z2 ).
We conclude clS (Z1 ∩ Z2 ) = clS Z1 ∩ clS Z2 , as claimed.
Claim 2: We claim that each point in S \T is the limit of a unique
z-ultrafilter on T .
Proof of claim: Let y ∈ T . Then y belongs to the closure of a
zero-set, Z, in T . Hence, y is the limit point of a z-ultrafilter, Z , in
T . Now, if y is also the limit of another z-ultrafilter, Z1 , in T then
Z1 , will contain a zero-set Z1 which will not intersect some zero-set,
Z2 , of Z . Then y ∈ clS Z1 ∩ clS Z2 = clS (Z1 ∩ Z2 ) = ∅. We can only
conclude that every point in S\T is the limit of a unique z-ultrafilter
in T . As claimed.
(c ⇒ a) We are given that S\T is a set of limits of free z-ultrafilters
on T . Since βT \T is the set of all limit points of free z-ultrafilters
7
To see this, note that Z(|h| + |g|) = ∅ in T and so for the function, k(x) =
|h(x)|/[|h(x)| + g(x)|], Z(h) ⊆ Z(k) and Z(g) ⊆ Z(k − 1).
on T , we can say that
S \T ⊆ βT \T
Now, since S is dense in βS and T is dense in S, then T is dense

in βS so we can view βS as a compactification, say γT , of T with
outgrowth
γT \T = (βS \S) ∪ (S \T )
Then for the function πβ→γ : βT → γT , we have, πβ→γ [βT\T ] = γT\T

where,
πβ→γ |S (x) = x
Then, for f ∈ C ∗ (T ) define f ∗ : S → R as
f ∗ (x) = f β ◦πβ→γ |←
S (x)
where f ∗ is seen to be continuous on S and f ∗ |S = f on T . So, f ∗

is a continuous extension of f from T to S. We conclude that T is
21.7 Pseudocompact Spaces Revisited
Recall (from Definition 17.10) that a topological space is said to

be pseudocompact if every continuous real-valued function on S is
bounded. That is, if C(S) = C ∗ (S).
Although the pseudocompact property has a simple and easily
understood definition, it turns out that, when not compact, such
spaces are not easily recognizable. It will be helpful to obtain a few
characterizations. In the following theorem, we show that, for locally
compact Hausdorff spaces, pseudocompact spaces are precisely those
spaces, S, where βS \S does not contain a zero-set.
Theorem 21.14 A locally compact Hausdorff space S is pseudo-

compact if and only if no zero set Z in Z[βS] is entirely contained
in βS \S.
Proof. Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff space.

(⇒) Suppose S is a pseudocompact space and Z(f β ) ∈ Z[βS].
We are required to show that Z(f β ) ∩ S = ∅.
Suppose not. That is, suppose, Z(h) ⊆ βS \S (where h ∈ C(βS).
Then, since h|S is not zero in S, we can define the function g = 1/h|S
and so g ∈ C(S). Let z ∈ Z(h). Since z belongs to clβS S, then there
is a sequence, {xi } in S, which converges to z. By continuity, the
corresponding sequence, {h(xi )} in R, must converge to h(z) = 0.
So, g is unbounded on S, which contradicts the hypothesis which
states that all real-valued continuous functions on S are bounded.
So, Z(h) must intersect with S, as required.
(⇐) Suppose now that, for any Z ∈ Z[βS], Z ∩ S = ∅. We are
required to show that S is pseudocompact.
Suppose S is not pseudocompact. Then C(S) contains an
unbounded function g. Let
f = |g| ∧ k
where k > 0. Then f is continuous real-valued unbounded on S. Then
for each n ∈ N, there exists xn ∈ S such that f (xn ) ∈ (n, ∞). Then
h = 1/f is a continuous well-defined real-valued bounded function on
S. Since βS is compact, {xn : n ∈ N} has a converging subsequence
{xni : i ∈ N} with limit, say x ∈ βS \ S. Since h is continuous
and bounded on S, h extends to hβ : βS → R with hβ (x) = 0.
Then Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \S, a contradiction of our hypothesis. Then S is
pseudocompact.
It is interesting to note that, in the above theorem, a property of the

outgrowth, βS \S characterizes a property of the space S.
We point out one easy consequence of the above theorem.
Suppose S is locally compact and completely regular. If S is
pseudocompact and k = f β (x) ∈ f β [βS \ S], then there exists
y ∈ Z(f β − k) ∩ S, so, f β (y) = k ∈ f [S]. So, f β [βS \S] ⊆ f [S].
Conversely, suppose f β [βS\S] ⊆ f [S]. Suppose Z(f β −t)∩βS\S =
∅. Then there exists y ∈ βS \S such that f β (y) = t and x ∈ S such
that f (x) = t. Then x ∈ Z(f β − t) ∩ S = ∅. So, S is pseudocompact.
The locally compact completely regular space, S, is pseudo-
compact if and only if, for every f ∈ C ∗ (S), f β [βS \S] ⊆
f [S].
21.8 The One-Point Compactification
It was shown in Theorem 18.8, that every locally compact Hausdorff

space is completely regular. Hence, a locally compact Hausdorff
space, S, has at least one compactification, namely, βS. This com-
pactification is maximal when compared to all others in the family,
C , of all compactifications. Does the family C contain a minimal
element? That is, does C have a compactification, γS, such that
γS αS, for all compactifications, αS in C ? The answer will depend
on the space, S. In a previous chapter of the book, we, in fact, pro-
vided an answer to this question, as we shall soon see.
In Theorem 18.7, we showed that given a locally compact Haus-
dorff space (S, τ ) and a point ω ∈ S, we can construct a larger set,
ωS = S ∪ {ω}
By first defining, Bω = {U ∪ {ω} : U ∈ τ and S \U is compact}, we
then define a topology, τω , on ωS as follows:
τω = τ ∪ B ω
We then showed that (ωS, τω ) is a compact space which densely con-
tains S. Then (ωS, τω ) satisfies the definition of a compactification
of S. Furthermore, and quite importantly, we show in Theorem 18.7
that ωS is Hausdorff if and only if S is locally compact.
So a non-compact, locally compact Hausdorff space, S, has a
compactification, ωS, which may be different from βS. We formally
define it.
Definition 21.15 Let (S, τ ) be a locally compact Hausdorff topo-

logical space, ω be a point not in S and ωS = S ∪ {ω}. If
Bω = {U ∪ {ω} : U ∈ τ and S \U is compact}
and τω = τ ∪ Bω then (ωS, τω ) is called
the one-point compactification of S.8
8
The one-point compactification of S is also referred to as the Alexandrov com-
pactification of S, named after the soviet mathematician, Pavel Alexandrov (1896–
1982).
We will, more succinctly, denote the one-compactification of S by,
ωS = S ∪ {ω}
Since we have chosen the symbol ωS as notation, then, to be consis-

tent with the notation used up to now, we should let
Cω (S) = {f |S : f ∈ C(ωS)}
But the symbol, Cω (S), has already been used in another sense on
page 493 where Cω (S) is used to represent the set of all f ∈ C ∗ (S)
such that f β is constant on βS\S. We verify that these are the same
set. For f ∈ Cω (S) if and only if,
f β [βS \S] = f β [ πβ→ω

←
[{ω}] ] = {f ω (ω)} ⊂ R
Then Cω (S) separates points and closed sets of S.9

It is also worth emphasizing the fact that
for a space S to have a one-point compactification which is
Hausdorff, S must be locally compact.
We can even say more. Amongst all the the completely regular spaces,
S, the only ones that are open in any compactification are the ones
where S is locally compact. We will prove this now.
Theorem 21.16 Let S be a completely regular topological space and

αS be any compactification of S. Then S is open in αS if and only
if S is locally compact.
Proof. We are given that S is completely regular and αS is a

compactification of S.
(⇒) Suppose S is open in αS. Since the space S is the intersection
of the open set S and the closed set αS, by Theorem 18.3, S is locally
compact.
9
Had we known this fact before we would has seen that, in the statement of
Theorem 21.11, the condition (1) is redundant.
(⇐) Suppose S is locally compact in αS. By Theorem 18.3, part

(d), S is the intersection of an open subset, U , and a closed subset,
F . Since F = αS and S is dense in αS, then S is open in αS, as
required.
If S is locally compact then the map, πβ→ω : βS → ωS, collapses

the set βS \S down to the singleton set {ω}. More generally, if αS
is any compactification of S, then πα→ω continuously collapses the
outgrowth αS \S down to {ω} and fixes the points of S. So for any
compactification αS,
ωS αS and Cω (S) ⊆ Cα (S)
Theorem 21.17 Uniqueness of ωS. Let S be a locally compact com-

pletely regular topological space. Suppose αS and γS are both com-
pactifications of S which contain only one point in their compact
extension. Then they are equivalent compactifications.
Proof. We are given that S is locally compact completely regular.
Suppose αS \S = {ωα } and γS \S = {ωγ }, both singleton sets.
Consider the map, h : αS → γS, where h(x) = x on S and
h(ωα ) = ωγ . Then h is one-to-one and onto. It will suffice to show
that h maps open neighborhoods to open neighborhoods.
Let Uα be any open neighborhood of a point in αS. If Uα ⊆ S
then Uα is open in S. Then h[Uα ] = Uα . Since S is locally compact,
it is open in γS and Uα = Uα ∩ S is open in γS.
Suppose ωα ∈ Uα . Since αS\Uα is compact and h|S is continuous,
then h[αS \ Uα ] is a compact. Since h is one-to-one, h[αS \ Uα ] =
h[αS]\h[Uα ] = γS \h[Uα ], a compact set which doesn’t contain ωγ .
So, h[Uα ] is open. Hence, h : αS → γS is a homeomorphism. We can
conclude that αS ≡ γS.
From this theorem, we can conclude that the one-point compactifi-

cation is unique, up to equivalence. We now consider a few examples
involving compactifications of a space.
Example 7. Suppose that S is locally compact and its one-point
compactification, ωS, of S is metrizable. Show that S must be second
countable.
Solution: Suppose ωS is metrizable. In the proof of Theorem 15.8,

it is shown that countably compact metric spaces are separable. By
Theorem 5.11, a separable metric space is second countable. Since ωS
is compact and so is countably compact, then, by combining these
two results, we obtain that ωS is second countable. By Theorem,
5.13, subspaces of second countable spaces are second countable. So,
S is second countable. As required.10
It may happen that βS and ωS are the same compactification.
We provide an example where they are not equivalent.
Example 8. Consider the set S = (0, 1] equipped with the usual
subspace topology. Determine ωS. Show that the one-point com-
pactification, ωS = [0, 1], of S is not equivalent to βS.
Solution: Since [0, 1] is a compact set which densely contains S, and
the one-point compactification is unique, then ωS = [0, 1]. Note that,
since the function f (x) = sin x1 is a bounded continuous function on
S, then it extends to βS. (Plot f (x) = sin x1 .) Verify that f does not
extend continuously to [0, 1].
Then [0, 1] cannot be the Stone–Čech compactification of S.
The following theorem provides an example of a space, S, such
that βS = ωS.
Theorem 21.18 If S is the ordinal space [0, ω1 ) (where ω1 is the

first uncountable ordinal) then βS \ S = {ω1 } and so βS = ωS =
[0, ω1 ], the one-point compactification of S.
Proof. Given: The space, S, is the ordinal space [0, ω1 ). Then ωS =
[0, ω1 ] is its one-point compactification. So, S is completely regular
and locally compact.
We are required to show that βS = ωS = [0, ω1 ].
In the example on page 373, it is shown that S = [0, ω1 ) is count-
ably compact but non-compact. In Theorem 15.9, it is shown that,
if S is countably compact every function in C(S) is bounded and so
has a compact image in R.
10
The converse of the statement in this example is true. That is, “Locally compact
second countable spaces have a metrizable one-point compactification” has been
proven. But its proof is fairly involved. So, we will not show it here.
Let f ∈ C ∗ (S) = C(S). Then
f β [βS] = f β [clβS S] = clR f [S] = f [S] ⊆ R
To show that βS = ωS it suffices to show that f β [βS\S] is a singleton

set in f [S]. Suppose q and q ∗ are two points in f β [βS\S] ⊆ f [S] ⊆ R.
We claim that q = q ∗ .
Proof of claim: Express f [S] as a net
N = {f (α) : α ∈ S = [0, ω1 )}
Both q and q ∗ are accumulation points of the net N = f [S]. So,

for each n ∈ N, both B1/2n (q) and B1/2n+1 (q ∗ ) each contain a cofinal
subset of the tail end of the net N . We can then choose, {αn : n ∈ N}
strictly increasing in S such that f (α2n ) ∈ B1/2n (q) and f (α2n+1 ) ∈
B1/2n+1 (q ∗ ). If sup {αn } = κ then sup {α2n } = κ = sup {α2n+1 }.
Hence,
lim f (α2n ) = q = f (κ) = q ∗ = lim f (α2n+1 )

n→∞ n→∞
So, q = q ∗ as claimed.
From this we can conclude that, for all f ∈ C ∗ (S), f β is constant
on βS \S. Then βS = [0, ω1 ] = ωS, the one-point compactification
of S.
In the following statement, an n-sphere , S n , refers to a subset of

Rn+1 defined as {x ∈ Rn+1 : x = 1}. For example, S2 is a subset
of R3 where (x, y, z) ∈ S 2 if and only if (x, y, z) = 1. We will show
that, the 2-sphere, S2 is homeomorphic to ωR2 .
Theorem 21.19 Let S n denote the n-sphere in Rn+1 . Then the

“punctured n-sphere”, S n minus a single point, (S n \{p}), is home-
omorphic to Rn . Then, S n is homeomorphic to the one-point com-
pactification, ωRn , of Rn .
Proof. We are given that S n is the n-sphere which is a subset

of Rn+1 and that p = (0, 0, 0, . . . , 0, 1) is a point in Rn+1 which
belongs to S n . We will first show that S n \ {p} is homeomorphic
to Rn . We achieve this by showing that the function g : S n\{p} → Rn

defined as
1
g(x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , xn+1 ) = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn−1 , xn )11
1 − xn+1
maps S n \{p} homeomorphically onto Rn .

Since p = (0, 0, . . . , 1), then 1 − xn+1 = 0, so g is well-defined.
Let a = (a1 , a2 , . . . , an+1 ) and b = (b1 , b2 , . . . , bn+1 ) be distinct
points in S n \{p}. Then ak = bk for at least one k ∈ {1, 2, . . . , n + 1}.
Then
1 1
(a1 , a2 , . . . , an−1 , an ) = (b1 , b2 , . . . , bn−1 , bn )
1 − an+1 1 − bn+1
So, g is one-to-one. The function g is also verified to be onto Rn .

To prove continuity of g : S n \{p} → Rn it suffices to show that
πi ◦g is continuous for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, and invoke 7.11. See that

1
(πi ◦g)(x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , xn+1 ) = πi (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn−1 , xn )
1 − xn+1
xi
=
1 − xn+1
πi (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn )
=
1 − xn+1

πi
= (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn )
1 − xn+1
so πi ◦g is continuous for each i.

Also, since π is an open map, the function g is an open map.
Then g maps S n \{p} homeomorphically onto Rn , as we claimed
earlier.
We now define a function g ∗ : Sn → ωRn and show it is a home-
omorphism.
Let g ∗ : Sn → ωRn be a function mapping the one-point com-
pactification, S n , of S n \ {p} onto the one-point compactification,
11
The function, g, is known as a stereographic projection.
ωRn = R ∪ {ω}, of Rn which is defined as
g∗ |S n\{p} (x) = g(x)

g ∗ (p) = ω
If U is an open subset of ωRn which doesn’t contain ω then g ∗ ← [U ]

is open in S n \{p}, and so is open in S n .
If U is an open subset of ωRn which contains ω then g ∗ ← [U ] =
{p} ∪ g ← [U ∩ Rn ]. Now, ωRn\U is compact in ωRn and so is compact
in Rn . Then g← [ωRn \ U ] is compact in S n . So, g∗← [U ] is an open
neighborhood of p in S n . So, g∗ is continuous on S n .
Similarly, g ∗ maps open subsets of S n to open subsets of ωRn .
So, g ∗ is a homeomorphism between the compact sets S n and
ωRn .
We also showed along the way that g ∗ | \ Sn\{p} = g maps the
punctured n-sphere, Sn \{p}, homeomorphically onto Rn .
21.9 Topic: Cardinality of Some Common Stone–Čech

Compactifications
We know the cardinality of the most common sets we encounter (such

as N, Q and Rn ). We can sometimes determine the cardinality of asso-
ciated sets such as their Stone–Čech compactification. We know the
cardinality, |N|, of the set N is ℵ0 while |R| = c = 2ℵ0 . In the follow-
ing theorem, we compute the cardinalities of βN, βQ, and βR. This
is good practice in working with these particular compactifications.
Theorem 21.20 The cardinality, |βN|, of the set βN is 2c .
Proof. We are given the compactification, βN, of N.

Claim 1: We first claim that |βN| ≥ 2c .
Proof of Claim 1: In Theorem 7.10, it is shown that, since [0, 1]
is separable, then the product space, K = i∈R [0, 1], with |R| = c
factors, is also separable. This means that there is a countably infinite
set, D, contained in K. There then exist a function
g:N→D⊂K
which indexes the elements of D. Note that g is continuous on N and

densely embeds D in K. By Tychonoff’s theorem, K is compact. See
that g extends continuously from N to
gβ(K) : βN → K
Then
g β(K) [βN] = gβ(K) [clβN N]

= clK gβ(K) [N]
= clK D
=K

Now, |K| = | i∈R [0, 1]| = cc = 2c .12 Since βN is the domain of the
function g β(K) (which could possibly not be one-to-one), then
|βN| ≥ |K| = 2c
as claimed.
Claim 2: That |βN| ≤ |K| = 2c .
Proof of Claim 2: We know that each function in C ∗ (N) can be
seen as a sequence {xi : i ∈ N} in RN . Then
|C ∗ (N)| = |RN | = cℵ0 = c13
That is, if I = |C ∗ (N)|, then
C ∗ (N) = {fi : N → R : i ∈ I}
contains I = c distinct functions.
12
The proof of | i∈R [0, 1]| = cc = 2c is shown in an example of Section 24.2 of
Axioms and Set theory, R. André, in which we compute the cardinality of RR .
13
The proof of |RN | = c is shown in Theorem 25.2 of Axioms and Set theory,
R. André.

Let T = i∈I [ai , bi ] ⊆ i∈I R where, by Tychonoff theorem, T is
compact.
Recall that eC ∗ (N) : N → i∈I R is the evaluation map generated
by C ∗ (N), explicitly defined as

eC ∗ (N) (n) = fi (n)fi ∈C ∗ (N) ∈ eC ∗ (N) [N] ⊆ T ⊆ i∈I R

Then eC ∗ (N) [N] ⊆ T = i∈I [ai , bi ], and |T | ≤ |R|I = cc = 2c . So,
eβC ∗ (N) [βN] = eβC ∗ (N) [clβS N]

= clT eC ∗ (N) [N]
⊆T
So, |βN| ≤ |T | ≤ 2c . This establishes our second claim.

Since |βN| ≤ 2c and |βN| ≥ 2c , then |βN| = 2c . We are done.
Now, N contains countably many points and so |βN\N| = 2c . Since

we can associate to each point in βN\N a unique free z-ultrafilter in
Z[N], the above theorem confirms that there are 2c free z-ultrafilters
in Z[N].
The cardinality of βN will help us determine the cardinalities of
βR and βQ.
Theorem 21.21 The sets βN, βR and βQ each have a cardinality

equal to 2c .
Proof. We have already shown that |βN| = 2c .

Claim 1: |βQ| ≤ 2c .
Proof of Claim 1: We know N and Q are countable so both have
cardinality ℵ0 . Then there exists a one-to-one function, f : N → βQ,
mapping N onto Q ⊆ βQ. Since N is discrete, f is continuous on N.
By Theorem 21.5, f : N → βQ extends to
f β(βQ) : βN → clβQ f [N] = clβQ Q = βQ

Then
f β(βQ) [βN] = f β(βQ) [clβN N] = clβQ f [N] = clβQ Q = βQ
So, |βQ| ≤ |βN| = 2c . This establishes Claim 1.

Claim 2: |βR| ≤ |βQ|.
Proof of Claim 2: Since Q is dense in R and R is dense in βR,
then it is dense in βR then clβR Q = βR. Consider the continuous
inclusion function
i : Q → clβR Q = βR
By Theorem 21.5, i : Q → clβR Q = βR extends to
iβ(βR) : βQ → βR
Then
iβ(βR) [βQ] = iβ(βR) [clβQ Q] = clβR i[Q] = clβR Q = βR
So, |βR| ≤ |βQ|. This establishes Claim 2.

Up to now we have shown that |βR| ≤ |βQ| ≤ |βN| = 2c .
Claim 3: |βR| ≥ |βN|.
Proof of Claim 3: We know that N is C ∗ -embedded in R. (See
example on page 488 or Theorem 21.8.) Then, if i : N → βN is the
continuous inclusion map, since N is C ∗ -embedded in R, i : N → βN
extends continuously to
i∗ : R → βN
Also, i∗ : R → βN extends continuously to i∗β : βR → βN. Then
βN = clβN N
= clβN i[N]
⊆ clβN i∗ [R] (Since i embeds N in i∗ [R])
= i∗β [clβR R]
= i∗β [βR]
Since i∗β [βR] contains βN, then |βN| ≤ |βR|. This establishes
Claim 3.
Combining the results in the three claims above we conclude that
|βR| = |βQ| = |βN| = 2c as required.
21.10 Compactifying a Subset T of S ⊆ βS
If T is a non-compact subset of S, it is interesting to reflect on how

clβS T compares with βT . Does it make sense to say that βT ⊆ βS?
We examine this question in the following example.
Example 9. Let T be a non-empty subspace of a completely regular
space, S. Show that
clβS T is equivalent to βT.
Solution: We are given that T ⊆ S. Since subspaces of completely

regular spaces are completely regular, then T is completely regular.
Let i : T → βS be the identity function which embeds T into βS. By
Theorem 21.5, i : T → βS extends continuously to iβ(βS) : βT → βS.
Then
βT = iβ(βS) [βT ]
= iβ(βS) [clβT T ]
= clβS i[T ]
= clβS T
So, clβS T is equivalent to βT .

Suppose now that F is a closed non-empty subset of the com-
pletely regular space S. The statement in the above example will
allow us to say something more about F .
To see this, suppose f ∈ C ∗ (S). As stated in the example,
clβS F = βF
So, F is C ∗ -embedded in clβS F . Since F is closed in S, then
(clβS S)\S ⊆ βS \S
So, f : F → R extends to f β : βF → R. Since βF is compact in βS,

∗
then f β extends to f β : βS → R. So,
∗
f β |S : S → R
∗ ∗
is a continuous extension of f on F to f β |S on S (via f β on βS).
Then F is C ∗ -embedded in S. We conclude that:
If F is a closed non-empty subset of a completely regular
space S then F is C ∗ -embedded in S.
21.11 The Zero-Sets of β N Are Clopen
Zero-sets in βN play a role in the solution of the following example.

If Z is a zero-set in N then it is clopen in N. It is easily seen that any
zero-set in N is a zero-set of a characteristic function, g : N → {0, 1},
←
on N. Since g extends to gβ : βN → {0, 1}, gβ (0) = Z(gβ ) = clβN Z
←
is a clopen zero-set in βN. As well, g β (1) = βN \ Z(gβ ) is a clopen
zero-set in βN. So, for every zero-set Z(g) in N, Z(g β ) is clopen in
βN. Hence, zero-sets of βN are clopen in βN.
Example 10. The compactification, βN, is easily seen to be separa-
ble (N is a dense subset of βN). Show that βN\N is not separable.
Solution: Suppose that βN\N is separable. Then, βN\N contains a
dense countable subset
D = {xi : i ∈ N}
Since the cardinality of βN is 2c (shown above), we can fix two points
n∗ ∈ (βN\N)\D and n ∈ N
Now, for each i ∈ N, {xi } and {n∗ , n} form disjoint closed subsets
of βN.
Since βN is normal, for each xi ∈ D, there is a clopen zero-set,

Zi = Z(gβ ) such that
xi ∈ Zi and {n∗ , n} ⊆ βN\Zi
Then {βN\Zi : i ∈ N} is a family of zero-set clopen neighborhoods

of {n∗ , n}.
If W = ∩{βN \ Zi : i ∈ N} then W is a countable intersection
of zero-sets and so is, itself, a zero-set which contains {n∗ , n} (see
page 252) which does not intersect D. Since n∗ ∈ βN\N ∩ W, then
W ∩ βN\N is a non-empty clopen subset of βN\N which does not
intersect D. Since D is dense in βN\N, we have a contradiction. So,
βN\N is not separable.
Concepts Review
1. Suppose S is a topological space and T is a compact Hausdorff

space. What does it mean to say that T is a compactification
of S?
2. If S has a compactification, αS, what separation axiom is guar-
anteed to be satisfied by S?
3. Given a completely regular space S let e : S → πi∈I [ai , bi ] be the
evaluation map on S induced by C ∗ (S). Give a definition of the
Stone–Čech compactification of S which involves this evaluation
map.
4. What does it mean to say that the two compactifications of S,
αS and γS, are equivalent compactifications?
5. If C = {αi S : i ∈ I} denotes the family of all compactifications
of S. Define a partial ordering of C .
6. If U is a subset of the topological space S, what does it mean to
say that U is C ∗ -embedded in S?
7. If S is C ∗ -embedded in the compactification, αS, of S what can
we say about αS?
8. Suppose S is completely regular and g : S → K is a continuous
function mapping S into a compact Hausdorff space K. For which
compactifications, αS, does the following statement hold true:
“the function g extends to a continuous function g ∗ : αS → K”?
9. Suppose S is locally compact and Hausdorff. Define the one-point

compactification, ωS, of S.
10. What can we says about those subspaces of a compactification,
αS, which are locally compact? What can we says about those
subspaces of a compactification, αS, which are open in αS?
11. What is the Stone–Čech compactification of the ordinal space
[0, ω1 )?
12. State a characterization of the pseudocompact property stated
in this chapter.
Chapter 22
Singular Sets and Singular

Compactifications
Abstract
In this chapter, we introduce an alternate method to construct a com-
pactification of a locally compact Hausdorff space. We define the notion
of the singular set, S(f ), of a function, f : S → T . We will show that
we can always use S(f ) to construct a compactification, αS = S ∪ S(f ),
by applying a suitable topology on αS. If the singular set, S(f ), con-
tains the image, f [S], of f , we refer to f as a singular map. When f is
singular the resulting compactification, S ∪f S(f ), is called a singular
compactification.
22.1 Singular Sets and Functions: Definitions
We begin by formally defining a “singular set” of a continuous func-

tion on a locally compact non-compact Hausdorff space. We also
define what is meant when a function is referred to as being a “sin-
gular map”.
Definition 22.1 Let (S, τ ) be a locally compact non-compact

Hausdorff topological space and f : S → T be a continuous function
mapping S into some compact space T . We define the singular set,
515
S(f ), of f as follows:
S(f ) = {x ∈ clT f [S] : clS f ← [U ] is not compact

∀ clT f [S]-open nbhd, U, of x}
If S(f ) = clT f [S] then f : S → T is said to be a singular function or

singular map.
We make the following few remarks about the two concepts we

have just introduced.
(1) If S is a non-compact locally compact Hausdorff, the singular

set S(f ) is never empty in the compact codomain, T . This is so,
whether f is a singular map or not. To see this, recall that, by
Theorem 21.5, f : S → T , extends to f β(T ) : βS → T . Suppose
u ∈ βS \S and
x = f β(T ) (u) ∈ f β(T ) [βS \S]
If U is an open neighborhood of x in T , then u ∈ f β(T )← [U ] an

open subset of βS. If clS f ← [U ] is a compact subset of S, then
f β(T )← [U ]\clS f ← [U ] is an open neighborhood of u contained in
βS \S, a contradiction. So, clS f ← [U ] is not compact. By defini-
tion, x ∈ S(f ). So, S(f ) is non-empty.
(2) The singular set S(f ) is always closed, and hence compact, in
T . This is so whether f is a singular map or not. To see this,
suppose x ∈ T \S(f ). Then there exists an open neighborhood U
of x in T , such that clS f ← [U ] is compact in S. Then every point
p ∈ U also belongs to T \S(f ). So, x ∈ U ⊆ T \S(f ). Hence, S(f )
is a closed (and so is a compact) subset of the compact space T .
(3) If f : S → T is a singular map, then f [S] is a dense subset of
S(f ) (since, by definition of singular function, S(f ) = clT f [S]).
22.2 Singular Compactifications: Definitions
We now show how the singular set, S(f ), of a function, f : S → T ,

can be used as the outgrowth of a compactification of S.
Singular Sets and Singular Compactifications 517
Definition 22.2 Let (S, τ ) be a locally compact non-compact

Hausdorff topological space and f : S → T be a continuous function
mapping S into a compact space T . Then S(f ) denotes its singular
set. If f is a singular map then, by definition, S(f ) = clT f [S] ⊆ T .
We construct a new set by adjoining S(f ) to S to obtain a larger set,
γS = S ∪f S(f )
The basic open neighborhoods, B1 , of points in S will be the same

as the ones in S when viewed as a topological space on its own.1 If
x ∈ S(f ), F is a compact subset of S and U an open neighborhood
of x in S(f ), we define
Bx = U ∪ f ← [U ]\F
as a basic open neighborhood of x. Let B2 = {Bx : x ∈ S(f )}. Let

B = B1 ∪ B2 . This defines a base for a topology on γS which is
easily seen to be a Hausdorff compactification of S. We will refer
to γS as the singular compactification induced by the singular map
f : S → T.
The definition of a singular compactification is not a simple one

to grasp nor to visualize. It invites many questions. For example, if
given a singular compactification γS, one may want to know which
function induces it. Can there be more than one such function that
induces it? Are there compactifications which are non-singular?
To help us answer such questions it will be helpful to find simpler
characterizations of a singular compactification.
Retractions and retracts. We remind the reader that, for a topo-
logical space S, . . .
if A ⊂ S and r : S → A is a continuous function which

fixes the points of A, then r is referred to as a “retraction”
of S onto A. In such a case, A is called a “retract” of S.
1
Remember that, if S is locally compact Hausdorff, then S is open in any com-
pactification of S.
We will see that those compactifications, αS, whose outgrowth,

αS \S, is a retract of αS characterize singular compactifications.
Theorem 22.3 Let S be locally compact and Hausdorff. Let αS be

a Hausdorff compactification of S. Then αS is a singular compacti-
fication of S if and only if αS \S is a retract of αS.
Proof. We are given that αS is a Hausdorff compactification of S.
(⇒) Suppose αS = S ∪f S(f ) is a singular compactification of S
induced by the continuous function,
f : S → clT f [S] = S(f ) = αS \S
We are required to show that αS \S is a retract of αS.
By definition, f [S] is dense in S(f ). Let
f α : αS → S(f )
be a function which agrees with f on S and fixes the points of S(f ).
We claim, that f α is continuous on αS: Let x ∈ S(f ) and U be an
open neighborhood of x. Then f α← [U ] = U ∪ f ← [U ], by definition
of a basic open neighborhood in αS. So, f α is continuous on αS, as
claimed.
Hence, αS \S is a retract of αS, as required.
(⇐) Suppose αS \S is a retract of αS. We are required to show
that αS is a singular compactification.
By hypothesis, there is a continuous function r : αS → αS \ S
which fixes the points of αS \S. By definition of retract, r[S] ⊆ αS \S.
We claim that r|S is a singular function on S: Let x ∈ αS \S and
U be an open neighborhood of x in αS \S. Now, U must intersect
r|S [S], for if not, r ← [U ] = U ⊆ αS \S which is not open in αS. So,
r ← [U ] = U ∪ (r ← [U ] ∩ S). Then, since clS r|S ← [S] is not compact in
S, then αS \S = S(r|S ) is the singular set of r|S , and so
αS = S ∪r S(r|S )
a singular compactification induced by the map r|S . So,
r|S : S → αS \S
is a singular, map as claimed.
We now have another way of recognizing a singular compactifica-

tion:
Singular compactifications are precisely those compactifi-
cations, αS, whose outgrowth, αS \ S, is a retract of the
whole space.
In the following example, we verify that, if we have one singular

compactification of S, then every compactification “below” it in the
partially ordered family of all compactifications will also be a singular
compactification.
Example 1. Show that if αS is a singular compactification and γS
is another compactification such that γS αS then γS is also a
singular compactification.
Solution: Suppose αS is a singular compactification and γS is
another compactification such that γS αS. Then αS = S ∪f S(f )
where f : S → T is continuous and f [S] ⊆ S(f ) = clT f [S]. Also,
there exists πα→γ : αS → γS such that πα→γ is continuous and onto
and fixes the points of S. If g = πα→γ ◦f then
clγS g[S] = clγS (πα→γ ◦f )[S]

= πα→γ [clαS (f [S])]
= πα→γ [αS \S]
= γS \S
If U is an open subset of γS \S
clS g← [U ] = clS (πα→γ ◦f )← [U ]

= clS f ← (πα→γ
←
[U ])
= clS f ← [V ] (V open in αS \S)
a non-compact set in S.
So, γS \S = S(g). This means that γS \S is a retract of γS and

so γS is a singular compactification. We are done with the solution.
Does every locally compact Hausdorff space, S, have at least one
singular compactification? Well, we know that such a space S, has
a one-point compactification, ωS = S ∪ {ω}. Consider the constant
function r : ωS → {ω}. It is a retraction on ωS. So, r|S : S → {ω} is a

singular map on S. So, we can answer this question in the affirmative.
22.3 Compactifications Induced by Non-Singular

Functions
Suppose (S, τ ) is a topological space and f : S → T is a continuous

function mapping a non-compact locally compact Hausdorff space S
into a compact space T . For what follows, f may or may not be a
singular map.
22.3.1 Definition of a non-singular compactification

induced by f
Suppose f is not a singular map on S. Recall that
S(f ) = {x ∈ clT f [S] : clS f ← [U ] is not compact for any

neighborhood U of x}
Since f is not singular, then S(f ) does not satisfy the condition,
f [S] ⊆ S(f ), required to construct a singular compactification.
Despite this, we can still adjoin the singular set S(f ) to S to form a
larger set, K = S ∪ S(f ).
We define a topology on K as follows: The set, BS , of basic open
neighborhoods of points in S will be the same as the ones in S when
viewed as a topological space on its own. For x ∈ S(f ), F a compact
subset of S and U an open neighborhood of x in T , we define
Bx = (U ∩ S(f )) ∪ f ← [U ]\F
as a basic open neighborhood of x. This defines a topology on K =

S ∪ S(f ) generated by the basic open sets,
B = BS ∪ {Bx : x ∈ S(f )}
The set, K, will be seen to be a compact set which contains S as a

dense subset. These facts will be verified following 22.4. In the case
where f is not singular (that is, f [S] ∩ T \S(f ) = ∅), the set S(f )
will however not be a retract of the compactification K = S ∪ S(f ).2

We would like to adopt notation which will help distinguish those
compactifications (induced by a function) which are singular from
those that are not.
Notation 22.4 Suppose S(f ) is a singular set of a function f : S →

T where T is compact. If f is not a singular map we will represent
the compactification γS induced by f as
γS = S ∪ S(f )
Note how we distinguish it from those compactifications where f is
a singular map:
γS = S ∪f S(f )
We first justify a few statements made in the introductory para-

graph above. All properties are for a continuous function f : S → T
mapping the locally compact Hausdorff space into the compact
space T .
(1) We verify that γS = S ∪ S(f ) is a well-defined topological space.
To do this we will show that the given family, B, of sets satisfies
the “base property”(See page 91). If so it generates a topology
on γS. Clearly γS = ∪{B ∈ B}. Given
A ∩ B = (Ux ∪ f ← [Ux ]\FU ) ∩ (Vx ∪ f ← [Vx ]\FV )
we have,
x ∈ A ∩ B = (Ux ∩ Vx ) ∪ [(f ← [Ux ]\FU ) ∩ (f ← [Vx ]\FV )]
= (Ux ∩ Vx ) ∪ [f ← [Ux ] ∩ f ← [Vx ]]\(FU ∪ FV )
implies
x ∈ (Ux ∩ Vx ) ∪ [f ← [Ux ∩ Vx ]]\(FU ∪ FV ) = A ∩ B
So, B satisfies the base property and so generates a topology
on γS.
2
If f is not singular, f [S] may still intersect S(f ), or may not even intersect
S(f ) at all; it is just that f [S] cannot be entirely contained in S(f ).
(2) The set S is dense in γS = S ∪ S(f ). See that very open neigh-
borhood, U ∪ f ← [U ]\F , of a point in S(f ) intersects S.
(3) Fact: Suppose f : S → T is a continuous function, where T is
compact.
Case 1: If f [S] is compact, S(f ) ⊆ f [S].
Case 2: If f [S] is non-compact, f also induces a compactification
of f [S]:
f β(T ) [βS] = f [S] ∪ S(f ) = clT f [S]
with compactification outgrowth, S(f )\f [S].
mapping S into the compact space T . The function f extends to
f β(T ) : βS → T .
By definition of S(f ), f [S] ∪ S(f ) ⊆ clT f [S] = f β(T ) [βS].
Case 1: Suppose f [S] is compact. Then f [S] ∪ S(f ) ⊆ clT f [S] =
f [S], so S(f ) ⊆ f [S], as required.
Case 2: Suppose f [S] is non-compact. We claim that
f β(T ) [βS] ⊆ f [S] ∪ S(f ). Suppose not. Suppose there is a point
u ∈ f β(T ) [βS]\S(f )). Then, since u ∈ S(f ), there is a clT f [S]-
open neighborhood, U , of u such that clS f ← [U ] is a compact
subset of S.
←
Then f β(T ) (u) ⊆ clS f ← [U ] ⊆ S. So, u ∈ f [S]. Then
f β(T ) [βS] ⊆ f [S] ∪ S(f ) as claimed.
We conclude that f β(T ) [βS] = f [S] ∪ S(f ).
So, f [S] ∪ S(f ) is a compactification of f [S] with compactifi-
cation outgrowth S(f ) \ f [S].
(4) Fact: For f : S → T , f β(T ) [βS \S] ⊆ S(f ).
Proof. Let f β(T ) (u) ∈ f β(T ) [βS \S] and U be an open neigh-
borhood of f β(T ) (u) in clT f [S]. Then
←
u ∈ f β(T ) [U ] ∩ βS \S = ∅
Then clS f ← [U ] cannot be compact.3 So f β(T ) (u) ∈ S(f ).
We conclude f β(T ) [βS \S] ⊆ S(f ).
3
For if clS f ← [U ] is compact and V is an open neighborhood of u which misses
←
clS f ← [U ] then V ∩ f β(T ) [U ] is an open subset of βS contained in βS \S.
(5) We verify that γS = S ∪ S(f ) is indeed compact.

Proof. Given: γS = S ∪ S(f ) and f : S → T a continuous
function mapping completely regular, S, into the compact space
T . Then f extends to f β(T ) : βS → T .
Define πβ(γ) : βS → γS = S ∪ S(f ) as:
πβ(γ) |βS\S = f β(T ) |βS\S and πβ(γ) |S (x) = x
We claim that πβ(γ) : βS → S ∪ S(f ) is continuous. Let U ∪

f ← [U ]\F be an open neighborhood of y ∈ S(f ) ⊆ γS (where F
is compact in S). Then
←
πβ(γ) [U ∪ f ← [U ]\F ] = πβ(γ)
← ←
[U ] ∪ πβ(γ) [f ← [U ]\F ]
= πβ(γ) |← ← ←
βS\S [U ] ∪ πβ(γ) |S [f [U ]\F ]
= f β(T ) |← ←
βS\S [U ] ∪ f [U ]\F
= f β(T ) |←
βS\S [U ] ∪ f
β(T ) ←
|S [U ]\F
←
= f β(T ) [U ]\F
an open subset of βS. So, γS = S ∪ S(f ) is the continuous image

of βS. Then γS = S ∪ S(f ) is compact.
Then S ∪ S(f ) is a compactification of S.
(6) Fact: For f : S → T , f β(T ) [βS \S] = S(f ).
Proof. We have shown above that f β(T ) [βS \ S] ⊆ S(f ). It
suffices to show that S(f ) ⊆ f β(T ) [βS\S]. Let x ∈ S(f ). To show
that x ∈ f β(T ) [βS \S] it suffices to show f β(T ) (y) = x for some
y ∈ βS \S. Then
← ←
πβ(γ) (x) = f β(T ) (x) ∩ βS \S ⊆ βS \S
←
So, for y ∈ f β(T ) (x) ∩ βS \S,
f β(T ) (y) = x
So,
x ∈ f β(T ) [βS \S]

Then S(f ) ⊆ f β(T ) [βS \S]. Then

S(f ) = f β(T ) [βS \S]
(7) Suppose f : S → T is continuous (not necessarily singular) where
T is compact and γS = S ∪ S(f ) is the compactification of S
induced by f .
Fact: f : S → T extends continuously to f γ : γS → clT f [S].
Proof of Fact: Let πβ(γ) : βS → γS be the continuous func-
tion defined as above. That is, πβ(γ) |βS\S = f β(T ) |βS\S and
πβ(γ) |S (x) = x.
We define f γ : γS → clT f [S] = f β(T ) [βS] as
f γ (x) = f β(T ) [πβ(γ)
←
(x)]
←
Then for x ∈ S(f ), f γ (x) = f β(T ) [πβ(γ)
← (x)] = f β(T ) [f β(T )
(x)] = x.
Then f γ : γS → clT f [S] is easily seen to be continuous on its
domain.
We can then say, f extends to f γ : γS → clT f [S] where
f γ [γS] = f γ [S ∪ S(f )]
= f γ [S(f )] ∪ f [S]
= S(f ) ∪ f [S]
= clT f [S]
22.3.2 Summary of the above results

We are given a continuous function f : S → T mapping S into
a compact space T (not necessarily a singular map). We obtain a
compactification of S,
γS = S ∪ S(f )
(not necessarily a singular compactification). Then, if f [S] is
non-compact,
f β(T ) [βS] = f [S] ∪ S(f ) = clT f [S]
f γ [γS] = f [S] ∪ S(f ) = clT f [S]
f β(T ) [βS \S] = S(f ) = f γ [S(f )]
where f [S] ∪ S(f ) may be disjoint, but not necessarily. If f is a

singular map then
f [S] ∪ S(f ) = S(f )
If f [S] is compact, f β(T ) [βS] = f [S] = f [S] ∪ S(f ).
22.4 A Few Examples
The above definition shows that any continuous function, f : S → T

from S into a compact space, T , can be used to construct a compact-
ification of a locally compact Hausdorff space S. We consider a few
examples to better visualize how this is done.
Example 2. Consider the space R equipped with the usual topology.
The space R is known to be locally compact non-compact Hausdorff.
Consider the continuous functions
sin : R → [−1, 1] and cos : R → [−1, 1]
both mapping R into the compact subspace [−1, 1]. Show that sin
and cos are both singular maps on R and so each induce a singular
compactification of R.
Solution: Case sine: See that, for any x ∈ [−1, 1] and open neigh-
borhood, U of x, in [−1, 1], sin← [U ] is unbounded and so its clo-
sure, clR sin← [U ], in R is not compact. Then x ∈ S(sin), and so
[−1, 1] ⊆ S(sin). By definition, S(sin) ⊆ cl[−1,1] sin[R], so
S(sin) = clR [sin [R]] = [−1, 1]
Then sin : R → [−1, 1] is a singular map. We can then use the sine
function to construct the singular compactification
R ∪sin S(sin) = R ∪sin [−1, 1]
of R with outgrowth [−1, 1].

Case cosine: Proceed similarly to show that R ∪cos S(cos) = R ∪cos
[−1, 1] is also a singular compactification of R.
The above example produces two compactifications of R with
identical outgrowth. It may be tempting to conclude that they are
equivalent compactifications. We will later show (on page 527) that

this is not the case.
Example 3. Consider the space R equipped with the usual topology.
The space S is known to be a locally compact non-compact Haus-
dorff. Let T = [−π/2, π/2]. Show that R ∪ S(arctan) is not a singular
compactification of R. Then find the compactification induced by
arctan.
Solution: We consider the function, arctan : R → T . We then verify
which points in clT [arctan [R] ] = [−π/2, π/2] belong to the singular
set S(arctan). We see that arctan, pulls back open intervals of the
form (a, b) in [−π/2, π/2], to intervals whose closure is compact in
R. Then arctan[R] = (−π/2, π/2) ⊆ S(arctan). So arctan is not a
singular map. Thus R ∪ S(arctan) is not a singular compactification
of R.
We now determine S(arctan). Since the curve of y = arctan (x)
is asymptotic to the horizontal lines y = −π/2 and y = π/2, the
function arctan pulls backs open intervals of the form (a, π/2] and
[−π/2, b) to unbounded sets and so the “pull backs” of these have
non-compact closures in R. So, S(arctan) = {−π/2, π/2}. So, even
though arctan is not a singular map on R it does induce a “two-point
compactification”
R ∪ S(arctan) = R ∪ {−π/2, π/2}
of R.
Not surprisingly,
arctan[R] ∪ S(arctan) = (−π/2, π/2) ∪ {−π/2, π/2} = [−π/2, π/2]
is the two-point compactification of arctan[R].

Example 4. Show that βR is not a singular compactification of R.
Solution: We have shown that R ∪ S(arctan) = R∪{−π/2, π/2} is a
compactification of R but not a singular one. Since R ∪ S(arctan)
βR, then, by the example on page 519, βR cannot be singular.
In the following example, we show that two compactifications of
the same set with the same outgrowth need not be equivalent com-
pactifications.
Example 5. Given the two singular compactifications,
αR = R ∪cos S(cos)
γR = R ∪sin S(sin)
show that, in spite of S(sin) = [−1, 1] = S(cos), αR and γR are not

equivalent compactifications.
Solution: Suppose αR and γR are equivalent compactifications. We
will show that this will lead to a contradiction.
Then, by definition of “equivalent compactifications”, there exists
a homeomorphism,
πγ→α : γR → αR
such that for x ∈ R, πγ→α (x) = x.

By definition, the function, πγ→α |γR\R , is a homeomorphism map-
ping [−1, 1] onto [−1, 1]. This means that πγ→α |γR\R is monotone
and maps endpoints to endpoints. Suppose, without loss of gener-
ality, that πγ→α is increasing and so πγ→α |γR\R (−1) = −1. Then
πγ→α |γR\R (1) = 1.
If U = (a, 1] ⊆ S(sin) and V = πγ→α |γR\R U ⊆ S(cos) see that can
choose a small enough so that sin← [U ] ∩ cos← [V ] ∩ [−π, π] is empty.
Then sin← [U ] ∩ cos← [V ] = ∅.
Now, cos : R → [−1, 1] extends to cosα : αR → [−1, 1].
Then U ∪ sin← [U ] is open in γR. Then by continuity, the two sets
πγ→α [U ∪ sin← [U ] ] = V ∪ sin← [U ]

cosα ← [V ] = V ∪ cos← [V ]
are both open subsets of αR.

So (V ∪sin← [U ])∩(V ∪cos← [V ]) = V , a non-empty open subset of
αR which is entirely contained in αR\R = [−1, 1]. Since R is dense in
αR = R ∪ [−1, 1], this is impossible. The source of our contradiction
is our supposition that αR and γR are equivalent. We are done.
Example 6. Determine whether f (x) = sin (1/x) with domain R\{0}
and range T = [−1, 1] = f [R\{0}] induces a singular compactifica-
tion. If not determine the non-singular compactification it induces
(Figure 22.1).
Figure 22.1. The graph of y = sin (1/x).
Solution: We are given f (x) = sin (1/x) where f : S → T , maps

S = R\{0} onto the compact set T = [−1, 1].
Suppose a ∈ [−1, 0) ∪ (0, 1] and y ∈ M = [−1, a) ∪ (−a, 1]. Then,
for an open interval U in M , f ← [U ] produces a bounded sequence of
open intervals converging to zero. If we take the closure, clS f ← [U ],
we obtain a bounded sequence of closed intervals converging to zero.
Since 0 ∈ S, then clS f ← [U ] is not compact. If y ∈ U = (−a, a) then
f ← [U ] is unbounded on both ends of R so clS f ← [U ] is not compact.
So, f : S → T is a singular map and, for S(f ) = [−1, 1],
S ∪f S(f ) = R\{0} ∪f [−1, 1]
is a singular compactification of R\{0} induced by f (x) = sin (1/x).
22.5 More on Equivalent Singular Compactifications
We will now produce a characterization of pairs of singular com-

pactifications which are equivalent. But first we must present a few
lemmas involving singular sets S(f ).
Lemma 22.5 Let f : S → K be a continuous function mapping a

locally compact Hausdorff space into a compact Hausdorff space, K,
and Y = clK f [S]. Then
S(f ) = ∩{clY f [S \F ] : F is compact in S}

Proof. We are given that f : S → K is a continuous function

mapping S into the compact space K and Y = clK f [S]. In the proof,
F will always represent a compact set in S.
Claim 1: We claim that S(f ) ⊆ clY f [S \F ] for all compact F . To
prove this, it suffices to show that Y \clY f [S \F ] ∩ S(f ) = ∅.
Let p ∈ Y \clY f [S \F ]. Then there exists an open neighborhood
U of p in Y such that f ← [U ] ⊆ F . Then clS f ← [U ] is compact so
p ∈ S(f ). Then Y \clY f [S \F ] ∩ S(f ) = ∅; so S(f ) ⊆ clY f [S \F ], as
claimed. We can deduce that
S(f ) ⊆ ∩{clY f [S \F ] : F is compact in S}
Claim 2: ∩{clY f [S \F ] : F is compact in S} ⊆ S(f ).

Let p ∈ ∩{clY f [S \ F ] : F is compact in S}. Suppose p ∈ S(f ).
Then there is an open neighborhood U1 of p in Y = clK f [S] such
that clS f ← [U1 ] is compact. But
p ∈ ∩{clY f [S \F ] : F is compact in S}
⊆ clY f [S \clS f ← [U1 ]]
⊆ clY f [S \f ← [U1 ]]
⊆ clY f ◦f ← [Y \U1 ]]
= Y \U
The statement “p ∈ Y \U ” contradicts the fact that U is a neighbor-

hood of p. Consequently, ∩{clY f [S \F ] : F is compact in S} ⊆ S(f )
as claimed.
So, S(f ) = ∩{clY f [S \ F ] : F is compact in S}. This completes
the proof of the lemma.
Lemma 22.6 Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff space and αS be

a compactification of S. Let K be a compact space. If f ∈ Cα (S,K)4
then f α [αS \S] = S(f ).
4
Where Cα (S, K) is the set of continuous functions mapping S into K which
extend to f α C(αS, K).
Proof. If F is compact in S then, since αS \S ⊆ αS \K, αS \S ⊆

clαS (S \F ), and so
f α [αS \S] ⊆ f α [clαS (S \F )] ⊆ clclK f [S] f [S \F ]
Then f α [αS \S] ⊆ ∩{clclK f [S] f [S \F ] : F is compact in S}. By the

previous lemma S(f ) = ∩{clKf [S]f [S \F ] : F is compact in S}, so
f α[αS \S] ⊆ S(f )
On the other hand, if p ∈ f α [αS\S] and U is an open neighborhood of
p in K such that clK U misses f α [αS\S] then clS f ← [U ] ⊆ f ← [clK U ],
a compact subset of S. Hence, clS f ← [U ] is compact and so p ∈ S(f ).
So
S(f ) ⊆ f α [αS \S]
We conclude that, if f extends to f α : αS → K, then f α [αS \S] =
S(f ). This proves the lemma.
Lemma 22.7 Let f : S → K be a continuous function in C(S, K)

mapping the locally compact Hausdorff space S into a compact Haus-
dorff space, K. Suppose f extends to f α(K) ∈ C(αS, K) for some
compactification αS such that f α(K) is one-to-one on αS \S. Then
αS ≡ S ∪ S(f )
Proof. Let S(f ) be the singular set of the continuous map f : S →
K (not necessarily a singular function). We are given a compactifi-
cation, αS, such that f extends continuously to f α(K) : αS → K in
such a way that f α is one-to-one on αS \S.
By Lemma 22.6, f α(K) [αS \S] = S(f ).
If γS = S ∪ S(f ), we define πα→γ : αS → S ∪ S(f ) as follows:
α
f (x) if x ∈ αS \S
πα→γ (x) =
x if x ∈ S
Claim: That πα→γ is continuous on αS. It suffices to show that
πα→γ pulls back open neighborhoods in S ∪ S(f ) to open sets in αS.
Suppose p ∈ S ∪ S(f ). Clearly, if p ∈ S and p ∈ U is open in S,
← [U ] is open in αS. If p ∈ S(f ) then an open neighborhood
then πα→γ
of p is, by definition, of the form [U ∩ S(f )] ∪ f ← [U ]\F where U is

an open subset of K and F some compact set in S. See that,
←
πα→γ [[U ∩ S(f )] ∪ f ← [U ]\F ] = πα→γ
← ←
[U ∩ S(f )] ∪ πα→γ [f ← [U ]\F ]]
← ←
= πα→γ [U ] ∩ πα→γ [S(f )] ∪ f ← [U ]\F
= (f α← [U ] ∩ f α← [S(f )]) ∪ f ← [U ]\F
= (f α← [U ∩ S(f )] ∪ f ← [U ]\F
= f α← [U ]\F
= f α← [U ] ∩ S \F
We see that πα→γ pulls back open neighborhoods of points in S(f )

to open sets. So, πα→γ : αS → S ∪ S(f ) is continuous, as claimed.
By definition, αS and S ∪ S(f ) are equivalent compactifications.
Theorem 22.8 Let S be a completely regular topological space. Sup-

pose f : S → K and g : S → K are two continuous singular func-
tions mapping S into a compact space K. Suppose S(f ) and S(g) are
homeomorphic. Then the two induced singular compactifications,
αS = S ∪f S(f )
γS = S ∪g S(g)
are equivalent if and only if the singular function f : S → S(f ) of

αS extends continuously to f γ : γS → S(g) such that f γ separates
the points of γS \S = S(g).
Proof. We are given that f : S → K and g : S → K are two
continuous singular functions mapping S into a compact space K
inducing the two singular compactifications, αS = S ∪f S(f ) and
γS = S ∪g S(g). Also, S(f ) and S(g) are seen to be homeomorphic.
(⇒) Suppose αS = S ∪f S(f ) and γS = S ∪g S(g) are equivalent.
We are required to show that the singular function f : S → S(f )
extends continuously to f γ : γS → S(g) such that f γ separates the
points of γS \S = S(g).
Recall that f α : αS → αS \S acts as the identity map on αS \S.
Also, since αS and γS are equivalent, then there is a continuous map
πγ→α : γS → αS such that πγ→α (x) = x on S and πγ→α maps γS\S

homeomorphically onto αS \S.
Let f γ : γS → S(f ) be defined as follows:
f γ = f α ◦πγ→α
Then f γ is continuous, f γ |S = f and f γ |S(g) = πγ→α |S(g) . This

shows that f : S → S(f ) extends continuously to the function f γ :
S ∪g S(g) → S(f ). Since πγ→α is a homeomorphism on S(g) and f α
is the identity function on S(f ), then f γ separates points of S(g), as
required.
(⇐) We are given that both f and g are singular maps on S
and αS = S ∪f S(f ) and γS = S ∪g S(g). We are also given
that the singular function f : S → S(f ) extends continuously to
f γ : S ∪g S(g) → S(g) such that f γ separates the points of S(g).
Then by Lemma 22.7, S ∪g S(g) is a compactification which is
equivalent to S ∪ S(f ).
Since f is singular, S ∪ S(f ) = S ∪f S(f ). So S ∪f S(f ) and
S ∪g S(g) are equivalent.
Theorem 22.9 Two continuous functions, f : S → K and

g : S → K, will be said to be homeomorphically related if there
exists a homeomorphic function h : clK g[S] → clK h[S] such that
h(g(x)) = f (x) for all x ∈ S. Suppose that f : S → K and g : S → K
are two singular maps such that S(f ) = S(g). If f and g are home-
omorphically related then S ∪f S(f ) and S ∪g S(g) are equivalent
compactifications.
Proof. We are given two continuous functions, f : S → K and

g : S → K, mapping S into the compact space K.
Suppose f and g are homeomorphically related singular maps
which, respectively, induce the singular compactifications,
αS = S ∪f S(f )
γS = S ∪g S(g)
where S(f ) = S(g). By definition, there exists a homeomorphism

h : S(g) → S(f ) such that h(g(x)) = f (x).
See that g : S → S(g) extends continuously to g γ : S ∪g S(g) →

S(g) where g γ is the identity map when restricted to S(g). Then
h◦g : S → S(f ) extends to
(h◦g)γ : S ∪g S(g) → S(f )
where (h◦g γ )|S(g) (x) = h(x). Since (h◦g)(x) = f (x) on S, f extends

to (h◦g)γ = f γ where
f γ : S ∪g S(g) → S(f )
and f γ = h on S(g). So f γ separates points of S(g).

By Theorem 22.8, S ∪f S(f ) and S ∪g S(g) are equivalent, as
required.
We can now present an example where this particular concept

plays a key role.
Example 7. The two compactifications R ∪sin2 S(sin2 ) and R ∪cos2
S(cos2 ) are easily seen to be singular compactifications with out-
growth [0, 1]. Show that they are equivalent compactifications.
Solution: Consider the function h(x) = 1 − x mapping [0, 1] onto
[0, 1]. It is a one-to-one continuous function. Also, note that
h(sin2 (x)) = 1 − sin2 (x) = (1 − sin2 )(x) = cos2 (x)
on [0, 1]. Then sin2 and cos2 are homeomorphically related. By the
above theorem R ∪sin2 S(sin2 ) and R ∪cos2 S(cos2 ) are equivalent
compactifications. This is what we were required to show.
There can be various ways of showing that
the compactification βN is not a singular compactification.
In the next example, we propose one method.

Example 8. Show that βN cannot be a singular compactification.
Solution: Suppose βN is a singular compactification, Then there is
a retraction function r : βN → βN\N which maps βN onto βN\N.
We know that βN is separable, but on page 513, we showed that βN\N

is not a separable space. By Theorem 6.11, we know that continuous
images of separable spaces are separable. So, βN \N cannot be the
continuous image of βN. So, βN is not a singular compactification.
22.6 What Kind of Space Has Only Singular

Compactifications?
We have already shown a compactification “less than” a singular

compactification must be singular. So, if βS is a singular compactifi-
cation of S, then all compactifications of S are singular. We wonder
what class of topological spaces satisfies this property?
Theorem 22.10 Let S be locally compact, non-compact, and

Hausdorff. If βS is a singular compactification then S is
pseudocompact.
Proof. The proof of the statement is differed to the end of the next
section in Theorem 23.8.
22.7 Compact spaces as a β-outgrowth, βS \S,

for some S
If we are given a compact Hausdorff space, T , we may wonder

whether it is the outgrowth of some topological space. We can answer
is question in the affirmative. Moreover, we can show that all such
spaces will appear as the outgrowth, βS \ S, of at least one space
S. We prove this statement now. The proof involves a few notions
involving uncountably infinite limit ordinals, ω1 , ω2 , ω3 , . . . , ωn , . . .
Theorem 22.11 Every compact Hausdorff topological space, T , is

the β-outgrowth of some locally compact non-compact Hausdorff topo-
logical space, S. That is, βS is equivalent to some compactification,
S ∪ T , of S, with βS \S homeomorphic to T .
Proof. Let T be a compact Hausdorff space. Let ωn be a limit

ordinal such that n ∈ N and |ωn | > |T |. Let
S = [0, ωn ) × T 5
See that [0, ωn ] = ωn + 1 is compact and, since ωn is a limit
ordinal, [0, ωn ) is dense in [0, ωn ] (see example on page 373). Since
both T and [0, ωn ] = ωn + 1 are compact, then so is [0, ωn ] × T . Also
S = ωn × T = [0, ωn ) × T ⊆dense (ωn + 1) × T = [0, ωn ] × T
See that {ωn + 1} × T is a homeomorphic copy of T .
We claim that βS = [0, ωn ] × T . If so, then T can be seen at the
β-outgrowth of S.
Proof of claim: Let i : S → [0, ωn ] × T denote the identity map
which densely embeds S into the compact set [0, ωn ] × T . It is easily
verified that {ωn + 1} × T ⊆ S(i). Then, when equipped with the
topology described earlier
αS = S ∪ S(i) = [0, ωn ] × T
is the compactification whose topology is induced by i.
To establish the claim it suffices to show that αS is equivalent to
βS. To do this we need to show that every bounded function, f , in
C ∗ (S) extends to f α on αS.
Let f ∈ C ∗ (S).
If p ∈ T , see that f |[0,ωn )×{p} must be constant on some tail end,
say
[αp , ωn ) × {p}6
of [0, ωn ) × {p}.
5
The limit ordinal (equipped with the interval topology), ωn is the set of all
ordinals less than ωn . It is also expressed as ωn = [0, ωn ). For example, ω0 =
[0, ω0 ) = N, is the set of all finite ordinals and [0, ω0 ] is the successor, ω0 + 1, of
ω0 . The first uncountable ordinal, ω1 = [0, ω1 ), is the set of all countable ordinals
and [0, ω1 ] is the successor ω1 + 1 of ω1 .
If |T | ≥ |ωn | for all n ∈ N, we can always choose a non-limit ordinal, α, such
that |ωα | > |T |. Things would then follow identically.
6
Since |[0, ωn ) × {p}| = |ωn | > |ω1 | = |R| ≥ |f [[0, ωn ) × {p}]|. Then
sup |f ← [f [[0, ωn ) × {p}]]| < |ωn |.
Since |ωn | ≥ |T |, then
|T | = |{[αp , ωn ) : p ∈ T }| < |ωn |
So, sup {αp : p ∈ T } = κ < ωn .

So, for this ordinal, κ, f : S → R is constant on {[κ, ωn ) × {p}}
for all p ∈ T .
For p ∈ T , say f [[κ, ωn ) × {p}] = kp .
For each p ∈ T we set f α ({ωn + 1} × p) = kp .
Then f α : αS → R is continuous. We can conclude that every
function f in C ∗ (S) extends to f α ∈ C(αS). So αS = βS as claimed.
So every compact Hausdorff space T is the β-outgrowth, βS \S,
of some locally compact non-compact Hausdorff space, S.
Concepts Review
1. Given a continuous function f : S → T from the completely

regular set S into the compact set T , define the singular set S(f ).
regular set S into the compact set T , what does it mean to say
that f is a singular map?
regular set S into the compact set T , define a compactification
induced by f .
4. Given a continuous function f : S → T from the completely regu-
lar set S into the compact set T , define a singular compactification
induced by f .
5. Show that arctan: R → [−π/2, π/2] is not a singular map. Find a
compactification of R induced by arctan.
6. Produce an example of a pair of singular compactifications with
the same singular sets but which are not equivalent.
7. Produce an example of a Stone–Čech compactification which is
not singular.
8. State one way of recognizing a pair of singular compactifications
which are equivalent.
Chapter 23
On C-Embeddings and
Pseudocompactness
Abstract
In this section, we define the C-embedded property. We describe a char-
acterization associated to the existence of a C-embedded subset. We then
present a few applications associated to these types of subsets. We then
discuss the pseudocompact property in relation to C-embeddings.
23.1 Definition: C-Embedded Subsets
The notion of C ∗ -embedded subsets was introduced in the last section

in the context of an important characterization of the Stone–Čech
compactification. By “C ∗ -embedded subset U of a space S” we mean
that all bounded real-valued functions in C ∗ (U ) can be continuously
extended to a function in C ∗ (S). This allowed us to characterize
βS as:
The compactification αS is the Stone–Čech compactifica-
tion of S if and only if S is C ∗ -embedded in αS.
We presented a characterization of a C ∗ -embedded set T in S in

the form of the Urysohn extension theorem:
The set T is C ∗ -embedded in S ⇔ completely separated
sets in T are completely separated in S.
537
From this we deduced that “compact subsets of a completely reg-

ular set, S, are C ∗ -embedded in S” and “closed subsets of a metric
space S are C ∗ -embedded in S”.
We now want to extend our study of C ∗ -embedded subsets to
C-embedded subsets.
Definition 23.1 A subset U of topological space S is C-embedded

in S if every continuous function f in C(U ) can be continuously
extended to a function f ∗ in C(S).
The notion of a C-embedded subset will play an important role

in the study of another extension of the space S denoted by, υS, (in
the chapter called “realcompact spaces”).
Clearly, it is always true that, for any subset U of S, C ∗ (U ) ⊆
C(U ). But one may wonder: Is a C ∗ -embedded subset, U , in S neces-
sarily C-embedded in S, and vice-versa? To answer such a question
we must compare the definitions of each of these two types of subsets
carefully.
We first verify the easier part of this question. We show that a
C-embedded set in S is C ∗ -embedded in S. Suppose U is C-embedded
in S. Consider a function, f ∈ C ∗ (U ). Then there exists a number,
M , such that f [M ] ∈ [−M, M ]. Since U is C-embedded, then f
extends to f ∗ ∈ C(S). Define the function g : S → R as
g = (f ∗ ∨ −M ) ∧ M
We see that g is both a continuous and bounded function on S such
that g|U = f . So f in C ∗ (U ) will extend to g ∈ C ∗ (S). So,
whenever U is C-embedded in S then it is also
That settles this particular part of the question.
But it is not true in general that a C ∗ -embedded set U in S is
C-embedded in S (unless certain conditions on U and S are satisfied).
That is, there are subsets U of S, for which every function f in C ∗ (U )
extends to a function f ∗ ∈ C ∗ (S), but not every function f ∈ C(U )
extends to a function f ∗ ∈ C(S).
The following theorem shows under what conditions if U is C ∗ -
embedded in S then U is C-embedded in S.
On C-Embeddings and Pseudocompactness 539
Theorem 23.2 Suppose U is a non-empty subset of the topological

space, S.
(a) If U is C-embedded in S then U is C ∗ -embedded in S.
(b) Let U be C ∗ -embedded in S. The set U is also C-embedded in S
if and only if U is completely separated from any disjoint zero-set
in S.
Proof. We are given that U is a subset in S.
(a) That “ U is C-embedded in S” ⇒ “ U is C ∗ -embedded in S” is
shown above.
(b) We are given that U is a subset of S.
(⇐) Suppose that U is C ∗ -embedded in S and is completely sep-
arated from any disjoint zero-set in S.
We are required to show that U is also a C-embedded subset
of S.
Let f : U → R be a function in C(U ). To prove this direction
of the statement, it suffices to find a function t ∈ C(S) such that
t|U = f .
Step 1: We first construct a zero-set, Q, in S which is disjoint from
U . Using the given function, f ∈ C(U ), we consider the continuous
function, g : U → (−π/2, π/2) defined as
g(x) = (arctan ◦f )(x)
Then |g| : U → [0, π/2) is a bounded continuous function on U . Since

U is C ∗ -embedded in S, |g| extends to |g|∗ : S → R in C ∗ (S).
The set [ π2 , ∞) is a closed Gδ in the normal space, R, so by 10.10,
it is a zero-set in R, say Z(h). We thus obtain the zero-set
π
Q = Z(h◦|g|∗ ) = (h◦|g|∗ )← (0) = |g|∗← [h← (0)] = |g|∗← ,∞
2
in S. For the zero-set, Q = Z(h◦|g|∗ ), Q ∩ U = ∅, since
π
x ∈ U ⇒ |g|∗ (x) ∈ [0, π/2) ⇒ x ∈ |g|∗← ,∞ = Q
2
So, Q is the desired zero-set disjoint from U .
Step 2: Given a zero-set Q = Z(h◦|g|∗ ) in S disjoint from U , we now

apply the hypothesis stating that U and Q are completely separated.
That is, there is a function, k : S → [0, 1] such that k[Q] = {0} and
k[U ] = {1}.
Let t(x) = tan(g(x)k(x)) be a continuous function in C(S). We
claim that t : S → R is such that t|U = f .
Proof of claim: See that, if x ∈ U ,
t(x) = tan[(gk)(x)]]
= tan[g(x)(1)]
= tan[arctan(f (x))]
= f (x)
So t|U = f , as claimed. Then t : S → R is a continuous extension of

f : U → R.
We are done with this direction.
(⇒) Suppose that U is a C ∗ -embedded set which is also
C-embedded in S. Suppose that Z(f ) is the zero-set of a function
f ∈ C(S) which is disjoint from U . We are required to show that U
and Z(f ) are completely separated in S.
Let
1
h=
f
on U . Then h ∈ C(U ). Since U is C-embedded in S, then h : U → R
extends to h∗ ∈ C(S). Then t = h∗ f ∈ C(S) where U ⊆ Z(h∗ f − 1)
and Z(f ) ⊆ Z(h∗ f ). So, U and Z(f ) are completely separated by t,
as required.
We are done with part (b).
Example 1. Show that every closed subset of R is C-embedded.

Solution: Let F be a closed subset of R.
By the previous example on page 493 F is C ∗ -embedded in R. Let
Z(f ) be a zero-set which does not intersect F . Since R is known to
be normal, F and Z(f ) are completely separated (by 10.1). By the
above theorem, F is C-embedded in R.
Theorem 23.3 Suppose U is a subspace of a topological space S and

let f ∈ C(S). If f maps U homeomorphically onto a closed subset,
f [U ], of R then U is C-embedded in S.
Proof. We are given a function, f , in C(S) which maps U home-
omorphically onto a closed subset, A = f [U ], in R. We are required
to show that U is C-embedded in S.
Let h ∈ C(U ). It suffices to show that there is a function t ∈ C(S)
such that t|U = h.
See that, the function h◦f |U ← : A → R is continuous on A and
that
[h◦f |U ← ][A] = h [f |U ← [A]] = h[U ]
in R. So, h◦f |U ∈ C(A). Since A is a closed subset of R, it is

C-embedded in R (as shown in the example above). This means there
is a function g ∈ C(S) such that g|A = h◦f |U ← . Let t = g◦f ∈ C(S).
Then for x ∈ U
t|U (x) = (g◦f )|U (x) (By definition of t)

= g[f (x)] (x ∈ U )
←
= (h◦f |U )(f (x)) (f (x) ∈ A)
= h(x) (f is a homeomorphism on U )
So, t|U = h. Then t ∈ C(S) is a continuous extension of h ∈ C(U ).

We conclude U is C-embedded in S.
23.2 C-Embeddings and the Pseudocompact Property
One consequence of the previous theorem is the statement proven in

the following example.
Example 2. Suppose S is a non-pseudocompact space. Show that
S contains a C-embedded copy of N.
Solution: We are given that S is non-pseudocompact and so there
is a real-valued continuous function, f ∈ C(S), which is unbounded.
For each i ∈ N, choose mi ∈ [2i − 1, 2i + 1] ∩ f [S], if non-empty

and not equal to mi−1 . Since f is unbounded, we can choose infinitely
many such mi ’s to construct the subset
N = {mi : i ∈ N}
in f [S] ⊆ R. See that. . .

— N is an unbounded subset of R,
— Each {mi } is a clopen subset of N ,
— The set N is a closed subset of R since N contains all its limit
points.
So, N is a closed unbounded copy of N in f [S].
We claim that, S contains a C-embedded copy, A, of N.
Note that f ← [N ] ⊆ S. For each i ∈ N, choose ni ∈ f ← (mi ) in
S. If A = {ni : i ∈ N}, then the function, f |A : A → N , maps A
homeomorphically onto the copy, N , of N in f [S], as claimed.
Since f maps A onto a closed subset of R, then, by Theorem 23.3,
A is C-embedded copy of N in S, as required.
It follows from this statement that. . .
if S does not contain a C-embedded copy of N then C(S)
cannot contain an unbounded function and so S must be
pseudocompact.
The converse also holds true as we shall show in the form of a
theorem.
Theorem 23.4 The space S is pseudocompact if and only if S does

not contain a C-embedded copy of N.
Proof. (⇐) We have shown in the example above that if S does
not contain a C-embedded copy of N then S must be pseudocompact.
(⇒) Suppose S is pseudocompact. We are required to show that
S does not contain a C-embedded copy of N. Suppose S contains a
C-embedded copy, A, of N. Let g : A → N ⊆ R be one-to-one and
onto N. Then g ∈ C(A) and is unbounded. Since A is C-embedded
in S, there exists a function f ∈ C(S) such that f |A = g. Since
such an f is unbounded in C(S), this contradicts the fact that S is
pseudocompact. So, S does not contain a C-embedded copy of N, as

required.
We present a few consequences of the previous theorems.
Corollary 23.5 Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff space and N

be a C-embedded copy of N in S. Let U be an open neighborhood of
N in S. Then clβS (S \U ) ∩ clβS N = ∅.
Proof. We are given that N = {ni : i ∈ N} is a C-embedded copy
of N in S and U is an open neighborhood of N in S.
By local compactness, S is open in βS, so we can construct the
family, {clS Vi : i ∈ N}, of pairwise disjoint compact sets such that Vi
is an open neighborhood of ni and Vi ⊆ clS Vi ⊆ U .
Then S \U ⊆ S \clS Vi ⊆ S \Vi , for each i. So
S \U ⊆ ∩{S \Vi : i ∈ N}
Since S is completely regular, for each i, there a function gi ∈ C ∗ (S)

such that
ni ∈ Z(gi − 1)
S \Vi ⊆ Z(gi )
S \U ⊆ ∩{Z(gi ) : i ∈ N}
If Z = ∩{Z(gi ) : i ∈ N}, it is a countable intersection of zero-sets

such that, for all i, ni ∈ Z. So, Z ∩N = ∅. Since Z is itself a zero-set,1
then Z = Z(t) for some t ∈ C(S).
So,
Z(t) ∩ N = ∅
By Theorem 23.2, since N is C-embedded in S, then N is completely

separated from any zero set disjoint from N .
1
See justification on page 252 where it is shown that a countable intersection of
zero-sets is a zero-set.
Then there is a continuous function h : S → [0, 1] such that
N ⊆ Z(h) and Z(t) ⊆ Z(h − 1)
It follows that,
clβS N ⊆ clβS Z(h) = Z(hβ )

clβS (S \U ) ⊆ clβS Z(h − 1) = Z(hβ − 1)
Since Z(hβ − 1) ∩ Z(hβ ) = ∅, then clβS (S \U ) ∩ clβS N = ∅, as

required.
In the following statement, we show that, given a C-embedded

copy, N , of N in a locally compact Hausdorff space, S, its outgrowth,
clβS N \N , in βS\S is contained in the βS\S-interior of any zero-set
which contains it.2
Corollary 23.6 Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff space and N

be a C-embedded copy of N in S. Suppose Z(f β ) is a zero-set in βS,
such that (clβS N )\N ⊆ Z(f β ) ∩ βS \S. Then
(clβS N )\N ⊆ intβS\S (Z(f β ) ∩ βS \S)
Proof. We are given a locally compact space, S, which contains a

C-embedded copy, N = {ni : i ∈ N}, of N. Also, we are given that,
for some function f ∈ C ∗ (S),
(clβS N )\N ⊆ Z(f β ) ∩ βS \S
We are required to show that (clβS N )\N ⊆ intβS\S (Z(f β ) ∩ βS \S).

For each i ∈ N, we can choose an open neighborhood Vi of ni
such that Vi ∩ Vj = ∅ for j < i. We can choose these Vi ’s such that
2
This statement expresses a property related to the concept of “p-points”.
A p-point in a space S, is a point p ∈ S such that p belongs
to the interior of any Gδ which contains it. It is easily verified
that, if S is completely regular and p is a p-point in S, then
p ∈ intS Z for any zero-set Z in Z[S] such that p ∈ Z.
{clβS Vi : i ∈ N} forms a family of pairwise disjoint compact subsets

of S. We define,
U = ∪{Vi : i ∈ N}
as a βS-open neighborhood of the C-embedded set N in S.

Fact 1: Suppose xi ∈ Vi , for each i ∈ N. Then {f β (xi ) : i ∈ N} must
converge to zero.
Proof of this fact: Let p ∈ (clβS N )\N . Since (clβS N )\N ⊆ Z(f β )∩
βS \S, f β (p) = 0 and p is an accumulation point of N . Then there
is some subsequence {nj(i) : i ∈ N} ⊆ N , converging to p. Since f β
is continuous on βS,
{f β (nj(i) ) : i ∈ N} −→ f β (p) = 0
For each i ∈ N and open ball B1/i+1 (f β (nj(i) )) in R, by virtue of

continuity of f β on βS (and that S is open in βS), there exists a
βS-open neighborhood, Vi , of nj(i) , contained in S such that
f β (nj(i) ) ∈ f β [Vi ] ⊆ f β [clβS Vi ] ⊆ B1/i+1 (f β (nj(i) ))
For each i ∈ N and xi ∈ Vi , then,
|f β (xi )| = |f β (xi ) − f β (nj(i) ) + f β (nj(i) )|

≤ |f β (xi ) − f β (nj(i) )(x)| + |f β (nj(i) )|
< 1/(i + 1) + |f β (nj(i) )|
Since {f β (nj(i) ) : i ∈ N} −→ 0, then {f β (xi ) : i ∈ N} −→ 0. This

proves Fact 1.
Corollary 23.5 states that
clβS (S \U ) ∩ clβS N = ∅ (†)
Fact 2: There exists a function a function hβ : βS → [0, 1] such that

clβS N ⊆ Z(hβ − 1) and clβS (S \U ) ⊆ Z(hβ ).
This follows immediately from (†) where it is shown that clβS (S\U )
and clβS N are disjoint compact sets in the normal space βS, and so
are completely separated. So a function, hβ : βS → [0, 1], exists
such that such that clβS (S \U ) ⊆ Z(hβ ) and clβS N ⊆ Z(hβ − 1), as
claimed.
We are then guaranteed that there exists a continuous function
h : S → [0, 1] such that,
clβS N ⊆ Z(hβ − 1) ⊆ Cz(hβ ) ⊆ βS\Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS\clβS (S\U ). (∗)
Fact 3: Cz(hβ )\S ⊆ Z(f β )\S.

Proof of this fact: Let q ∈ Cz(hβ )\S. To show that q ∈ Z(f β )\S
it suffices to show that f β (q) = 0.
By (∗), Cz(hβ ) ⊆ βS \clβS (S \U ).
Let W be any βS open neighborhood of q.
Claim: We claim that W must intersect infinitely many of the com-
pact clS Vi ’s.
Suppose not. Suppose K = ∪{clβS Vni : i = 1 to m} is the union
of finitely many clβS Vi ’s, where W ∩ N\K = ∅. Then K is compact.
From (*), we have q ∈ βS \clβS (S \U ) ∩ W . Verify that
[W ∩ βS \clβS (S \U )]\ K
is a non-empty open subset of βS which is contained in βS \S. This

is impossible. So, W must intersect infinitely many of the compact
clS Vi ’s, as claimed.
So, W must must meet infinitely many Vi ’s.
We construct an infinite family of open neighborhoods
←
{f β [B1/j (f (q))] : j = 1, 2, 3, . . .}
of q. The proven claim guarantees that each of these intersects

infinitely many Vi ’s.
Then, for each j, we can choose uj such that
←
uj ∈ f β [B1/j (f (q))] ∩ Vj
By Fact 1, {f β (uj ) : j ∈ N} −→ f β (q) = 0. So, q ∈ Z(f β ).

We conclude that,
Cz(hβ )\S ⊆ Z(f β )\S
This completes the proof of the Fact 3.

By (*), clβS N ⊆ Cz(hβ ) so
clβS N \N ⊆ Cz(hβ ) ∩ βS \S ⊆ Z(f β ) ∩ βS \S
Since Cz(hβ )∩βS\S is open in βS\S, then clβS N\N ⊆ intβS\S (Z(f β )∩
βS \S), as required.
Recall that (from Definition 10.17), for a completely regular space,

a P -point in S is a point which belongs to the interior of any Gδ -set
that contains it. Also, every space in which all points are P -points is a
P -space. In Theorem 10.18, we proved that completely regular spaces
P -spaces are zero-dimensional spaces. We also stated without proof
that pseudocompact P -spaces are finite. We prove that particular
statement now.
Theorem 23.7 All pseudocompact P -spaces are finite.

Proof. Suppose S is a pseudocompact P -space.
Then every continuous real-valued function on S is bounded.
If S is infinite then we can inductively construct a sequence A =
{xi : i ∈ N} for which there is a clopen neighborhood Bi of xi which
does not intersect a clopen neighborhood Bj of xj for j < i. So A is
a discrete subset. Also, S \A = ∩{S \{xi } : i ∈ N} so S \A is a Gδ of
S. Then both S \A and A are clopen in S. Then A is C ∗ -embedded
in S.
Let f : A → R be the continuous function defined as f (xi ) = i.
Suppose Z is a zero-set in S which is disjoint from A. Since zero-
sets in a P -space are clopen, then Z and A are completely separated.
By Theorem 23.2, part (b) A is C-embedded in S. So, f : A →
R extends to f ∗ : S → R. But f ∗ is unbounded; this contradicts
pseudocompactness of S. Then S cannot be infinite.
23.3 When Is βS a Singular Compactification?
With the tools presented above, we are now able to prove an inter-
esting statement (in Theorem 22.10) presented in the last chapter
whose proof was differed to this time. We stated that spaces, S, such
that βS is a singular compactification must be pseudocompact. We
prove this in the next theorem.
Theorem 23.8 Let S be locally compact, non-compact, and Haus-

dorff. If βS is a singular compactification then S is pseudocompact.
Proof. We are given that S is locally compact and Hausdorff and

that βS is a singular compactification.
Since βS is singular, there exists a continuous function r : βS →
βS \S where r[βS] = r[βS \S] = βS \S and r(x) = x for x ∈ βS \S.
We are required to show that S is pseudocompact.
Suppose S is not pseudocompact.
By Theorem 23.4, since the space S is not pseudocompact, it must
contain a C-embedded copy, N , of N.
From the Example 9 found on page 512, we know that clβS N =
βN .
Then r[βN ] = (βN \ N ) ∪ r[N ]. Since βN is separable, then
r[βN ] is separable.3 Since βN \ N was shown to be non-separable
(see page 513), the subset r[βN ] \ (βN \ N ) of βS \ S must contain
countably infinite elements say,
T = {ti : i ∈ N}4
where T ⊆ r[βN ]. For each i ∈ N, choose in N , mi ∈ r ← (ti ), to

obtain the subset,
M = {mi : i ∈ N}
of N . So, r[M ] = T ⊆ βS \S. Note that M ⊆ N ⊆ S; also T and M

can be viewed as disjoint subsets of βS.
3
By Theorem 6.11, the continuous image of a separable set is separable.
4
For if r[βN ]\(βN \N ) is finite, then βN \N is separable.
Claim: That (clβS\S T )\T = (clβS M )\M .

Proof of claim: First see we have two representations of r[clβS M ]:
r[clβS M ] = clβS\S (r[M ]) = clβS\S T (Since r(mi ) = ti )
r[clβS M ] = r[(clβS M )\M ] ∪ r[M ] = (clβS M )\M ∪ T
So,
clβS\S T = (clβS M )\M ∪ T (∗)
Verify that clβS M \M ∩ T = ∅.5 So,

(clβS\S T )\T = (clβS M )\M (†)
as claimed.
We now define the function g : clβS\S T → R as
1
g(ti ) =
i+1
g[ (clβS\S T )\T ] = {0}
So, {g(ti ) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} −→ {0}. The function g is continuous
and bounded on the compact domain, clβS\S T , and so is the function
(g ◦r) ∈ C ∗ (M ) where
(g◦r)(mi ) = g(ti ) = 1/(i + 1)
Then (g◦r) extends to (g ◦r)∗ ∈ C ∗ (S).6 So, (g◦r) extends continu-
ously to (g◦r)β ∈ C(βS).
5
T ⊆ r[βN ]\(βN \N ) ⇒ T ∩ βN \N = ∅
and
M ⊆ N ⇒ clβS M ⊆ clβS N = βN
⇒ clβS M \M ⊆ clβS N \N = βN \N
⇒ clβS M \M ⊆ βN \N
⇒ T ∩ clβS M \M = ∅ (Since T ∩ βN \N = ∅)
6
Every function is continuous on N so M is C-embedded in N . Now, N
was declared to be C-embedded in S so M is C-embedded in S. Then M is
So,
(clβS M )\M = (clβS\S T )\T ⊆ Z((g◦r)β ) ∩ βS \S (By †)
By Corollary 23.6,
(clβS M )\M ⊆ intβS\S [Z((g◦r)β ) ∩ βS \S]
Since, by (†), (clβS\S T )\T = (clβS M )\M ,
(clβS\S T )\T ⊆ intβS\S [Z((g◦r)β ) ∩ βS \S]
But this is impossible since it implies there exists infinitely many

i’s such that g(r(mi )) = g(ti ) = 1/(i + 1) = 0.
The contradiction is the result of our assumption that S is not
pseudocompact.
So, S is pseudocompact, as required. This completes the proof of
the theorem.
23.4 Another Characterization of Pseudocompactness
A space, S, was originally said to satisfy the “pseudocompact prop-

erty” if and only if every continuous real-valued function on S is
bounded. Any compact Hausdorff space is easily seen to be pseu-
docompact. But a pseudocompact space need not be compact: We
showed, for example, that any countably compact space is pseudo-
compact (15.9). For example, the ordinal space, S = [0, ω1 ), was
shown to be pseudocompact but not compact. We have also seen
that every sequentially compact space satisfies the pseudocompact
property (17.4).
We saw other ways of describing those spaces which are pseudo-
compact.
— In Theorem 21.14, we saw that (for locally compact Hausdorff
spaces) pseudocompact spaces are precisely those spaces for which
zero-sets, Z, in Z[βS] cannot be entirely contained in βS\S. That
is, for any zero-set, Z ∈ Z[βS], Z ∩ S = ∅. Equivalently, for any
continuous, f : S → ωR,
f β(ω) [βS \S] ⊆ f [S]
This is interesting, since it shows that we can characterize a prop-

erty of S in terms of a property of its β-outgrowth. By itself, this
can motivate the study of compactifications of S.
— Also, a space S is pseudocompact if and only if S does not contain
a C-embedded copy of N (23.4).7
We also have the following results associated to the pseudocompact
property.
— Let S be locally compact, non-compact, and Hausdorff. If βS is
a singular compactification then S is pseudocompact (23.8).8
We add to the list of characterizations for the pseudocompactness
property, the following statement.
Theorem 23.9 Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff space. Then

the following statements are equivalent:
(a) The space S is pseudocompact.
(b) The space S does not admit an infinite family, U , of non-empty
open sets which satisfies the property “every point has an open
neighborhood which will intersect only finitely many elements
of U ”.9
Proof. We are given S is a locally compact Hausdorff space. Then

S is completely regular (by 18.8).
(a ⇒ b) Suppose S is pseudocompact. Suppose S admits an infi-
nite family, U , of non-empty open sets such that every point has
an open neighborhood which will intersect at most finitely many ele-
ments of U .
7
We will add later to this list the following characterization: Pseudocompact
spaces, S, are precisely those spaces whose realcompactification, υS, is βS (24.8).
8
We will add later: A Hausdorff topological space, S, is compact if and only if
S is both realcompact and pseudocompact (24.7).
9
When U satisfies this property we say that U is “locally finite”.
Step 1: We inductively construct sequences {pi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} and

open subsets, {Vi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .}, where pi ∈ Vi and the Vi ’s are
open and pairwise disjoint.
Let U1 ∈ U . Then there is a point p1 and open V1 such that
p1 ∈ V1 ⊆ U1 where V1 intersects at most finitely many elements
of U .
There exists U2 ∈ U such that U2 ∩ V1 = ∅. Then there is a point
p2 and open V2 such that p2 ∈ V2 ⊆ U2 where V2 intersects at most
finitely many elements of U .
There exists U3 ∈ U such that U3 ∩ (V1 ∪ V2 ) = ∅. Then there is
a point p3 and open V3 such that p3 ∈ V3 ⊆ U3 where V3 intersects
at most finitely many elements of U .
..
.
Inductively, there exists Un ∈ U such that Un ∩(V1 ∪· · ·∪Vn−1 ) =
∅. Then there is a point pn and open Vn such that pn ∈ Vn ⊆ Un
where Vn intersects at most finitely many elements of U .
We thus obtain the sequences {pi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} and {Vi : i =
1, 2, 3, . . .} where pi ∈ Vi and the Vi ’s are open and pairwise disjoint.
Step 2: By complete regularity, we can find, for each i ∈ N\{0}, a
continuous fi : S → [0, i] such that fi (pi ) = i and fi [S \Vi ] = {0}.
Since the Vi ’s are pairwise disjoint, then the function g : S → R
defined as
∞

g(x) = fi (x)
i=1
is continuous and unbounded on S. This contradicts our hypothesis.

So, if S is pseudocompact, it cannot admit an infinite family, U , of
open sets such that every point has an open neighborhood which will
intersect at most finitely many elements of U . This concludes a ⇒ b.
(b ⇒ a) Suppose S does not admit an infinite family, U , of open
sets such that every point has an open neighborhood which will inter-
sect at most finitely many elements of U . We are required to show
that S is pseudocompact.
Suppose not. Then S contains a C-embedded copy, N = {ni :
i ∈ N}, of N. Let g : N → N be a function defined as g(ni ) = i.
Then g is continuous on N . Since N is C-embedded, g extends to a
continuous function, f : S → R, where f |N = g. Let {Vi : i ∈ N}
be a pairwise disjoint family of open sets such that f (ni ) ∈ Vi .
Then U = {f ← [Vi ] : i ∈ N} forms a pairwise disjoint family of open

sets in S such that ni ∈ f ← [Vi ].
We claim that every point of S has an open neighborhood which
intersects at most finitely many elements of U (thus contradicting
our hypothesis).
Proof of claim: Let p ∈ S, q = f (p) and B = B1/2 (q). Then
f ← [B] is an open neighborhood of p in S which intersects at most
two elements of U . Then U is an infinite family of open subsets of S
such every point has an open neighborhood which intersects at most
finitely many points. Since this contradicts our hypothesis, S must
be pseudocompact. This concludes b ⇒ a.
23.5 The Stone–Čech Compactification of a Product
Suppose we are given two completely regular spaces S and T and

we consider the Stone–Čech compactification of their corresponding
product space, S × T . By the Tychonoff theorem, βS × βT is a
compactification of S × T . Under what conditions is it equivalent
to β(S × T )? We investigate the question below.
In the proof of the following theorem, we invoke in various steps
the statements 18.8, 23.2, 21.14, and 23.5.
Theorem 23.10 Let S and T be locally compact Hausdorff infinite

spaces. If S × T is C ∗ -embedded in βS × βT , then S × T must be
pseudocompact.
Proof. We are given that S and T are locally compact Hausdorff
infinite spaces such S × T is C ∗ -embedded in βS × βT . We want to
show that S × T is pseudocompact.
Notation: We start by introducing some notation. Let

X =S×T
A = S × βT \T
B = βS \S × T
C = βS \S × βT \T (compact)
Let αX = X ∪ A ∪ B ∪ C where B ∪ C and A ∪ C are compact. Since

S × T is C ∗ -embedded in βS × βT ,
αX = βS × βT ≡ βX
Claim 1: We first show that β(X ∪ A ∪ B) ≡ αX.

Proof of claim: Since
βX ≡ αX
if f ∈ C ∗ (X ∪ A ∪ B), then f |X ∈ C ∗ (X), so f |X extends to (f |X )α ∈

C(αX) = C(X ∪ A ∪ B ∪ C). So,
X ∪ A ∪ B is C ∗ -embedded in αX (∗)
Then clβX X = β(X ∪ A ∪ B) ≡ αX, as claimed.

We prove the theorem statement in two steps: In step one we
prove that X ∪ A ∪ B is pseudocompact. In step two that X is pseu-
docompact.
Step 1. We show that X ∪ A ∪ B is pseudocompact.
Suppose X ∪ A ∪ B is not pseudocompact.
Then C contains a zero-set Z(f α ) for some f ∈ C ∗ (X ∪ A ∪ B) (by
Theorem 21.14).
We know that a zero-set is a Gδ . Then Z(f α) = ∩{Bn : n ∈ N}
where {Bn : n ∈ N} is a countable family of open sets in αX. For
each i ∈ N, let Vi = ∩{Bn : n = 0 to i}, to obtain a decreasing
collection {Vi : i ∈ N} of open neighborhoods of Z(f α ) such that
Z(f α ) = ∩{Vi : i ∈ N}
Since Z(f α) is a zero-set in αX \ (X ∪ A ∪ B), then the function

g : X ∪ A ∪ B → R defined as
g = 1/f
is continuous on X ∪ A ∪ B.
Suppose (u, v) ∈ Z(f α ), a subset of C.
Claim 2: The function g is unbounded on S × {v} and on {u} × T .

Proof of Claim 2: We show this for the case, g : S × {v} → R.
Suppose g|S×{v} is bounded. Then there exists M > 0 such that
|g|S×{v} |[S × {v}] ⊆ [0, M ]. For a neighborhood B1/M +1 (0) of 0
there exists an open neighborhood U × V of (u, v) in X such that
f α [U × V ] ⊆ B1/M +1 (0). Now, (U × V ) ∩ (S × {v}) is non-empty.
Then there exists (a, v) ∈ S × {v} such that g(a, v) = 1/f (a, v) >
1/(1/M ) = M . Since M was assumed to be a bound for g|S×{v} ,
g|S×{v} is unbounded on S × {v}, as claimed.
The proof which shows that g|{u}×T is unbounded on {u} × T is
similar. This establishes Claim 2.
Claim 3: We now claim that S × {v} contains a closed C-embedded
copy of N.
Proof of Claim 3: For each i ∈ N, choose mi ∈ [2i − 1, 2i + 1] ∩
g[S × {v}], if non-empty. Since g is unbounded on S × {v}, we can
choose infinitely many such mi ’s to construct the subset
M = {mi : i ∈ N}
in g[S × {v}] ⊆ R. See that. . .

— M is an unbounded subset of R.
— Each {mi } is a clopen subset of M .
— The set M is a closed subset of R since it contains all its limit
points.
So, M is a closed unbounded copy of N in R.
Note that g← [M ] ⊆ X ∪ A ∪ B. For each i ∈ N, choose (ni , v) ∈
←
g (mi ) to form the set N1 = {(ni , v) : i ∈ N} in X ∪ A ∪ B. Then
the function, h : M → N1 defined as h(mi ) = (ni , v) maps the copy,
M , of N in g[X ∪ A ∪ B] homeomorphically onto N1 . Then N1 is a
closed copy of N in X ∪ A ∪ B.
Since g maps N1 onto a closed subset, M , of R then, by Theorem

23.3, N1 is C-embedded copy of N in S × {v}. This establishes the
Claim 3.
By applying an analogous reasoning, {u} × T contains a closed
C-embedded copy, N2 , of N.
Since every open neighborhood U × V of (u, v) intersects both

N1 and N2 , then (u, v) is an accumulation point of both N1 and N2 .
This implies that,
(u, v) ∈ clαX N1 ∩ clαX N2
See that S × βT = (X ∪ A∪ B)\(βS\S × T ) is an open neighborhood

of N1 in X ∪ A ∪ B. By Theorem 23.5,
clαX [(X ∪ A ∪ B)\(S × βT )] ∩ clαX N1
must be empty. Since
(u, v) ∈ clαX N2 ∩ clαX N1 ⊆ clαX [(X ∪ A ∪ B)\(S × βT )] ∩ clαX N1
we have a contradiction.
So, X ∪ A ∪ B must be pseudocompact. We are done with step 1.
Step 2. In this part we conclude the proof by showing that X is
pseudocompact.
We are given that αX and βX are equivalent compactifications
and so X is C ∗ -embedded in αX. Also we know (from step 1) that
X ∪ A ∪ B is pseudocompact.
Suppose X is not pseudocompact.
Then the space X contains a copy, N = {(ni , mi ) : i ∈ N}, of N
which is C-embedded in X. That is, there is a continuous function d :
N → R such that d[N ] is closed and unbounded in R and {d(ni , mi )}
is clopen in d[N ], for each i. Suppose, without loss of generality, that
Z = {ni : (ni , mi ) ∈ N } is infinite. Let
Y = {nij : nij ∈ Z, j ∈ N, nij = nik if k < j}
Then {d(nij , mij ) : j ∈ N} is an unbounded copy of N in R.

Let (u, v) ∈ C. Let
W = {(nij , v) : nij ∈ Y }
a subset of S × {v} ⊆ A.
Let r : W → d[N ] be defined as r(nij , v) = d(nij , mij ).
Then r[W ] is a C-embedded copy of N. So W is a C-embedded

copy of N in X ∪ A ∪ B. Since X ∪ A ∪ B is pseudocompact, we have
a contradiction.
We conclude that X is pseudocompact, what is required for
Step 2.
We have a simple example illustrating the above result.
Example 3. Since R × R not pseudocompact, we can invoke the

above theorem to deduce that β(R × R) ≡ βR × βR.
In the following theorem, we show that pseudocompactness of
S × T is sufficient to guaranty that β(S × T ) ≡ βS × βT .
23.6 Tietze’s Extension Theorem
The proof of the following theorem invokes the Urysohn lemma in

an important way to deduce that closed subspaces of a normal space
are C-embedded.
Theorem 23.11 Let S be a normal topological space which contains

a non-empty closed subset, A. If f : A → [a, b] is a continuous real-
valued function then f extends to a continuous function which maps
all of S into [a, b].
Proof. We are given that S is normal and contains a non-empty

closed subset A.
Fact 1. If f is a continuous function which maps A into I =
[−k, k] there is a function g ∈ C ∗ (S) such that g[S] ⊆ − 13 k, 13 k and
| g|A (x) − f (x) | ≤ 23 k
for x ∈ A. That is, there is a function g ∈ C(S) which “approximates”

f on A.
Proof of Fact 1: Subdivide the interval [−k, k] into

1 1 1 1
I1 = [−k, − k], I2 = [− k, k], I3 = [ k, k].
3 3 3 3
Then f ← [I1 ] and f ← [I3 ] are disjoint closed subsets of S (since f
is continuous on A and A is closed in S). We can then invoke
the1 Urysohn lemma to justify the existence of a function g : S →
− 3 k, 13 k such that g[ f ← [I1 ] ] = {− 13 k} and g[ f ← [I3 ] ] = { 13 k}.
Then g[S] ⊆ − 13 k, 13 k and |g|A (x) − f (x)| ≤ 23 k. This establishes
Fact 1.
Without loss of generality, suppose f : A → [−1, 1] is continuous.
We apply the general principle illustrated in Fact 1 replacing k with 1.
We then know of the existence of a continuous function g1 ∈ C(S):

g1 [S] ⊆ − 13 , 13 , where | f (x) − (g1 )|A (x) | ≤ 23 on A
Applying the same principle, replacing f with f − (g1 )|A , we know
of the existence of a continuous function g2 ∈ C(S):

g2 [S] ⊆ − 13 23 , 13 23 where
|f (x) − (g1 )|A (x) − (g2 )|A (x)| ≤ [2/3]2 on A
We can inductively construct a sequence of continuous functions
{g1 , g2 , g3 , . . . , gn , . . .} where, if given {g1 , g2 , . . . , gn } ⊆ C(S) where,
n−1
|gn (x)| ≤ 13 23 and
|f (x) − (g1 )|A (x) − · · · − (gn )|A (x)| ≤ [2/3]n on A
there exists a continuous function gn+1 ∈ C(S) such that
n
|gn+1 (x)| ≤ 13 23 and
|f (x) − (g1 )|A (x) − · · · − (gn+1 )|A (x)| ≤ [2/3]n+1 on A
We can then consider the series
∞

g(x) = gn (x)
n=1
on S. This series converges uniformly to g(x),10 so g is continuous

on S.
10
By comparison
with a geometric series and the Weierstrass M -test. Note that,
2n
since 13 ∞n=1 3 converges to 1 the range of g is contained in [−1, 1].
Claim: We claim that g|A = f .

Proof of claim: To see this simply witness the inequality,
| f (x) − (g1 )|A (x) − · · · − (gn+1 )|A (x) | ≤ [2/3]n+1
on A. Taking the limit as n goes to ∞ on each side produces 0.
Then the sequence of partial sums { mn=1 gn (x) : m ∈ N} converges
uniformly to f (x) at each x ∈ A.
We can conclude that, if S is normal, a continuous, f ∈ C(A),
mapping a closed subset, A, into [−1, 1] extends to a continuous
function, g : S → [−1, 1].
The above theorem states that in normal spaces, S, those continu-

ous real-valued functions f on a closed subset A extend to a bounded
continuous function on S. In the following statement, we generalize
the statement so as to include unbounded continuous functions.
Corollary 23.12 Let S be a normal topological space which con-

tains a non-empty closed subset, A. If f : A → R is a continuous real-
valued function then f extends to a continuous function h : S → R,
on all of S.
Proof. We are given that S is normal and contains a non-empty
closed subset A.
We know that the open interval (−1, 1) is homeomorphic to R, so
we will more simply consider a continuous function f : A → (−1, 1)
mapping the closed subset, A, into (−1, 1). Then we will show that
it extends to a continuous function h : S → (−1, 1) mapping S inside
(−1, 1).
The theorem above guarantees that f extends to a function
g : S → [−1, 1] mapping S into [−1, 1]. But we need a continuous
function h : S → (−1, 1) mapping S into (−1, 1) such that h|A = f .
We will use the function g : S → [−1, 1] to construct h.
We define the subset, D, of S as
D = g ← [{−1}] ∪ g← [{1}]
We see that D is a closed subset of S which entirely misses the closed
subset, A (since f [A] ⊆ (−1, 1)).
Since D∩A = ∅, by the Urysohn lemma, there exists a continuous

function k : S → [0, 1] such that
D ⊆ Z(k) and A ⊆ Z(k − 1)
We let
h(x) = k(x)g(x)
where h is seen to be continuous on S. Since
A ⊆ Z(k − 1) ⇒ h[A] = k[A]f [A] = 1 · f [A] (So h = f on A)

D ⊆ Z(k) ⇒ h[D] = k[D]g[D] = 0 · g[D] = {0}
a∈D ⇒ |g(a)| < 1
So, h[S] ⊆ (−1, 1). We are done.
Concepts Review
1. Define a C-embedded subset of a space S.

2. Describe a property which characterizes those C ∗ -embedded
which are C-embedded.
3. Show that closed subsets of R are C-embedded.
4. State a characterization of pseudocompactness involving a copy
N of N.
5. Give a characterization of those spaces S such that βS is singular.
6. State a characterization of pseudocompactness involving a locally
finite family of sets.
7. State Tietze’s theorem.
Chapter 24
Realcompact Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we introduce the set of all points in βS called the “real
points” of a space S. The set of all real points of S is denoted by υS.
Given a space S, the extension of S, υS, is referred to as the Hewitt–
Nachbin realcompactification of S. If υS = S then S is said to be real-
compact. We provide a characterization as well as a few examples of
realcompact spaces.
24.1 Realcompact Space: Definitions and

Characterizations
Suppose S is a locally compact Hausdorff topological space and

f : S → R is a function in the set, C(S), of all real-valued contin-
uous functions (including unbounded ones) on S. Let i : R → ωR
be the inclusion function (identity map) which embeds R into the
one-point compactification,
ωR = R ∪ {∞}
defined as i(x) = x (where ∞ represents a point not in R). We

can combine the two functions f and i to define the function f+ =
i◦f , where f+ : S → ωR maps S into the compact set ωR. In this
case, we have practically identical functions, f+ and f , except that
the codomain of f+ is ωR. We have shown in Theorem 21.5 that
561
any continuous function, g : S → K, mapping a locally compact

Hausdorff space, S, into a compact space K extends to a function,
gβ(K) : βS → K. We will denote the extension of f+ : S → ωR to
βS as
f β(ω) : βS → ωR
That is, if f ∈ C(S) (possibly unbounded), f extends to f β(ω) ∈

C(βS, ωR).
In the case where f is bounded, the extension f β(ω) : βS → ωR
maps the compact space βS onto the compact space
f β(ω) [βS] = f β(ω) [clβS S] = clωR f [S] = clR f [S]
a compact set in R ⊂ ωR. So in the case of a bounded function, f ,

f β(ω) : βS → ωR and the usual, f β : βS → R, both represent the
same function.
Of course, if f : S → R is unbounded,
f β(ω) [βS] = f β(ω) [βS \S ∪ S]

= f β(ω) [βS \S] ∪ f [S]
⊆ f β(ω) [βS \S] ∪ R
where f [S] is non-compact in R (since f [S] is unbounded). So, f β(ω)

must map at least one point in βS \S to ∞. We stress at least one
point, since f β(ω)← (∞) need not be a singleton set in βS. We then
have the disjoint union,
βS = f β(ω)← [R] ∪ f β(ω)← (∞)
So, if C(S) has some unbounded functions,
C(βS, ωR) ⊆ C(βS)
24.1.1 Real points in βS

Given f ∈ C(S), we will want to distinguish those points in βS which
belong to f β(ω)← (∞) from those which belong to f β(ω)← [R]. For a
Realcompact Spaces 563
given f ∈ C(S) we then define υf S 1 as
υf S = βS \f β(ω)← (∞) = f β(ω)← [R]
Clearly, S ⊆ υf S ⊆ βS, for all f .

For a bounded function f ∈ C ∗ (S),
υf S = f β(ω)← [R]
= f β(ω)← [clR f [S]]
= f β← [clR f [S]]
= βS
So, in the particular case, f ∈ C ∗ (S)
υf S = βS
The function, f : S → R, in C(S) is one which continuously

extends to a real-valued function, f β(ω) : υf S → R in C(υf S). The
points in υf S are commonly referred to as being the set of all real
points of f (in the sense that f β(ω) (x) has a real number value at
each of point x in υf S). To consider the “real points” associated to
all functions, f ∈ C(S), we define.
υS = ∩{υf S : f ∈ C(S)} = ∩{f β(ω)← [R] : f ∈ C(S)}
Note that every function, f ∈ C(S), extends continuously to a real-

valued function,
f β(ω) |υS
on υS. More specifically, each function in C(S) is associated to a

unique function in C(υS).
With these facts in mind, we can now formally define the following
related concepts.
1
The Greek letter, υ, is pronounced upsilon.
Definition 24.1 Let S be locally compact and Hausdorff.

(a) If f ∈ C(S), the function f β(ω) : βS → ωR represents the exten-
sion of f to βS with range ωR. We define the subset, υf S, of βS
as
υf S = f β(ω)← [R]
If p ∈ βS\υf S, then f β(ω) (p) = ∞. The points in υf S are referred

to as real points of f .
(b) We define, the subspace, υS of βS, as
υS = ∩{υf S : f ∈ C(S)} = ∩{f β(ω)← [R] : f ∈ C(S)}
The elements of υS ⊆ βS are called real points of S. Every

element of S is a real point. If p ∈ βS \υS, p is not a real point
of S and so there must be at least one function f ∈ C(S) such
that f β(ω) (p) = ∞.
(c) If the space S is such that S = υS, then we refer to S as being
a realcompact space. A space S is realcompact if and only if it
contains all real points. If S is realcompact βS \ S contains no
real points.
Based on the above definition, for any locally compact Hausdorff

space S,
S ⊆ υS ⊆ βS
Furthermore, if f is any function in C(S), f can be viewed as

belonging to C(S, ωR) and so extends to a continuous function
f β(ω) |υS : υS → ωR. In fact,
f ∈ C(S) ⇒ f β(ω) |υS ∈ C(υS)
We will more succinctly denote the function f β(ω) |υS by
f υ = f β(ω) |υS
At one end of the spectrum we have, for example, the class of count-
ably compact spaces. These spaces have been shown to have only
bounded functions. So for a countably compact space, S, every func-

tion in C(S) is real-valued on βS; therefore, for any f , every point
in βS \S is a real point of f . In this case υS = βS.
In fact, if S is any pseudocompact space, then υS = βS.
At the other end of the spectrum, we have the class of all realcom-
pact spaces S where S = υS. In this case, for every point p ∈ βS\S,
there is some function f ∈ C(S) such that f β(ω) (p) = ∞. That is,
only S contains real points. We eventually show that R (equipped
with the usual topology) is such a space.
We will require the following concept for our first characterization
of a “realcompact space”. It refers to a slightly stronger condition on
z-ultrafilters.
Definition 24.2 Let S be locally compact and Hausdorff.

A z-ultrafilter, Z , in Z[S] is called a
real z-ultrafilter
if and only if Z is closed under countable intersections. That is,

all countable subfamilies of a real z-ultrafilter, Z , have non-empty
intersection.
There are z-ultrafilters in Z[S] which are not “real”.
Theorem 24.3 Let S be a locally compact non-compact Hausdorff

space.
(a) If p ∈ βS \υS then p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \υS for some h ∈ C ∗ (S).

(b) A real z-ultrafilter in Z[S] can only converge to a real point in υS.
(c) The following three statements are equivalent.
(i) The space S is realcompact. That is, S = υS.
(ii) For any p ∈ βS \ S, there is a function, h ∈ C ∗ (S), such
that p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \S.
(iii) Every real z-ultrafilter in Z[S] converges to a point p ∈ S.
Proof. We are given that S is a locally compact non-compact

Hausdorff space.
(a) Let p ∈ βS \υS.
We claim that p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \υS for some h ∈ C ∗ (S).
Since p ∈ βS \υS, then p is not a real point of S, in the sense
that, for some function, say g ∈ C(S), g β(ω) (p) = ∞. Then gυ is
unbounded on υS. For, if g υ was bounded on υS,
g β(ω) (p) ∈ gβ(ω) [clβS S] = gβ(ω) [clβS υS] = clωR gυ [υS]

= clR gυ [υS] ⊆ R
contradicting g β(ω) (p) = ∞.

Let f υ = (gυ )2 ∨ 1. Then f υ : υS → [1, ∞) is continuous,
unbounded and nowhere zero on υS. Furthermore, f υ extends
to f β(ω) : βS → ωR.
Define the function hυ : υS → R as
hυ (x) = (1/f υ )(x) = 1/f υ (x)
Then hυ ∈ C ∗ (υS) is bounded by 0 and 1.

Now, hυ : υS → R extends continuously to hβ : βS → R where
hβ [βS] = clR hυ [υS] ⊆ clR (0, 1] = [0, 1]
Since p ∈ βS \ υS, there is sequence (net) {xi : i ∈ N } in υS

converging to p. Then

β β
{h (xi ) : i ∈ N } −→ h lim xi = hβ (p) ∈ (0, 1]
xi →p
So, hβ (p) = 0. That is, p ∈ Z(hβ ). Since hβ is not zero on υS,

then
p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \υS
as required.
(b) We are given that every point in βS \υS belongs to a zero-set
entirely contained in βS \ υS. Suppose p is a point in βS \ υS.
We will show that no real z-ultrafilter converges to p; so a real
z-ultrafilter can only converge to a point in υS.
In the particular case where S is pseudocompact υS = βS so

every real z-ultrafilter can only converge to a point in υS.
We now consider the case where βS \ υS is non-empty. If p ∈
βS \ υS then, by hypothesis, p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \ υS, for some
h ∈ C ∗ (S). We know there exists a z-ultrafilter, Z , in Z[S] which
converges to p. It suffices to prove that, if Z is a z-ultrafilter
which converges to p ∈ υS, then Z does not satisfy the “CIP”,
and so is not “real”.
See that,
Z(hβ ) = ∩{hβ ← [−1/n, 1/n] : n ∈ N\{0}}
where each hβ ← [−1/n, 1/n] is a zero-set in Z[βS].2

Therefore, {h← [−1/n, 1/n] : n ∈ N\{0}}, is a countable family of
(non-empty) sets in the z-ultrafilter Z (which converges to p).
Since Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \υS ⊆ βS \S, then
∩{h← [−1/n, 1/n] : n ∈ N\{0}} = ∅
So a real z-ultrafilter in Z[S] can only converge to a real point

in υS. As required.
(c) Let S be a locally compact non-compact Hausdorff space.
(i ⇒ ii) We are given that S is realcompact. Then υS = S.
Let p ∈ βS \υS = βS \S.
By part (a) p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \S for some h ∈ C ∗ (S).
(ii ⇒ i) We are given that every point in βS \ S belongs to a
zero-set entirely contained in βS \ S. We are required to show
that S is realcompact. Let p ∈ βS \S. It suffices to show that p
is not a real point.
To say that p is not a real point means that there is a function
h ∈ C(S) such that hβ(ω) (p) = ∞. By hypothesis, p ∈ Z(f β ) ⊆
βS \S for some f ∈ C(S). Then f is never 0 on S.
We can then define h : S → ωR as h = 1/f . Then h extends to
hβ(ω) : βS → ωR. There exists a sequence (net), {xi : i ∈ N },
2
See that hβ ← [ [−a, b] ] = ∩{hβ ← [ (a − 1/n, b + 1/n) ]} is a closed Gδ -set
in βS. In a normal space, closed Gδ ’s are zero-sets (by Theorem 10.10). Then
hβ ← [−1/n, 1/n] is a zero-set, for each n.
in S which converges to p ∈ Z(f β ). Then {f (xi ) : i ∈ N }

approaches zero as xi approaches p. By continuity of hβ(ω) ,

hβ(ω) (p) = hβ(ω) lim {xi }
xi →p
= lim {h(xi )}
xi →p
= lim {1/f (xi )}
xi →p
= ∞ ∈ ωR
So, p is not a real point. Then, if every point in βS\S belongs to a
zero-set entirely contained in βS\S the subset, βS\S, cannot con-
tain any real points. So, υS = S. By definition, S is realcompact.
This proves (ii ⇒ i).
(ii ⇒ iii) We are given that every point in βS \S belongs to a
zero-set entirely contained in βS\S. We are required to show the
limit of any real z-ultrafilter belongs to S.
Since (ii) ⇒ (i), our hypothesis implies that no point in βS\S
is real. So, υS = S. By part b) no real z-ultrafilter converges to
a point in βS \ υS = βS \ S. Then a real z-ultrafilter can only
converge to point in S, as required.
(iii ⇒ ii) We are given that every real z-ultrafilter in Z[S] con-
verges to a point in S. Let p ∈ βS\S. We are required to produce
a zero-set Z(h) ∈ Z[S] such that p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \S.
Suppose Zpβ = {Z(f β ) : f ∈ C ∗ (S), p ∈ Z(f β )} is the unique
z-ultrafilter in Z[βS] which converges to p. By hypothesis, the
corresponding z-ultrafilter, Z = {Z(f ) : f ∈ C ∗ (S), p ∈ Z(f β )},
in Z[S] is not real. Then, Z contains a countable subfamily
{Z(fn ) : fn ∈ D, p ∈ Z(fnβ } such that
∩{Z(fn ) : fn ∈ D, p ∈ Z(fnβ } = ∅
Let
W β = ∩{Z(fnβ ) : fn ∈ D, p ∈ Z(fnβ )}
Then W β is a zero-set, say W β (hβ ), in Z[βS] such that p ∈
W β (hβ ) ⊆ βS \S, as required.
We add a few remarks in reference to non-compact spaces S.

(1) Compare statement (b)
“S = υS if and only if, for any p ∈ βS \ S = βS\υS,
there is a function, h ∈ C ∗ (S), such that p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆
βS \S”.
above to the theorem statement in 21.14 which states:
“S is pseudocompact if and only if no zero set Z in
Z[βS] is entirely contained in βS \S”.
When viewed together, see what this implies.3
(2) The statement above also says that S = υS if and only if every
real z-ultrafilter in Z[S] is fixed (that is, it converges in S = υS).
By definition of real z-ultrafilter, this means that a space S is
realcompact if and only if every z-ultrafilter in Z[S] which satis-
fies the countable intersection property must converge in S = υS.
Further on in the book, we will be presenting still another char-

acterization of realcompact spaces (in Corollary 25.6).
Example 1. Show that R equipped with the usual topology is a

realcompact space.
Solution: Consider the function f : R → R defined as f (x) =
1/(1 + |x|). The function f is continuous, bounded and nowhere zero
on R, with range, (0, 1]. Recall from Theorem 10.10 that. . .
closed Gδ ’s in a normal space are zero-sets.
Then, since R is normal, for each n ∈ N\{0}, f β← [0, 1/n] is a zero-set
neighborhood of βR\R. Then
βR\R = ∩{f β ← [0, 1/n] : n > 0}
Being a countable intersection of Gδ ’s in βR, βR\R is a βR zero-set
disjoint from R. By Theorem 24.3, R is realcompact.1
3
If S is pseudocompact then every function in C(S) is bounded and so βS \υS
is empty. Being empty it cannot contain a zero-set of Z[βS]. On the other hand,
if a non-compact space, S, is realcompact, then βS\S = βS\υS is non-empty. So,
C(S) contains unbounded functions. So a non-compact realcompact space cannot
be pseudocompact. In this case, βS \S contains a zero-set.
1
In Theorem 25.7 of the next chapter where better tools are available, we show
that any product of R’s is realcompact.
24.2 Extending Functions to υS
Let S and T be locally compact and Hausdorff. Then, being com-

pletely regular, S and T can be densely embedded into βS and βT ,
respectively.
Suppose f : S → T is a continuous function which maps S onto T .
By Theorem 21.5, the function f : S → βT extends to f β(βT ) : βS →
βT . We know that υS is a subspace of βS, hence the restriction,
f β(βT ) |υS : υS → βT , maps υS into βT .
In the following theorem, we will show a little bit more. We show
that f υ [υS] ⊆ υT . That is, if f : S → T is any continuous function
mapping S to T , (both locally compact and Hausdorff) f will extend
to a continuous function f υ which maps υS into υT .4
Theorem 24.4 If S and T are locally compact Hausdorff spaces

and f : S → T is a continuous function then f extends continuously
to a unique continuous function
f υ : υS → υT
Proof. We are given that S and T are locally compact Hausdorff
spaces and f : S → T is a continuous function. Since f extends
to f β(βT ) : βS → βT and S ⊆ υS ⊆ βS, then f extends to f υ :
υS → βT (where f υ = f β(βT ) |υS ). We are required to show that
f υ [υS] ⊆ υT .
Suppose h ∈ C(T ). Then, if ωR = R ∪ {∞},
h : T → R will continuously extend to hω : βT → ωR
Furthermore,
(h◦f ) : S → R will continuously extend to (h◦f )ω : βS → ωR
For x ∈ S, (h◦f )ω |S (x) = h(f (x)) = (hω ◦f β )|S (x). Since S is
dense in βS, then
(h◦f )ω : βS → ωR
(hω ◦f β ) : βS → ωR
are equal functions on βS.
4
Where f υ = f β(βT ) |υS .
Let r ∈ υS. By definition, r is a real point of the function h◦f :

S → ωR. This means that (h◦f )ω (r) = hω [f β (r)] = ∞. Then f β (r)
is a real point of h. That is,
f υ (r) ∈ υh T
But h was an arbitrarily chosen function in C(T ). The point r

was also arbitrarily chosen in υS. We can then conclude that
f υ [υS] ⊆ ∩{υh T : h ∈ C(T )} = υT
So, f υ [υS] ⊆ υT . This is what we were required to prove.
Corollary 24.5 Suppose S and T are locally compact Hausdorff

spaces. If T is realcompact and f : S → T is a continuous function
then f extends continuously to a unique continuous function f υ :
υS → T . In particular, if f ∈ C(S), f extends continuously to f υ ∈
C(υS).
Proof. This is a special case of the theorem where T = υT . The

second part follows from the fact that R is realcompact as shown in
the above example.
From the above corollary, we see that, if S is completely reg-

ular, every continuous function f : S → R in C(S) extends to
f υ : υS → R. We know that S is C ∗ -embedded in βS, but now
we can confidently say that
S is C-embedded in υS.
The function
φ : C(S) → C(υS)
defined as φ(f ) = f υ is then an isomorphism from the ring C(S)

onto C(υS).
24.3 The Hewitt–Nachbin Real Compactification

of a Space S
We have seen that S ⊆ υS ⊆ βS. We have also seen that, for every
function f ∈ C(S), the function, f β(ω) |υS , continuously maps υS
into R. That is, every function f ∈ C(S) extends to a function, f υ ,
in C(υS).
We also make the following observation. Since υS ⊆ βS, then
clβS υS ⊆ βS. Given that clβS S ⊆ clβS υS, then
β(υS) = βS
Theorem 24.6 Suppose S is locally compact and Hausdorff. Then

υS is a realcompact subspace of βS.
Proof. To show that υS is realcompact, it suffices to show that
υ(υS) = υS. To do this, it suffices to show that the set of all real
points of υS is υS.
First note that υS ⊆ υ(υS). Then it suffices to show that υ(υS) ⊆
υS. Suppose p ∈ υ(υS). Then p is a real point of υS. Let f ∈ C(S).
Then there is g ∈ C(υS) such that g = f υ . Since p is a real point of
υS, then g β(ω) (p) ∈ R. Since g and f υ agree on υS, gβ(ω) = f β(ω) on
βS. So, f β(ω) (p) ∈ R. So, p is a real point of S. That is, p ∈ υS. We
have shown that υ(υS) ⊆ υS.
So,
υ(υS) = υS
Then we can view υS as a realcompact space which densely con-

tains the locally compact Hausdorff space S.
Given a space S, the topological space, υS, is normally referred
to as the
Hewitt–Nachbin realcompactification of S.5
5
Named after the American mathematician Edwin Hewitt (1920–1999) and the
Jewish-Brazilian mathematician Leopoldo Nachbin (1922–1993).
So, instead of referring to υS as being “the set of all real points of

S”, we will now speak of υS as being “the realcompactification of S”.
If a space, S, is realcompact then it is its own realcompactification.
If S is pseudocompact then C(S) = C ∗ (S) and so every point of
βS is a real point of S. Hence, if S is pseudocompact, βS is both the
Stone–Čech compactification and the Hewitt–Nachbin realcompact-
ification of S.
24.4 Another Characterization of Compactness

and of Pseudocompactness
The statements which appear above are mostly in reference to non-

compact spaces. The realcompact property provides us with another
characterization of the compact property.
Theorem 24.7 A Hausdorff topological space, S, is compact if and

only if S is both realcompact and pseudocompact.
Proof. (⇒) If S is compact then S = βS; hence, every real-valued

function on S is bounded. Then, by definition, S is pseudocompact.
Since S ⊆ υS ⊆ βS, then S = υS, so S is realcompact.
(⇐) Suppose S is both pseudocompact and realcompact. We are
required to show that S is compact.
Since S is pseudocompact, every f ∈ C(S) is bounded. Then, for
such an f ,
f β(ω) [βS] ⊆ clR f [S] ⊆ R
Then
βS ⊆ ∩{f β(ω)← [R] : f ∈ C(S)} = υS
So, υS = βS. Since S is realcompact, then S = υS. So, S = βS. So,

S is compact, as required.
Theorem 24.8 Let S be a non-compact locally compact Hausdorff

space. Then the following are equivalent.
(a) The space S is pseudocompact.

(b) The equality, βS = υS, holds true.
(c) Every z-ultrafilter is a real z-ultrafilter.
Proof. We are given that S is a non-compact locally compact
Hausdorff space.
(a ⇒ b) We are given that, S is pseudocompact. We are required
to show that βS = υS.
Then, for any f ∈ C(S), f β(ω) : βS → ωR maps βS onto
clωR f [S] ⊆ clR f [S] ⊆ R. Then, for any f ∈ C(S), we have υf S = βS.
So,
βS = ∩{υf S : f ∈ C(S)} = υS
as required.
(b ⇒ a) We are given that, βS = υS. We are required to prove
that S is pseudocompact.
Suppose not. Then there is an unbounded function, f , in C(S).
Then f : S → R extends to f β(ω) : βS → ωR. If f β(ω) [βS] ⊆ R
then f β(ω) [βS] is non-compact since it is unbounded. So, there is
an x ∈ βS \ S such that f β(ω) (x) = ∞. In such a case, βS = υS.
Contradiction. So, S must be pseudocompact.
(b ⇔ c) Given that S is a non-compact locally compact Hausdorff
space.
See that βS = υS if and only if every point in βS is a real point.
A z-ultrafilter converges to a real point if and only if it is a real
z-ultrafilter. So, βS = υS if and only if every z-ultrafilter is a real
z-ultrafilter.6
24.5 A Few Examples of Real Compact Spaces
In Theorem 16.3, we showed that in any Lindelöf space, S, every

filter of closed sets in P(S) which satisfies the “countable intersection
property” has a non-empty intersection (in S). In fact, this property
characterizes Lindelöf spaces. Now every real z-ultrafilter in Z[S] is a
6
We can also conclude that “if and only if every z-ultrafilter satisfies the count-
able intersection property”.
collection of closed subsets of S which satisfies the CIP. Then if S is

lindelöf, every real z-ultrafilter in Z[S] has a non-empty intersection.
Then, by Theorem 24.3, Lindelöf spaces are realcompact. We state
this as a formal result.
Theorem 24.9 If S is a Lindelöf space then S is realcompact.

Proof. Given in the paragraph above.
Example 2. By Definition 18.9, a σ-compact space is the countable

union of compact sets. State conditions under which a σ-compact
space is guaranteed to be realcompact.
Solution: In Theorem 18.10, it is shown that in a locally com-
pact Hausdorff space the σ-compact property is equivalent to the
Lindelöf property. So any locally compact Hausdorff σ-compact space
is realcompact.
Example 3. Show that N is realcompact.
Solution: Any countable space is the union of singleton sets and
hence is σ-compact. Since N is locally compact Hausdorff and count-
able, N is realcompact.
Example 4. Show that any separable metric space is realcompact.
Solution: By definition, a space that has a countable open base is
Lindelöf. By Theorem 16.3, for metric spaces, the following are equiv-
alent: (1) the second countable property, (2) the separable property,
and (3) the Lindelöf property. By Theorem 24.9, a separable metric
space is realcompact.
Example 5. Show that every subspace of Rn equipped with the
usual topology is realcompact.
Solution: The Euclidean space Rn is a finite product of the met-
ric separable space R and hence is both metrizable and separable
(see Theorem 7.10 on products of separable spaces and Lemma 31.1
on countable products of metrizable spaces). Then it is second count-
able (see Theorem 5.11 where it is shown that metrizable spaces
which are separable are also second countable). So every subspace of
Rn is both second countable and metrizable (see the example after
Definition 5.12 of hereditary property and Theorem 5.13 where we
see that both metrizability and second countability are hereditary).

In metrizable spaces the Lindelöf property is equivalent to the sep-
arable property and the second countable property (see Theorem
16.3). Then every subspace of Rn is Lindelöf. Since Lindelöf spaces
are realcompact (by Theorem 24.9), then every subspace of Rn is
realcompact.
24.6 Properties of Realcompact Spaces
We now examine when a particular space inherits the realcompact

property from other spaces known to be realcompact. We show, in
particular, that the realcompact property is closed under arbitrary
intersections and arbitrary products. We also show that a closed
subspace inherits the realcompact property from its superset.
Theorem 24.10 Let {Sα : α ∈ I} be a family of non-empty com-

pletely regular spaces each of which is realcompact.
(a) If S is a realcompact space which contains each Sα and T =
∩{Sα : α ∈ I} is non-empty in S, then T is a realcompact sub-
space of S.
(b) The product space, α∈I Sα , is realcompact.
Proof. We are given that {Sα : α ∈ I} is a family of completely
regular non-empty realcompact spaces.
(a) Suppose the Sα ’s are all subspaces of a realcompact space S and
T = ∩{Sα : α ∈ I}
is non-empty. We are required to show that T is realcompact.
Since each Sα is realcompact, Sα = υSα . Since subspaces of
completely regular spaces are completely regular, T = ∩{Sα :
α ∈ I} is a completely regular subspace. As shown in an example
on page 512, clβS T ≡ βT ⊆ βSα . Since υT ⊆ βT , υT ⊆ βSα for
each α.
We claim that υT ⊆ υSα . For each α, let iα : υT → βSα
denote the identity map embedding the subspace υT into βSα .
By Theorem 24.4, for each α, iα |T : T → S extends continuously
to the function
(iα |T )υ : υT → υSα = Sα
Since T is dense in υT , (iα |T )υ = iα on υT , so (iα |T )υ embeds
υT into υSα , establishing the claim.
Since (iα |T )υ [υT ] = υT ⊆ υSα = Sα for all α ∈ I, then
υT ⊆ ∩{Sα : α ∈ I} = T .
Given that T ⊆ υT , we can only conclude that T = υT and
so T is realcompact.

(b) Suppose S = α∈I Sα where each Sα is realcompact. For γ ∈ I,
the projection map, πγ : S → Sγ is continuous and hence extends
continuously to
πγυ : υS → υSγ
where Sγ = υSγ .
Let G = {πα :α ∈ I} where πα : S → Sα . Thenthe evaluation
map, eG : S → α∈I Sα extends to eG υ : υS → α∈I Sα = S a
function which embeds υS into S.
Then υS ⊆ S. We conclude that S = υS and so S is
realcompact.
The subspace, T , of a realcompact space, S, need not, generally,

be realcompact. It is if T is closed in S.
Theorem 24.11 If F is a closed non-empty subspace of a realcom-

pact space S then F is realcompact.
Proof. We are given that F is closed in realcompact S. Then S =
υS hence,
clυS F = clS F = F
(since F is closed in S). We are required to show that F = υF .
Let i : F → S denote the inclusion map embedding F into S.
Then (by Theorem 24.4) i : F → F ⊆ S extends continuously to
iυ : υF → υS where
iυ [υF ] = υF ⊆ υS = S
Now, F is dense in υF hence,

υF ⊆ clυS F = clS F = F
Then υF ⊆ F . So F = υF .
24.7 Example of a Non-Realcompact Space
The above few examples may lead the reader to suspect that non-
realcompact spaces are uncommon. This motivates us to construct
such a space. We do so in the following example.
Example 6. Recall that ω1 denotes the first uncountable ordinal
while ω0 denotes the first countable infinite ordinal. Let X = [0, ω1 )
and Y = [0, ω0 ) be equipped with the ordinal topology, and T =
X × Y be the corresponding product space.7
In the example on page 373, it is shown that X = [0, ω1 ) is count-
ably compact. By Theorem 15.9, since X is countably compact, for
any f ∈ C(X), f [X] is compact in R. This implies that [0, ω1 ) is
pseudocompact. But the space X is non-compact since the open
cover {[0, γ) : γ ∈ S} has no finite subcover. By Theorem 24.7,
pseudocompact spaces which are realcompact must be compact. So,
[0, ω1 ) is not realcompact.
But the space X, when viewed as a homeomorphic image of the
subspace, [0, ω1 )× {0}, of the product, T , is closed in T . By Theorem
24.11, closed subspaces of realcompact spaces are realcompact. So,
the product space, [0, ω1 ) × [0, ω0 ), cannot be realcompact.
Concepts Review
1. If f is a function in C(S) define set, υf S, of all the real points

of f .
2. Define υS in terms of all the sets υf S.
7
In Theorem 21.18, it is shown that βX = [0, ω1 ] = ωX.
3. What does it mean to say that the space, S, is realcompact?

4. Define a real z-ultrafilter in Z[S].
5. Give a characterization of the realcompactness property in terms
of zero-sets in Z[βS].
6. Give a characterization of the realcompactness property in terms
of z-ultrafilters of zero-sets in Z[S].
7. If f : S → T is a continuous function mapping S into T what
can be said about a particular continuous extension of f ?
8. What does it mean to say that f ∈ C(S) is C-embedded in υS?
9. What can we say about a space that is both realcompact and
pseudocompact?
10. What can we say about Lindelöf spaces in the context discussed
in this chapter?
11. What can we say about arbitrary intersections of realcompact
space?
12. What can we say about arbitrary products of realcompact space?
13. What kind of subsets of a realcompact space are guaranteed to
be realcompact?
14. Give an example of a realcompact space.
15. Give an example of a space which is not realcompact.
Chapter 25
Perfect Functions
Abstract
In this section, we introduce the notion of a “perfect function”. After pro-
viding a formal definition we derive two of its most well-known charac-
terizations. Our brief discussion of perfect functions will involve notions
discussed in our study of singular functions and of realcompact spaces.
25.1 Introduction
Our study of realcompact spaces started with a brief discussion of

a continuous function, f : S → R mapping a completely regular
space, S, into R. So, f could be seen as a map, f+ : S → ωR,
continuously mapping S into the one-point compactification denoted
as ωR = R∪{∞}, where f+ = f on S. By Theorem 21.5, f+ : S → ωR
extends continuously to a function, f β(ω) : βS → ωR. Even if it was
clear that f β(ω) [S] ⊆ R, there was no reason to assume that, in the
case where f is unbounded, f β(ω) would map all of βS \ S onto {∞}.
In fact, f β(ω) could still map some points, x, in βS\S to f β(ω) (x) ∈ R.
We defined υf S as
υf S = {x ∈ βS : f β(ω) (x) ∈ R} = f β(ω)← [R]
The points in υf S were referred to as the “real points of f ”. When

υf S was not entirely contained in S this was viewed as a property of
581
S rather than as a property of f . The set
υS = ∩{υf S : f ∈ C(S)}
was called the set of “all real points of S”. When υS ∩ βS\S = ∅, we
referred to S as satisfying the “realcompact” property and referred
to S as being a realcompact space.
In this section, we will generalize the procedure used to construct
υf S and study those functions f : S → T such that f+ : S → αT ,
for any compactification αT of T (instead of only for ωR).
25.2 Perfect Function: Definition
Recall that, for a function, f : S → T , the fibers of f refers to the

elements of the set
{f ← (y) : y ∈ f [S]} ⊆ P(S)
Definition 25.1 Let S and T be completely regular spaces and

f : S → T be a continuous function mapping S into T . We say that
f is a compact mapping if its fibers are all compact (subsets of S).
That is, f ← (y) is compact for each y in the range of f .
We say that the continuous function, f : S → T , is a perfect
function if f is both a closed function and a compact mapping.1
In our introductory paragraph, we considered a continuous func-

tion f : S → R to construct the function f β(ω) : βS → ωR. Here we
will start with a function, f : S → T , to construct, by using a similar
procedure, a function f β(α) : βS → αT .
Suppose f : S → T continuously maps S into T (both completely
regular). Let i : T → αT be the identity map embedding T into αT .
Let f+ : S → αT be defined as
f+ (x) = i(f (x))
1
Some authors may not require that perfect functions be continuous.
Perfect Functions 583
Then, by Theorem 21.5, f+ : S → αT extends continuously to
f β(α) : βS → αT
With this in mind we will describe a perfect function, f : S → T

by referring to a property of, f β(α) : βS → αT .
Theorem 25.2 Let f : S → T be a continuous function mapping

a non-compact completely regular space, S, into a non-compact com-
pletely regular space T . Let αT be any Hausdorff compactification of
T . Then the following are equivalent:
(a) The function f : S → T is perfect.
(b) If f : S → T, and f β(α) : βS → αT is its continuous extension
to βS, then
f β(α) [βS \S] ⊆ clαT f [S]\f [S]
(c) If f : S → T, and f β(α) : βS → αT is its continuous extension

to βS, then
f β(α) [βS \S] ∩ f [S] = ∅
Proof. Let f : S → T be a continuous function mapping a non-

compact completely regular space, S, into a non-compact completely
regular space T .
(a ⇒ b) We are given that f : S → T is perfect, αT is any Haus-
dorff compactification of T and f β(α) : βS → αT is the continuous
extension of f to βS where f β(α) [clβS S] = clαT f [S] ⊆ αT .
We are required to show that f β(α) [βS \S] ⊆ clαT f [S]\f [S].
Suppose f β(α) [βS \S] ⊆ clαT f [S]\f [S]. Therefore f β(α) [βS \S] ∩
f [S] = ∅. There must then exist a u ∈ βS \S such that f β(α) (u) ∈
f [S].
Let
K = f ← (f β(α) (u))
Then, given that f : S → T is perfect, K is a compact subset of the

completely regular subspace S ∪ {u} of βS where f β(α) [S ∪ {u}] =
f [S].
Then there is an open neighborhood, U of K in S ∪ {u} such that
K = clS∪{u} K ⊆ U ⊆ clS∪{u} U ⊂ (S ∪ {u})\{u} (*)
So, u ∈ clS∪{u} U . Then u ∈ clS∪{u} (S \U ).2

We then have,
f β(α) (u) ∈ f β(α) [clS∪{u} [S \U ]]

⊆ clT f [S \U ] (By continuity and Theorem 6.4)
= f [S \U ] (Since f is a closed function.)
Then, there is a point t in S \U such that f β(α) (u) = f (t). Then

t ∈ f ← (f β(α) (u)) = K.
So, t ∈ K ∩ S \U , contradicting K ⊆ U (see (*).
Then f β(α) [βS \S] ⊆ clαT f [S]\f [S] as required.
We are done with (a ⇒ b).
(b ⇒ a) We are given that f : S → T is a continuous function
which extends to f β(α) : βS → f β(α) [βS] = clαT f [S] ⊆ αT such that
f β(α) [βS \S] ⊆ clαT f [S]\f [S] (†)
We are required to show that f is both a compact and closed

function.
Step 1: The function f : S → T is compact: Let y ∈ f [S] ⊆ T . Then
f β(α)← (y) is closed in βS.
Case (a): f β(α)← (y) ⊆ S. Then it is a closed subset of βS so it is
a compact subset of S.
Case (b): f β(α)← (y) ∩ βS \S ∈ ∅. Then, by hypothesis,
f β(α) [[f β(α)← (y)] ∩ βS \S] = {y} ⊆ clαT f [S]\f [S]
Since y ∈ f [S] (by hypothesis), this case cannot occur. So,

f β(α)← (y) ⊆ S. Then f ← (y) is compact in S. So, f : S → T is a
compact function. This concludes Step 1.
2
Since u ∈ clS∪{u}S = clS∪{u}(S \ U ∪ U ) = clS∪{u} (S \ U ) ∪ clS∪{u} U and
u ∈ clS∪{u}U then u ∈ clS∪{u}(S \U ).
Step 2: The function f : S → T is a closed function: Let F be a

closed subset of S.
See that clβS F is compact in βS and so f β(α) [clβS F ] ∩ T is a
closed subset of T .
We claim that f β(α) [clβS F ] ∩ T = f [F ].
f β(α) [clβS F ] ∩ T = f β(α) [(clβS F ∩ βS \S) ∪ F ] ∩ T
= [f β(α) [(clβS F ∩ βS \S)] ∪ f β(α) [F ]] ∩ T
= [f β(α) [(clβS F ∩ βS \S)] ∩ T ] ∪ [f β(α) [F ] ∩ T ]
⊆ [[clαT f [S]\f [S]] ∩ T ] ∪ [f β(α) [F ] ∩ T ] (By (†)).
= ∅ ∪ [f [F ] ∩ T ] (By our hypothesis)
= f [F ]
So, f β(α) [clβS F ] ∩ T ⊆ f [F ]. Since f [F ] ⊆ f β(α) [clβS F ] ∩ T , then
f β(α) [clβS F ] ∩ T = f [F ]
a closed subset of T , as claimed.

So, f is a closed map.
By definition, f is a perfect function. We are done with (b ⇒ a).
(b ⇔ c) Proof is left as an exercise.
25.3 Relating a Perfect Function, f to Its Singular

Set, S(f )
Recall (from page 526) that, if we are given a continuous function

f : S → T mapping S into a compact space T (not necessarily a
singular map), we obtain a compactification of S,
γS = S ∪ S(f )
(not necessarily a singular compactification). We showed that,

f β(T ) [βS] = f [S] ∪ S(f ) = clT f [S] (††)
f γ [γS] = f [S] ∪ S(f ) = clT f [S] (†)
f β(T ) [βS \S] = S(f ) = f γ [S(f )] († † †)
where f [S] and S(f ) may be disjoint, but not necessarily.
In the case where f is a singular map (that is, f [S] is dense in
S(f )) then
f [S] ∪ S(f ) = S(f )
So should f be singular and f [S] be a compact subset of T ,
S(f ) = f [S]
In the case where f is not singular f [S] will intersect T \S(f ). It
may even happen that f [S] ∩ S(f ) is empty. Whether f is singular
or not (and f [S] is not compact), the set
S(f )\f [S]
is the outgrowth of the compactification, clT f [S], of the image, f [S],
of S under f .
We now show that the function f : S → T is perfect depending,
specifically, on how its range, f [S], intersects its singular set, S(f ).
Theorem 25.3 A characterization of perfect functions. Let S

and T be non-compact locally compact Hausdorff spaces and f : S →
T be a continuous function mapping S into T . Then f is perfect if
and only if
f [S] ∩ S(f ) = ∅
mapping S into T , where S and T are both locally compact, non-
compact and Hausdorff. Let αT be a compactification of T so that
f [S] is a subset of αT .
Then the function f : S → αT , extends to
f β(α) : βS → clαT f [S] = f [S] ∪ S(f ) ⊆ αT
where f β(α) [βS \S] = S(f ) (see (†) above).
Let
γS = S ∪ S(f )
The function f : S → f [S] ∪ S(f ), extends to
f γ(α) : S ∪ S(f ) → f [S] ∪ S(f ) = clαT f [S] = f β(α) [βS]
where f γ(α) [S(f )] = S(f ) appears in the role of the identity map on
S(f ).
(⇒) Suppose f is perfect. We are required to show that f [S] ∩
S(f ) = ∅.
Then, f β(α) [βS \ S] ∩ f [S] = ∅ ((By Theorem 25.2, part (c)).
Therefore,
f β(α) [βS \S] ⊆ f β(α) [βS]\f [S] (By Theorem 25.2, part (c)
= [ f [S] ∪ S(f ) ]\f [S] (See (††))
Since f β(α) [βS\S] = S(f ) (see († † †), above), and [ f [S] ∪ S(f ) ] \
f [S] = S(f )\f [S], we obtain
S(f ) ⊆ S(f )\f [S] which implies f [S] ∩ S(f ) = ∅
So, if f is a perfect function f [S] ∩ S(f ) = ∅. This is the desired

result.
(⇐) Conversely, suppose f [S] ∩ S(f ) = ∅.
f β(α) [βS \S] = S(f ) (see († † †), above)

= S(f )\f [S] (Since f [S] ∩ S(f ) = ∅)
⊆ [ S(f ) ∪ f [S] ]\f [S]
= clαT f [S]\f [S] (see (†), above)
This implies f β(α) [βS \S] ∩ f [S] = ∅.

By Theorem 25.2, (c) ⇒ (a), f is perfect, as required.
So intersection of S(f ) with f [S] helps recognize both perfect

functions and singular functions. Since a function f : S → T is
singular when f [S] ⊆ S(f ), a singular function can never be perfect.

The above theorem confirms that a perfect function is one such that
f [S] ∩ S(f ) is empty. So perfect functions and singular functions are
at opposite ends of a “spectrum of functions” each characterized by
the contents of the set f [S]∩S(f ). At one end we have f [S] ⊆ S(f ) for
a singular function, f , and at the other end we have f [S] ∩ S(f ) = ∅
for a perfect function, f . For all other cases of f [S] ∩ S(f ) = ∅, f is
perfect neither nor singular.
Example 1. Suppose S is non-compact completely regular and con-
nected. Let f : S → R be a continuous real-valued bounded function
on S. Verify that f a perfect function if and only if f [S] is not
closed.
Solution: We are given that non-compact S is connected and f :
S → R belongs to C ∗ (S). Since f is bounded, the function f : S → R
extends to f β : βS → clR f [S] where f β [βS] = clR f [S]. Since S is
connected, then f [S] is connected and clR f [S] is a closed bounded
interval.
Recall that f β [βS] = clR f [S] = f [S]∪S(f ) (see (††)). This implies
clR f [S] = f [S] ∪ S(f ) = [a, b]
for some a and b.
Case f [S] = [a, b] : Then f β [βS] = f [S] = [a, b]. So S(f ) ⊆ f [S].
Since S(f ) ∩ f [S] = ∅, then f is not perfect.
Other cases, f [S] = [a, b) or f [S] = (a, b] or f [S] = (a, b):
If f [S] = [a, b) then f β [βS] = clR f [S] = f [S] ∪ S(f ) = [a, b) ∪ {b}
where {b} = S[f ]. Then S(f )∩f [S] = ∅ and so f is perfect. Similarly,
if f [S] = (a, b] or f [S] = (a, b) then S(f ) ∩ f [S] = ∅ and so f is
perfect.

Example 2. Let f = π2 arctan. We then obtain the function f :
R → [−1, 1]. Show that f is perfect.
Solution: The function, f , maps the connected interval (−∞, ∞)
one-to-one onto T = (−1, 1). Since f : R → [−1, 1] is real-valued
and bounded then, by the statement the previous example, f is
perfect.
25.4 The Realcompact Property and Perfect

Evaluation Maps
We will review a few facts related to the realcompact property. Sup-

pose S is completely regular and F = C(S). If f ∈ F , we have seen
that f : S → R extends continuously to f β(ω) : βS → ωR (where
ωR = R ∪ {∞}).
Furthermore,
υf S = {x ∈ βS : f β(ω) (x) ∈ R} = f β(ω)← [R]
represents all the “real points in βS associated to f ”. If a point p in

βS is a real point associated to all f ∈ C(S) then we say that p is a
“real point of βS”. Then the set
υS = ∩{f β(ω)← [R] : f ∈ F } = ∩{υf S : f ∈ F }
represents the set of all real points of βS.

So, if x ∈ βS \υS there is some g ∈ C(S) such that g β(ω) (x) = ∞.
If υS = S then S is said to be “realcompact”. That is, for every
point, p, in βS \S there is some f ∈ C(S) such that f β(ω) (p) = ∞.
In the special case where f ∈ C ∗ (S), then
f β(ω) [βS] = f β(ω) [clβS S]

= clωR f [S]
= clR R
⊆R
So, in this case, υf S = f β(ω)← [R] = βS. Then ∩{f β(ω)← [R] : f ∈
C ∗ (S)} = βS. When S is not pseudocompact3 the functions, f , in
C ∗ (S) play no role in distinguishing the real points in βS \S from
the “non-real points”. Only unbounded functions, f , will extend to
a function, f β(ω) , so that f β(ω)← (∞) is non-empty.
So, if S is not pseudocompact and F = C(S) we will denote
the non-empty set of all unbounded real-valued functions on S by
3
A pseudocompact space is one for which C(S) = C ∗ (S).
H = F \C ∗ (S). Then
υS = ∩{f β(ω)← [R] : f ∈ H }

= ∩{f β(ω)← [R] : f ∈ F }
If g ∈ H , then g β(ω) [clβS S] = clωR g[S]. For this function g, the

image, g[S], of S is unbounded in R and so is not a compact subset
of R; this means that there must be some point q in βS\S such that
gβ(ω) (q) = ∞.
We will now consider these few notions from a slightly different
point of view.
First, some notation.
If F = C(S), H = F \ C ∗ (S), and ωRf is the codomain of
f : S → ωR.

H = f ∈F ωRf

K = f ∈F clωR f [S]
T = eF [S]
αT = clK T
By Tychonoff’s theorem, H and K are compact with T dense in

αT ⊆ K ⊆ H.
For each f : S → R, we obtain f+ : S → ωR which extends to
f β(ω) : βS → clωR f [S].
The evaluation function, eF : S → T , maps S onto T , where
eF (x) = f (x)f ∈F ∈ T
It extends to
β(α)
eF : βS → αT
β(α)
where eF maps βS onto clK T = αT .
In the following theorem, we establish a fundamental relationship
between the realcompact property and properties of eF .
Theorem 25.4 Let S be both a completely regular and non-

pseudocompact space and F = C(S). Let Rf denote the codomain
of f : S → Rf . If S is realcompact then the evaluation map,

eF : S → f ∈F Rf

is a perfect function which maps S onto eF [S] in f ∈F Rf .
Proof. We are given that S is both a completely regular and non-

pseudocompact space and F = C(S).
Let H = F \C ∗ (S) and KH = f ∈H clωR f [S].
Since S is non-pseudocompact, then H is non-empty.
Let function, eH : S → eH [S], be the evaluation map generated
by H defined as
eH (x) = f (x)f ∈H ∈ eH [S]

β(α) β(α)
The function eH extends to eH : βS → eH [βS] defined as
β(α)
eH (x) = f β(ω) (x)f ∈H
Suppose S is realcompact.

We are required to show that eF : S → eF [S] ⊆ f ∈F R is a
β(α)
perfect function. To do this it will suffice to show that eF [βS \S] =
(clK T ) \T and invoke Theorem 25.2, part (b).
Since S is realcompact, βS \S = βS \υS, so, for every x ∈ βS \S,
there is some f ∈ H such that f β(ω) (x) = ∞.
Then
∩{f β(ω)← [R] : f ∈ H } = S

β(α)
Then, for every x ∈ βS\S, eH (x) = f β(ω) (x)f ∈H has an entry
which is ∞.
So,
β(α)
eH [βS \S] ∩ f ∈H Rf = ∅
hence,
β(α)
eF [βS \S] ∩ f ∈F Rf =∅ (∗)

Let T = eF [S]. Since T ⊆ f ∈F Rf , then (*) implies
β(α)
eF [βS \S] ∩ T = ∅ (∗∗)

For K = f ∈F clωR f [S].
β(α) β(α)
eF [βS] = eF [βS \S] ∪ eF [S]
β(α)
= eF [βS \S] ∪ T (By (**), disjoint union.)
= clK T
β(α) β(α)
Since [eF [βS \S] ∪ T ]\T = eF [βS \S], then
β(α)
eF [βS \S] = (clK T )\T

So, if S is realcompact, then, by 25.2, eF : S → f ∈F f [S] is
perfect.
We now show that the converse of the above theorem statement

holds true. That is, if eF : S → f ∈F f [S] is perfect then S must be
realcompact.
Theorem 25.5 Let S be both a completely regular non-

pseudocompact space and F = C(S). If eF : S → f ∈F Rf is a
perfect function then S is realcompact.

Proof. Let R = f ∈F Rf , K = f ∈F ωRf and T = eF [S]. Then
T ⊆ R ⊆ K.
Given: eF : S → T is perfect.
We are required to show that S is realcompact. Let αT = clK T .

Then eF extends to
eβ(α)F : βS → αT
To prove S is realcompact it suffices to show that, if y ∈ βS \S,

then
eβ(α)F (y) = f β(ω) (y)f ∈F

in has at least one entry, g β(ω) (y) = ∞.
f ∈F ωRf
Since eF : S → f ∈F , Rf is perfect it is, by definition, a closed
function. Then eF [S] = T is a closed subset of R. This means that
clR T = T . So, clK T ∩ R = clR T = T . Then
(clK T )\T ∩ R ⊆ (clK T ∩ R)\T
= T \T
= ∅
implies
(clK T )\T ∩ R = ∅ (†)
Since eF is perfect, by Theorem 25.2,
eβ(α)F [βS \S] ⊆ (clK T )\T
= [(clK T )\T ] \ R (By (†).)
⊆ K \R
So,

eβ(α)F [βS \S] ⊆ f ∈F ωR \ f ∈F R
If y ∈ βS \S then eβ(α)F (y) has at least one entry which is ∞.

So, y is not a real point of S. So the only real points of βS belong
to S. So, S is realcompact, as required.
Corollary 25.6 Let S be both a completely regular non-

pseudocompact space and F = C(S). The space S is realcompact
if and only if the evaluation map, eF : S → f ∈F f [S], is a perfect

function which homeomorphically maps S into f ∈F Rf .
Proof. This simply summarizes the two previous theorems into a
single “if and only if” statement.
From the previous results we restate the general statement:

Realcompact spaces are precisely those spaces, S, such that

eC(S) : S → f ∈C(S) Rf
is a perfect function.
We will use the techniques illustrated in the proof of the above

characterization of realcompactness to prove the following statement
about arbitrary products of R’s.

Theorem 25.7 Let R = j∈J Rj denote a product of R’s. The
product space, R, is realcompact.

Proof. Let R = j∈J Rj and K = j∈J ωRj .
We are required to show that R is realcompact.

To do this, it suffices to show that eC(R) : j∈J Rj → f ∈C(R) Rf
is perfect and invoke Corollary 25.6.
Consider the identity function i : R → R expressed asi : R → K,
where i is seen as an inclusion map which embeds R = j∈J R into

K = j∈J ωR.
Then i extends to iβ(K) : βR → clK i[R] ⊆ K. See that
clK i[R] = iβ(K) [βR] = iβ(K) [βR\R] ∪ i[R]
Now i pulls back points to points and so is a compact function on

R. If F is closed in R then i[F ] is closed in R and so it is a closed
function. So, i is a perfect function.
Also, see that
iβ(K) [βR\R] ⊆ clK i[R]\i[R] (Since i : R → R is a perfect map)

⊆ K \R

= j∈J ωR\ j∈J R

Let πi : j∈J Rj → Ri denote the function defined as πi ( xj j∈J ) =
xi ∈ Ri . Essentially πi is the real-valued continuous function which
projects R into R. So,
P = {πj : j ∈ J} ⊆ C(R)

The family P generates the evaluation map eP : Rj →
j∈J
j∈J Rj defined as
eP ( xjj∈J ) = πj ( xii∈J ) j∈J

= xjj∈J

∈ j∈J Rj
Then eP ( xjj∈J ) = xjj∈J . The function, eP , is simply another

way of representing the identity function mapping
R onto R.
Since iβ(K) [βR\R] ⊆ j∈J ωRj \ j∈J Rj , if y ∈ βR\R, then
β(ω)
eP β(K) (y) = πj (y)πj ∈P ∈ πj ∈P ωRπj \ j∈J Rπj
has at least one entry which is ∞.

Since P ⊆ C(R), for y ∈ βR\R,

eC(R) β(K) (y) = f β(ω) (y)f ∈C(R) ∈ f ∈C(R) ωRf \ j∈J Rj
has at least one entry which is ∞.

So, y is not a real point of R. Then,

eC(R) β(K) [βR\R] ⊆ f ∈C(R) ωRf \ f ∈C(R) Rf

This means that eC(R) : R → f ∈C(R) Rf is a perfect function.
By Corollary 25.6, R is realcompact.
We have shown that R is realcompact.
Concept Review
1. Define a compact function.

2. Define a perfect function.
3. Provide two characterizations of a perfect function.
4. Provide a characterization of the realcompact property involving
a perfect function.
5. Provide a characterization of a perfect function f : S → K in
terms of a singular
set.
6. If eC(S) : S → f ∈C(S) f [S] is an evaluation map what can we say
about Sif eC(S) is perfect?
7. If S = i∈J Si what property must S satisfy if we want the pro-
jection map to be perfect?
Chapter 26
Perfect and Freudenthal

Compactifications
Abstract
In this chapter, we define both the Freudenthal compactification and
the family of “perfect compactifications”. In spite of its name, a perfect
compactification has very little to do with “perfect functions”. A per-
fect function is one which is closed and whose fibers are compact, while a
perfect compactification, αS, is one for which the fibers of πβ→α are con-
nected. We produce an algebraic characterization of those compactifica-
tions we call “perfect”. We also present examples of both the Freudenthal
compactification of a space and a perfect compactification. This chapter
can be studied immediately after the chapter introducing compactifica-
tions without loss of continuity.
26.1 The Freudenthal Compactification
We introduce a particular compactification for locally compact Haus-

dorff spaces called the Freudenthal compactification.1 Just like the
Stone–Čech compactification we will see that a space can only have
1
Hans Freudenthal (1905–1990) was a Jewish, German-born Dutch mathemati-
cian at the University of Amsterdam. He was suspended from his duties by the
Nazis during the war. After the war he was reinstated to his former position.
597
one Freudenthal compactification. We begin by reminding ourselves

that,
a space is said to be zero-dimensional if and only if every

point has an open neighborhood base of clopen sets.
While,
a space is totally disconnected if and only if every connected
component is a singleton set.
Both of these are related to either connectedness or disconnectedness

properties. By Theorem 20.24 “a locally compact Hausdorff space is
zero-dimensional if and only if it is totally disconnected”.
Definition 26.1 Given a locally compact Hausdorff compactifica-

tion of the space, S, the Freudenthal compactification, φS, of S is
the maximal compactification whose outgrowth, φS\S, is totally dis-
connected. Equivalently φS is the maximal compactification whose
outgrowth, φS\S, is zero-dimensional. By “maximal” we mean that,
if Z = {αi S : i ∈ I} is the family of all compactifications of S with
zero-dimensional remainder, φS ∈ Z and αi S φS, for all i.
There is another way to visualize the Freudenthal compactifica-

tion, φS, of a space S. In the following theorem, we show that φS
is the unique compactification of S obtained by collapsing the con-
nected components of βS\S to points. This theorem guarantees that a
maximal compactification with zero-dimensional outgrowth exists in
the partially ordered set of all compactifications. Furthermore, there
is only one such compactification (up to equivalence).
Theorem 26.2 Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff space and let

αS be a compactification of S. Let πβ→α : βS → αS be the corre-
sponding continuous map which fixes the points of S. The expression,
φS, denotes the Freudenthal compactification of S.
← (p)
(a) If αS \S is zero-dimensional then, for any p ∈ αS \S, πβ→α
is a union of connected components of βS \S.
Perfect and Freudenthal Compactifications 599
← (p) is a connected com-

(b) Suppose that, for each p ∈ αS \S, πβ→α
ponent of βS\S. Then αS is equivalent to the Freudenthal com-
pactification, φS, of S.
Proof. Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff space and αS be a
compactification of S.
(a) We are given that the outgrowth, αS\S, is zero-dimensional. We
are required to show that, for each point p ∈ αS \S, πβ→α← (p) is
a union of connected components of βS \S.

Let p ∈ αS\S and C be a connected component in βS\S which
intersects πβ→α← (p). It suffices to show that C ⊆ π ←
β→α (p).
←
Suppose C ⊆ πβ→α (p). Then there exists t ∈ C \ πβ→α ← (p).
Then there exists a point, q, in αS \S distinct from p such that

t ∈ πβ→α ← (q). Since αS \ S is zero-dimensional, there is some
clopen neighborhood U of q in αS \S which does not contain p.

Then
← ←
t ∈ πβ→α (q) ⊆ πβ→α [U ]
← [U ] ∩ π ←
where πβ→α β→α (p) = ∅. Since πβ→α is continuous,
←
πβ→α [U ] is a clopen set in βS \ S which only intersects a por-
tion of C. This contradicts the fact that C is a connected com-
ponent of βS \ S. So, C \ πβ→α ← (p) must be empty. This means
←
that C ⊆ πβ→α (p). Since every point of πβ→α ← (p) belongs to
a component of βS \S which is entirely contained in πβ→α ← (p),

←
πβ→α (p) must be a union of connected components. We are done
for part (a).
(b) We are given that, for each p ∈ αS \S, πβ→α ← (p) is a connected
component of βS \S. We are required to show that αS and φS

are equivalent compactifications.
A function which collapses the connected components of a
compact Hausdorff set, βS \ S, to points in αS \ S produces a
totally disconnected set (equivalently a zero-dimensional space)
(see the example on page 454). Then αS \S is zero-dimensional.
We have shown in part (a) that πβ→α pulls back points to
unions of components. Then, for each p ∈ αS\S, πβ→α ← (p) is the
“union” of a single component. Then αS\S, cannot be partitioned

any further without slicing into a connected component. Then
αS must be the maximal compactification with zero-dimensional
outgrowth. So, αS ≡ φS. As required.
26.2 Perfect Compactification: Definition
We have seen above that, if αS has zero-dimensional outgrowth,

αS \S, then
for all p ∈ αS \S, πβ→α← (p) is the union of connected
components of βS \S.
From this fact we concluded that there is only one maximal compact-
ification, φS, with zero-dimensional outgrowth, namely the compact-
ification, αS, for which the fibers of πβ→α |βS\S is a single connected
component of βS \S. It is called the Freudenthal compactification.
Those compactifications, αS, with zero-dimensional outgrowth
must then be “less than or equal to” the Freudenthal compactifi-
cation, φS.
There may be compactifications, αS, whose outgrowth, αS \ S,
satisfies the property,
for all p ∈ αS \S, πβ→α ← (p) is connected
but is not zero-dimensional. This could occur only if πβ→α ← (p) is a
connected subset of at most one component.
Such compactifications are referred to as “perfect” compactifica-
tions. We formally define this.
Definition 26.3 Let γS be a Hausdorff compactification of S and

πβ→γ : βS → γS be the continuous map which projects βS onto
γS. The compactification, γS, is said to be a perfect compactification
provided πβ→γ ← (p) is connected for every p ∈ γS \S.
The Freudenthal compactification, φS, is an example of a perfect

compactification. In the family of all perfect compactifications of S,
it is in fact the smallest one. So perfect compactifications form a
family of compactifications which are gathered “above” φS, while
the ones with zero-dimensional outgrowth form a family which are
gathered “below” φS.
If for a locally compact Hausdorff space, S, βS\S is zero-
dimensional then βS is both the Freudenthal compactification and
the only perfect compactification of S.
The main result in this chapter is an algebraic characterization of

a perfect compactification.
26.3 Algebraic Subrings of C ∗ (S)
Our algebraic characterization will involve properties of a particular

type of subring of C ∗ (S), called an “algebraic subring”. Setting up
the stage for the proof of the characterization first requires a proper
understanding the concept of an algebraic subring and some of its
properties. Characterizing the topological property of “perfect com-
pactification”, αS, with an algebraic property of a subring of Cα (S),
requires a bit of mathematical prowess. We begin with the following
definition. Three lemmas will follow.
Definition 26.4 Let S be a locally compact Hausdorff space and

C ∗ (S) be the ring of all bounded continuous real-valued functions
on S.
(a) We will say that A is an algebraic subring of C ∗ (S) if A is
a subring which contains all of the constant functions and all
functions, f , such that f 2 = f · f ∈ A .
(b) Given a subring, A , of C ∗ (S), a subset T of S on which every
function in A is constant is called a stationary set of the subring,
A . If T is a stationary set and, for any p ∈ S\T , there is a function
f ∈ A which is not constant on T ∪ {p} then we say that T is a
maximal stationary set of A . Equivalently, if T is a stationary
set of A containing y and T = {x ∈ S : f (x) = f (y), for all
f ∈ A } then T is a maximal stationary set of A .
By definition, if T is a maximal stationary set of the subring, A ,

of C(S) then every function in A is constant on T . Then, for f ∈ A ,
f [T ] is some singleton set, say {tf }, and so T ⊆ Z(f − tf ). Then
T ⊆ ∩{Z(f − tf ) : f ∈ A }. Since T is maximal with respect to this
property, then
T = ∩{Z(f − tf ) : f ∈ A }
a closed subset of S. So, a maximal stationary set, T , of A is an

intersection of zero sets generated by the functions in A .
The following lemma offers yet another way of describing the max-
imal stationary set of subring.
Lemma 26.5 Given a space, S, let G be a subring of C(S). For any

point p ∈ eG [S], eG ← (p) is a maximal stationary set of G .
Proof. Let G is a subring of C(S) and let p be a point in eG [S] ⊆

f ∈G Rf . Then, for a given x ∈ S, p is of the form
p = eG (x)
= f (x) f ∈G
= pf f ∈G

∈ f ∈G Rf
That is, p = pf f ∈G where the element pf is the image of the given x

under f : S → R.
If p = pf f ∈G is in the range, eG [S], of S then
eG ← (p) = {x ∈ S : eG (x) = p}
contains at least one point, say, a.
Let
[a] = {x ∈ S : eG (x) = eG (a) = p}
Then, eG [[a]] = {p}, so eG is constant on [a]. In fact, for each f ∈ G ,
f (x) = f (a) = pf
for all x ∈ [a] ⊆ S. So, f is constant on [a] for each f ∈ G . Then [a] is
a stationary set of G . If x ∈ [a] then eG (x) = eG (a). So, eG ← (p) = [a]
is a maximal stationary set of G . As required.
Lemma 26.6 Let T be a connected subset of a topological space,

S, and G be the subset of C ∗ (S) which contains only those functions
which are constant on T . Then G is an algebraic subring which is
closed with respect to the uniform norm topology.
Proof. We are given that G contains precisely all those functions

which are constant on the connected subspace T .
Clearly, G is closed under multiplication and addition and so G
is a subring of C ∗ (S).
Claim: That G is algebraic. Let g be a function on S such that √
g 2 [T ]√= k. It suffices to show that g ∈ G . For every x ∈ T , g(x) is k
or − k. By hypothesis, T is connected and so the range g[T ] cannot
contain two elements. So, g must be constant on T and so belongs
to G . We deduce that G is algebraic, as claimed.
Claim: That G is closed with respect to the uniform norm. Suppose
h is a limit point of G . Then there is a sequence {ti : i ∈ N} in
G which converges to h with respect to the uniform norm topology.
Since each ti is constant on T , h is constant on T and so belongs to
G . So, G contains it’s limit points and so is closed with respect to
the uniform norm.
In the next lemma, we establish a relationship between a topo-

logical property of a maximal stationary set of a subring, A , and an
algebraic property of this subring, for the case where S is compact.
Lemma 26.7 Let S be a compact Hausdorff space and A be an

algebraic subring of C ∗ (S). If T is a maximal stationary set of A
then T is a connected subset of S.
Proof. We are given that S is compact and Hausdorff and T is a

maximal stationary set of the algebraic subring, A , of C ∗ (S).
Suppose x ∈ S and
eA (x) = t = tf f ∈A
Let T = e←
A ( tf f ∈A ). Then f (x) ∈ f [T ] = {tf }, for each f ∈ A .
This means that
T = ∩{f ← {tf } : f ∈ A }
is the maximal stationary set of A .

We are required to show that T is connected.
Suppose T is not connected. That is, suppose

T = F1 ∪ F2
where F1 and F2 are disjoint non-empty closed subsets of T . Since
S is compact, both F1 and F2 are compact. We will show that this
leads to a contradiction.
There exist disjoint open subsets, U1 and U2 , of S, such that
F1 ⊆ U1
F2 ⊆ U2
So,
T = ∩{f ← (tf ) : f ∈ A }
= ∩{f ← (tf , tf + ε) : f ∈ A , ε ∈ R+ } (†)
= ∩{f ← [tf , tf + ε] : f ∈ A , ε ∈ R+ }
⊆ U1 ∪ U2
Step 1: We claim that there exists at least one function, h : S → R,
in A and one ε such that
eA ← (t) = T ⊆ h← [th , th + ε] ⊆ U1 ∪ U2
Proof of claim in step 1: Suppose no such function h : S → R

exists.
That is, for all f and ε, there is an x ∈ S \(U1 ∪ U2 ) such that
x ∈ f (x) ∈ [tf , tf + ε].
Then, for all f, ε,
f ← [tf , tf + ε] ∩ [S \(U1 ∪ U2 )] = ∅ and T ⊆ f ← [tf , tf + ε]
This means that the collection of closed subsets of S
C = {f ← [tf , tf + ε] : f ∈ A , ε ∈ R+ } ∪ {S \(U1 ∪ U2 )}
satisfies the finite intersection property.
Since S is compact, there exists
q ∈ ∩{f ← [tf , tf + ε] ∩ [S \(U1 ∪ U2 )] : f ∈ A , ε ∈ R+ }
This contradicts T = ∩{f ← [tf + ε] : f ∈ A , ε ∈ R+ }.
Then there must exist at least one continuous function, h : S → R,

in A and one ε such that
T = F1 ∪ F2 ⊆ h← [th , th + ε] ⊆ U1 ∪ U2 (∗)
as claimed.
Step 2: Suppose h ∈ A and ε > 0 such that h← [th , th + ε] ⊆

U1 ∪ U2 . Let
W1 = h← [th , th + ε] ∩ U1 (Which contains F1 )

←
W2 = h [th , th + ε] ∩ U2 (Which contains F2 )
Since U1 and U2 are disjoint, then W1 ∩ U1 and W2 ∩ U2 are disjoint

neighborhoods of F1 and F2 , respectively. So,
T = F1 ∪ F2 ⊆ W1 ∪ W2
See that
h← (th + ε) ⊆ h← [th , th + ε]
= h← [th , th + ε] ∩ (U1 ∪ U2 ) (by (∗))
= [h← [th , th + ε] ∩ U1 ] ∪ [h← [th , th + ε] ∩ U2 ]
= W1 ∪ W2
so there exists y ∈ W1 ∪ W2 such that
h(y) = th + ε (∗∗)
Step 3: For h ∈ A and ε > 0 given above, we define a real-valued

function r : S → R on S, as follows
r(x) = (th + ε) − h(x) if x ∈ W1

r(x) = h(x) − (th + ε) if x ∈ S \W1
Claim: We claim that r is a continuous real-valued function on S.

— By (∗∗), there exists y ∈ W1 ∪ W2 such that r(y) = 0.
— Moreover, see that th + ε is maximal in [th , th + ε], therefore,
r[W1 ] ⊆ [0, ∞)
r[S \W1 ] ⊆ (−∞, 0]
where r(y) = (th + ε) − (th + ε) = 0.
— See that the function r is well-defined and continuous on each of
the pieces, W1 and S \W1 .
— Also note that r(y) = 0 is a boundary point of each of the subsets
r[W1 ] and r[S \W1 ].
— So, r is continuous on S. As claimed.
Claim A: We now claim that the function r (defined above) belongs

to the subring A .
Proof of claim A: Given that h ∈ A and A is a subring, then
(th + ε) − h(x) ∈ A . Note that r 2 = ((th + ε) − h(x))2 . Since A is a
subring, then r 2 ∈ A . Since A is algebraic and r 2 ∈ A , then r ∈ A .
As claimed.
Claim B: We claim that r is not constant on T .
Proof of claim B: Recall from (†) that
T = F1 ∪ F2 = ∩{f ← (tf , tf + ε) : f ∈ A , ε ∈ R+ } ⊆ h← (th , th + ε)
See that r(x) = 0 if and only if h(x) = th +ε; that is, if x ∈ h← (th +ε).
Since F1 ∪ F2 ⊆ h← (th , th + ε), r is not zero on F1 ∪ F2 . We know
that
r[F1 ] ⊆ r[W1 ] ⊆ [0, ∞)
r[F2 ] ⊆ r[W2 ] ⊆ r[S \W1 ] ⊆ [0, ∞)
then r > 0 on F1 and r < 0 on F2 . So r is not constant on T , as
claimed.
Since T is maximal stationary set of A and r ∈ A , then r must
be constant on T . So, we have a contradiction.
We conclude that T must be connected. We are done.
26.4 An Algebraic Characterization of

“Perfect Compactification”
Having established that (for a compact space S),
all maximal stationary sets of an algebraic subring are

connected,
we are ready to roll out the proof of the following characterization

of perfect compactifications.
Theorem 26.8 Let γS be a compactification of S. Then γS is a

perfect compactification if and only if Cγ (S) is an algebraic subring
of C ∗ (S).
Proof. (⇐) We are given that G = Cγ (S) where Cγ (S) is an alge-
braic subring of C ∗ (S).
We are required to show that γS is a perfect compactification.
To do this it suffices to show that, for any p ∈ γS, πβ→γ ← (p) is
connected.
Given that Cγ (S) is algebraic, it is easily verified, that Cγ (S)β
must also be an algebraic subring of C(βS). By Lemma 21.12,
πβ→γ = eGγ ← ◦eG β . So, for p ∈ γS \S,
πβ→γ← (p) = [eGγ ← ◦eG β ]← (p)

= eG β ← (eGγ (p))
= a maximal stationary set of G β in βS
Since G β is an algebraic subring of C(βS), then by Lemma 26.7,

the maximal stationary set, πβ→γ← (p), of G β is connected. So, for
any p ∈ γS, πβ→γ ← (p) is connected. By definition, γS is a perfect
compactification. As required for the direction, ⇐.
(⇒) Suppose γS is a perfect compactification. By definition of
perfect compactification, πβ→γ ← (p) is connected for every p ∈ γS\S.
We are required to show that Cγ (S) is an algebraic subring of
∗
C (S).
Let G = Cγ (S). To show that G is an algebraic subring of C ∗ (S)
it suffices to show that G β is an algebraic subring of C(βS).
For p ∈ γS, let Fp denote the set of all functions in C(βS) which
are constant on the connected set, πβ→γ ← (p). By Lemma 26.6, Fp
is an algebraic subring of C(βS).
Since πβ→γ = eGγ ← ◦eG β (by Lemma 21.12), then πβ→γ ← (p) =
β←
eG (eGγ (p)). So,
eGβ [πβ→γ ← (p)] = eGγ (p)
It follows that G β ⊆ Fp . It is easily verified that the intersection

of a family of algebraic subrings is an algebraic subring. So, ∩{Fp :
p ∈ γS} is an algebraic subring of C(βS). So,
G β ⊆ ∩{Fp : p ∈ γS}
If we can show that ∩{Fp : p ∈ γS} ⊆ G β , then we are done.

Let f ∈ ∩{Fp : p ∈ γS}. If g ∈ C(γS) is such that g(πβ→γ (x)) =
f (x) for all x ∈ βS, then g|S = f |S ; so f |S ∈ Cγ (S) = G . Hence,
∩{Fp : p ∈ γS} ⊆ G β .
We conclude that G β = Cγ (S)β = ∩{Fp : p ∈ γS}, an algebraic
subring of C(βS).
So, Cγ (S) is an algebraic subring of C ∗ (S). We are done with the
direction ⇒.
Example 1. Recall that the Freudenthal compactification is the

maximal compactification in the family of all compactifications whose
outgrowth is zero-dimensional (equivalently, totally disconnected).
The Freudenthal compactification can also be seen as the minimal
“perfect compactification” of a space. In the following proposition,
we provide an example of a space whose Freudenthal compactifica-
tion is βS. In such a case, S has only one perfect compactification,
βS.
The proposition involves the space, N. Suppose A is a subset of
N. We confirm that clβN A and clβN N\A are clopen in βN. To see this
simply note that A is a zero-set. Then there is a continuous function,
f : N → {0, 1}, such that A = Z(f − 1). Then f extends continuously
to f β : clβN A → {0, 1} where
f β [clβN A] = clR f [A] = {1}

Then
clβN A = Z(f β − 1) = βN\Z(f β − 0)
is clopen in βN.
Proposition 26.9 The Stone–Čech compactification, βN, of N is

both the Freudenthal compactification and the minimal perfect com-
pactification.
Proof. To show that βN is the Freudenthal compactification of N,
it suffices to show that βN\N is zero-dimensional, equivalently, totally
disconnected. We have shown that subspaces of totally disconnected
spaces are themselves totally disconnected. So, it will suffice to show
that βN is totally disconnected.
Let C be a connected component of βN. Suppose p and q are
points in C. We claim that p = q. If p = q then they are limits of two
distinct z-ultrafilters Zp and Zq in Z[N]. Then Zp contains a zero-set
Z(f − 1) which does not belong to Zq . Then p belongs to the clopen
zero-set Z(f β − 1) which does not contain q. Since C is connected,
then p must equal q. We conclude that βN is totally disconnected.
Then βN\N is zero-dimensional.
It is the maximal compactification with zero-dimensional out-
growth and so is Freudenthal. It also is the smallest compactification
which is perfect.
Since the Freudenthal compactification is the smallest of perfect

compactifications, no compactification αN ≺ βN is perfect. So, by
the above characterization, no proper subring of C ∗ (N) is algebraic.
Concept Review
1. Define the Freudenthal compactification of a space.

2. How can βS be used to construct the Freudenthal compactifica-
tion φS?
3. What does it mean to say that a compact space is a perfect com-
pactification of S?
4. State what we mean when we that A is an algebraic subring of

C ∗ (S).
5. If A is an algebraic subring of C ∗ (S) what is a stationary set
of A ? What does it mean to say that a subset, T , is a maximal
stationary set of A ?
6. State an algebraic characterization (involving C ∗ (S)) of a perfect
compactification.
Chapter 27
Spaces Whose Elements

Are Sequences
Abstract
In this chapter, we investigate a family of topological spaces whose
elements are sequences. These spaces of sequences are vector spaces
equipped with a topology which is determined by norms. The norms
we will study are p -norms and the ∞ -norm. We will verify when the
p -spaces are separable, second countable, Lindelöf and sequentially com-
pact. The ∞ -spaces of sequences will be shown to be complete. Along
the way we will prove two important inequalities: Hölder’s inequality
and Minkowski’s inequality for the p -spaces.
27.1 Definitions: p -Spaces
To begin we remind ourselves that a sequence of points can be viewed

as a function; one whose domain is N. If S is a normed topological
space, the functions studied here will be S-valued. We will represent
the set of all S-valued sequences as
F (N, S)
These are more commonly expressed as
F (N, S) = {{s0 , s1 , s2 , s3 . . .} : si ∈ S} = {si i∈N : si ∈ S}
the family of all sequences whose elements belong to the space S.

The topology defined on F (N, S) depends on the topology of S.
611
Given a normed vector space (S, +, ·, ) and the set F (N, S), an
“p -space” and the “p -norm” are defined as follows.
Definition 27.1 Let S be a normed vector space (S, +, ·, ) and

F (N, S) denote the set of all sequences, f = {s0 , s1 , s2 , s3 , . . .} =
si i∈N , whose elements, si , belong to S. Let p be any real number
greater than or equal to 1. The p -norm of f = si i∈N is defined as
∞ 1/p

f p = si i∈N p = si p
i=0
Let (Sb , p ) denote the family of those sequences, si i∈N , in

F (N, S) such that
si i∈N p < ∞
The expression, “p -space”, refers to the (bounded) normed space,

(Sb , p ).
The use of the lower-case cursive form, , in the definition, is

standard. When we refer to “p -norm” we are speaking of an infinite
family of norms on F (N, S). These are distinguished from each other
by the chosen value of p in [1, ∞). They are viewed as belonging
to the same family of norms because the same formula to used to
compute them.
The space S may be the space, R, or the complex numbers, C,
equipped with the usual norm. We should be careful not to confuse
the norm, , on S with the chosen p -norm, p , on F (N, S).
The definition of the p -norm can be modified so as to include the
set of n-tuples, F ({1, 2, , 3. . ., n}, S) = S n where
n 1/p

si i=1...n p = si p
i=1
The only significant difference is the symbol, n, which replaces, “∞”.

Everything else flows identically. The case where, p = 2, turns out to
be the Euclidean norm on S n .
Spaces Whose Elements Are Sequences 613
When applied to R, the p -norm is a generalization of the absolute

value since
x2 = [x2 ]1/2 = |x|
On R2 ,

(a, b)2 = a2 + b2
The p -norms on Rn flow naturally to p -norms on R∞ (viewed as
infinite sequences of real numbers).
27.1.1 The p -norm is a valid norm for all p ≥ 1

Having defined the p -norm on the family of S-valued sequences,
F (N, S), in this way we have yet to verify that it satisfies the three
norm axioms N1, N2 and N3 for all values of p. Proving that any
p -norm satisfies the first two norm axioms is straightforward. Let
f = si i∈N .
p 1/p = 0 ⇔
N1: f p < ∞ (by definition) and f p = [ ∞ i=0 si ]
si = 0 for all i ∈ N.
N2:
∞ 1/p

p
αf p = αsi
i=0
∞
1/p

= |α|p si p
i=0
n
1/p

p p
= lim |α| si
n→∞
i=0
n
1/p

= lim |α|p si p
n→∞
i=0
n
1/p

p 1/p p
= [|α| ] lim si
n→∞
i=0
∞
1/p

= |α| si p = |α|f p
i=0
N3: The triangle inequality for p -norms, also called the Minkowski
inequality, is more difficult to prove. It is in fact quite tricky. It’s
proof is the main subject of the next subsection on inequalities.
27.2 Two Fundamental Inequalities: Hölder’s

and Minkowski’s Inequalities
To following inequalities are important. The proof of Minkowski’s

inequality (the triangle inequality for p ) must be preceded by
“Hölder’s inequality”.
The following lemma helps set up the proof of Hölder’s inequality.
Lemma 27.2 Lemma for Hölder’s Inequality For any t ∈ (0, 1) and
any A > 0, B > 0
At B 1−t ≤ tA + (1 − t)B
Proof. We are given that A > 0, B > 0. For values of t ∈ (0, 1),
we define the functions f (t) and g(t) as
f (t) = tA + (1 − t)B = (A − B)t + B

g(t) = At B 1−t
To prove the lemma it suffices to show that g(t) ≤ f (t) on (0, 1).
If we let a = ln A and b = ln B, then
A = ea
B = eb
The functions f (t) and g(t) then take on the form (Figure 27.1),
f (t) = tea + (1 − t)eb = (ea − eb )t + eb

g(t) = (ea )t (eb )(1−t) = eta+(1−t)b = e(a−b)t+b
where f (t) represents a straight line joining the points (0, eb ) and
(1, ea ) and g(t) represents an exponential function joining the same
points (0, eb ) and (1, ea ).
g(t) = e(a – b)t + b
200
(1, ea)
f(t) = (ea – eb) t+ eb
100
(0, eb)
0
–0.4 –0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
x
Figure 27.1. The graph of f (t) and g(t) when a > b. See Figure 27.2 for case
a < b.
Regardless of whether a > b or b > a the function g(t) is concave

upwards. In order for g(t) to intersect f (t) at the points (0, eb ) and
(1, ea ) it must be that g(t) ≤ f (t) on the interval, (0, 1). Equality
holds only if a = b.
So, At B 1−t ≤ tA + (1 − t)B on (0, 1), as required.
Theorem 27.3 Hölder’s Inequality Let S be a normed vector space

(S, + , · , ) and F (N,S) denote the set of all sequences, f = si i∈N ,
whose elements, si , belong to S. Let p be any real number greater
than or equal to 1. The p -norm of f = si i∈N is defined as
∞ 1/p

f p = si i∈N p = si p
i=0
Let p be any real number > 1 and f = si i∈N , g = ti i∈N ∈ p . Let
p
q = p−1 . Then,
∞

si ti ≤ f p gq
i=0
g(t) = e(a – b)t + b
200
(0, eb)
f(t) = (ea – eb) t + eb

100
(1, ea)
0
–0.4 –0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
x
Figure 27.2. The graph of f (t) and g(t) when a < b.
p
Proof. Note that q = p−1 implies 1p + 1q = 1. If either f or g is
0 then both sides are zero and so the theorem holds true. Suppose
then that neither f nor g is the zero sequence.
Suppose A = si p /f pp and B = ti q /gqq .
p
Let t = 1/p. Then q = p−1 implies 1 − t = 1/q. Then At B 1−t ≤
tA + (1 − t)B (this follows from the lemma).
A B
At B 1−t ≤ tA + (1 − t)B ⇒ A1/p B 1/q ≤ +
p q
si ti si p ti q
⇒ ≤ p +
f p gq pf p qgqq
implies
∞
∞ ∞
si ti 1 si p 1 ti q
≤ +
f p gq p f pp q gqq
i=0 i=0 i=0
∞ p
∞ q
1 i=0 si 1 i=0 ti
= +
p f pp q gqq
1 f pp 1 gqq
= +
p f pp q gqq
1 1
= +
p q
= 1 (By hypothesis)
From which we obtain

∞

si ti ≤ f p gq
i=0
This proves Hölder’s inequality.
Hölder’s inequality can now be used as a tool to prove Minkowski’s

inequality, f + gp ≤ f p + gp (which is the triangle inequality
for the p norm).
Theorem 27.4 (The Minkowski Inequality). Let p be any real

number greater or equal to 1 and (S, ) be a normed vector space.
Let f = si i∈N , g =< ti i∈N ∈ p where the entries belong to S.
Then,
f + gp ≤ f p + gp
Proof. We are given that p ∈ [1, ∞) and (S, ) be a normed

vector space and
f = si i∈N , g = ti i∈N ∈ p

n n
nCase p = 1: If p = 1, then, since i=0 si + ti ≤ i=0 si +
i=0 ti , for all n, f + g1 ≤ f 1 + g1 . Then the statement
holds true for this particular case.
p
Case p > 1: Suppose now that p > 1. Let q = p−1 .
Claim: We claim that if f = si i∈N ,

si p−1 i∈N = f p−1 (∗)
q p
Proof of claim: Suppose f = si i∈N and we are given q = p/(p−1).

∞ 1/q
q
si p−1 i∈N = si p−1
q
i=0
∞ 1/q

q(p−1)
= si
i=0
∞ 1/q

= si p
i=0
⎡ 1/p ⎤p/q
∞
=⎣ si p ⎦
i=0
= f p/q
p
= f p−1
p (Since q = p/(p − 1))

So, si p−1 i∈N q = f p−1
p , as claimed.
The inequality is now proven in the following chain of inequalities.
⎛ 1/p ⎞p
∞
f + gpp = ⎝ si + ti p ⎠
i=0
∞

= si + ti p−1 si + ti
i=0
∞

≤ si + ti p−1 (si + ti ) (Triangle inequality for .)
i=0
∞
∞

p−1 p−1
= si + ti si + si + ti ti
i=0 i=0

≤ si + ti p−1 i∈N q · f p

+ si + ti p−1 i∈N q · gp (By Hölder’s twice)

= si + ti p−1 i∈N · [f p + gp ]
q
= f + gp−1
p · [f p + gp ] (By claim *)
Then

1
f + gp = f + gpp ≤ f p + gp
f + g p−1
p
from which we obtain the desired triangle inequality.
27.3 A Few Simple Topological Properties

of p -Spaces
We now investigate topological properties possessed by p -spaces. If

we are given an p -space, S = F (N, S), the norm of a sequence,
f = si i∈N , in S is defined as
∞ 1/p

p
f p = si
i=0
where the computation of f p involves the norm of its entries and
so the topology on S will depend on the topology of S.
Since normed spaces are metrizable spaces, then (S , p ) can be
viewed as a metric space. Then S is normal (by Theorem 9.19) and
first countable (by Theorem 5.9).
The following theorem illustrates why S is separable whenever
S is separable. If equipped with an p -norm, (S , p ) is an p -space
whose elements are sequences with entries belonging to S.
Theorem 27.5 Suppose (S, ) is a normed vector space and S

represents the p -space, (F (N,S), p ) of all infinite sequences with
entries from S. If S is separable and p > 1, then S is a separable
topological space (with respect to the p -norm).
Proof. Since S is separable, S contains a dense countable subset,

D = {di : i ∈ N}, of S. Let
D = {xi i∈N : xi ∈ D for finitely many i’s and xi

= 0 otherwise} ⊆ S
We claim that D is dense in S . Let f = si i∈N ∈ S . It suffices

to show that, for any ε > 0, the ε-ball centered at f ,
Bε (f ) = {y ∈ S : y − f p < ε}
contains a sequence in D.
p 1/p is a number, then
Since f p = [ ∞i=0 si ]
∞

lim si p = 0
n→∞
i=n

Let ε > 0. We can then choose n such that ∞ p p
i=n+1 si < ε /2.
Since D is dense in S, every open ball, Bε (si ), with center si meets
D, and so, for a given n, for each i = 0 to n, we can find di ∈ D such
that si − di < εp /2n.
For i > n, set di = 0. Let d = {di : i ∈ N} =
{d0 , d1 , d2 , . . . dn , 0, 0, 0, . . .}. Then d ∈ D.
Then
∞

f − dpp = si − di p
i=0
n
∞

= si − di p + si − 0p
i=0 i=n+1
n
εp εp
< +
2n 2
i=0
nεp εp
= + = εp
2n 2
So, f −dp < ε. Since d ∈ D, then Bε (f )∩D = ∅. We conclude that

D is dense in S , so the p -space, S , is separable. This completes
the proof.
If S is separable, since p -spaces are both metrizable and sepa-

rable, then (by Theorem 16.3) they are both second countable and
Lindelöf. Also since S is separable metrizable, it is realcompact (see
the example on page 577).
Example 1. Show that an p -space is not, generally, sequentially
compact.
Solution: Let S = F (N, S) be an p -space and choose a κ ∈ S such
that κ = 1. Let
U = {f ∈ S : all entries are 0, except one term is κ}
We will construct a sequence in F (N, S) with no converging subse-

quence.
For each n let fn = s(n,j) j∈N be the sequence in U whose nth
term is κ. Then
U = {fn : n ∈ N}
If n = k,
⎡ ⎤1/p
∞

fn − fk p = ⎣ s(n,j) − s(k,j)p ⎦
j=0
= (1p + 1p )1/p
= 21/p
Let ε = (21/p )/2. If g ∈ U is the limit of a subsequence of U , then

fn − gp = 21/p must be < ε for infinitely many terms, fn . This
can obviously not be. Then there is no converging subsequence for
{fn : n ∈ N}. So S cannot be sequentially compact.
By Theorem 17.2, in metric spaces, sequentially compact, com-
pact and countably compact are equivalent topological properties.
So, S is not compact.
27.4 The Sup-Norm on F (N, S)
We know that for each real value of p ∈ [1, ∞), f p is a valid norm
on F (N, S).
We now wonder if there is a natural way we can extend the value
of p so as to include p = ∞, In a sense, we are wondering whether
the limit, limp→∞ f p is a number. If so, is this number a norm of
f which we could represent as “f ∞ ”. How would we define it?
To investigate this, let (S, ) be a normed vector space, let
f =< si >i∈N ∈ F (N, S) and p ≥ 1, let
k(n) = sup{si : i = 0, 1, 2, . . . , n}
Then {k(n) : n ∈ N} is an increasing sequence of numbers.

Let
β = sup{si : i ∈ N}
To ensure that β is a number we will assume that each sequence,

si i∈N , is bounded with respect to . Now, k(n) ≤ β for all values
of n. If sup{k(n) : n ∈ N} < β then there exists t such that sup{k(n) :
n ∈ N} < t < β. Then k(n) < t for all n ∈ N. Then si < t < β for
all i ∈ N contradicting the definition of β.
So,
lim k(n) = β
n→∞
We claim that, if f is bounded in F (N, S), limp→∞ f p = β.

Proof of claim: Let ε > 0. Let f =< si >i∈N be a bounded element
of F (N, S). Since limn→∞ k(n) = β, then there exists an M ∈ N such
that
n>M ⇒ |k(n) − β| < ε/3
Let
n 1/p

p
g(n, p) = si
i=0
See that, for any choice of n,

n 1/p

p
lim g(n, p) = lim si
p→∞ p→∞
i=0
n−m 1/p
si p
= lim +m k(n) (Where m ≥ 1)
p→∞ k(n)p
i=0
= (1)k(n)
= k(n)
Then there exists κ > 0 such that p > κ implies, for any choice
of n
| g(n, p) − k(n)| < ε/3
Then, if n > M and p > κ,
|g(n, p) − β| = |g(n, p) − k(n) + k(n) − β|

≤ |g(n, p) − k(n)| + |k(n) − β|
< ε/3 − ε/3
<ε
If α = max{M, κ}, when n, κ > α, |g(n, p) − β| < ε.

Then
lim lim g(n, p) = lim β = β

p→∞ n→∞ p→∞
This implies,
∞
1/p

p
lim f p = lim si
p→∞ p→∞
i=0
n
1/p

p
= lim lim si
p→∞ n→∞
i=0
⎛ 1/p ⎞
n
= lim lim ⎝ si p ⎠
p→∞ n→∞
i=0
= lim lim g(n, p)

p→∞ n→∞
=β
So, limp→∞ f p = β. This establishes the claim.

If f = si i∈N ∈ F (N, S), it will be convenient to represent β =
sup{si : i ∈ N} as
lim f p = f ∞
p→∞
We formally define the sup-norm (also called the ∞-norm), f ∞ .
Definition 27.6 Let S be a normed vector space. We say a sequence

si i∈N in F (N, S) is bounded if there is a k such that si ≤ k for
all i ∈ N. Let Sb be the set of all bounded sequences with elements
from S. If f = si i∈N , we define the sup-norm, f ∞ , of f as
f ∞ = sup{si : i ∈ N}
The sup-norm on Sb is also referred as the ∞ -norm. If Sb is

equipped with the norm ∞ we refer to Sb as being an ∞ -space.
Verifying that ∞ is a valid norm is straightforward. Verifying

this is left as an exercise for the reader.
27.5 Topologizing F (N, S) by Defining Convergence
Once chosen, a norm on F (N, S) precisely determines how sequences

of sequences in F (N, S) will converge. The norm will topologize
F (N, S). But defining norms on F (N, S) is not the only way to topol-
ogize F (N, S).
We can also view F (N, S) as an infinite product, S N (see Definition
12.6 on page 305). We normally assign on infinite products either the
“product topology” or the “box topology”. The box topology on S N
is equivalent to the topology obtained by assigning the ∞ -norm on

F (N, S) = S N . That is, if limn→∞ g − fn ∞ = 0 then the sequence,
{fn : n ∈ N}, will
converge uniformly to the sequence g.
On the other hand, assigning the product topology on F (N, S) = S N

produces a topological space independent of any norm defined on
F (N, S). It is the topology with which the closed subsets are defined
by “pointwise convergence”. This means that, if fn = sni i∈N , and
for each i,
lim sni = ti
n→∞
then the sequence g = ti i∈N represents the
pointwise limit of the sequence {fn : n ∈ N}
Unless explicitly specified otherwise, the default topology on F (N, S)

is the one determined by uniform convergence. Note that, if a
sequence in F (N, S) converges uniformly, then it also converges point-
wise. The converse does not hold true.
27.6 Completeness of (F (N, S), ∞ )
Recall that a normed vector space, (S, ), is said to be complete

if every Cauchy sequence in (S, ) converges to a point which is
contained in S.
In the following example, we verify that, whenever (S, ) is com-
plete, the normed vector space (F (N, S)b , ∞ ) is complete.1
Example 2. Verify that, if (S, ) is a complete normed space,
Sb = (F (N, S)b , ∞ ) is a complete normed vector space.
Solution: Let C = {fn : n ∈ N} be a Cauchy sequence of sequences
in the ∞ -space, Sb . Since C is Cauchy, it is bounded, so there is a
real number, K, such that fn ∞ < K, for all n ∈ N (as shown in
the above example).
1
The subscript b indicates “bounded” to ensure that the sup-norm is never ∞.
For each n, let fn = snii∈N . We are required to show that {fn :

n ∈ N} converges to some sequence, h, in the ∞ -space, Sb .
Let ε > 0. Since {fn : n ∈ N} is Cauchy, there exists N ∈ N such
that, m, n > N ⇒ fn − fm ∞ < ε.
Then, when m, n > N , and each i,
sni − smi ≤ sup{sni − smi }

i∈N
= sni − smii∈N ∞
= snii∈N − smii∈N ∞
= fn − fm ∞
<ε
Then, for each i, when m, n > N , sni − smi < ε. Then for each i,
{sni : n ∈ N} is a Cauchy sequence in S. Since S is a complete space,
for each i, {sni : n ∈ N} converges to some ti ∈ S (with respect to
). That is, for each i, there exists Ni , such that,
n > Ni ⇒ ti − sni < ε
Let h = {ti : i ∈ N}.

We view h as a candidate for the limit of the Cauchy sequence,
{fn : n ∈ N}. To prove this we must first show that h∞ ∈ R, and
then show that h − fn ∞ < ε for all n > N for some N .
For our chosen ε, for i ∈ N, and any n > Ni ,
ti = ti − sni + sni
≤ ti − sni + sni
< ε + fn ∞ (Since n > Ni .)
≤ε+K
Then h∞ ≤ sup{t0 , t1 , . . . tNi , ε + K} ∈ R. So, h∞ is a

number.
We now claim that {fn : n ∈ N} converges to h.
Suppose m, n > N . See that, independently of the value of i,
ti − smi = ( lim sni ) − smi

n→∞
= lim sni − smi

n→∞
≤ sup{sni − smi } (since norms are continuous)

i∈N
= fn − fm ∞
<ε
Then supi∈N {ti − smi } ≤ ε. So, h − fm ∞ ≤ ε. Therefore, {fn :

n ∈ N} converges to h.
27.7 Topologizing Other Families of Functions
For two normed topological spaces S and T , let F (S, T ) denote the
family of all functions mapping S into T . Whenever the functions on
S are continuous and real-valued the expression, C(S, R), specifies
this fact. It is standard to express this set more concisely as C(S).
We can topologize C(S) in a way that is analogous to the method
used to topologize the family of all sequences, F (N, S). We do this by
defining a similar norm on C[a, b] called, an Lp -norm. The symbol,
p -norm, is reserved specifically for the set, F (N, S), or the family of
all n-tuples, S n , of elements from S.
Definition 27.7 Let C[a, b] denote the set of all real-valued contin-
uous functions on [a, b] and p ∈ [1, ∞). If f ∈ C[a, b] we define,
b 1/p
f p = |f (x)|p
a
We refer to this norm on C[a, b] as an Lp -norm and we refer to

(C[a, b], p ) as an “Lp -space”.
We must again verify that p satisfies the three norm axioms.

Verifying that it satisfies the N1 and N2 axioms is straightforward.
Just as for p -norms the triangle inequality, f + gp ≤ f p + gp ,

for Lp -norms is referred to as the Minkowski inequality. It is proven
by first obtaining an equivalent version of Hölders inequality.
Theorem 27.8 Hölder’s inequality. Let p be any real number strictly

p
greater than 1 and f, g ∈ (C[a, b], p ). Let q = p−1 . Then,
b
|f (x)| · |g(x)| dx ≤ f p gq
a
Proof. The proof mimics the proof of ∞Hölder’s inequality for
sequences replacing the summation sign, i=0 with the integration
sign.
Theorem 27.9 Minkowski’s inequality Let p be any real number

strictly greater than 1 and f ,g ∈ (C[a,b], p ). Then, f + gp ≤
f p + gp . That is,
b 1/p b 1/p b 1/p
p p p
|f (x) + g(x)| dx ≤ |f (x)| dx + |g(x)| dx
a a a
Proof. The proof mimics the proof of Minkowski’s

inequality for
sequences replacing the summation sign, ∞i=0 with the integration
sign.
Definition 27.10 Let C(K, R) be the set of all (bounded) contin-

uous real-valued function on the compact set K. If f ∈ C(K, R), we
define the sup-norm, f ∞ , of f as
f ∞ = sup{|f (x)| : x ∈ K}
Example 3. Consider the expression

·
x ··
xx
α(x) = xx
How should we interpret this expression? Are there values of x, for
which this expression has meaning?
Proposed solution: Let C = {fn : n ∈ N \{0}} be a sequence of

functions recursively defined as follows. f1 (x) = x and for n > 1
fn+1 (x) = xfn (x)
Then
f1 (x) = x
f2 (x) = xx
x
f3 (x) = xx
xx
f4 (x) = xx
..
.
forms an infinite family of continuous functions on the interval (0, ∞).

We now reformulate the question: Are there values of x such that
the sequence {fn (x) : n ∈ N\{0}} converges pointwise to α(x)?
There is at least one such value for x. Observe that fn (1) = 1 for
all n; hence, limn→∞ fn (1) = 1. Are there others?
Case 1. We analyze the behavior of the functions, {fn (x) : n > 0},
for values of x ≥ 1.
Fact 1: For each n, fn (x) is increasing on the part of its domain
where x ≥ 1. This can be verified by seeing that f2 (x) has a positive
derivative whenever x ≥ 1. Then by mathematical induction, we can
conclude that, for all n, fn (x) has a positive derivative, whenever
x ≥ 1.
Fact 2: For each a ≥ 1, Ma = {fn (a) : n ∈ N\{0}} is an increas-
ing sequence of numbers. This is verified by applying mathematical
induction on Ma .
We first determine the interval [1, a) such that
lim fn (x)
n→∞
is a number for each x in [1, a). At such points
y = lim fn+1 (x)

n→∞
= lim xfn (x)

n→∞
= xlimn→∞ fn (x)
= xy
So the expression, y = xy , represents a curve which is the pointwise

limit of the sequence {fn (x) : n > 0} for certain values of x greater
than or equal to 1.
For what values of x ≥ 1 can we accept y = xy as a representa-
tion of the expression α(x)? We verify if the curve, y = xy , has an
unbounded derivative with respect to x. Observe that y = xy if and
ln y
only if x = e y .
Differentiating both sides with respect to x we obtain
dy y2
= ln y
dx (1 − ln y)e y
We see that the curve of y = xy has a defined derivative whenever

y belongs to [1, e) but gets steeper as it approaches e from the left.2
Solving for x in the expression, e = xe , we obtain x = e1/e .3
So, y = xy can suitably represent α(x) for values of x in [1, e1/e ).
Case 2. We analyze the behavior of the functions, {fn (x) : n > 0},
for values of x in (0, 1].
The functions {fn (x) : n > 1} are not defined at x = 0 but
converge pointwise to the curve y = xy for x in (0, 1]. The derivative
of the curve, y = xy , with respect to x shows that it is smooth and
is positive with respect to x on (0, 1]. So, y = xy suitably represents
α(x) on (0, 1].
2
Also see that the the slope of the tangent line is negative for y > e.
3
Note that e does not bound all values of fn (x), just the values of fn (x) where
{fn (x) : n > 0} converges.
The limit expression,
lim {fn (a) : n > 0}

n→∞
has no (unique) numerical value for a ∈ [e1/e , ∞).
Concept Review
1. Let F (N, R) denote the set of all sequences of real numbers. Define
the p -norm and p -space.
2. State the Minkowski inequality for the p -space, F (N, R).
3. State Hölder’s inequality for p -spaces.
4. Define the sup-norm, f ∞ , on Sb the set of all bounded
sequences in F (N, R).
5. Describe a condition on S which guarantees that (F (N, S)b , ∞ )
is complete.
Chapter 28
Completing Incomplete
Metric Spaces
Abstract
Some metric spaces are not complete. The space Q is the example which
immediately comes to mind.Every irrational number is the limit of a
Cauchy sequence in Q, so R is the smallest non-compact complete metric
space which densely contains Q. We investigate how we can complete a
metric space by isometrically and densely embedding it in a complete
metric space.
28.1 Introduction
Recall that a metric space, S, is said to be complete if every Cauchy

sequence in S converges to a point in S. Not all metric spaces are
complete. Simply witness the subspace of rational numbers. But we
can densely embed the rationals in the complete metric space R.
We will show that, likewise, any incomplete metric space, S can be
densely embedded in some complete metric space.
28.2 A Space Whose Elements are Cauchy Sequences

of S
To achieve this, we will first gather together all Cauchy sequences of

the metric space (S, ρ) to form a set,
S = {α ∈ P(S) : α = {αn : n ∈ N} is a Cauchy sequence in S}
633
An equivalence relation on S : If α = {αn : n ∈ N} and γ = {γn :

n ∈ N} are both Cauchy sequences in S, we will say “α is equivalent
to γ” and write α ∼ γ, if and only if limn→∞ ρ(αn , γn ) = 0. The
relation ∼ is easily seen to be an equivalence relation on S where
[α] = {γ ∈ S : γ ∼ α} forms an equivalence class and the family of
subsets
[S ] = {[α] : α ∈ S }
partitions S . For any η ∈ [α], [η] = [α].

Observations. We are given that α = {αn } and γ = {γn } are both
Cauchy sequences in (S, ρ).
(1) We claim that if γ ∈ [α] and ε > 0 then there exist M such that
n, m > M implies ρ(αn , γm ) < ε. Let ε > 0 and γ ∈ [α] ∈ [S ].
Since γ ∼ α, then (by definition of ∼) limn→∞ ρ(γn , αn ) = 0.
There exists, M > 0 such that n, m > M implies, ρ(αn , γn ) < ε/2
and ρ(γn , γm ) < ε/2 (since γ is Cauchy). Then, if n, m > M ,
ρ(αn , γm ) ≤ ρ(αn , γn ) + ρ(γn , γm )

< ε/2 + ε/2
<ε
So, if γ ∈ [α], there exists M such that
ρ(αn , γm ) < ε when n, m > M (∗∗)
as claimed.
(2) Also, suppose limn→∞ αn = x ∈ S, and γ ∈ [α]. Then, if ε > 0,
there exists, M , such that if n, m > M ,
ρ(γn , x) ≤ ρ(γn , αm ) + ρ(αm , x))

< ε/2 + ε/2 (By (∗∗ ))
<ε
So, “if α converges to x in S, all Cauchy sequences in [α] converge

to x”.
Completing Incomplete Metric Spaces 635
28.3 Defining a Suitable Metric on the Set [S ]
We now define a metric δ on [S ] = {[α] : α ∈ S } as follows: For

[α], [β] ∈ [S ],
δ([α], [β]) = inf { lim ρ(ηn , γn ) : η ∈ [α], γ ∈ [β]}

n→N
(a) We claim that δ is well-defined.

Proof of claim: We prove this in two steps.
(1) We begin by showing that δ([α], [β]), has a numerical value.

To do this we show that, for the Cauchy sequences α, η in [α]
and β, γ in [β], the sequence {ρ(ηn , γn ) : n ∈ N} is Cauchy in
R. If so, then limn→N ρ(ηn , γn ) is a positive number (since R is
complete); hence, inf{limn→N ρ(ηn , γn ) : η ∈ [α], γ ∈ [β]} is a
number and so δ([α], [β]) ∈ R.
Let ε > 0. Then there exists N such that k, j > N implies
ρ(ηj , ηk ) < ε/2 and ρ(γk , γj ) < ε/2.
ρ(ηj , γj ) ≤ ρ(ηj , ηk ) + ρ(ηk , γj )

≤ ρ(ηj , ηk ) + [ρ(ηk , γk ) + ρ(γk , γj )]
ρ(ηj , γj ) − ρ(ηk , γk ) ≤ ρ(ηj , ηk ) + ρ(γk , γj )
× (Subtract ρ(ηk , γk ) on both sides)
< ε/2 + ε/2 = ε (By (∗∗))
ρ(ηk , γk ) ≤ ρ(ηk , ηj ) + ρ(ηj , γk )
≤ ρ(ηk , ηj ) + [ρ(ηj , γj ) + ρ(γj , γk )]
ρ(ηk , γk ) − ρ(ηj , γj ) ≤ ρ(ηk , ηj ) + ρ(γj , γk )
× (Subtract ρ(ηj , γj ) on both sides)
< ε/2 + ε/2 = ε (By (∗∗))
Then k, j > N implies,
|ρ(ηj , γj ) − ρ(ηk , γk )| < ε

So, {ρ(ηj , γj ) : j ∈ N} is Cauchy and so is bounded in

R, say by K. So, limj→∞ ρ(ηj , γj ) ≤ K and since R is com-
plete limj→∞ ρ(ηj , γj ) is a real number greater than zero. Then
δ([α], [β]) ∈ R.
(2) Next, we verify that, for the Cauchy sequences η, γ in [α] and [β],
respectively, δ([η], [γ]) = δ([α], [β]). So, the value of δ([α], [β])
does not depend on the choice of representatives η and γ.
For all j, n,
ρ(η(j) n , γ(j) n ) ≤ ρ(η(j) n , α(j) n ) + ρ(α(j) n , β(j) n ) + ρ(β(j) n , γ(j) n )

⇒
lim ρ(η(j) n , γ(j) n ) ≤ lim ρ(η(j) n , α(j) n ) + lim ρ(α(j) n , β(j) n )
n→∞ n→∞ n→∞
+ lim ρ(β(j) n , γ(j) n )

n→∞
⇒
lim ρ(η(j) n , γ(j) n ) ≤ 0 + lim ρ(α(j) n , β(j) n ) + 0
n→∞ n→∞
⇒
δ([η], [γ]) ≤ δ([α], [β])
Similarly
δ([α], [β]) ≤ δ([η], [γ])
So, δ([α], [β]) = δ([η], [γ]).

So, δ([α], [β]) is well-defined, as claimed.
(3) Next we verify that δ : [S ] × [S ] → R+ , is a valid metric.
Indiscernibility of identicals: Clearly, if [α] = [β] then δ([α], [β]) = 0.

Identity of indiscernibles: Suppose δ([α], [β]) = 0. Then
limn→∞ ρ(ηn , γn ) = 0 for some η ∈ [α], γ ∈ [β]. This implies η ∈ [γ],
so [α] = [β].
Symmetry of δ follows immediately from the symmetry of ρ.
Triangle inequality: Let [α], [β], and [ϕ] be three elements of [S ].
Let μ = {μn : n ∈ N} ∈ [ϕ],
δ({μ}, [α]) = inf{ lim ρ(μn , ηn ) : η ∈ α, μ ∈ {μ}}

n→∞
δ({μ}, [β]) = inf{ lim ρ(μn , γn ) : γ ∈ β, μ ∈ {μ}}

n→∞
For i ∈ N\{0} there exist η(i) ∈ [α] and γ(i) ∈ [β] such that
lim ρ(μn , η(i) n ) < δ({μ}, [α]) + 1/i

n→∞
lim ρ(μn , γ(i) n ) < δ({μ}, [β]) + 1/i

n→∞
Then, for all i ∈ N, and the chosen μ ∈ [ϕ],

n→N
≤ lim ρ(η(i) n , γ(i) n )

n→∞
≤ lim ρ(η(i) n , μn ) + lim ρ(μn , γ(i) n ) (Triangle inequality)

n→∞ n→∞
< δ([α], {μ}) + 1/i + δ({μ}, [β]) + 1/i
This implies
δ([α], [β]) ≤ δ([α], {μ}) + δ({μ}, [β])
This inequality holds true independently of the choice of μ ∈ [ϕ]. So,
δ([α], [β]) ≤ δ([α], [ϕ]) + δ([ϕ], [β])
This establishes the triangle inequality property.

Then δ : [S ] × [S ] → R+ , is a valid metric, as claimed. So,
([S ], δ) is a metric space.
28.4 The Space ([S ], δ) Contains an Isometric

Copy of (S, ρ)
If α is a sequence which converges to x ∈ S then α is Cauchy

and so [α] ∈ [S ]. More significantly, the constant sequence x =
{x, x, x, . . .} belongs to [α] and so [α] = [x]. If y = {y, y, y, . . .} and
x = {x, x, x, . . .} are distinct sequences, then [y] = [x]. It follows

that the function f : (S, ρ) → ([S ], δ) defined as
f (x) = [x]
maps S one-to-one into [S ].

We claim the function f is also isometric. It suffices to show that
δ( f (x), f (y) ) = ρ(x, y). Suppose x, y ∈ S and η ∈ [x], γ ∈ [y]. Then
ρ(ηn , γn ) ≤ ρ(ηn , x) + ρ(x, y) + ρ(y, γn )
implies
lim ρ(ηn , γn ) ≤ lim ρ(ηn , x) + lim ρ(x, y) + lim ρ(y, γn )

n∈∞ n∈∞ n∈∞ n∈∞
= 0 + ρ(x, y) + 0
= ρ(x, y)
Then
δ([x], [y]) = inf {ρ(x, y) : η ∈ [x], γ ∈ [y]}

= ρ(x, y)
So,
δ(f (x), f (y)) = ρ(x, y)
So, the function f is isometric, as claimed.
28.5 The Space ([S ], δ) Is Complete
If [S ] is complete and contains a dense isometric copy of S (as we

will soon show) then it can be viewed as a completion of S.
Proposition 28.1 The metric space, ([S ], δ), is complete.

Proof. We are given a metric space (S, ρ). We defined S as being
the set whose elements, α = {αn : n ∈ N}, are the Cauchy sequences
in S. We are given the set [S ] = {[α] : α ∈ S } where β ∈ [α] if
and only if β = {βn : n ∈ N} ∈ S and limn→∞ ρ(αn , βn ) = 0. If

[α], [β] ∈ [S ],

n→N
is a metric.
Let
[U ] = {[α(j) ] : j ∈ N}]
be a Cauchy sequence in [S ] with α(j) = {α(j) n : n ∈ N} as represen-

tative of the class, [α(j) ]. We are required to show that [U ] converges
to some [ζ] in [S ].
28.5.1 Construction of a Cauchy sequence ζ: Let ε > 0.

Since [U ] is Cauchy in [S ], there exists M such that j, k > M ⇒
δ([α(j) ], [α(k) ]) < ε/3. That is, for any j, k > M ,
inf{ lim ρ(η(j) n , η(k) n ) : η(j) ∈ [α(j) ], η(k) ∈ [α(k) ]} < ε/3
n→∞
Then there exists at least one pair j, k > M such that,
lim ρ(α(j) n , α(k) n ) < ε/3. 1

n→∞
So, for this j, k, there exists N1 such that n > N1 implies,
ρ(α(j) n , α(k) n ) < ε/3 (∗)
Consider the triangle inequality expression for ρ,
ρ(α(k) k , α(j) j ) ≤ ρ(α(k) k , α(k) n ) + ρ(α(k) n , α(j) n ) + ρ(α(j) n , α(j) j )
By (∗) there is j, k > M and N1 , such that
n > N1 ⇒ ρ(α(j) n , α(k) n ) < ε/3
1
For, if limn→∞ ρ(α(j) n , α(k) n ) ≥ ε/3, for all j, k > M δ([α(j) ], [α(k) ]) =
inf{limn→∞ ρ(α(j) n , α(k) n ) : η(j) ∈ [α(j) ], η(k) ∈ [α(k) ]} ≥ ε/3.
Since a(k) = {α(k) n : n ∈ N} is Cauchy, there exists N2 such that,
n, k > N2 ⇒ ρ(α(k) k , α(k) n ) < ε/3
Since a(j) = {α(j) n : n ∈ N} is Cauchy in S, there exists N3 such

that,
j, n > N3 ⇒ ρ(α(j) j , α(j) n ) < ε/3
Then for, k, j, n > N = max {M, N1 , N2 , N3 }
ρ(α(k) k , α(j) j ) ≤ ρ(α(k) k , α(k) n ) + ρ(α(k) n , α(j) n ) + ρ(α(j) n , α(j) j )

< ε/3 + ε/3 + ε/3
=ε
Then ∪{a(j) : j ∈ N} contains a sequence ζ = {a(j) j : j ∈ N} in S

which is a Cauchy sequence and so belongs to S . Then [ζ] ∈ [S ].
Claim: We claim that the Cauchy sequence, [U ] = {[α(j) ] : j ∈ N}],
in [S ] converges to [ζ].
Proof of claim: It suffices to show that limj→∞ δ([α(j) ], [ζ]) = 0.
Let ε > 0.
Since ζ = {α(0) 0 , α(1) 1 , α(2) 2 , . . .} is a Cauchy sequence in S, there
exists M1 such that j, k > M1 implies ρ(α(j) j , α(k) k ) < ε/2.
Since a(j) = {α(j) n : n ∈ N} is Cauchy in S, there exists M2 such
that j, k > M2 implies ρ(α(j) k , α(j) j ) < ε/2.
By triangle inequality,
ρ(α(j) k , α(k) k ) ≤ ρ(α(j) k , α(j) j ) + ρ(α(j) j , α(k) k )
If j, k > M = max{M1 , M2 } then
ρ(α(j) k , α(k) k ) ≤ ρ(α(j) k , α(j) j ) + ρ(α(j) j , α(k) k )

< ε/2 + ε/2
=ε
So
j, k > M ⇒ ρ(α(j) k , α(k) k ) < ε
Since inf{limk→∞ ρ(η(j) k , η(k) k ) : η(j) ∈ [α(j) ], η(k) ∈ [ζ]} < ε, then
limj→∞ δ([α(j) ], [ζ]) = 0.
We conclude that [U ] converges to [ζ], as claimed.
With the next result we complete the proof of the statement:

Every metric space has a completion.
Proposition 28.2 The metric space (S, ρ) is dense in ([S ], δ).

Proof. We are given a metric space (S, ρ) and S , the set of
all Cauchy sequences in S. If α ∈ S , [α] = {η ∈ S :
limn→∞ ρ(ηn , αn ) = 0}. Let [S ] = {[α] : α is Cauchy in S}. For
x = {x, x, x, . . .} in S let
[S] = {[x] : x ∈ S}
in [S ]. The function f (x) = [x], embeds an isometric copy, f [S], of
S into [S ].
For α = {αn : n ∈ N}, suppose [α] ∈ [S ] \ [S]. To show that
[S] is dense in [S ], it will suffice to show that there is a sequence,
{[a(n) ] : n ∈ N}, in [S] which converges to [α] with respect to the
metric δ.
We define {[a(n) ] : n ∈ N} in terms of α = {αn : n ∈ N} as
a(0) = {α0 , α0 , α0 , . . . .}
a(1) = {α1 , α1 , α1 , . . . .}
a(2) = {α2 , α2 , α2 , . . . .}
..
.
a(k) = {αk , αk , αk , . . . .}
..
.
We claim that {[a(n) ] : n ∈ N} converges to [α].
Proof of claim: Let ε > 0. It suffices to show there is a N0 such

that k > N0 implies δ([α], [ak ]) < ε.
Since α is Cauchy in S, there exists N0 , such that
m, n > N0 ⇒ ρ(αn , αm ) < ε
Suppose k > N0 and n > N0 . Then
δ([α], [ak ]) = inf { lim ρ(ηn , γn ) : η ∈ [α], γ ∈ [ak ]}

n→N
= inf { lim ρ(αn , αk ) : η ∈ [α], γ ∈ [ak ]}

n→N
= ρ(αn , αk )
<ε
Then {[a(n) ] : n ∈ N} converges to [α].

So, (S, ρ) is dense in ([S ], δ).
Chapter 29
The Uniform Space and

the Uniform Topology
Abstract
This section serves as a brief introduction to uniform space. Given a
non-empty set S we define a family of subsets, U , of P(S × S) which
satisfies a set of axioms. The family, U , is called a uniformity on S and
the pair (S, U ), is called a uniform space. We then show that any metric
space, (S, ρ), generates a uniform space, (S, Uρ ), which inherits some
of its metric space properties. Even though (S, U ) is not a topological
space, the uniformity U , generates a topology τU , on S. A topological
space, (S, τ ), which can be obtained from a uniformity, U , is called a
uniformizable topological space.
29.1 Introduction
A topological space generalizes many concepts and properties asso-

ciated to metric spaces. But, some properties closely associated to
the structure of a metric space do not transfer easily to a less struc-
tured topological space. For example, notions associated to “Cauchy
sequences” or “uniform continuity” are not meaningful in the con-
text of a topological space even though such tools can be useful in
describing some topological properties. To see this, witness how the
function g(x) = 1/x on R\{0} maps R\{0} homeomorphically onto
itself. The sequence T = {1, 1/2, 1/3, . . .} is a Cauchy sequence in
643
the domain of g. But its image, g[T ] = {1, 2, 3, . . .}, is not Cauchy
in R \{0}. So being “Cauchy” is not a topological property and so
cannot be adequately expressed in this mathematical context.
In this section, we discuss a space which, like topological space,
generalizes metric spaces, but in slightly different way.
We begin by reviewing a few basic notions associated with
relations.
Basic definitions and notation: Recall that for a given non-empty
set S, a subset U of S × S is referred to as a (binary) relation on S.
If U is a relation on S,
dom U = {x ∈ S : there is a y ∈ S such that (x, y) ∈ U }

im U = {y ∈ S : (x, y) ∈ U for some x ∈ S}
If U is a relation on S, then its inverse, U −1 , is defined as
U −1 = {(x, y) : (y, x) ∈ U }
Composition of relations: If U and V are relations on S
U ◦V = {(a, b) : (a, c) ∈ V and (c, b) ∈ U for some c ∈ im V }
The relation
Δ(S) = {(x, x) : x ∈ S}
is referred to as the diagonal of S × S.

Symmetric relations: The relation, U , is said to be symmetric if and
only if U = U −1 . Alternatively, U is symmetric whenever. . .
(a, b) ∈ U if and only if (b, a) ∈ U
Definition 29.1 Let S be a non-empty set. A uniform space is

a pair (S, U ) where U is a non-empty subset of P(S × S) whose
elements satisfy the following five axioms:
U1. Δ(S) ⊆ U for all U ∈ U .
U2. If U, V ∈ U , then U ∩ V ∈ U . That is, U is closed under finite
intersections.
U3. If U ∈ U then V ◦V ⊆ U for some V ∈ U .
The Uniform Space and the Uniform Topology 645
U4. If U ∈ U then E −1 ⊆ U for some E ∈ U .

U5. If U ∈ U and U ⊆ V ∈ P(S × S), then V ∈ U . That is, U is
closed under supersets.
A subset, U , of P(S × S) which satisfies these five axioms is called
a uniformity for S.
It may be helpful to view each element of a uniformity, U , of S,

as a region in S × S surrounding the diagonal, Δ(S). A pair of points
a, b in S may be considered as being “near” each other if and only if
the pair (a, b) in S × S is “near” the diagonal, Δ(S).
In spite of its nomenclature, a uniform space, (S, U ), is not a
topological space. We will however soon define a topology, τU , on S
which is derived from the structure, U . Remember that, even though
a topology and a uniformity are both families of subsets, a topology
is a subset of P(S) while a uniformity is a subset of P(S × S).
Like a topology on S, a uniformity, U , for S is not unique.
Also note that, since U is non-empty and is closed both under
finite intersections and supersets (U2 and U5), it is a filter of sets on
S × S.
Example 1. The largest uniformity on S, is the family
Ud = {U ∈ P(S × S) : Δ(S) ⊆ U }
It is called the discrete uniformity.

Example 2. The smallest uniformity on S is the singleton set,
Ui = {S × S}
It is called the trivial uniformity or the indiscrete uniformity.
Proposition 29.2 Let S be a non-empty set and U be a uniformity

on S. If U ∈ U , then U −1 also belongs to U on S.
Proof. We are given a set S and an element, U , of a uniformity,
U . By property U4, U contains an element V such that V −1 ⊆ U .
Then V = (V −1 )−1 ⊆ U −1 . Since V ∈ U and V ⊆ U −1 , then, by
U5, U −1 ∈ U , as required.
Note that,
U ∈ U ⇒ [U ∩ U −1 ∈ U and is symmetric] (†)
To see this, note that if (a, b) ∈ U ∩ U −1 then (a, b) ∈ U , so (b, a) ∈

U −1 ; if (b, a) ∈ U , then (a, b) ∈ U −1 , contradiction. So (b, a) ∈ U .
Then U ∩ U −1 is symmetric.
29.2 A Base for a Uniformity
To facilitate our investigation of uniform spaces, (S, U ), we first

briefly review some of the mechanisms used to generate various
topologies on a set S. There are surprisingly few axioms that govern
the family, τ , which defines a topological space. They simply state
that τ contains both ∅ and S, is closed under finite intersections and
closed under arbitrary unions. We also know that any given topology,
τ , on S, contains a distinguished subfamily, B, referred to as a base
for τ , where,
for every x ∈ S and x ∈ U ∈ τ , there is a B ∈ B such that
x ∈ B ⊆ U.
It allows us to recover all open sets simply by taking arbitrary unions
of elements of B.
We also saw that, given any (untopologized) set S and B ⊆ P(S),
the property,
if B covers S and for A, B ∈ B, if x ∈ A ∩ B, there is
C ∈ B such that x ∈ C ⊆ A ∩ B.
characterizes a base for a topology on S. By this we mean that, if B
satisfies this property, it generates a topology, τ , on S by collecting
the union of all subsets of B. More specifically,
τ = {U ∈ P(S) : U = ∪{C : C ∈ C } for some subset C of B}
The definition we provide for the base of a uniformity will, in some

ways, be similar to the one given for a base for a topology.
Definition 29.3 Let S be a non-empty set and U be a uniformity

on S.
A subfamily B of U is a base for U , if,
for every U ∈ U , there is a B ∈ B such that B ⊆ U
A subfamily, S , of U is a subbase for U , if the family of finite

intersections of the members of S forms a base for U .
The characterization we will obtain for the uniformity base, B, is

a slightly weakened version of axioms U1 to U4. The uniformity, U ,
is then generated from B by applying the axiom U5 to B.
Theorem 29.4 Let S be a non-empty set and B be a non-empty

subset of P(S × S).
The family, B, is a base for some uniformity on S if and only
if, B satisfies U1, U2∗ , U3 and U4 where U2∗ is a slightly weaker
version of U2:
U2∗ : “ If U, V ∈ B, then W ⊆ U ∩ V ∈ U for some W ∈ B”
Proof. We are given a set S.

(⇐) Suppose B is a subset of P(S × S) which satisfies properties,
U1, U2∗ , U3, and U4. We are required to show that B is a base for
some uniformity on S.
Let
UB = {V ∈ P(S × S) : V contains some B ∈ B}
— By definition of UB every V in UB contains an element of B.

— Furthermore, if B ∈ B, B ⊆ B so B is a subfamily of UB .
It now suffices to show that the family, UB generated by B, is a
uniformity on S. We do this by verifying that it satisfies the proper-
ties U1 to U5.
U1. Since Δ(S) ⊆ B for all B ∈ B and B ⊆ V for some V in UB ,

then every element of UB contains Δ(S). So, UB satisfies U1.
U2. Let U, V ∈ UB . Then B ⊆ U , W ⊆ V for some B, W ∈ B. There
exists Z ∈ B such that Z ⊆ B ∩ W (by U2∗ ). Then Z ⊆ U ∩ V .
By definition of UB , U ∩ V ∈ UB . So, UB satisfies U2.
U3. Let U ∈ UB . Then B ⊆ U for some B ∈ B. Since B satisfies

U3, W ◦W ⊆ B for some W ∈ B where W ∈ UB . So, W ◦W ⊆ U .
We conclude that UB satisfies U3.
U4. Let U ∈ UB . Then B ⊆ U for some B ∈ B. Since B satisfies U4,
W −1 ⊆ B for some W ∈ B where W ∈ UB . Then W −1 ⊆ U .
So, UB satisfies U4.
U5. Let U ∈ UB and V ∈ P(S × S) such that U ⊆ V . Then B ⊆
U ⊆ V for some B ∈ B. Then B ⊆ V . By definition of UB ,
V ∈ UB . So, UB satisfies U5.
We conclude that if B is a subset of P(S × S) which satisfies
properties, U1, U2∗ , U3 and U4, then it is a base for the unifor-
mity, UB .
(⇒) Suppose now that B is a base for the uniformity U on S. Then
B is a subfamily of U where for every V ∈ U there is a B ∈ B such
that B ⊆ V . It suffices to show that B satisfies U1, U2∗ , U3, U4.
That B satisfies U1 and U2∗ is immediate.
Suppose B ∈ B. Since B ∈ U , there is a V ∈ U such that
V ◦V ⊆ B for some V ∈ U . Since B is a base of U , there is a W ∈ B
such that W ⊆ V . Then W ◦W ⊆ V ◦V ⊆ B. So, B satisfies U3.
Suppose B ∈ B. Since B ∈ U , there is a V ∈ U such that
V −1 ⊆ B for some V ∈ U . Since B is a base of U , there is a W ∈ B
such that W ⊆ V . Then W −1 ⊆ V −1 ⊆ B. So, B satisfies U4.
We are done.
The above result guarantees that. . .

if B ⊆ P(S × S) satisfies U1, U2∗ , U3, and U4 then
the collection, UB , of all supersets of elements of B is a
uniformity on S.
The following result shows that, for any uniformity U on S, the
family of all symmetric relations in U forms a base for U .
Theorem 29.5 Let S be a non-empty set and U be a uniformity

on S with base B. Suppose
Bsym = {V ∈ U : V is symmetric}
Then Bsym forms a base for the uniformity U .

Proof. Let U be a uniformity on S with base B and U ∈ B ⊆ U .

By Proposition 29.2, U −1 ∈ U . Let B = U ∩ U −1 . By U2, B ∈ U .
If (a, b) ∈ U ∩ U −1 then (a, b) ∈ U and so (b, a) ∈ U −1 . Since (a, b) ∈
U −1 , then (b, a) ∈ U . Then (b, a) ∈ U ∩ U −1 . So, B = U ∩ U −1 is
symmetric. Since B ⊆ U , Bsym forms a base for the uniformity U ,
as required.
Example 3. Consider the set of real numbers R. For κ > 0, let
Bκ = {(a, b) ∈ R × R : |a − b| < κ}
Verify that the collection,
B = {Bκ : κ > 0}
forms a base for some uniformity on R.

Solution: We verify that B satisfies the four base properties for a
uniformity.
U1. Since (x, x) ∈ Bκ for all κ, then B satisfies U1.
U2∗ . For κ1 and κ2 larger than 0, let κ3 = min {κ1 , κ2 }. If (x, y) ∈
Bκ3 then (x, y) are strictly within a distance of κ3 from each
other. So, (x, y) ∈ Bκ1 ∩ Bκ2 . Then Bκ3 ⊆ Bκ1 ∩ Bκ2 . It follows
that B satisfies U2∗ .
U3. Let Bκ ∈ B. We claim there exists λ such that Bλ ◦Bλ ⊆ Bκ .
Let λ = κ/4. Recall that
U ◦V = {(u, v) : (u, y) ∈ V and (y, v) ∈ U for some y ∈ im V.}
Let (u, v) ∈ Bκ/4 ◦Bκ/4 . We claim that |u − v| < κ.
(u, v) ∈ Bκ/4 ◦Bκ/4 ⇒ ∃ z ∈ im

× Bκ/4 such that (u, z) ∈ Bκ/4
× and (z, v) ∈ Bκ/4
⇒ |u − z| < κ/4 and |z − v| ∈ κ/4
|u − v| ≤ |u − z| + |z − v|
< κ/4 + κ/4
= κ/2 < κ
Then (u, v) ∈ Bκ . So Bκ/4 ◦Bκ/4 ⊆ Bκ . We conclude that B

satisfies U3.
U4. Let Bκ ∈ B. Since Bκ = {(x, y) : |x − y| < κ} = {(x, y) :
|y − x| < κ} = Bκ−1 , then B satisfies U4.
Then
B = {Bκ : κ > 0}
is a base which generates a uniformity on R. Then the unifor-
mity on R is
U = {V ∈ P(R × R) : Bκ ⊆ V for some κ > 0}
Definition 29.6 The uniformity on R generated by the base, B =

{Bκ : κ > 0}, illustrated in the above example is called the usual or
the standard uniformity on R.
29.3 A Uniform Space, (S, U ), Generated by a Metric,

ρ, on S
We see that a uniform space, (S, U ), has slightly more structure than
a topological space (S, τ ). In the following example, we verify that a
metric, ρ, on a set S will always generate a uniformity on S.
Example 4. Let (S, ρ) be a metric space. For each κ > 0, let
Bκ = {(x, y) ∈ S × S : ρ(x, y) < κ}
be a subfamily of P(S ×S) generated by the metric ρ. Verify that the
family, Bρ = {Bκ : κ > 0}, is a base which generates a uniformity,
Uρ , on S.
Solution: It will suffice to show that Bρ satisfies properties U1,
U2∗ , U3, and U4. If so, then, by Theorem 29.4, Bρ generates the
uniformity,
Uρ = {V ∈ P(S × S) : V contains some Bκ ∈ Bρ }
Since ρ(x, x) = 0 < κ for all x ∈ S, then Δ(S) ⊆ Bκ for each κ. This
is property U1.
For Bκ1 , Bκ2 ∈ Bρ , let κ = min {κ1 , κ2 }/2. Then (x, y) ∈ Bκ

implies ρ(x, y) < κ. Since κ < κ1 and κ < κ2 , then (x, y) ∈ Bκ1 ∩Bκ2 .
So, Bκ ⊆ Bκ1 ∩ Bκ2 . Then there exists κ such that Bκ ⊆ Bκ1 ∩ Bκ2 .
This is property U2∗ .
Let Bκ ∈ Bρ . We claim there exists λ such that Bλ ◦Bλ ⊆ Bκ . Let
λ = κ/4. Recall that
U ◦V = {(u, v) : (u, y) ∈ V, (y, v) ∈ U, for some y ∈ im V.}
Let (u, v) ∈ Bκ/4 ◦Bκ/4 . We claim that ρ(u, v) < κ.
(u, v) ∈ Bκ/4 ◦Bκ/4 ⇒ there is z ∈ im Bκ/4
× such that (u, z) ∈ Bκ/4 , (z, v) ∈ Bκ/4
⇒ ρ(u, z) < κ/4 and ρ(z, v) ∈ κ/4
ρ(u, v) ≤ ρ(u, z) + ρ(z, v)
< κ/4 + κ/4
= κ/2 < κ
Then (u, v) ∈ Bκ . So, Bκ/4 ◦Bκ/4 ⊆ Bκ . We conclude that B satis-
fies U3.
Let Bκ ∈ Bρ . Recall Bκ = {(x, y) : ρ(x, y) < κ} = {(x, y) :
ρ(y, x) < κ} = Bκ−1 . Then Bρ satisfies U4.
Then Bρ is a base which generates a uniformity on (S, ρ).
Definition 29.7 Given a metric space, (S, ρ), the uniformity, Uρ ,

generated by ρ is called the metric uniformity.
This example shows that every metric, ρ, on a space S, will gener-

ate a uniformity, Uρ . In Example 3, the uniformity described on R is
simply the metric uniformity generated by the metric ρ(a, b) = |a−b|
on R.
Example 5. Show that the metric 2ρ generates the same uniformity
on S as the metric space ρ.
Solution: It will suffice to show that Uρ = U2ρ .
Suppose V ∈ Uρ . Then V ∈ P(S × S) contains some Bλ ∈ Bρ .
There exist Bμ ∈ B2ρ such that Bμ ⊆ Bλ ⊆ V . So, V ∈ U2ρ . Then
Uρ ⊆ U2ρ .
Suppose V ∈ U2ρ . Then V ∈ P(S × S) contains some Bλ ∈ B2ρ .

There exist Bμ ∈ Bρ such that Bμ ⊆ Bλ ⊆ V . So, V ∈ Uρ . Then
U2ρ ⊆ Uρ .
Then ρ and 2ρ generate the same uniformity on S.
Since a single uniformity does not always distinguish distinct met-
ric spaces, uniform spaces have less structure than metric spaces.
29.4 The Uniform Topology, τU , Generated

by a Uniformity, U , on a Set
It is important to keep in mind that a uniformity, U , on a set is not,

by itself, a topology on S. It is not even a subset of P(S). We will
show, however, that we can use the elements of a uniformity, U , on
S to define, in a natural way, a corresponding topology, τU on S.
Recall that, if B is an element of a uniformity U on S, then
B : S → S is a subset of S × S which contains Δ(S). So, for each
B ∈ U , the image of {x} under B is a subset of S which contains
the point x. Let B(x) denote the image of {x}. The collection
{B(x) : B ∈ U }
is a family of subsets of S each containing x. Since, for each B ∈ U ,
the image of B at x is B(x) = {y ∈ S : (x, y) ∈ B}, B(x) can also
be viewed as
B(x) = π2 [ ( {x} × S ) ∩ B ] 1
Theorem 29.8 Let S be a non-empty set, U be a uniformity on

S, and B be a base for U . For x ∈ S, and B in U , let B(x) denote
the image of {x} (in S) under the relation, B. Let
τU = {U ∈ P(S) : for each x ∈ U there exists B ∈ U
such that B(x) ⊆ U }
Then τU is a topology on S with base Bτ = {B(x) : x ∈ S and
B ∈ B}.
1
Where π2 (a, b) = b.
Proof. We are given a set S and a uniformity U on S and the

family of subsets,
τU = {U ∈ P(S) : for every x ∈ U there exists B ∈
U such that B(x) ⊆ U }.
O1. Clearly ∅ ∈ τU . Let x ∈ S. Since S × S ∈ U , x ∈ (S × S)(x) =

S ⊆ S. So S ∈ τU .
O2. Let U, V ∈ τU . We claim U ∩ V ∈ τU . Suppose x ∈ U ∩ V . It
suffices to show there is a W ∈ U such that W (x) ⊆ U ∩ V .
By definition of τU there exists B1 , B2 in U such that x ∈
B1 (x) ⊆ U and x ∈ B2 (x) ⊆ V . By U2, B1 ∩ B2 ∈ U .
z ∈ (B1 ∩ B2 )(x) ⇒ (x, z) ∈ B1 ∩ B2

⇒ z ∈ B1 (x) and z ∈ B2 (x)
⇒ z ∈ B1 (x) ∩ B2 (x)
⇒ z ∈U ∩V
Then (B1 ∩ B2 )(x) ⊆ U ∩ V . So U ∩ V ∈ τU .

O3. Let {Ui : i ∈ A} be a family of elements of τU . If x ∈ ∪{Ui : i ∈
A} then x ∈ Uj for some j ∈ A. Then there exists B ∈ U such
that x ∈ B(x) ⊆ Uj ⊆ ∪{Ui : i ∈ A}. So, τU is closed under
arbitrary unions.
So, τU is a topology. By definition of τU , for each U ∈ τU and
x ∈ U there is a V ∈ U such that x ∈ V (x) ⊆ U . Then there is
a B ∈ B such that B ⊆ V and so x ∈ B(x) ⊆ V (x) ⊆ U . We
conclude that
Bτ = {B(x) : x ∈ S and B ∈ B}
forms a base for τU . (Note that, in the proof, we can choose

as base B for the uniformity, U , the family, B = Bsym, if
necessary.)
Definition 29.9 Let S be a non-empty set and U be a uniformity

on S. The topology on S, τU , generated by the uniformity, U , is
called a uniform topology.
Let (S, τ ) be a topological space. If
τ = τU
for some uniformity, U , on S, then (S, τ ) is said to be uniformizable

topological space.
In the literature, the words “uniform space” is often used to refer

to both (S, U ) and (S, τU ). It is usually clear from the context to
which space the author is referring to.
Theorem 29.8 guarantees that given a uniformity on a set S we
can generate a corresponding topology on S:
S −→ (S, U ) −→ (S, τU )
Finally, note that, for a given set S, we can speak of a base B for the
uniformity U and a base B for the topology τU . Even though we
tend to use the same symbol, B, for both bases, the reader should
determine, by the context, which one it refers to.
For convenience we juxtapose both concepts.
B is a base for U : For every U ∈ U , there is a B ∈ B
such that B ⊆ U .
Bτ is a base for τU : Bτ = {B(x) : x ∈ S and B ∈ B, a
base for U }.
By Definition 29.9, a topological space, (S, τ ), derived from some

uniformity, U , on S (that is, where τ = τU ) is said to be “uniformiz-
able”. Are there any topological spaces that are not uniformizable?
That is, is there a topology, τ , on S for which there is no unifor-
mity, U , such that τ = τU ? The answer is yes. We will show in
Theorem 29.17 that a topological space derived from a uniformity
is a regular space (i.e., T1 + T3 ).2 So, a non-regular space is not
uniformizable.
Example 6. Consider the usual uniformity, U , on R which is gener-
ated by the base, B = {Bκ : κ > 0}, given in example three (where
2
In fact, a uniformizable space is always completely regular. We will not prove
this in this book. For a proof the reader is referred to Theorem 38.2 of Willard
where it is shown that, for (S, τ ), “uniformizable ⇔ completely regular”.
Bκ = {(a, b) ∈ R × R : |a − b| < κ}). By Theorem, 29.8, the unifor-

mity, U , generates a topology τU on R. Verify that τU is the usual
topology, τ , on R. That is,
R −→ (R, U ) −→ (R, τU ) = (R, τ )
Solution: Let U be the usual uniformity on R and τ denote the usual

topology on R. Then U is generated by the base, B = {Bκ : κ > 0},
where Bκ represents all pairs (a, b) such that |a − b| < κ.
Claim 1: We claim that τU ⊆ τ .
Proof of claim: Let U be an open neighborhood of x ∈ R with
respect to τU . By definition of τU , there exists Bκ ∈ B such that
x ∈ (Bκ )(x) ⊆ U .
See that (Bκ )(x) = (x − κ/2, x + κ/2).
So, U is a union of basic open intervals. So, U ∈ τ . We conclude
that τU ⊆ τ , as claimed.
Claim 2: We claim that τ ⊆ τU .
Proof of claim: Let A be a non-empty open subset in R and x ∈ A.
Then there exists ε such that (x − ε, x + ε) ⊆ A. Consider Bε/2 , a
base element of U . Then (Bε/2 )(x) ∈ τU . By Claim 1, τU ⊆ τ ; then
(Bε/2 )(x) ∈ τ .
See that,
x ∈ (x − ε/4, x + ε/4)

= π2 ({x} × S) ∩ Bε/2
= (Bε/2 )(x)
⊆ (x − ε, x + ε)
⊆A
Then the family, B = {B(x) : x ∈ R, B ∈ U } forms a base for τ .

By Theorem 29.8, B is also a base for τU . So, A ∈ τU . We conclude
that τ ⊆ τU , as claimed.
So, τU = τ .
We now examine, in a more general context, how the open subsets

of the topology, τU , relate to the uniformity, U , which generates it.

on S. Let τU be the topology on S generated by U . If T ⊆ S, then
intτU T = {x ∈ T : x ∈ B(x) ⊆ T for some B ∈ U }
Proof. We are given a set S and a uniformity U on S.

For each B ∈ U , B(x) = π2 [ ({x}×S)∩B ] and τU is the topology
generated by the base B = {B(x) : x ∈ S and B ∈ U }.
Let K = {x ∈ T : x ∈ B(x) ⊆ T for some B ∈ U }. By definition
K ⊆ T . We are required to show that K = intτU T .
We first show that K is open in S (hence, K ⊆ intτU T ).
Let x ∈ K. Then there exists U ∈ U such that x ∈ U (x) ⊆ T .
There exists V ∈ U such that V ◦V ⊆ U . We claim V (x) ⊆ T ; if so
x ∈ V (x) ⊂ K and so K is open.
Let u ∈ V (x). Then we have V (u) ⊆ (V ◦V )(x). We then obtain
the chain of inclusions,
u ∈ V (u)
⊆ (V ◦V )(x)
⊆ U (x)
⊆T
So, u ∈ T implies V (x) ⊆ T , as claimed.

Then x ∈ V (x) ⊂ K, which implies K is open.
Then K ⊆ intτU T .
We now show intτU T ⊆ K. Let x ∈ intτU T . Since B is a base for
τU and intτU T is open, there exists B ∈ U such that x ∈ B(x) ⊆
intτU T ⊆ T . So, x ∈ K.
Then intτU T = K.
The following results exhibits another way of expressing the clo-

sure of a set in (S, τU ).
In the statement, we use the following notation.
Notation: Let U be a uniformity on S. If T ⊆ S then
U [T ] = ∪x∈T {U (x)}

on S. Let τU be the topology on S generated by U . Let T ⊆ S. Then
the closure, clτU T , of T with respect to the uniform topology τU can
be expressed as, then

clτU T = {U [T ]}
U ∈U
Proof. We are given a set S and a uniformity U on S from which

we obtain the space (S, τU ) equipped with the uniform topology. Let
T ⊆ S.
We know that B = {B(x) : x ∈ S and B ∈ Bsym } forms a base of
τU .
We are required to show that x ∈ clτU T if and only if x ∈
U ∈U {U [T ]}.
To say that “x ∈ clτU T ” is equivalent to saying that “B(x) inter-
sects T for all B ∈ B”.
To say that “B(x) intersects T for all B ∈ B” is equivalent to
saying that “x belongs to B −1 [T ] for all B ∈ B”. But since B is
symmetric, we can replace “B −1 [T ]” with “B[T ]”.
So we can rewrite the second statement as:
“The set, B(x) intersects T for all B ∈ B if and only if, x ∈
U ∈U {U [T ]} ”.
The desired conclusion follows.
Example 7. Suppose (S, U ) is the uniform space equipped with the

discrete uniformity. Show that the corresponding topological space
is equipped with the discrete topology, τU = P(S).
Solution: By definition, U = {U ∈ P(S × S) : Δ(S) ⊆ U }, is the
discrete uniformity. By definition, a base for U is a subfamily, B,
such that for every U ∈ U , there is a B ∈ B such that B ⊆ U .
We choose,
B = {Δ(S)}
By definition, for the given B,
Bτ = {B(x) : x ∈ S and B ∈ B a base for U }
forms a base for (S, τU ).

For each x ∈ S,
B(x) = π2 [({x} × S) ∩ B]
= π2 [ ({x} × S) ∩ Δ(S)]
= {x}
Then {{x} : x ∈ S} forms a base for the uniform topology. This

base generates τU = P(S).
Example 8. Suppose (S, U ) is the uniform space equipped with the
single element uniformity, U = {S×S}. Show that the corresponding
topological space is equipped with the trivial topology, τU = {∅, S}.
Solution: We are given that U = {S × S}, so B = {S × S} is a base
for U . Now, Bτ = {B(x) : x ∈ S and B ∈ B a base for U }. For
each x ∈ S, B(x) = π2 [ ({x} × S) ∩ (S × S) ] = S. So, τU = {∅, S}.
Example 9. For each κ ∈ R, let
Bκ = Δ(R) ∪ [κ, ∞) × [κ, ∞)
Suppose (R, U ) is the uniform space where U has as base,
B = {Bκ : κ ∈ R}
Show that the corresponding topological space, (R, τU ), is the dis-

crete space.
Solution: We are given the family of subsets B = {Bκ : κ ∈ R}
is a base for U . It is easily verified that B satisfies the properties
required for it to serve as a base for some uniformity, U , on S.
Now τU = {U ∈ P(S) : for each x ∈ U there exists B ∈ U
such that B(x) ⊆ U }.
If x < κ then B(x) = {x}; so {x} is an open base element of R.

So, (R, τU ) is a discrete topological space.
The following result will be a useful tool in proofs to come.
Proposition 29.12 For any M ∈ U , there exists W ∈ B such that

W ◦W ◦W ⊆ M .
Proof. We are given a set S, a uniformity U on S. For any M ∈ U ,

by U3, there is a B ∈ B such that B ◦B ⊆ M . There is a D ∈ B
such that D ◦D ⊆ B. Since
D ◦D ⊆ B
(D ∩ B)◦(D ∩ B) ⊆ D ◦D ⊆ B
(D ∩ B)◦(D ∩ B)◦(D ∩ B) ⊆ (D ∩ B)◦B ⊆ B ◦B ⊆ M
there exists W = D ∩ B ∈ B such that W ◦W ◦W ⊆ M .

This proves the proposition.
29.5 On the Product Topology Derived from

(S, τU ) × (S, τU )
Since a uniformity, U , is subfamily of P(S × S), every element, M ,

in U can be viewed as a subset of the Cartesian product, (S, τU ) ×
(S, τU ), equipped with the product topology. We will see that every
element, M , in U on S is a neighborhood of the diagonal, Δ(S)
(with respect to this product topology). That is, Δ(S) ⊆ intS×S M .
To confirm this fact, it will suffice to show that, for all M ∈ U ,
intS×S M ∈ U . For, if this is so, it will follow from U1 that Δ(S) ⊆
intS×S M , for all M ∈ U .

on S. If M ∈ U then intS×S M ∈ U .
Proof. We are given a set S, a uniformity U on S and the uniform

topology,
τU = {U ∈ P(S) : for each x ∈ U there exists B ∈ U

such that B(x) ⊆ U }
on S. Recall (from Theorem 29.8) that B = {B(x) : x ∈ S and B ∈

Bsym } forms a base for the topology, τU , on S (where Bsym denotes
all symmetric relations in U ).
An open base element of S × S (equipped with the product topol-
ogy) is of the form U (x) × V (y) for some U, V ∈ B ⊆ U . We will
begin by establishing the following three facts.
Fact 1. For any M ∈ U ,
intS×S M = {(x, y) : (x, y) ∈ W (x) × W (y) ⊆ M for some W ∈ B}
Proof. By U2, U ∩ V ∈ U Then (U ∩ V )(x) ⊆ U (x) and

(U ∩ V )(y) ⊆ V (y).
Then (U ∩ V )(x) × (U ∩ V )(y) ⊆ U (x) × V (y).
Let M ∈ U . We are required to show that intS×S M ∈ U . The
set, intS×S M , can be expressed as,
intS×S M = {(x, y) : (x, y) ∈ U (x) × V (y) ⊆ M for U, V ∈ B}
Since (U ∩ V )(x) ⊆ U (x) and (U ∩ V )(y) ⊆ V (y), then (U ∩

V )(x) × (U ∩ V )(y) ⊆ U (x) × V (y).
By U2, U ∩ V ∈ U . Also, if U, V ∈ B then U ∩ V ∈ B. If we let
W = U ∩ V , the set, intS×S M , can then be expressed as,
intS×S M = {(x, y) : (x, y) ∈ W (x) × W (y) ⊆ M for some W ∈ B}
This proves Fact 1.

Fact 2. For any M ∈ U , there exists W ∈ B such that
W ◦W ◦W ⊆ M .
This fact is proven in Proposition 29.12.
Fact 3. For any U, W ∈ U where W is known to be symmetric,

W ◦U ◦W = {W (x) × W (y)}
(x,y)∈U
Proof. Consider the composition W ◦U ◦W where W is symmetric

in U . Recall that
W ◦U ◦W = {(u, v) : (u, x) ∈ W and (y, v) ∈ W

for some (x, y) ∈ U } (∗)
See that, if (u, v) ∈ W , then u ∈ W (x) and v ∈ W (y) for some

(x, y) ∈ U . So, (u, v) ∈ W (x) × W (y). Then, for some (x, y) ∈ U ,
W ⊆ W (x) × W (y).
Conversely, if, for some (x, y) ∈ U , (a, b) ∈ W (x) × W (y), then
a ∈ W (x) and b ∈ W (y). So, (a, x) ∈ W and (b, y) ∈ W . Since
W is symmetric, (y, b) ∈ W . Since (x, y) ∈ U , then (a, b) ∈ W , so
W (x) × W (y) ⊆ W .
We conclude that, whenever W is symmetric, there is (x, y) ∈ U
such that
W = W (x) × W (y)
Restating (*) we get,
W ◦U ◦W = {(u, v) ∈ S×S : (u, v) ∈ W (x)×W (y) for some (x, y) ∈ U }
Equivalently,

W ◦U ◦W = {W (x) × W (y)}
(x,y)∈U
This proves Fact 3.

We now combine these few facts, to proceed as follows. Let
M ∈U.
By Fact 1,
intS×S M = {(x, y) : (x, y) ∈ W (x) × W (y) ⊆ M for some W ∈ B }
If we prove that W ⊆ intS×S M , then by applying U5, we will be

done.
By Fact 2, there exists W ∈ B such that W ◦W ◦W ⊆ M .
By Fact 3,

W ◦W ◦W = {W (x) × W (y)} ⊆ M
(x,y)∈W
Then. . .
(x, y) ∈ W ⇒ (x, y) ∈ W (x) × W (y) ⊆ intS×S M
Then every point of W belongs to intS×S M . So, W ⊆ intS×S M .
Since W ∈ B, by U5, intS×S M ∈ U . We are done.
We know that B = {B ∈ U : B is symmetric } forms a base

for U . This means that, for every U ∈ U , there is a B ∈ B such
that B ⊆ U . By the above theorem, not only is intS×S B ⊆ B, but
intS×S B ∈ U . This proves the following corollary.
Corollary 29.14 Let S be a non-empty set and U be a uniformity

on S. The the family of all (S × S)-open symmetric elements of U
forms a base for U .
We now describe an alternate way for representing the closure

(with respect to the product topology on S × S) of the elements
of U .

on S. Let Bsym denote the base of all symmetric elements of U . If
M ∈ U then

clS×S M = {B ◦M ◦B}
B∈Bsym
Proof. We are given a set S, a uniformity U on S and the base,

Bsym , of all symmetric elements of U .
Let M ∈ U . Then by U5, clS×S M ∈ U . We keep in mind that
M is a subset of (S, τU ) × (S, τU ), equipped with
the product topol-
ogy. We are required to prove that clS×S M = B∈Bsym {B ◦M ◦B}. It
suffices to show that,
B(x) × B(y) intersects M for all B ∈ Bsym if and only if

(x, y) ∈ B ◦M ◦B
B∈Bsym
Let (x, y) ∈ S × S. Let B(x) × B(y) be a basic open neighborhood

of (x, y) (where B ∈ Bsym ).
To say that “B(x) × B(y) intersects M ” is equivalent to saying
that “there is some (u, v) ∈ M such that (x, y) ∈ B(u) × B(v)”.
To say that “there is some (u, v) ∈ M such
that (x, y) ∈ B(u) ×
B(v)” is equivalent to saying that “(x, y) ∈ (u,v)∈M B(u) × B(v)”.
By Fact 3 proven in the previous theorem, we can express the
right-hand side, “(x, y) ∈ (u,v)∈M B(u) × B(v)” as,
(x, y) ∈ B ◦M ◦B
Combining the two statements we obtain,

B(x)×B(y) intersects M for all B ∈ Bsym ⇔ (x, y) ∈ B ◦M ◦B
B∈Bsym
We conclude that, if M ∈ U ,

clS×S M = {B ◦M ◦B}
B∈Bsym
29.6 Separation Properties Inherent to (S, τU )
The uniform space, (S, τU ), inherits from the uniformity U on S

some separation properties. We can show immediately that the uni-
formity U on S guarantees that (S, τU ) is T3 .

on S. Let τU be the topology on S generated by U . The space, (S, τU ),
is T3 .3
Proof. We are given a set S, a uniformity U on S and the derived
topological space, (S, τU ), equipped with the uniform topology.
3
Recall that a space is T3 if, given a closed set F and a point x ∈ F , there exists
disjoint open neighborhoods U, V such that F ⊆ U and x ∈ V .
Fact: The family of all (S × S)-closed symmetric sets in U forms a

base for U .
Proof of fact: Suppose U ∈ U . By Proposition 29.12, there exists
V ∈ B sym such that V ◦V ◦V ⊆ U .
By Theorem 29.15,

clS×S V = {B ◦V ◦B}
B∈Bsym
which is, by U5, an element of U .

Then
clS×S V ⊆ V ◦V ◦V ⊆ U
So we can declare that there exists a (S×S)-closed W = clS×S V ∈ U

such that W ⊆ V . Then W ∩ W −1 is a closed and symmetric element
of U contained in U .
We conclude that the family of all (S × S)-closed symmetric sets
in U forms a base for U . This establishes the stated fact.
In what follows we will represent this base by, Bcl-sym
Let F be closed in S (with respect to τU ) and x ∈ S \F . Then
S \F is open in S.
To show that (S, τU ) is T3 it suffices to show that x has a closed
neighborhood which misses F . Since S \ F is open, there exists an
open neighborhood V of x such that x ∈ V ⊆ S \F .
A base Bτ for τU is of the form
Bτ = {B(x) : x ∈ S and B ∈ Bcl-sym, a base for U }
We have seen that there is closed symmetric W ∈ Bcl-sym such

that x ∈ W (x) ⊆ S \F . Since W (x) = π2 [({x} × S) ∩ W ], and π2 is
open and one-to-one on the closed subset {x} × S) ∩ W of {x} × S),
then W (x) is a closed neighborhood of x. Since W (x) misses F , we
conclude that (S, τU ) is T3 .
Corollary 29.17 Let S be a non-empty set and U be a uniformity

on S. Let τU be the topology on S generated by U . The space, (S,τU ),
is regular (T1 + T3 ) if and only if

{U } = Δ(S)
U ∈U
Proof. We are given a set S, a uniformity U on S and the derived

topological space, (S, τU ), equipped with the uniform topology.
( ⇒ ) Suppose S is regular. Then S is T3 and T1 . This implies that
the points in (S, τU ) are closed. By Theorem 29.11,

{x} = clτU {x} = {U (x)}
U ∈U

Suppose (a, b) ∈ U ∈U {U }. Then b ∈ U ∈U {U (a)}. So b must equal
a. We conclude that U ∈U {U } = Δ(S).

( ⇐ ) Suppose that U ∈U {U } = Δ(S). Then for each x ∈ S, {x} =

U ∈U {U (x)} = clτU {x}. So, {x} is closed and
hence, (S, τU ) is T1 .
We have shown that (S, τU ) is T3 , so, if U ∈U {U } = Δ(S), the
space is regular (T3 + T1 ).
29.7 Uniform Continuity on a Uniform Space (S, U )
The uniformity U defined on a set S will allow us to introduce

the notion of “uniform continuity” on the resulting uniform space,
(S, U ).
Definition 29.18 Let (S, U ) and (T, V ) be two sets equipped with
the uniformities, U and V , respectively. Let f : S → T be a func-
tion mapping S into T . Let gf : S × S → T × T be the function
defined as
gf (x, y) = ( f (x), f (y))

We will say that a function f : (S, U ) → (T, V ) is uniformly contin-

uous relative to U and V if and only if for any V ∈ V the set
gf← [V ] = {(x, y) ∈ S × S : (f (x), f (y)) ∈ V }
is an element of the uniformity, U .

Equivalently, f : S → T is uniformly continuous if and only if for
any V ∈ V there is an element U ∈ U such that gf [U ] ⊆ V .
Example 10. Recall that the usual uniformity on R is the unifor-

mity with base B = {Bε : ε > 0}, where Bε = {(a, b) ∈ R × R :
|a − b| < ε}. Let (S, U ) be a uniform space and f : S → R be a
function mapping S into R, where (R, V ) is equipped with the usual
uniformity, V . By definition, f : S → R is uniformly continuous on S
if and only if for any ε > 0, there exists U ∈ U such that gf [U ] ⊆ Bκ .
That is, for any pair, (x, y) ∈ U , |f (x) − f (y)| < ε. Note that the
choice of U is independent of the location of (x, y) in S × S.
In the following example, a little bit closer to home, we examine
what uniform continuity means for a function f : R → R.
Example 11. Let (R, U ) be the uniform space for R equipped with
the usual uniformity with the base B = {Bε : ε > 0}. Let f : R →
R be a function mapping R into R. By definition, f is uniformly
continuous on R if and only if for any Bε ∈ U , there is a Bδ ∈ U
such that gf [Bδ ] ⊆ Bε . Equivalently, for any ε > 0 there exists a
δ > 0 such that |x − y| < δ implies |f (x) − f (y)| < ε.
Note that the composition of two uniformly continuous functions
is easily verified to be uniformly continuous.
We will immediately formally define the following three concepts.
Definition 29.19 If, for a given one-to-one function, f : (S, U ) →

(T, V ), both f and f ← are known to be uniformly continuous then
we say that the function f : S → T is a uniform isomorphism from
between S and T .
If f : S → T is a uniform isomorphism then we will say that
(S, U ) and (T, V ) are uniformly isomorphic.
A property on (S, U ) which is shared by all uniform spaces which
are uniformly isomorphic to (S, U ) is said to be a uniform invariant.
29.8 Uniform Continuity Implies Continuity
Continuity is always defined with respect to some topology. If we

are given a function f : S → T which is known to be uniformly
continuous with respect to the uniformities U and V , respectively,
what can say about the same function f : S → T mapping S to T
with respect to the corresponding topologies τU and τV . We answer
this question with the following theorem.
Theorem 29.20 Let S and T be sets with corresponding uniformi-

ties, U and V , respectively. If f : S → T is a uniformly continuous
function with respect to the uniformities U and V then this same
function is a continuous function with respect to the uniform topolo-
gies, τU and τV .
Proof. We are given sets S and T with respective uniformities U

and V . Suppose f : S → T is a uniformly continuous function.
To prove continuity of f it suffices to show f is continuous at each
point x ∈ S.
Let x ∈ S and let V be a base element of V such that f (x) ∈
V (f (x)), a neighborhood of f (x) in T . It suffices to produce a neigh-
borhood W , of x such that f [W ] ⊆ V (f (x)). (See Definition 6.2 and
6.3.) By the definition of “f : S → T is uniformly continuous”, gf← [V ]
is an element of U (with Δ(S) in its (S × S)-interior).
See that,
f ← [V (f (x))] = { y ∈ S : f (y) ∈ V (f (x))}

= {y ∈ S : (f (x), f (y)) ∈ V }
= {y ∈ S : gf (x, y) ∈ V }

= gf← [V ] (x) (Where gf← [V ] ∈ U )

Since gf← [V ] (x) is a neighborhood of x, then f ← [V (f (x))] is a
neighborhood of x.
Since f [f ←[V (f (x))]] = V (f (x)), f is continuous at x. Since x
was arbitrarily chosen in S, f is continuous on all of S.
It follows from the theorem that a function f : S → T which is a

uniform isomorphism can also be seen as a homeomorphism mapping
S onto T .
Uniform continuity on a uniform space generalizes the notion of
uniform continuity from one metric space to another. In the case of a
metric space, it is more often discussed without explicitly introduc-
ing the concept of uniformities on a set. To see this we present the
following example.
Example 12. Suppose (M1 , ρ1 ) and (M2 , ρ2 ) are two metric spaces.
Suppose f : M1 → M2 is a function satisfying the condition,
for every ε > 0, there is a δ > 0 such that f [Bδ (x)] ⊆
Bε (f (x)), for all x ∈ S.
In this case, the condition imposed on the existence of δ is stronger
than the one required in the definition of continuity at x (where the
value of δ depends on both the value of ε and the point, x). It easily
seen here that if f satisfies the given condition then f is continuous
at each point.
We compare this to the same function f : M1 → M2 where the
sets M1 and M2 are equipped with the metric uniformities, U and
V , respectively. A metric uniformity has as base, B = {Bκ : κ >
0} where Bκ = {(x, y) : ρ(x, y) < κ}. By using the language and
notation for uniformities, we can say that f is uniformly continuous if,
for any ε > 0, there is δ > 0 such that, if (x, y) ∈ Bδ ∈
U , then (f (x), f (y)) ∈ Bε ∈ V . Equivalently, f [Bδ (x)] ⊆
Bε (f (x)), for all x ∈ S.
Chapter 30
The Stone–Weierstrass Theorem
Abstract
In this section, we revisit the relationship between algebraic structures
of C ∗(S) and the family of Hausdorff compactifications of S. We provide
a detailed proof of the Stone–Weierstrass Theorem. One consequence of
this important theorem is allowing us to view the family of all compact-
ifications as a lattice of topological spaces.
30.1 Introduction
In this section, for a topological space S, the symbol Cb (S) represents

all real-valued bounded functions on S. We will view (Cb (S), +, ·) as
a ring of bounded functions. We equip Cb (S) with the sup-norm,
f ∞ = sup{|f (x)| : x ∈ S}
It is an easy exercise to show that ∞ is a valid norm on
Cb (S). So, Cb (S) can be viewed as a metric space, (Cb (S), ρ), where
ρ(f, g) = sup{|f (x) − g(x)| : x ∈ S}. In Theorem 1.11, we proved
that (Cb (S), ∞ ) is a complete space. That is, all Cauchy sequences
in Cb (S) converge to an element of Cb (S).
Suppose that (A, ≤) is a partially ordered set (meaning the binary
operation, ≤, is reflexive, antisymmetric and transitive). A partially
ordered set, (A, ≤), is referred to as being a
lattice.
669
if, for every a, b ∈ A, a ∨ b = sup{a, b} ∈ A and a ∧ b = inf{a, b} ∈

A (with respect to ≤). The symbol, ∨, is read as “join” while the
symbol, ∧, is read as “meet”. The set A is said to be a complete lattice
if, for any non-empty B ⊆ A, ∨B = sup B exists in A and ∧B = inf B
exists in A. The lattice derived from (A, ≤) is denoted as
(A, ≤, ∨, ∧)
The set (B, ≤, ∨∗ , ∧∗ ) is said to be a sublattice of (A, ≤, ∨, ∧) if
(B, ≤∗ ) ⊆ (A, ≤) and (B, ≤, ∨∗ , ∧∗ ) is itself a lattice with respect
to the binary relations, ∨∗ and ∧∗ , it inherits from (A, ≤, ∨, ∧). That
is, if a, b ∈ B, a ≤∗ b if and only if a ≤ b and a ∨∗ b = a ∨ b and
a ∧∗ b = a ∧ b.
Example 1. For a topological space S, the set C(S) denotes the set
of all continuous real-valued functions on S. For f, g ∈ C(S), we will
say f ≤ g if f (x) ≤ g(x) for all x ∈ S. Then (C(S), ≤) is a partial
ordering. If
h(x) = { max {f (x), g(x)} : x ∈ S } = (f ∨ g)(x)
k(x) = { min {f (x), g(x)} : x ∈ S } = (f ∧ g)(x)
(C(S), ≤, ∨, ∧) can easily be verified to be a lattice. To show this use
the identities,
f + g + |f − g|
f ∨g = (∗)
2
f + g − |f − g|
f ∧g = (∗∗)
2
For further reference, we include the following identity which is
deduced by these.
f ∧ g = f + g − (f ∨ g) (∗ ∗ ∗)
Analogous definitions apply to C ∗ (S) (the set of all continuous

bounded functions) to obtain the lattice (C ∗ (S), ≤, ∨, ∧).1
The subset F of C ∗ (S) is said to be a subring of the ring,
∗
(C (S), +, ·), if it closed under + and ·. When we say that the sub-
ring, F , of the ring, C ∗ (S), is complete, we mean that it is complete
1
Note that neither (C(S), ≤, ∨, ∧) nor (C ∗ (S), ≤, ∨, ∧) need be a complete lattice
unless extra conditions are attached to S.
The Stone–Weierstrass Theorem 671
with respect to the sup-norm, ∞ . We would like to prove the

Stone–Weierstrass Theorem. But first we will need in the following
two lemmas, in which we associate the metric space notion of “com-
pleteness of F with respect to ∞ ”, to the algebraic notion of “F ,
a sublattice of C ∗ (S)”.
Lemma 30.1 The Stone–Weierstrass lemma one. Let S be a topo-

logical space. Let F be a complete subring of (C ∗ (S), + ,·) which
contains all constant functions. Then, if f ∈ F , |f | ∈ F .
Proof. We are given that F is a complete subring of (C ∗ (S), +, ·)

which contains all constant functions. Let f ∈ F . We are required to
show that |f | belongs F . Since f is bounded, there exists k ∈ R such
that |f (x)|∞ < k on S. Then f /k∞ < 1. If we show that |f /k| ∈ F
then so does |f |. So let us suppose, without loss of generality, that
f ∞ < 1. Then |f (x)| < 1 on S
Consider the binomial expansion of the expression h(x) =
(1 − x)1/2 ,
∞

(1 − x)1/2 = C(1/2, n)xn
n=0
Convergence of this series to (1−x) 1/2

∞ on [0, 1] is known to be uniform
(see page 305). The power series n=0 C(1/2, n)xn can be seen as a
sequence of polynomials which converges uniformly to (1 − x)1/2 on
[0, 1]. This means that there is a polynomial, p(x), such that

1/2
(1 − x) − p(x) < ε on [0, 1]
Let x = 1 − u2 . Substituting this term in the above expression we

obtain,
√
2 2
u − p(1 − u ) < ε, for u in [−1, 1]

from which we obtain |u| − p(1 − u2 ) < ε, for u in [−1, 1]. We
substitute f (x) into u, to obtain

|f (x)| − p(1 − f (x)2 ) < ε, for f (x) in [−1, 1]
and so,
|f | − p◦(1 − f 2 )∞ ≤ ε
Let h = p◦(1 − f 2 ) ∈ F . Now, since p is a polynomial and F is a

subring which contains all constant functions, then h ∈ F . So every
ε-ball, Bε (|f |) (with respect to ∞ ), contains an element, h, of F .
So |f | is a limit point of F . Since F is complete, the function, |f |,
must belong to F . As required.
Lemma 30.2 The Stone–Weierstrass lemma two. Let S be a topo-

logical space. Let F be a complete subring of (C ∗ (S), +, ·) which
contains all constant functions. Then (F , ∨, ∧) is a sublattice of
(C ∗ (S), ∨, ∧).
Proof. We are given that F is a complete subring of (C ∗ (S), +, ·)

which contains all constant functions. Let f, g ∈ F . To show that
F is a sublattice we are required to show that f ∨ g and f ∧ g both
belong F
Consider the two identities (*) and (***) (given above)
f + g + |f − g|
f ∨g =
2
f ∧ g = f + g − (f ∨ g)
In the first lemma, we showed that if f ∈ F then |f | ∈ F . Since F

is a subring, then both f ∨ g and f ∧ g both belong F . So, F is a
sublattice of (C ∗ (S), ≤, ∨, ∧). As required.
In the following theorem, we refer to a subset F of C ∗ (S) which

separates points of S. This means that, “for every pair of distinct
points p and q in S, there is a function h ∈ F such that h(p) = h(q)”.
While studying the Stone–Weierstrass theorem below, the reader
may have a vague impression of having previously seen a similar
statement (presented in 21.11). Compare the statements 21.11 to
30.3, the conditions and the conclusions that follow from these con-
ditions. See the slight differences in how we approach the statements.
Most of the technical work for the proof of the following theorem is
done in the preceding two lemmas.2
Theorem 30.3 The Stone–Weierstrass theorem. Let S be a com-

pact topological space. Let F be a complete subring of C ∗ (S) which
contains the constant functions. If F separates the points of S then
F = C ∗ (S).
Proof. Suppose S is a compact space and f ∈ C ∗ (S). Also suppose

that F is a complete subring of C ∗ (S) which separates points of S
and which contains all constant functions, {r ∈ C ∗ (S) : r(x) =
r ∀ x, r ∈ R}. To show that F = C ∗ (S) it will suffice to show that,
for any ε > 0, Bε (f ) ∩ F = ∅ with respect to ∞ . (For this would
imply f is a limit point of F and since F is complete, f ∈ F .)
If f is constant then, since F contains all constant functions, then
f ∈ F . So, we will assume, without loss of generality, that f is not
constant; then inf {f (x) : x ∈ S} < sup {f (x) : x ∈ S}.
Step 1. Choose p, q ∈ S. By hypothesis, there exists hpq ∈ F such
that hpq (p) = hpq (q). We define the function gpq as,

hpq (x) − hpq (q) hpq (x) − hpq (p)
gpq (x) = f (p) − f (q)
hpq (p) − hpq (q) hpq (p) − hpq (q)
Verify that, for such choices of p and q, gpq (p) = f (p) and gpq (q) =
f (q). Since F is a subring which contains the constant functions and
hpq ∈ F , then gpq ∈ F .
Step 2. Let ε > 0. Let
Upq = {x ∈ S : (gpq − f )(x) < ε}

Vpq = {x ∈ S : (gpq − f )(x) > −ε}
2
The Theorem 21.11 states: Suppose (S, τ ) is a completely regular space and
F is a subalgebra of C ∗ (S) which separates points and closed sets in S. Suppose
F generates the compactification αS = eβF [βS] = clT eF [S]. If F satisfies the
properties, (1) F contains Cω (S) and (2) every f ∈ Cα (S) is equivalent to some
function g ∈ F , then F = Cα (S).
For what follows we will fix q ∈ S. Note that, since gpq (q) = f (q),
q ∈ Vpq (independently of the value of p)
Similarly, see that gpq (p) = f (p), so p ∈ Upq . Since Upq = (gpq − f )←
[(−∞, ε)] is open for any p, then {Upq : p ∈ S} is an open cover
of S. Since S is compact, there is a subset, {p1 , p2 , p3 , . . . , pn },
of S such that {Up1 q , Up2 q , . . . , Upn q } covers all of S. Let Vq =
∩{Vp1 q , Vp2 q , . . . , Vpn q }. Then q ∈ Vq .
We define, for our fixed q, the function gq : S → R as,
gq (x) = ∧{gp1 q (x), gp2 q (x), . . . , gpn q (x)}
By Lemma 30.2, since F is a complete subring which contains the

constant functions, F is a sublattice. So, gq ∈ F .
Then for any x ∈ S, x ∈ Upk q for some k ∈ {1, 2, 3, . . . , n}. For
this k and x we have,
gq (x) ≤ gpk q (x) < f (x) + ε (1)
This expression is independent of the value of x in S, so we can write

more generally that, independent of the chosen value q ∈ S,
gq < f + ε, for all q ∈ S. (2)
Let y ∈ Vq where Vq = ∩{Vp1 q , Vp2 q , . . . , Vpn q } is a non-empty open

subset of S. Then there is some pt q ∈ {p1 q, p2 q, . . . , pn q} such that
gq (y) = gpt q (y) and so,
gq (y) > f (y) − ε (3)
Step 3. Since q ∈ Vq for each q ∈ S, then {Vq : q ∈ S} forms an open

cover of S, so there exist {q1 , q1 , . . . qm } such that {Vq1 , Vq2 , . . . Vqm }
covers S.
Let x ∈ S. Then x ∈ Vqb for some qb ∈ {q1 , q2 , . . . , qm }.
Let
g = ∨{gq1 , gq2 . . .gqm }

Then g ∈ F (by the lemma) and there is some qa ∈ {gq1 , gq2 . . .gqm }
such that
g(x) = gqa (x) > f (x) − ε (4)
Since this expression is independent of the value of q and x, we can

conclude that
f −ε<g (5)
Step 4. From inequality (2) we have gq < f + ε (on S) for all values
of q. Then
g = ∨{gq1 , gq2 . . .gqm } < f + ε (6)
Then, combining inequalities (5) and (6),
f −ε<g <f +ε
This is equivalent to stating “for arbitrary ε > 0, g ∈ Bε (f ) with

respect to ∞ ”.
Since, by hypothesis, F is complete, it is closed; then f ∈ F . So,
C ∗ (S) ⊆ F ; it follows that F = C ∗ (S), as required.
30.2 A Consequence of the Stone–Weierstrass

Theorem
Let C = {αi S : i ∈ I} represent the family of all compactifications

of a locally finite completely regular space. We will partially order
the family, C , by defining “” in the following way:
If αi S and αj S belong to C , we will write
αi S αj S
if and only if there is a continuous function f : αj S → αi S,

mapping αj S \S onto αi S \S which fixes the points of S.
See that with thus defined, (C , ) forms a partially ordered set

of compact topological spaces.
Notation: Suppose two compactifications αS and γS are such that

αS γS, then by definition, there is a continuous function f : γS →
αS, mapping γS \S onto αS \S which fixes the points of S. We will
represent this continuous function f as,
πγ→α : γS → αS
The subscript of the function πγ→α explicitly expresses which com-

pactification is larger than (or equal to) the other. Note that a pair
of compactifications need not necessarily be comparable in the sense
that one need not necessarily by “less than” the other.
Notation: For any compactification αS let Cα (S) = {f |S : f ∈
C(αS)}. Clearly, Cα (S) ⊆ C ∗ (S). If S is locally compact and
completely regular then it has a one-point compactification, ωS =
S ∪ {ω} (see 21.15). We will adopt the following notation:
Cω (S) = {f |S : f ∈ C(ωS)}
Note that, since ωS is compact and Hausdorff then it is normal (see

14.3). Then it is completely regular and so C(ωS) separates points
and closed sets of ωS. Clearly, it also contains all constant functions.
It is also a complete ring, with respect to ∞ (see 1.11). Then it is
easily verified that Cω (S) also separates points and closed sets of S
(remember that since S is locally compact it is open in ωS).
Also note that f ∈ Cω (S) ⊆ C ∗ (S) if and only if f is constant on
the compliment of some compact subset of S (since, if it extends to
ωS, it must be constant on the outgrowth, {ω}).
Compare the following statement to the one in Theorem 21.11.3
Theorem 30.4 Let S be locally compact and completely regular. If

C ∗ (S) contains a subring, F , which is complete and contains Cω (S)
then F = Cα (S) for some compactification, αS, of S.
3
Theorem 21.11 states: Suppose (S, τ ) is a completely regular space and F
is a subalgebra of C ∗ (S) which separates points and closed sets in S. Suppose
F generates the compactification αS = eβF [βS] = clT eF [S]. If F satisfies the
properties, (1) F contains Cω (S) and (2) every f ∈ Cα (S) is equivalent to some
function g ∈ F , then F = Cα (S).
Proof. We are given that S is locally compact completely regular,

that F is complete subring of C ∗ (S) and contains Cω (S). Since ωS is
compact and C(ωS) separates points and closed subsets of ωS, then
Cω (S) separates points and closed sets of S. Then F separates points
and closed sets in S. Every function f in F extends to a function
f β ∈ C(βS). Then F β = {f β : f ∈ F } ⊆ C(βS).
By the embedding theorem I (Theorem 7.17) the evaluation map

eF : S → f [S]
f ∈F

embeds S into T = f ∈F R. Then eF β [βS] = clT eF [S] can be
viewed as a compact space which densely contains a homeomorphic
copy of S. We can then represent clT eF [S] as a compactification,
αS = clT eF [S]. By the Stone–Weierstrass theorem, F α = C ∗ (αS).
Then F = Cα (S).
By the theorem above, we can associate to each complete subring,

F , of C ∗ (S), which contains Cω (S), a compactification αS of S such
that F = Cα (S).
Conversely, for each compactification γS we can associate a
unique complete subring, Cα (S), of C ∗ (S), which contains Cω (S).
(If S is locally compact, the ring Cα (S) contains Cω (S) so every
function, f in ωS extends to all compactifications of S).
For compactifications αS and γS, αS γS if and only if Cα (S) ⊆
Cγ (S).
We define Cα (S) ∨ Cγ (S) = the smallest complete subring, Cδ (S),
of C ∗ (S) which contains both Cα (S) and Cγ (S). We can equivalently
say,
Cα (S) ∨ Cγ (S) = Cα (S), Cγ (S)
to represent the subring generated by Cα (S) and Cγ (S).4
4
It is the intersection of all subrings of C ∗ (S) which contains both Cα (S) and
Cγ (S).
We define Cα (S) ∧ Cγ (S) = Cα (S) ∩ Cγ (S), the largest subring,

Cδ (S), of C ∗ (S) which is contained in both Cα (S) and Cγ (S).
We can then view C as a lattice, (C , ∨, ∧) where
αS ∨ γS = δS if and only if Cα (S) ∨ Cγ (S) = Cδ (S)

αS ∧ γS = δS if and only if Cα (S) ∩ Cγ (S) = Cδ (S)
Chapter 31
Metrizability
Abstract
In this section, we prove two important metrizability theorems. The
Urysohn metrization theorem is proved for the special case where the
space is known to be separable. This is of particular interest since it
exposes the strategy used to prove the more general Nagata–Smirnov
metrization theorem.
31.1 Introduction
We have previously discussed topological spaces, (S, τ ), on which we

have defined a metric producing a metric topology which is equiv-
alent to τ . Such spaces are said to be metrizable. We know that
metric spaces are first countable (5.9), normal (9.19) and paracom-
pact (19.11). So metrizable spaces must at least be first countable,
normal and paracompact. Determining those specific properties on a
topological space which characterize metrizability is the question we
will investigate here.
31.2 The Urysohn Metrization Theorem
We begin by discussing metrizability of a certain class of topological

spaces. The following results help us characterize those separable
spaces which are metrizable. We begin by proving two lemmas and
a theorem.
679
Lemma 31.1 Let {(Sn , ρn ) : n ∈ N} be a countable family of metric

spaces. Suppose
that, for each n ∈ N, sup{ρn (x, y) : x, y ∈ Sn } ≤ 1.
Let S = n∈N Sn . Let ρ : S × S → R be defined as
ρn (xn , yn )
ρ(xnn∈N , ynn∈N ) =
2n
n∈N
Thenρ : S × S → R is a metric on S. Furthermore, the topology on

S = n∈N Sn derived by the metric ρ is the product topology.
Proof. This statement has been proven in an example which

appears on page 162.
Lemma 31.2 Let S be a T1 topological space. Suppose {Sn : i ∈ N}

is a countably infinite indexed family where, for each n, Sn = [0, 1]
is equipped with the usual topology. Let F = {fn : n ∈ N} be a set of
continuous functions fn : S → Sn = [0, 1].
(a) If F separates points and closed sets of its domain, S, then the
evaluation map,

e(x) = fn (x)n∈N ∈ n∈N fn [S] ⊆ n∈N [0, 1]
with respect to F , is both continuous

and one-to-one on S.
(b) Furthermore, the function, e : S → n∈N Sn , maps S homeo-
morphically onto

e[S] ⊆ n∈N fn [S] ⊆ n∈N Sn
Hence, this evaluation map embeds ahomeomorphic copy of S

into the (metrizable1 ) product space, n∈N [0, 1].
Proof. This lemma is simply restating the Embedding Theorem I,

7.17, for the case where the codomain of each fn is [0, 1].
1
By Lemma 31.1.
Metrizability 681
The two above lemmas allow us to streamline the proof of

Urysohn’s metrization theorem.
Theorem 31.3 The Urysohn metrization theorem. Let S be a regu-

lar
(T1 + T3 ) second countable topological space. Then S is embedded
in n∈N [0, 1] = [0, 1]N (with the product topology). So second count-
able regular topological spaces are metrizable spaces.
Proof. We are given that S is a regular and second countable topo-

logical space. Then, by Theorem 16.2,2 S is Lindelöf and, by Theorem
16.6,3 S is normal.
If we can show that there exists
a function which embeds S into
the metrizable product space, n∈N [0, 1], then S can be viewed as a
subspace of a metric space and so must be metrizable.
Since S is second countable there is a countable base, B = {Bi :
i ∈ N} of open sets in S. We define the countably infinite set
A = {(U, V ) : U, V ∈ B, clS U ⊆ V }
in B × B.
Since S is normal, for each pair (U, V ), there is a continuous
function f(U,V ) : S → [0, 1] such that
f(U,V ) [clS U ] = {0}

f(U,V ) [S \V ] = {1}
Let F = {f(U,V ) : (U, V ) ∈ A }.

Claim: We claim that F separates points and closed sets.
Proof of claim: Let F be a closed subset of S and x ∈ S \F . We
can choose V ∈ B such that x ∈ V ⊆ S \F and choose U ∈ B such
that x ∈ clS U ⊂ V . Then (U, V ) ∈ A . Let f(U,V ) be the member of
F which corresponds to this choice of (U, V ) where x ∈ Z(f ) and
F ⊆ S \V ⊆ Z(f − 1). So, F separates the point x and the closed
subset F of S. This establishes the claimed.
2
Which states that second countable spaces are Lindelöf.
3
Which states that regular Lindelöf spaces are normal.
Then, by the Embedding Theorem I, 7.17, the evaluation map,

eF , embeds a homeomorphic copy of S in the metrizable space,
n∈N [0, 1].
It follows that S is metrizable.
Corollary 31.4 Let S be a T1 -space. The following statements are

equivalent.
(1) The space S is regular and second countable.
(2) The space S is homeomorphically embedded in [0, 1]N .
(3) The space S is both metrizable and separable.
Proof. We are given that S be a T1 -space.
(1) ⇒ (2) That a regular and second countable space is embedded
in [0, 1]N is proven in the theorem immediately above.
(2) ⇒ (3) We are given that S is embedded in [0, 1]N . In Lemma
31.1, we proved that [0, 1]N is metrizable. Since [0, 1] is
second countable (example on page 103), so is [0, 1]N (7.9).
Since S is embedded in [0, 1]N , S is second countable. By
Theorem 5.10, S is separable. So, S is both metrizable and
separable.
(3) ⇒ (1) Suppose S is metrizable and separable. Metrizable spaces
are normal (9.19) and so are regular. A metric space which
is separable is second countable (5.11). So, S is regular and
second countable.
So, all second countable regular spaces are separable metrizable

spaces.
31.3 The Nagata–Smirnov Metrization Theorem
The statement in the following theorem involves a collection of sub-

sets referred to as being a “locally finite collection”.
Definition 31.5 A locally finite collection, C , of subsets of a topo-

Metrizability 683
The collection of sets, D is said to be σ-locally finite if and only

if D is the countable union of locally finite families of locally finite
sets.
The collection of sets, A is said to be a discrete family of sets is
one for which every point in S has at least one neighborhood which
meets at most one elements of A .
In Lemma 6.16, we show that it satisfies the interesting property:
If C is locally finite, clS [∪C ] = ∪{clS C : C ∈ C } (*)
That is, if p is an accumulation point of ∪C it is an accumulation

point of some set in C . The statement, (*), is invoked in the proof
of the statements below.
In the following statements we prove two interesting properties of
those regular spaces which have a σ-locally finite base.
— In the first lemma, we show that, if a regular space S has a

σ-locally finite base, then every non-empty open subset of S is
the countable union of open subsets which is also a countable
union of the closures of these same subsets.
— In the second lemma, we show that, if a regular space S has a
σ-locally finite base, then it is a normal space.
Lemma 31.6 Suppose the space S is regular and has a σ-locally

finite base. That is, S has a base, B = ∪n∈N Bn , where each Bn is
locally finite. Let W be an open subset of S. Then
W = ∪{UnW : n ∈ N} = ∪{clS UnW : n ∈ N}
where each UnW is open in S.
Proof. Let B = ∪n∈N Bn be a σ-locally finite base of the regular

space S and W be some non-empty open subset in S. Let
UW = {B ∈ B : B ⊆ clS B ⊆ W }
Each B in UW belongs to Bn , for some n.

For each m, we define,

UmW = {B ∈ UW : B ∈ Bm }
= UW ∩ B m
For each m ∈ N, we define the subset, UmW , as
UmW = ∪{B : B ∈ UmW = UW ∩ Bm }
We first claim that W ⊆ ∪{clS UnW : n ∈ N}.
Proof of claim: For any q ∈ W , regularity of S guarantees that
there is a B ∈ B such that q ∈ B ⊆ clS B ⊆ W . So B ∈ UW . Then
q ∈ B ∈ UW ∩ Bm for some m.
So there is an m such that q ∈ UmW . Therefore W ⊆ ∪
{UnW : n ∈ N}. Since UnW ⊆ clS UnW for each n, W ⊆ ∪{clS UnW
: n ∈ N}, as claimed.
It now suffices to show ∪{clS UnW : n ∈ N} ⊆ W . This is the part
of proof where the locally finite property is involved.
For each n ∈ N
clS UnW = clS [∪{B : B ∈ UnW }]
= ∪{clS B : B ∈ UnW }
(Each UnW is locally finite and (*) above)
⊆W (Since clS Bx ⊆ W )
So, ∪{clS UnW : n ∈ N} ⊆ W .
We conclude that if S is regular, has a σ-locally finite base,
B = ∪{Bn : n ∈ N}, and W is open in S then
W = ∪{UnW : n ∈ N} = ∪{clS UnW : n ∈ N} (∗∗)
where each UnW is the union of open sets in B. This completes the
proof of the lemma.
Note: An easy (and interesting) consequence of the result (∗∗) is the

following fact:
If S is regular with a σ-locally finite base then every
closed subset of S is a Gδ .
To see this, consider a closed subset, F , of S.
Metrizability 685
Then, by (∗∗), S \F = ∪{clS UnS\F : n ∈ N} a countable union of

closed sets. Then F = ∩{S \clS UnS\F : n ∈ N}, a countable intersec-
tion of open sets, a Gδ .
Lemma 31.7 A regular space S which has a σ-locally finite base is

a normal space.
Proof. We are given that S is regular and has a σ-locally finite

base, B. That is,
B = ∪n∈N\{0} Bn
where each Bn is locally finite.

Suppose A and K are disjoint non-empty closed subsets. To show
that S is normal it suffices to show that A and K are respectively
contained in disjoint open subsets of S.
Since S is regular and has a σ-locally finite base, by Lemma 31.6
S \K = ∪{UnS\K : n ∈ N} = ∪{clS UnS\K : n ∈ N} (†)

S \A = ∪{VnS\A : n ∈ N} = ∪{clS VnS\A : n ∈ N} (††)
Where UnS\K = ∪{B : B ∈ US\K ∩ Bn } and VnS\A = ∪{B : B ∈

US\A ∩ Bn }.
Let
U = ∪{UnS\K : n ∈ N}
V = ∪{VnS\A : n ∈ N}
Then
K⊆V
A⊆U
Now, U and V are open neighborhoods of A and K, but they may

not be disjoint.
For each n, we replace UnS\K and VnS\A with Un∗S\K and Vn∗S\A
defined as follows:
Un∗S\K = UnS\K \∪{clS ViS\A : i ≤ n}

Vn∗S\A = VnS\A \∪{clS UiS\K : i ≤ n}
If
x∈A ⇒ x ∈ S \K
⇒ x ∈ UmS\K , for some m (By (†))
x∈A ⇒ x ∈ S \A
⇒ x ∈ clS VnS\A , for all n (By (††))
so
x∈A ⇒ x ∈ Un∗S\K
Similarly, x ∈ K ⇒ x ∈ Vn∗S\A .
Then, for each n,
A ⊆ Un∗S\K
K ⊆ Vn∗S\A
Let
U ∗ = ∪{Un∗S\K : n ∈ N}
V ∗ = ∪{Vn∗S\A : n ∈ N}
Clearly, U ∗ and V ∗ are both open and neighborhoods of A and K,

respectively.
We claim that U ∗ ∩ V ∗ = ∅. If so, S is normal, as required.
Proof of claim: Suppose x ∈ U ∗ ∩ V ∗ . Then x ∈ Uj∗S\K ∩ Vk∗S\A for
some j and k.
That is,

x ∈ UjS\K \∪{clS ViS\A : i ≤ j} ∩ VkS\A \∪{clS UiS\K : i ≤ k} (∗)
Suppose without loss of generality that j ≤ k.

Metrizability 687
From (∗), x ∈ UjS\K ∩ S \∪{clS UiS\K : i ≤ k}.4

So, x ∈ UjS\K but x ∈ clS UjS\K , a contradiction.
Then U ∗ ∩ V ∗ = ∅ as claimed. So, S is normal.
Theorem 31.8 A regular space S with a σ-locally finite topology is

metrizable.
Proof. We are given that S is regular and has a σ-locally finite
base, B. That is,
B = ∪n∈N\{0} Bn
where each Bn is locally finite. Then, by the previous lemma,

S is normal. To prove metrizability of S it will suffice to produce
a continuous function which embeds S into a metric space.
If U ∈ B, the expression “mU ” declares that the base element
U belongs to Bm . For example, the label 2U refers to the base ele-
ment U which belongs to B2 .
Normality of S guarantees that, if mB ∈ B, there exists contin-
uous “separating” function denoted as “fmB ” mapping S into [0, 1]
such that, for a point u ∈ B
fmB [S \B] = {0} and fmB (u) = qm ∈ (0, 1/m) (†)
More generally, we can construct a family of continuous functions
F = {fnB : n ∈ N\{0}, B ∈ B}
where
fnB [B] ⊆ (0, 1/n)

fnB (x) = 0, if x ∈ B
We claim that F separates points and closed subsets of S.

To see this, let K be a closed subset of S and z ∈ S \K. Since B
is an open base for S, then there exits Bm ∈ B such that z ∈ Bm ⊆
S\K. Then there is fmB ∈ F such that fmB (z) = qz ∈ (0, 1/m) and
4
A\B ∩ C \D = A ∩ C ∩ S \B ∩ S \D.
fmB [S \Bm ] = {0}. So, F separates points and closed subsets of S,

as claimed.
See that eF is a one-to-one mapping: Let J = {nB : n ∈ N \
{0}, B ∈ Bn }. If j ∈ J, let [0, j]j denote the range of fj .
Let

T = j∈J [0, 1]j = [0, 1]J
Since F separates points and closed sets, then the evaluation map,
eF : S → T , defined as
eF (x) = fj (x)j∈J

is a one-to-one function mapping S into T = j∈J [0, 1]j . (Argue as
in 7.17).
To prove continuity of eF , we will use the topology on S which
is generated by B. Rather than use the product topology for T we
will choose the uniform topology induced by the uniform metric (see
Example 3 on page 151):
ρ(< xj >j∈J , < aj >j∈J ) = sup {|xj − aj |}

j∈J
where, in this particular case,
ρ(eF (x), eF (a)) = ρ(< fj (x) >j∈J , < fj (a) >j∈J )

= sup {|fj (x) − fj (a)|}
j∈J
Then T can be viewed as a metric space with metric, ρ.

Claim: We claim that the function eF : S → j∈J [0, 1]j , where

j∈J [0, 1]j is equipped with the uniform metric, is a continuous
function.
Proof of claim: Let ε > 0 and a ∈ S.
To show that eF is continuous at a, it suffices to find an open
neighborhood V (a) in S such that x ∈ V (a) implies
ρ(eF (x), eF (a)) = sup {|fnB (x) − fnB (a)|} < ε

nB ∈J
Let N ∈ N, such that 1/N ≤ ε/2.

Metrizability 689
Since BN is locally finite, there exists an S-open neighborhood,

UN (a), of a such that UN (a) intersects at most finitely many base
elements, say EN = {Bi : i = 1 to m} in BN .
Then,
B∈E ⇒ fNB [UN (a)] = {0} (Since B ∩ UN (a) = ∅)

B∈E ⇒ fNB [UN (a) ∩ B] ⊆ (0, 1/N ) (By †)
Since fNB : S → [0, 1] is continuous, there exists an open neighbor-

hood, VN (a) ⊆ UN (a), such that,
x ∈ VN (a) implies |fNB (x) − fNB (a)| ≤ min {1/N, ε/2}
is satisfied.
(a) For each of the values of i, i = 1, 2, . . . , N −1 and a ∈ S we repeat
the procedure to prove the existence of {V1 (a), V2 (a), . . . , VN −1 (a)}.
For Vi (a) ⊆ Ui (a),
x ∈ Vi (a) implies |fiB (x) − fiB (a)| ≤ min {1/i, ε/2} ≤ ε/2 < ε
Let
V (a) = V1 (a) ∩ V2 (a) ∩ · · · ∩ VN (a)
Then, for i ≤ N ,
x ∈ V (a) implies |fiB (x) − fiB (a)| ≤ min {1/i, ε/2} < ε (††)
Then,
x ∈ V (a) ⇒ sup |fiB (x) − fiB (a)| < ε (∗∗)

{iB : i ≤ N }
(B) For values of i such that i > N let Vi (a) = V (a)
x ∈ V (a) ⇒ |fiB (x) − fiB (a)|

≤ min {1/i, ε/2} < min {1/N, ε/2} ≤ ε/2 < ε († † †)
Then,
x ∈ V (a) ⇒ sup |fiB (x) − fiB (a)| < ε (∗∗∗)

{iB : i ≥ N }
Combining (∗∗) and (∗∗∗) we conclude that for a ∈ S,

x ∈ V (a) ⇒ ρ(eF (x), eF (a)) = sup |fnB (x) − fnB (a)| < ε
nB ∈J
So, eF is continuous at a ∈ S. Since a is arbitrary, eF : S → T is

continuous on S, as claimed.
We now show that

eF (x) = fj (x)j∈J ∈ T = j∈J [0, 1]j
is an open function.
Let U be a non-empty open subset of S with the point u ∈ U .
Then F = S \U is closed in S. Since F separates points and closed
sets, there exists k ∈ J such that fk (u) ∈ cl[0,1] fk [F ]. Then fk (u) ∈

[0, 1]\ cl[0,1] fk [F ] .
We now show that eF [U ] is open in j∈J [0, 1]j .
Note that,
(πk ◦ eF )(u) = πk (eF (u))
= πk ( fj (u)j∈J )
= fk (u)

∈ [0, 1]\ cl[0,1] fk [F ]

Since eF (u) ∈ πk← [0, 1]\ cl[0,1] fk [F ] and since πk is continuous,

then πk← [0, 1]\ cl[0,1] fk [F ] is an open neighborhood of eF (u) in

j∈J [0, 1]. It now suffices to show that

πk← [0, 1]\ cl[0,1] fk [F ] ⊆ eF [U ]

Suppose eF (a) ∈ πk← [0, 1]\ cl[0,1] fk [F ] .

eF (a) ∈ πk← [0, 1]\ cl[0,1] fk [F ]

⇒ (πk ◦ eF )(a) ∈ πk πk← [0, 1]\cl [0,1] fk [F ]

⇒ fk (a) ∈ [0, 1]\cl [0,1] fk [F ]
⇒ fk (a) ∈ cl[0,1] fk [F ]
⇒ a ∈ S \ F = S \(S \U ) = U
⇒ eF (a) ∈ eF [U ]
Metrizability 691

So, πk← [0, 1]\ cl[0,1] fk [F ] is an open neighborhood of eF (u)
which
is entirely contained in e[U ]. We conclude eF [U ] is open in
j∈J [0, 1].
So, eF embeds S into the metric space, T .
So, S is metrizable.
In the following theorem, we invoke a result (19.8) previously

proven in the chapter on paracompactness. It states:
If S is metrizable space and U is an open cover of S then

there is an open cover, E , which both refines U and is
σ-locally finite.
Recall that a collection of sets, E , refines a collection of sets, U , if

every element of E is contained in some element of U .
Theorem 31.9 The Nagata–Smirnov metrization theorem.5 The

space S is metrizable if and only if S is regular and has a σ-locally
compact base of open sets.
Proof. Let S be a topological space.

(⇐) The proof that regular spaces which have a σ-locally compact
base of open sets are metrizable is presented in Theorem 31.8.
(⇒) Suppose S is metrizable. Then there exists a metric, ρ, such that
(S, ρ) is equivalent to S. Since metric spaces are regular, so is S. We
are simply required to find a σ-locally finite basis for S.
To do this, we will construct an open cover of S which will allow us
to invoke Lemma 19.8 (cited above) to arrive at the required result.
For n ∈ N, let Un = {B1/n (x) : x ∈ S}; it is, clearly, an open cover
of S. Then, by Lemma 19.8, there is a σ-locally finite cover, En , of S
which refines Un .
5
Jun-iti Nagata (1925–2007) was a Japanese mathematician specializing in
topology. Yuri Mikhailovich Smirnov (b. 1921, Kaluga, d. 2007, Moscow) was
a Soviet and Russian mathematician, specializing in topology. This theorem was
proved independently by Nagata in 1950 and Smirnov in 1951.
Let E = ∪{En : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .} be a σ-locally finite cover of S

which refines U = ∪{Un : n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}. We claim that E is a base
for S. Suppose a ∈ S and Bε (a) is an open ε-ball centered at a with
respect to ρ. Then there exists k ∈ N, such that 1/k < ε/2. Now, Bk
covers S so there is B ∈ Bk such that a ∈ B. The diameter of B is
less than (1/k)/2 < ε/2. So, B ⊆ Bε (a). Then E is a base for S as
claimed. Then E is a σ-locally finite base for S, as required.
Chapter 32
The Stone Space
Abstract
In this section, we discuss those partially ordered sets called lattices and
Boolean algebras along with some of their properties. Given a Boolean
algebra, B, we construct the set, S (B), of all ultrafilters on B and topol-
ogize it. We call the resulting topological space, (S (B), τ ), the Stone
space. We show that the Stone space, (S (B), τ ), is a compact, zero-
dimensional Hausdorff space. We then show that any Boolean algebra,
B, is isomorphic to B(S (B)), the set of all clopen subsets of (S (B), τ ).
32.1 The Lattice of a Partially Ordered Set
The main objective of this chapter is to derive a topological represen-

tation of a Boolean algebra. Since we would like to make this chapter
as self-contained as possible, we will begin by working our way from
the topic of partially ordered sets, to lattices, complete lattices, lat-
tice filters and ultrafilters and finally to Boolean algebras. Along the
way we will gather useful tools which will allow us to prove the main
results of this chapter.
Given a partially ordered set (P, ≤) there may be pairs of elements
a, b in P whose least upper bound or greatest lower bound does not
belong to P . This section will involve partially ordered sets in which
every pair of elements in P have lower and upper bounds contained
in P (with respect to ≤). We refer to this type of set as a lattice
of the partially ordered set. We discussed the notion of a lattice
of a partially ordered set before, on page 671. For convenience, and,
693
hopefully, to render this section a bit more “self-contained” we review

the basics of these notions here.
Definition 32.1 A partially ordered set (P, ≤) is called a lattice if,

for all pairs a, b in P , a ∨ b = lub{a, b} and a ∧ b = glb{a, b} (with
respect to the partial order, ≤) both exist in P . The lattice derived
from (P, ≤) is denoted as
(P, ≤, ∧, ∨)
The binary relation “∧” is often expressed as “meet” and “∨” as
“join”.
Definition 32.2 If B is a non-empty subset of the lattice (P, ≤

, ∧, ∨), then
∨B = lub{B}
∧B = glb{B}
both with respect to ≤.
Note that ∨B and ∧B may or may not be an element of P . A lattice
(P, ≤, ∧, ∨) is said to be a
complete lattice
if for any non-empty subset B of P , both ∨B and ∧B exist as ele-
ments of P .
Example 1. Let S be a set and (P(S), ⊆) be a partially ordered

set ordered by inclusion. Let A and B be any pair of subsets of S
(read, A, B ∈ P(S)). We define A ∨ B = A ∪ B and A ∧ B = A ∩ B.
For U ⊆ P(S), ∨U = ∪{A ∈ P(S) : A ∈ U } (read, “∨U is the
union of all subsets, A, of S such that A ∈ U ”) is an element of
P(S). Also define ∧U = ∩{A ∈ P(S) : A ∈ U } (read, “∧U is the
intersection of all subsets, A, of S such that A ∈ U ”) is an element
of P(S). In this case, with ∨ and ∧ defined as ∪ and ∩, respectively,
(P(S), ⊆, ∪, ∩)
is a complete lattice.
The Stone Space 695
Example 2. We are given a topological space (S, τ ).

(a) Then
(τ, ⊆, ∩, ∪)
is a lattice of sets since it is closed under finite intersections and

unions. But, since infinite ∩{U : U ∈ F ⊆ τ } need not be open,
it is not a complete lattice.
(b) If ϕ denotes the set of all closed subsets of S then
(ϕ, ⊆, ∩, ∪)
is a lattice, but not a complete lattice (since infinite collections of

open subsets need not have an intersection which is an element
of τ ).
(c) If Z[S] denotes the set of all zero-sets in S then
(Z[S], ⊆, ∩, ∪)
is a lattice, but not a complete lattice.1

Example 3. Let (S, τ ) be a topological space. We partially order
the elements of τ with “⊆”. If A and B are both members of τ , we
define ∨ and ∧ as,
A∨B =A∪B
A ∧ B = intS (A ∩ B)
Also, if ψ ⊆ τ ,
∨ψ = ∪{A ∈ P(S) : A ∈ ψ} ∈ τ
∧ψ = intS (∩{A ∈ P(S) : A ∈ ψ}) ∈ τ
1
For example, suppose R is equipped with the discrete topology and R ∪ {ω} is
its one-point compactification. To verify that arbitrary intersections of zero-sets
in Z[R ∪ {ω}] need not be a zero-set in Z[R ∪ {ω}], suppose F = {0, ω}. For any
open neighborhood U of F , R\U must be compact and so finite. So, F cannot be
a Gδ and so could not be a zero-set. For each x ∈ R\{0}, let Ux = (R ∪ {ω})\{x}.
Then each Ux is a zero-set in R ∪ {ω}. Then ∩{Ux : x ∈ F } = F . Then F is a the
intersection of zero-sets but not itself a zero-set.
In this case, if A, B ∈ τ , A∨B = A∪B ∈ τ and A∧B = intS (A∩B) =

A ∩ B ∈ τ . So, (τ, ⊆, ∨, ∧) is a lattice. Then
(τ, ⊆, ∨, ∧)
(with ∧ and ∨ as defined above) is a complete lattice.

Example 4. Let S be a topological space. Let
B(S) = {A ⊆ S : A is clopen in S}2
partially ordered by inclusion, ⊆. If A and B are clopen subsets of S

we define A ∨ B = A ∪ B and A ∧ B = A ∩ B. Then (B(S), ⊆, ∪, ∩) is
a lattice in (P(S), ⊆). But it need not necessarily be complete (since
arbitrary unions of clopen sets as well as arbitrary intersections of
clopen sets need not be clopen).
Example 5. Let (B, ≤) be a partially ordered set and (B, ≤, ∨, ∧)
be an associated lattice. Suppose that B has a least element, say
L. That is, L ≤ B for all B ∈ B. Suppose that, ∨M ∈ B for all
non-empty subsets M of B.
Show that ∧M must then also belong to B for all non-empty
subsets M of B.
Solution: We are given that (B, ≤) is a partially ordered set
which has a least element L. We are also given that ∨M ∈ B
for all non-empty M ⊆ B.
Let M ⊆ B where M = ∅. We are required to show that
∧M ∈ B.
Let
N = {N ∈ B : N ≤ M for all M ∈ M }
Since L ∈ B and L ≤ M for all M ∈ M , then L ∈ N . So, N = ∅.

Since N = ∅, then, by hypothesis, ∨N exists in B.
For N ∈ N , N ≤ M for all M ∈ M ; so M ≥ N for all M ∈ M .
This means N is a lower bound of M . This holds true for each
N ∈ N . Then the lubN = ∨N is a lower bound of M . Then
∨N ≤ glbM = ∧M
2
A set is clopen if it is simultaneously open and closed in S.
The Stone Space 697
We claim that ∨N = glbM . For suppose A is a lower bound of M .

That is, suppose A ≤ M for all M ∈ M . Then A ∈ N . This implies
A ≤ ∨N . So, ∨N is a lower bound of M which greater than or
equal to the lower bound A. Then ∨N is the greatest lower bound
of M . So, ∨N = ∧M , as claimed.
By hypothesis, ∨N ∈ B so ∧M ∈ B, as required.
32.2 Regular Open Sets Revisited
We revisit the notion of regular open sets in order to provide a more

intricate example of a complete lattice. For convenience, we restate
the definition of “regular open set” previously discussed on page 81.
Definition 32.3 Let S be a topological space. An open subset, B,

of S is said to be regular open in S if
B = intS (clS (B))
The set of all regular open subsets of S will be denoted as Ro(S).
See that (Ro(S), ⊆) is a partially ordered subset of (τ, ⊆).

For example, B = (−5, 0) ∪ (0, 5) is open in R but not regular
open in R (since intS (clS B) = (−5, 5) = B).
Observation. If B is an open subset of S it is always the case that
B ⊆ intS clS B ⊆ clS B (∗)
since B ⊆ clS B implies B = intS B ⊆ intS clS B.
Example 6. Show that for any subset B of S, intS clS B ∈ Ro(S).
Solution: Note that, for any set B in S, since intS clS B is open in
S, intS clS B ⊆ intS clS (intS clS B) (since intS clS B is open in S and by
(∗)). Also
intS clS (intS clS B) ⊆ intS clS (clS B)

= intS clS B
implies
intS clS B = intS clS (intS clS B)
so, for any B,
intS clS B ∈ Ro(S)
The set Ro(S) is then the set of all open subsets B of S which can
be expressed in the form B = intS clS B.
When the elements of a set are subsets of a certain type, partially
ordered by “⊆”, it does not automatically follow that ∨ and ∧ rep-
resent ∪ and ∩, respectively. Consider the following statement which
verifies that (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∧) forms a complete lattice in τ .
Theorem 32.4 Let (S, τ ) be a topological space and (Ro(S), ⊆)

represent the family of all regular open sets in S partially ordered by
inclusion, ⊆. Suppose that, for A, B ∈ Ro(S) and M ⊆ Ro(S),
A∧B =A∩B
∨M = intS clS (∪M )
Then (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∧) is a complete lattice in (τ, ⊆).
Proof. Given S be a topological space.

Suppose A and B belong to Ro(S).
Step 1: We claim that A ∧ B = A ∩ B ∈ Ro(S).

By definition of Ro(S), A = intS clS A and B = intS clS B.
Since A and B are open, then so is A ∧ B = A ∩ B. Then
The Stone Space 699
A ∧ B ⊆ intS clS (A ∧ B). Also,

intS clS (A ∧ B) = intS clS (A ∩ B)
⊆ intS (clS A ∩ clS B) By Theorem 4.6
= intS clS A ∩ intS clS B
=A∩B
=A∧B
Therefore, intS clS (A ∧ B) ⊆ A ∧ B. We conclude that
A ∧ B = intS clS (A ∧ B) (∗)
So, A ∧ B is a regular open set.
Step 2: Let M ⊆ Ro(S) where M is non-empty. That is M =
intS clS M for all M ∈ M . We claim that ∨M = intS clS (∨M ). If so
then ∨M is regular open.
Proof of claim: Since ∨M = intS clS (∪M ), ∨M is open in S. So,
∨M ⊆ intS clS (∨M )
Also,
intS clS (∨M ) = intS clS [intS clS (∪M ]
⊆ intS clS [clS (∪M )]
= intS clS (∪M )
= ∨M
So, intS clS (∨M ) ⊆ ∨M .
We conclude that ∨M = intS clS (∨M ), as claimed.
We now claim that ∧M = intS clS (∧M ).
First note that Ro(S) has a smallest element: Since intS clS ∅ =
intS ∅ = ∅ and ∅ ⊆ U for all U ∈ Ro(S), then ∅ is the smallest
regular open set with respect to ⊆.
We have shown in Example 4 above that for any lattice, (B, ≤,
∨, ∧), which has a least element and ∨M ∈ B (for all non-empty
M ⊆ B) then ∧M ∈ B for all non-empty M ⊆ B. The lat-
tice (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∧) satisfies precisely these conditions. So, ∧M =
intS clS (∧M ), as claimed.
Then ∧M ∈ Ro(S) for all non-empty M ⊆ Ro(S).

We conclude that (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∧) is a complete lattice.
32.2.1 The set Ro(S) is an open base for some

topology on S
Given a topological space, (S, τ ), by definition, ∅ and S belong to
Ro(S). On page 81, we showed that
Ro(S) is closed under finite intersections
Then, if x ∈ S and x ∈ A ∩ B where {A, B} ⊆ Ro(S), since

A ∩ B ∈ Ro(S), then Ro(S) satisfies the “base property”. Then,
by Theorem 5.4,
Ro(S) is an open base for some topology on S
32.2.2 Some notation involved in the space generated

by regular open sets
We will denote the topology generated by Ro(S) by
τs
So, given any topological space (S, τ ) we can construct by using

Ro(S), the topological space
(S, τs )
Note that τs is strictly weaker than τ (since there are open sets which
are not regular open). So, (S, τ ) may differ from (S, τs ).
32.2.3 If (S, τ ) is Hausdorff then so is (S, τs )

We claim that if (S, τ ) is Hausdorff then so is (S, τs ). If (S, τ ) is
Hausdorff, τ separates points of S. Then, for x, y ∈ S, there exists
disjoint U, V ∈ τ containing x and y, respectively. Then x, y belong
to intS clS (U ) and intS clS (V ), respectively (since U ⊆ intS clS (U ) and
V ⊆ intS clS (V )).
The Stone Space 701
Suppose A = intS clS U ∩ intS clS V . See that clS U ∩ V = ∅ so

intS clS U ∩ V = ∅. Since intS clS U ∩ V = ∅ and intS clS V ⊆ clS V ,
A ⊆ clS V \V . Then the open subset A must be empty. So, if U and
V separates x and y then so do the open base elements intS clS (U )
and intS clS (V ) of τs . So, (S, τs ) is Hausdorff, as claimed.
So,
If (S, τ ) is Hausdorff then (S, τs ) is Hausdorff
32.2.4 Sublattices
Note that every element of (B(S), ⊆, ∩, ∪) (the clopen subsets of S)
is an element of (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∧). We say that (B(S), ⊆, ∩, ∪) is a
sublattice
of Ro(S).
The lattice (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∧) cannot be viewed as a “sublattice” of
(P(S), ⊆, ∩, ∪) since A ∨ B = intS clS (A ∪ B) = A ∪ B.
32.3 Filters and Ultrafilters in a Lattice of Sets
Suppose S is a set and the family, P(S), of all subsets of S is par-

tially ordered by inclusion “⊆”. In what follows the set, L, denotes
a particular subset of P(S) which is partially ordered by “⊆” and
which contains both ∅ and S.
The definition of “lattice filter” is analogous to the one of “filter
of sets”.
Definition 32.5 Let (L ⊆, ∨, ∧) be a lattice of sets and F ⊆ L.

The subfamily F of L is called an L-filter base if it satisfies the two
conditions,
(1) F is non-empty,
(2) F is such that, for non-empty A, B ∈ F there exists D = ∅ in
F such that D ⊆ A ∧ B ∈ F .
If an L-filter base F also satisfies the condition,
If A ∈ F and A ⊆ C for some C ∈ L then C ∈ F
then we say that F is an L-filter. Given an L-filter base, F , it can

always generate an L-filter which we will denote as, F ∗ . The lattice
L is itself an L-filter. A filter, F , is said to be a proper L-filter if
F = L. Note that F is a proper L-filter if and only if ∅ ∈ F .3
Definition 32.6 Let (L, ⊆, ∨, ∧) be a lattice of sets in P(S). An

L-ultrafilter is a proper filter F ⊆ L which is not properly contained
in any other proper filter in L. If the filter F is such that ∧{F : F ∈
F } = ∅ then we say that the filter F is a fixed L-ultrafilter. Those
L-ultrafilters which are not fixed are said to be free L-ultrafilters.
Example 7. Given a topological space (S, τ ) the family of all zero-

sets, (Z[S], ⊆, ∩, ∪) forms a lattice of sets contained in P(S). It
contains both ∅ and S.
If F is a non-empty subset of Z[S] such that, for Z1 and Z2 in
F , Z1 ∩ Z2 = Z3 ∈ F , and whenever Z ∈ F and Z ⊆ Z ∗ for some
Z ∗ ∈ Z[S] then Z ∗ ∈ F , the collection F is a
z-filter.
The concept of z-filters has been discussed extensively in 14.10. If

we apply the notation suggested in the definition we could also say
“Z[S]-filter”.
Also, instead of saying “Z[S]-ultrafilter” we can write z-ultrafilter.
We present the following associated facts about L-ultrafilters.
Theorem 32.7 Let S be a topological space and (L, ⊆, ∨, ∧) be a

lattice in (P(S), ⊆). Suppose F is a proper L-filter.
(a) The L-filter, F , can be extended to an L-ultrafilter.

(b) The L-filter, F , is an L-ultrafilter if and only if, for every A ∈
P(S), either A ∈ F or S \A ∈ F .
3
Since if ∅ ∈ F , ∅ ⊆ F for all F ∈ L, so F = L.
The Stone Space 703
Proof.
(a) We are given that L ⊆ P(S) and F is a proper L-filter. Let
H = {M : M is a proper L-filter such that F ⊆ M }
We partially order H with ⊆. Let C be a chain in (H , ⊆). Then
∪{C : C ∈ C } is an upper bound of C with respect to ⊆. So every
chain in H has an upper bound. By Zorn’s lemma, (H , ⊆) has a
maximal element. That is, H contains a filter, F ∗ , which is not
properly contained in any other filter. Since F ∗ ∈ H , F ⊆ F ∗ .
Then F can be extended to an L-ultrafilter, as required.
(b) (⇒) We are given that F is an L-ultrafilter in L ⊆ P(S) and
that A ⊆ S. We are required to show that either A ∈ F or
S \A ∈ F .
Suppose neither A nor S \A belongs to F . Let
HA = {B ∈ L : A ∩ F ⊆ B for some F ∈ F }
We claim that HA is a proper L-filter base which contains F as a
proper subset.
Proof of claim: See that, if U ∈ F , A ∩ U ⊆ U , an element of F .
Then U ∈ HA , so F ⊆ HA .
Also, since A ∩ F ⊆ A for all F ∈ F , A ∈ HA . Then, A ∈ HA\F .
Then F is a proper subset of HA .
Suppose B, D ∈ HA . We now show that B ∧ D ∈ HA .
Then B, D ∈ L, A∩ F1 ⊆ B and A∩ F2 ⊆ D for some F1 , F2 ∈ F .
Then A ∩ (F1 ∧ F2 ) ⊆ A ∩ F1 ⊆ B and A ∩ (F1 ∧ F2 ) ⊆ A ∩ F2 ⊆ D.
Then A ∩ (F1 ∧ F2 ) ⊆ B ∩ D ⊆ glb{B, D} = B ∧ D. Since B ∧ D ∈ L,
then B ∧ D ∈ HA .
Also, see that ∅ ∈ HA . For, if it was, A ∩ F = ∅ for some F and
so F ⊆ S \A which would imply S \A ∈ F , a contradiction. So, HA
is proper.
Hence, since HA is proper, is non-empty and is closed under finite
applications of ∧, it is an L-filter base, as claimed.
Then HA will generate an L-filter HA∗ . Then F ⊂ HA∗ which
contradicts the fact that F is an L-ultrafilter.
Then the L-ultrafilter F must intersect either A or S \A.
(⇐) Conversely, for L ⊆ P(S), suppose that, for every A ⊆ S,
either A ∈ F or S \A ∈ F . We are required to show that F is an
ultrafilter. Suppose not. That is, suppose that there exists a proper
filter, H , such that F ⊂ H . Then there exists some non-empty A
such A ∈ H \F . Then S \A cannot belong to F , for, if it did, then
A ∩ (S\A) = ∅ must belong to H , contradicting the fact that H is
a proper filter. Hence, F must be an L-ultrafilter.
A word of caution: For the characterization of an L-ultrafilter

above, things will work out a bit differently in the case L = Ro(S),
as the following theorem shows.
Theorem 32.8 Let S be a topological space. We have shown that

(Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∩) is a complete lattice in (τ, ⊆). An Ro(S)-filter, F ,
is an Ro(S)-ultrafilter if and only if, for any A ∈ Ro(S), either A or
S \clS (A) belongs to F .
Proof. (⇒) Suppose F is an Ro(S)-ultrafilter and A ∈ Ro(S). Let
F ∈ F.
Case 1: If F ∩ A = ∅ then (since F is open) F ⊆ S \clS A. Since
S \clS A = intS (S \A)
= intS (S \intS clS A)
= intS clS (S \clS A)
F ⊆ S \clS A ∈ Ro(S).
Case 2: Suppose F ∩ A = ∅ for all F ∈ F . Suppose A ∈ F . Let
H = {B ∈ Ro(S) : A ∩ F ⊆ B}
Then F ⊆ H and A ∈ H \ F . As shown in the theorem above,
H is a filter base which generates a filter H ∗ in (Ro(S), ⊆). Since
F ⊂ H ∗ , this contradicts the fact that F is an Ro(S)-ultrafilter.
So, A must belong to F .
(⇐) Suppose that for any A ∈ Ro(S), either A or S\clS (A) belongs to
F . See that the filter F extends to an Ro(S)-ultrafilter F ∗ . Suppose
A ∈ F ∗ . If A ∈ F then S \clS A ∈ F ⊆ F ∗ implying that A ∩ (S \
clS A) = ∅ ∈ F ∗ , a contradiction. So A ∈ F . Then F ∗ ⊆ F which
implies that F is an Ro(S)-ultrafilter.
The Stone Space 705
It can similarly be shown that a τ -filter, F , is a τ -ultrafilter if

and only if, for any A ∈ τ , either A or S \clS (A) belongs to F .
32.4 Boolean Algebras
The definition which follows is a generalization of the notion of a

“lattice”, (P ≤, ∨, ∧), for a partially ordered set discussed earlier in
this section. We can also approach the notion of a lattice independent
of a predetermined partial ordering on a given set and then determine
a partial ordering in terms of its properties.
Definition 32.9 Let B be any non-empty set. Suppose there is

defined on B two binary operations ∧ and ∨ such that a, b ∈ B
implies a ∨ b ∈ B and a ∧ b ∈ B. Suppose ∧ and ∨ also satisfy the
properties:
(a) a = a ∨ a and a = a ∧ a (Reflexivity)

(b) a ∧ b = b ∧ a and a ∨ b = b ∨ a (Commutativity)
(c) a ∧ (b ∧ c) = (a ∧ b) ∧ c; a ∨ (b ∨ c) = (a ∨ b) ∨ c (Associativity)
A set (B, ∨, ∧) along with two such binary operations is also referred
to as a lattice.
A lattice (B, ∨, ∧) is said to be a distributive lattice if, in addi-
tion to the three properties stated above, the following property is
satisfied:
(d) ∀x, y, z ∈ B, x ∨ (y ∧ z) = (x ∨ y) ∧ (x ∨ z) and x ∧ (y ∨ z) =

(x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ z)
The lattice (B, ∨, ∧) is said to be a
complemented lattice
if it has an element we refer to as “maximal element”, denoted by 1,

and an element we refer to as “minimal element”, denoted by 0, such
that, for every x ∈ B there exists a unique x such that

x ∨ x = 1 and x ∧ x = 04
A complemented distributive lattice is referred to as being a Boolean
algebra. A Boolean algebra is denoted as
(B, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, )
Exercise: A. Suppose (B, ∨, ∧) is a set equipped with binary oper-

ations ∨ and ∧. Suppose that ∨ and ∧ are reflexive, commutative,
associative and distributive binary operations. Show that
a∧b=a ⇔ a∨b = b
Example 8. Suppose we are given a Boolean algebra, (B, ∨, ∧), as
defined above. That is, the binary operations ∨ and ∧ are reflex-
ive, commutative, associative and distributive. Suppose we define
the binary operation, ≤, on B as:
a≤b ⇔ a∧b=a ⇔ a∨b=b
Show that ≤ thus defined is a partial ordering of (B, ∨, ∧).
Solution: Reflexivity: Since a ∧ a = a and a ∨ a = a, then a ≤ a.
Antisymmetry: Suppose a ≤ b and b ≤ a. Then a ∨ b = b and
b ∨ a = a. By property in part (b) of the definition, a ∨ b = b ∨ a. So,
a = b.
Transitivity: Suppose a ≤ b and b ≤ c.
Then
b ∧ c = b, b ∨ c = c and a ∧ b = a, a ∨ b = b
So,
a ∧ c = (a ∧ b) ∧ c = a ∧ (b ∧ c) = a ∧ b = a
a ∨ c = a ∨ (b ∨ c) = (a ∨ b) ∨ c = b ∨ c = c
Since a ∧ c = a and a ∨ c = c, then a ≤ c.
4
Note that in this context and with the information given it is not meaningful
to say x = S \x.
The Stone Space 707
Hence, ≤ partially orders B. In such a case, we can write

(B, ≤, ∨, ∧)
as a partially ordered lattice.
Exercise: B. Suppose (B, ≤) is a lattice where
a≤b ⇔ a∧b=a ⇔ a∨b=b
where a ∨ b = sup {a, b} and a ∧ b = inf {a, b}. Show that ∨ and ∧
are reflexive, commutative, associative and distributive binary oper-
ations. So, B is a Boolean algebra.
32.4.1 A few properties related to complements

(a) Note that in (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ), for any y ∈ B,
0≤y ⇔ 0∨y =y ⇔ 0∧y =0
y≤1 ⇔ y∨1=1 Lra y∧1=y
(b) The expression x is to be interpreted as (x ) . Note that, since
x ∧ x = 0 = x ∧ x and x ∨ x = 1 = x ∨ x and the complement
of x and of x is unique, then
x = x
(c) Also, by definition of 0 and 1, 0 ∧ 1 = 0 and 0 ∨ 1 = 1. This
implies
0 = 1 and 1 = 0
(d) Consider z = x ∧ y and w = x ∨ y . Then
z ∨ w = (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∨ y )
= [(x ∧ y) ∨ x ] ∨ [(x ∧ y) ∨ y ]
= ( [x ∨ x ] ∧ [y ∨ x ] ) ∨ ( [x ∨ y ] ∧ [y ∨ y ] )
= ( 1 ∧ [y ∨ x ] ) ∨ ( [x ∨ y ] ∧ 1 )
= [y ∨ x ] ∨ [x ∨ y ]
= [y ∨ y ] ∨ [x ∨ x ]
=1
Similarly, z ∧ w = 0.
So,
(x ∧ y) = x ∨ y
(e) Suppose x ≤ y. Then x ∧ y = x. So, (x ∧ y) = x ∨ y = x . It

follows that y ≤ x .
Exercise: C. Show that if (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1) is a distributive lattice
with maximum and minimum elements 1 and 0 respectively then, for
every element x ∈ B, its complement, x , is unique.
Example 9. The lattices (P(S), ⊆, ∪, ∩, S, ∅, ) and (B(S), ⊆
, ∪, ∩, S, ∅, ) where
B(S) = {A ⊆ S : A is clopen in S}
are the simplest examples of Boolean algebras.

In both cases (P(S), ⊆, ∪, ∩, S, ∅, ) and (B(S), ⊆, ∪, ∩, S, ∅, )
we can say
A = S \A
32.4.2 The set (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∩) is a Boolean algebra

Recall that, for a given topological space, S, (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∩) is a
complete lattice. But is it also a Boolean algebra? It is. But this is
not at all obvious. We verify this.
To show that (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∩) is a Boolean algebra we must show
that it is (1) a complemented lattice and (2) a distributive lattice.
See that (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∩) contains 0 = ∅ and 1 = S.
We claim that the set Ro(S) is a complemented lattice: Let A ∈
Ro(S). Then A = intS clS A. See that
A ∧ (S \clS A) = A ∩ (S \clS A)
=∅
A ∨ (S \clS A) = intS clS (A ∪ (S \clS A))
= intS S
=S
So, A = S \clS A. (It is erroneous to interpret A as meaning S \A.)

The Stone Space 709
The element A belongs to Ro(S) since
S \clS A = S \clS intS clS A

= intS clS (S \clS A)
So, Ro(S) is closed under complements, as claimed.

Finally, we show that (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∩) is a distributive lattice.
Let A, B, C ∈ Ro(S).
A ∩ (B ∨ C) = intS clS A ∩ intS clS (B ∪ C)

= intS clS (A ∩ (B ∪ C))
= intS clS ( (A ∩ B) ∪ (A ∩ C) )
= (A ∩ B) ∨ (A ∩ C)
Proceed similarly to show that A ∨ (B ∩ C) = (A ∨ B) ∩ (A ∨ C).

Then (Ro(S), ⊆, ∨, ∩) is a Boolean algebra.
32.5 Boolean Filters and Ultrafilters
We are given that (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) is a Boolean algebra (a comple-

mented distributive lattice where a ≤ b ⇔ b = a∨b ⇔ a = a∧b).
Like lattices (L, ⊆, ∨, ∧), given a Boolean algebra (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ),
the set B has special subsets we call B-filters and B-ultrafilters. The
following concepts and properties are slight generalizations of ones
we have already seen, so they will seem familiar to readers.
Definition 32.10 Suppose that, for a given set, B, (B, ≤, ∨,

∧, 0, 1, ) is a Boolean algebra. Then F ⊆ B is a
B-filter base
if F is non-empty and is such that, for any x, y ∈ F , there is a

z ∈ F where z = 0 and z ≤ x ∧ y.
If F is a B-filter base which also satisfies the property,
[ x ∈ F and x ≤ y ] ⇒ y∈F
F is called a B-filter.
We say that F is a B-ultrafilter if F is a proper filter and F is

not properly contained in any other proper B-ultrafilter.
Note that a B-filter or a B-ultrafilter is a subset of the Boolean
algebra, B, and so can be seen as a particular element of P(B).
Keep in mind the fact that B-filters and B-ultrafilters are subsets
of B (not subsets of P(B)).
We will emphasize three important B-ultrafilter characterizations.
Of particular interest: For an ultrafilter F , if x is an element of B
which meets every element of F then x must belong to F . Also if
x ∈ B, either x or its complement belongs to F .
Theorem 32.11 Let F be a proper B-filter in the Boolean algebra,

(B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ). Then the following statements are equivalent.
(1) The set F is a (proper) B-ultrafilter.
(2) If a ∈ B and a ∧ y = 0 for all y ∈ F then a ∈ F .
(3) Whenever x ∨ y ∈ F , either x ∈ F or y ∈ F .
(4) For any x ∈ B, either x ∈ F or x ∈ F .
Proof. We are given that F is a B-filter in the Boolean

algebra,(B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, ).
(1 ⇒ 2) Suppose the set F is a B-ultrafilter and that a ∈ B is such
that a ∧ y = 0 for each y ∈ F . We are required to show that a ∈ F .
Let
U = {z ∈ B : z ≥ a ∧ y = 0 for some y ∈ F }
We claim that U = F .
Since z ∈ F ⇒ a ∧ z ≤ z ⇒ z ∈ U
F ⊆U
See that, since a ≥ a ∧ y for all y ∈ F , then a ∈ U .

It now suffices to show that U is a B-filter. (If so, since F is an
ultrafilter which is contained in U , F = U .)
We claim that Ua is a proper B-filter.
The Stone Space 711
See that 0 ∈ U (since if 0 ∈ U ⇒ 0 ≥ a ∧ y = 0, for y ∈ F ,

contradicting 0 ≤ z for all z ∈ B).
Suppose u, v ∈ U . There must exist b, c ∈ F such that u ≥ a ∧ b
and b ≥ a ∧ c. Then
u ∧ v ≥ (a ∧ b) ∧ (a ∧ c)
= a ∧ (b ∧ c)
implies u ∧ v ∈ U (since b ∧ c ∈ F ).
Also, u ∈ U and v ≥ u, v ≥ u ≥ a ∧ b for some b ∈ F . So v ∈ U .
We conclude that U is a proper B-filter which contains the ultra-
filter, F , as claimed.
So,
F =U
Since a ∈ U , a ∈ F , as required.
(2 ⇒ 3) Suppose that, if a ∈ B is such that a ∧ y = 0 for each y ∈ F ,
then a ∈ F . We are required to show that, whenever x ∨ y ∈ F ,
either x ∈ F or y ∈ F .
Suppose x ∨ y ∈ F . Suppose that neither x nor y belongs to F .
Then by hypothesis, x and y each miss at least one element of F .
That is, there exists a, b ∈ F such that a ∧ x = 0 and b ∧ y = 0. Since
both x ∨ y and a ∨ b belong to F , then so does (x ∨ y) ∧ (a ∨ b).
But
(x ∨ y) ∧ (a ∨ b) = (x ∧ a ∧ b) ∨ (y ∧ a ∧ b)
≤ (x ∧ a) ∨ (y ∧ b)
= 0∨0
=0
So, 0 ∈ F , contradicting that F is proper. So, either x or y ∈∈ F .
(3 ⇒ 4) Suppose that whenever x ∨ y ∈ F , either x ∈ F or y ∈ F .
Since x ∨ y = 1 ∈ F , then either x or x belongs to F .
(4 ⇒ 1) Suppose F is a B-filter such that for x ∈ B, either x or
x belongs to F . We are required to show that F is a B-ultrafilter.
Suppose U is a B-ultrafilter which contains F . It suffices to show
that F = U .
If x ∈ U then, by hypothesis, either x or x belongs to F . If

x ∈ F then x ∈ U . So x ∧ x = 0 ∈ U . This is a contradiction
(since by hypothesis U is a proper filter). Then x ∈ F . So, F = U .
Then F is a B-ultrafilter.
Definition 32.12 Suppose we are given two Boolean algebras,

(B1 , ≤1 , ∨1 , ∧1 , 0, 1, ) and (B2 , ≤2 , ∨2 , ∧2 , 0, 1, ) and a function
f which maps elements of B1 to elements of B2 . We say that
f : B1 → B2 is a Boolean algebra homomorphism if, for any x, y ∈ B,
(1) f (x ∨1 y) = f (x) ∨2 f (y)

(2) f (x ∧1 y) = f (x) ∧2 f (y)
(3) f (x ) = f (x)
The function f : B1 → B2 is a Boolean isomorphism if f is a bijection

and both f and f ← are Boolean homomorphisms.
Note. See that if f : (B1 , ≤1 , ∨1 , ∧1 , 0, 1, ) → (B2 , ≤2 ,

∨2 , ∧2 , 0, 1, ) is a Boolean homomorphism then
f (1) = f (1 ∨ 1 )
= f (1) ∨ f (1 )
= f (1) ∨ f (1)
=1
Similarly, f (0) = f (0 ∧ 0 ) = f (0) ∧ f (0) = 0.
32.6 The Set S (B) of All B-Ultrafilters on B
Given a Boolean algebra, (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1), a B-ultrafilter, U , is a

subset of B and so is an element of P(B). So the B-ultrafilter, U ,
can be seen as an element of the Boolean algebra,
(P(B), ⊆, ∪, ∩, B, ∅)
The Stone Space 713
Not every element of P(B) is a B-ultrafilter. The subset of P(B)

which is made of B-ultrafilters is denoted as
(S (B), ⊆, ∪, ∩, B, ∅)
where B is the largest B-ultrafilter and ∅ is the smallest (with respect

to the partial order ⊆).
A function ϕ : B → P(S (B)):
For each element, x, of a Boolean algebra (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ), we define
ϕx = {U ∈ S (B) : x ∈ U } ∈ P(S (B))
It represents the set of all B-ultrafilters on B which contain the

element x. Then for each x ∈ B,
ϕx ∈ P(S (B))
We define the function,
ϕ : (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1) → (P(S (B)), ⊆, ∩, ∪, S (B), ∅)
as follows:
ϕ(x) = ϕx
The largest set of all B-ultrafilters is S (B).

See that ϕ : B → P(S (B)) is a well-defined function. For sup-
pose ϕx = ϕy . Without loss of generality, suppose U ∈ ϕx and
U ∈ ϕy . Then x ∈ U and y ∈ U . So, x = y.
Theorem 32.13 The function
ϕ : (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1) → (P(S (B)), ⊆, ∩, ∪, S (B), ∅)
defined as ϕ(x) = ϕx satisfies the following four properties.

(a) If x, y ∈ B, ϕx∧y = ϕx ∩ ϕy .
(b) If x, y ∈ B, ϕx∨y = ϕx ∪ ϕy .
(c) ϕ0 = ∅ and ϕ1 = S (B).
(d) ϕx = S (B)\ϕx . We can write ϕx = ϕx .
Then the function ϕ : B → P(S (B)) is a Boolean homomorphism.
Proof.
Proof of property (a): We are given that ϕx∧y is the family of
all ultrafilters which contain x ∧ y. We claim that every ultrafilter
in ϕx∧y contains x. If so then ϕx∧y ⊆ ϕx . Let V be an ultrafilter in
ϕx∧y . We will show that V ∈ ϕx . If z ∈ V then z ∧ (x ∧ y) = 0.
Then, for any element z in V , z ∧ x = 0. Then every element
of V meets x. So, V ∈ ϕx . We conclude that ϕx∧y ⊆ ϕx , as
claimed.
By applying similar reasoning, every ultrafilter in ϕx∧y contains y.
So,
ϕx∧y ⊆ ϕx ∩ ϕy
Let V ∈ ϕx ∩ ϕy . Then V is an ultrafilter which contains x and
contains y. We claim that V ∈ ϕx∧y .
Since V is an ultrafilter which contains both x and y, then it must
contain x ∧ y. Let z ∈ V . Then z ∧ x = 0 and z ∧ y = 0. So V ∈ ϕx∧y .
Therefore ϕx ∩ ϕy ⊆ ϕx∧y , as claimed.
We conclude
ϕx∧y = ϕx ∩ ϕy
Proof of property (b): Let V ∈ ϕx∨y . Then x ∨ y ∈ V . Then x or
y belongs to V (Theorem 32.11). Suppose without loss of generality
that x ∈ V . Then V ∈ ϕx . We conclude that V ∈ ϕx ∪ ϕy . So,
ϕx∨y ⊆ ϕx ∪ ϕy .
Suppose V ∈ ϕx ∪ ϕy . Suppose without loss of generality that
V ∈ ϕx . Let z ∈ V . Then z ∧ x = 0. So, z ∧ (x ∨ y) = (z ∧ x) ∨ (z ∧ y)
cannot be 0. Then V ∈ ϕx∨y . We conclude that ϕx ∪ ϕy ⊆ ϕx∨y .
Finally ϕx ∪ ϕy = ϕx∨y .
Proof of property (c): Since B-ultrafilters are proper filters, no
ultrafilter can contain the 0-element of B; then
ϕ(0) = ϕ0 = ∅
Also, 1 belongs to all B-ultrafilters hence, ϕ(1) = ϕ1 = S (B).
Proof of property (d): See that, ∅ = ϕ0 = ϕx∧x = ϕx ∩ ϕx .
Also, S (B) = ϕ1 = ϕx∨x = ϕx ∪ ϕx . It follows that
ϕx = S (B)\ϕx = ϕx
The Stone Space 715
That ϕ : B → P(S (B)) is a Boolean homomorphism follows from

properties (a), (b), and (d).
The proof of the theorem is complete.
32.7 Topologizing S (B) to Obtain the Stone Space of B
We will now use the set,
ϕ[B] = {ϕx : x ∈ B} ⊆ P(S (B))
to topologize the set, S (B), of all B-ultrafilters.
Theorem 32.14 Let (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra. Then

the set
M = {ϕx : x ∈ B}
is an open base for some topology, τ , on the set S (B).

Proof. Let M = {ϕx : x ∈ B} ⊆ P(S (B)) where ϕx = {U ∈
S (B) : x ∈ U }. To show that M is an open base topology on
S (B) it suffices to show that M satisfies the “base property”. (See
Theorem 5.4.)
We claim that ∪M = S (B). The set ∪M is a union of sets whose
elements are B-ultrafilters. So, ∪M ⊆ S (B). If U ∈ S (B) and
x ∈ U then U ∈ ϕx ∈ ∪M . So, S (B) ⊆ ∪M . Then ∪M = S (B),
as claimed.
Since each ultrafilter in S (B) belongs to some ϕx , the elements
of M cover S (B).
Suppose ϕx and ϕy belong to M . Since B is a Boolean algebra,
then x∧y ∈ B. So, ϕx∧y ∈ M . Also see that for any B-ultrafilter, U ,
x∧y ∈U ⇔ x, y ∈ U
Then U ∈ ϕ(x ∧ y) if and only if U belongs to both ϕx and ϕy .

Then
ϕ(x ∧ y) = ϕ(x) ∩ ϕ(y)

This implies that, for any x, y ∈ B other than 0 and 1, there exists
a B-ultrafilter, U , such that
U ∈ ϕx∧y ⊆ ϕx ∩ ϕy
We conclude that M satisfies the “base property” with respect

to the set S (B). Then, by 5.4, M is an open base for a topology,
say τ , on S (B), as required.
The previous theorem states that, given a Boolean algebra (B, ≤,

∨, ∧, 0, 1, ), we can topologize, S (B), the set of all B-ultrafilters, by
using the elements of M as an open base for S (B). That is, for each
x ∈ B,
. . . the set, ϕx , is an open base element for a topology on S (B)
Notation: The topology on S (B) generated by M will be denoted

as
τM
to form the topological space
(S (B), τM )
It is also important to note that if ϕx ∈ M there is in M an element

ϕx = ϕx = S (B)\ϕx .
Since both ϕx and ϕx = ϕx are open base elements and ϕx is the
S (B)-complement of ϕx , then ϕx and ϕx are clopen in (S (B), τM ).
So,
. . . all elements ϕx of the base M are clopen sets in (S (B), τM )
Definition 32.15 Let (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra and

let S (B) = {U : U is a B-ultrafilter }. When equipped with the
topology, τM , the set
(S (B), τM )
The Stone Space 717
is referred to as the
Stone space of B.5
Recall that, if (S, τ ) is some topological space then
(B(S), ⊆, ∪, ∩, ∅, S)
represents the Boolean algebra of all clopen sets in S.

We summarize the main steps in the construction of a Stone space
of a Boolean algebra.
(1) We are given a Boolean algebra
(B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, )
(2) From (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) we form those subsets, U , of B we call

B-ultrafilters. So each B-ultrafilter, U is an element of P(B).
(3) We can construct the set, S (B), of all B-ultrafilters.
(4) For each x ∈ B, we construct the set, ϕx , of all ultrafilters in
S (B) which contain the element x. So, ϕx ∈ P(S (B)).
(5) We construct the family, M = {ϕx : x ∈ B}, a subset of
P(S (B)) which satisfies the “base property” and so forms a
base for a topology, τM on S (B).
(6) The topological space (S (B), τM ) generated by M is called the
Stone space.
(7) Every element ϕx in M is shown to be a clopen subset of
(S (B), τM ). So M ⊆ B(S (B)).
32.8 Stone’s Representation Theorem
The Stone representation theorem states that any Boolean algebra

can be represented as a Boolean algebra of all clopen subsets of some
compact zero-dimensional Hausdorff space.
5
Named after the American mathematician, Marshall Harvey Stone (April 8,
1903 to January 9, 1989). He significantly contributed to real analysis, functional
analysis, topology and the study of Boolean algebras. In 1936, he published a
long paper that included Stone’s representation theorem for Boolean algebras.
Theorem 32.16 Let (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra and
S (B) = {U : U is a B-ultrafilter on B}
For each x ∈ B, let
ϕx = {U ∈ S (B) : x ∈ U }
The function, ϕ : B → P(S (B)), is defined as ϕ(x) = ϕx (the fam-

ily of all B-ultrafilters which contain x). Let τM denote the topology
on S (B) which is generated by
M = {ϕx : x ∈ B}
where each ϕx has been shown to be clopen in S (B).

The Stone space of B space
(S (B), τM )
is a compact zero-dimensional Hausdorff topological space.6
Proof. Let (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra.

We are given that (S (B), τM ) is the topological space generated
by the open base M = {ϕx : x ∈ B}.
By definition, the topological space is zero-dimensional (since M
is an open base of clopen sets). So, we need only show that S (B) is
Hausdorff and compact.
We claim that (S (B), τM ) is Hausdorff. Let U1 and U2 be distinct
B-ultrafilters in S (B). Then there exists some x ∈ U2 which does
not belong to U1 . Then x must belong to U1 . It follows that U2 ∈ ϕx
and U1 ∈ ϕx . Since x ∧ x = 0 implies ϕx ∩ ϕx = ∅, it follows that
S (B) is a Hausdorff topological space, as claimed.
We now claim that (S (B), τM ) is a compact space.
Proof of claim: Since M = {ϕx : x ∈ B} is a base of clopen sets in
S (B), M is a base for closed sets in S (B) and so every closed set
in S (B) is the intersection of elements in M .
6
Recall that a space is zero-dimensional if it has a base of clopen sets.
The Stone Space 719
If F is a closed subset of S (B) let
TF = {x ∈ B : F ⊆ ϕx }
That is, F = ∩{ϕx : x ∈ TF }.

Suppose {Fi : i ∈ I} is a family of closed subsets of S (B) which
satisfies the finite intersection property. To show compactness it suf-
fices to show that ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} = ∅.
Then {Fi : i ∈ I} is a S (B)-filter base of closed subsets of S (B).
See that, for each i, Fi = ∩{ϕx : x ∈ TFi } and TFi = {x ∈ B :
Fi ⊆ ϕx }.
Let
T = ∪{TFi : i ∈ I}
a non-empty subset of B.
So,
∩{Fi : i ∈ I} = ∩i∈I [∩{ϕx : x ∈ TFi ]}

= ∩{ϕx : x ∈ ∪i∈I TFi }
= ∩{ϕx : x ∈ T }
We claim that T is B-filter in B.

Proof of claim: To see this, suppose a, b ∈ T . Then a ∈ TFj and
b ∈ TFk for some j, k ∈ I.
This means Fj ⊆ ϕa and Fk ⊆ ϕb . It follows that Fj ∩ Fk ⊆
ϕa ∩ ϕb = ϕa∧b . Since {Fi : i ∈ I} satisfies the finite intersection
property, then ϕa∧b = ∅. This means that that 0 < a ∧ b = 0. By
definition, T is a B-filter base.
Suppose c ∈ T and c ≤ d for some d in B. Then Fj ⊆ ϕc ⊆ ϕd
for some j. So, d ∈ TFj ⊆ T . This implies that T is a B-filter, as
claimed.
Let ψ be the unique (proper) B-ultrafilter which contains the
B-filter, T .
Since T ⊆ ψ, then
∩{ϕx : x ∈ ψ} ⊆ ∩{ϕx : x ∈ T }
= ∩{ϕx : x ∈ ∪i∈I TFi }
= ∩{Fi : i ∈ I}
Suppose a belongs to the B-ultrafilter ψ. Recall that ϕa is the set of

all B-filters that contain a. Then ψ ∈ ϕa . So,
ψ ∈ ∩{ϕx : x ∈ ψ}
We then see that ∩{ϕx : x ∈ ψ} is non-empty so ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} is
non-empty.
We have shown that, if {Fi : i ∈ I} satisfies the finite intersection
property, then ∩{Fi : i ∈ I} is non-empty. We can then conclude
that (S (B), τM ) is compact, as required.
Theorem 32.17 Let (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra and

Suppose B(S (B)) is the set of all clopen subsets of (S (B), τM ).
Then
M = B(S (B))
We are required to show that M = B(S (B)). We already know
that M ⊆ B(S (B)). So, it will suffice to show that B(S (B)) ⊆ M .
let U be a clopen subset of S (B). Then
U = ∪{ϕy : y ∈ V }
for some V ⊆ B. We claim that U ∈ M .
We have shown that S (B) is a compact Hausdorff topological
space, hence, U must be compact. Then {ϕy : y ∈ V } is an open
cover the compact set U . So there exists a finite subcover {ϕy : y =
y1 , y2 , . . . , yk } such that U = ∪{ϕy : y = y1 , y2 , . . . , yk }. Since
U = ∪{ϕy : y = y1 , y2 , . . . , yk } = ϕy1 ∨y2 ∨···∨yk ∈ M
(see properties of ϕ above). Then B(S (B)) ⊆ M . So, B(S (B)) =
M , as required.
Definition 32.18 A Boolean algebra (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) is said to

have a
topological representation
The Stone Space 721
if there exists a a topological space, S, and a Boolean isomorphism

f : B → B(S) which maps B onto the Boolean algebra, (B(S), ⊆,
∪, ∩, ∅, S), of all clopen subsets of some topological space, S.
The following theorem relates a Boolean algebra, B, to the topo-

logical space, (S (B), τM ), which is generated from B. We know that
the space, S (B), has a base of clopen sets (with respect to the topol-
ogy, τM ). From S (B) we gather together all clopen subsets of S (B)
to form the Boolean algebra,
(B(S (B)), ⊆, ∪, ∩, 0, 1)
of all clopen subsets of S (B). We show that B can be mapped

isomorphically onto B(S (B)). By definition, B(S (B)) will then
serve as a “topological representation” of B.
Theorem 32.19 The Stone representation theorem. Let (B, ≤,

∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra and
For each x ∈ B, let
ϕx = {U ∈ S (B) : x ∈ U }
The function, ϕ : B → P(S (B)), is defined as ϕ(x) = ϕx (the fam-

ily of all B-ultrafilters which contain x). Let τM denote the topology
on S (B) which is generated by
M = {ϕx : x ∈ B}
where each ϕx has been shown to be clopen in S (B).

The function ϕ : B → B(S (B)) is a Boolean isomorphism map-
ping mapping B onto B(S (B)).

We are required to show that the function ϕ : B → B(S (B)) is
a Boolean isomorphism onto B(S (B)). We have shown in the list of
properties of ϕ, that
ϕx∧y = ϕx ∩ ϕy
ϕx∨y = ϕx ∪ ϕy
ϕx = S (B)\ϕx
Since we have shown that M = B(S (B)), ϕ : B → B(S (B)) is a

homomorphism mapping B onto B(S (B)).
We now show that the function ϕ : B → B(S (B)) is one-to-one.
Suppose x and y are distinct points in B. It suffices to show that
ϕx = ϕy .
Since x = y, then one of the two statements x ≤ y, y ≤ x must
be false. We will assume, without loss of generality, that x ≤ y.
Claim: We claim that, since x ≤ y, then x ∧ y = 0.
Proof of claim: Suppose that x ≤ y and x ∧ y = 0. See that
x = x ∨ 0 ⇒ x = x ∨ (x ∧ y )
⇒ x = (x ∨ x) ∧ (x ∨ y ) (B is distributive)
⇒ x = 1 ∧ (x ∨ y )
⇒ x = (x ∨ y )
⇒ y ≤ x
⇒ x≤y
We have a contradiction. The source of the contradiction is our

supposition that x ∧ y = 0. So, x ∧ y = 0, as claimed.
Consider the collection F = {u ∈ B : x ∧ y ≤ u}. Clearly, x ∧ y ,
x, y ∈ F .
Now, F is easily seen to be a B-filter. So there exists U ∈ S (B)
such that F ⊆ U . Since x, y ∈ U , U ∈ ϕx ∩ ϕy = ϕx∧y . Then U
belongs to ϕx but cannot belong to ϕy .
So, ϕx = ϕy . So ϕ : B → B(S (B)) is one-to-one.
So, ϕ : B → B(S (B)) is an isomorphism onto B(S (B)), as
required.
Chapter 33
Baire Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we present a brief introduction to a particularly impor-
tant class of topological spaces called “Baire spaces”. The properties
possessed by members of this class turned out to be relevant in many
applied fields, in particular in analysis. We will define such spaces and
describe a few characterizations and properties. This is followed by a few
examples.
33.1 Definitions
On a first reading, the definition of the class of Baire spaces may

appear odd or of little interest and may lead the reader to wonder
whether it is worth investing mental energy in studying such prop-
erties. This first impression may change once we start investigating
characterizations and seeking examples of Baire spaces and non-Baire
spaces.
A non-empty set, A, where
intS clS A = ∅
is said to be nowhere dense. Since every point in the closure of a

nowhere dense set is a boundary point of the set, such sets are often
perceived as being “thin”. Note that arbitrary unions of “thin” sets
may not be “thin”, if we gather enough of these together.
723
For example, consider a countable set S = {x1 , x2 , x3 , . . .}

equipped with the cofinite topology. Let {F1 , F2 , F3 , . . .} be a col-
lection of subsets where Fi = {xi }. Then each Fi is closed in S (since
if x ∈ S \Fi , S \Fi is an open neighborhood of x which misses Fi ). If
x ∈ Fi any basic open set containing x cannot be entirely contained
in Fi . So, intS clS Fi = intS Fi = ∅. Then each Fi is nowhere dense in
S (. . . is“thin”). But
∪{Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} = ∪{S \{xi } : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} = S
So, ∪{Fi : i = 1, 2, 3, . . .} is not nowhere dense (“not thin”).
Definition 33.1 A topological space, S, is a Baire space (or simply

said to be Baire) if and only if, the union of any countable family,
{Fi : i ∈ N}, of closed subsets with empty interior has empty interior.
A subset U of S is said to be first category in S if U can be
expressed as a union, ∪{Ai : i ∈ N} of a countable family of nowhere
dense subsets (that is, clS Ai has empty interior).1
A subset U of S which is not of the first category in S is said to
be of the second category in S.2
When viewed in this way, a first category set may be perceived

as being the union of countably many “thin” sets.
A second category set, U , is one which, when expressed as a count-
able union, ∪{Ai : i ∈ N}, of sets, at least one Ai has a closure with
non-empty interior.
The following examples will help internalize the meaning of the
above definitions.
Example 1. Suppose S is a Baire space and U is any non-empty
open subset of S. Show that U cannot be a first category set in S.
1
The expression A is first category also appears in texts in the form of the
following equivalent definition: “The set, A, is first category in S if and only if
S\clS A is dense in S”. The set A if first category in S if and only if it is “meager”
in S.
2
A set A is non-meager in S if and only if it is a set of second category. A set
A is said to be residual if it is the complement of a meager set.
Baire Spaces 725
Solution: Suppose S is Baire and U is a first category open subset.

That is, suppose U can be expressed as the union, ∪{Ai : i ∈ N}, of
subsets where clS Ai has empty interior. Then, since S is Baire and
clS Ai = ∅ for each i, ∪{clS Ai : i ∈ N} must have empty interior. So,
intS U = U
= ∪{Ai : i ∈ N}
⊆ ∪{clS Ai : i ∈ N}
Since intS U ⊆ ∪{clS Ai : i ∈ N}, ∪{clS Ai : i ∈ N} has interior,

we have a contradiction. So every non-empty open subset of a Baire
space is second category in S.
33.2 Characterizations
The definition of a Baire space often appears in texts in different

forms. The following proposition shows that the alternate definitions
are equivalent.
Theorem 33.2 Let S be a topological space. The following state-

ments are equivalent.
(1) The space S is a Baire space.

(2) The intersection of all members of a countable family,
{Ui : i ∈ N}, of dense and open subsets of S, is a dense subset
of S.
(3) Every non-empty open subset of S is second category.

(1 ⇒ 2) Suppose S is a Baire space as defined above. Let {Ui : i ∈ N}
be a countable family of open dense subsets of S. We claim ∩{Ui :
i ∈ N} is dense in S.
For each i, S\Ui is a closed subset of S with empty interior (since
Ui is dense in S). Since S is a Baire space,
E = ∪{S \Ui : i ∈ N}
also has empty interior. So, S \E is dense in S. Then,

S \E = S \∪{S \Ui : i ∈ N}
= ∩{S \[S \Ui ] : i ∈ N}
= ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}
So, ∩{Ui : i ∈ N} is dense in S. As required.
(2 ⇐ 1) Suppose the intersection of all members of a countable
family, {Ui : i ∈ N}, of dense and open subsets of S, is a dense
subset of S. Let {Fi : i ∈ N} be a family of closed subsets of S such
that Fi has empty interior in S. Then S \Fi is a dense open subset
of S. We claim that ∪{Fi : i ∈ N} has empty interior. To show this
it suffices to show that S \[∪{Fi : i ∈ N}] is dense in S.
See that
S \[∪{Fi : i ∈ N}] = ∩{S \Fi : i ∈ N}
an intersection of countably many dense open subsets of S. By
hypothesis, ∩{S \Fi : i ∈ N} is dense in S. So, intS [∪{Fi : i ∈ N}] is
empty in S.
We can conclude that S is a Baire space.
(1 ⇒ 3) The proof is presented in the example following the defini-
tion, above.
(3 ⇒ 1) Suppose every non-empty open subset of S is second cat-
egory. This means that, if U is an open subset of S such that
U = ∪{Ai : i ∈ N}, then clS Ai has non-empty interior for at least
one i.
Let {Fi : i ∈ N} be a family of closed sets in S each with empty
interior. To show that S is Baire, it suffices to show that ∪{Fi : i ∈ N}
has empty interior.
Let us suppose that U = intS [∪{Fi : i ∈ N}] is non-empty. Since
U ⊆ ∪{Fi : i ∈ N}, U = ∪{Vi ∩ Fi : i ∈ N} for some Vi ’s. Since every
open subset of S is hypothesized to be second category, intS clS (Vj ∩
Fj ) is non-empty for some j. Since clS (Vj ∩Fj ) ⊆ Fj , then intS clS (Vj ∩
Fj ) ⊆ intS Fj . This contradicts our hypothesis stating that each Fi
has empty interior. The source of our contradiction is our supposition
that intS [∪{Fi : i ∈ N}] is non-empty. Then intS [∪{Fi : i ∈ N}] must
me empty so S is a Baire space.
Baire Spaces 727
33.3 Baire Category Theorems
At the first reading, a few questions which may come to mind are
“How common are Baire spaces?”, “Are they hard to recognize?”
Baire spaces are, in fact, quite common as we shall see. The following
results show, by describing some of their most basic characteristics,
that Baire spaces are quite common. We will then provide a few
examples.
Lemma 33.3 Suppose S is a regular space. Let F = {Fi : i ∈ N}

be a countable collection of closed subsets, each with empty interior.
Let U be any open subset of S. Then S contains a countably infinite
nested collection, U = {Ui : i ∈ N}, of non-empty open subsets
and an infinite sequence, {ui : i ∈ N} such that, for each i ∈ N
(Figure 33.1),
ui ∈ Ui ⊆ clS Ui ⊆ S \Fi and clS Ui ⊆ Ui−1 \Fi ⊆ U \Fi
Proof. We are given that S is a regular topological space and F =

{Fi : i ∈ N}, is a countably infinite collection of closed subsets each
with empty interior. Let U be any non-empty open subset of S.
Since F0 has empty interior, U ⊆ F0 , so there exists u0 ∈ U \F0 .
Since {u0 } ∩ F0 = ∅ and S is regular, there exists some open set U0 ,
Figure 33.1. For Lemma 33.3.

such that
u0 ∈ U0 ⊆ clS U0 ⊆ S \F0 and clS U0 ⊆ U \F0
Since F1 has empty interior, U0 ⊆ F1 , so there exists u1 ∈ U0 \F1 .

Since {u1 } ∩ F1 = ∅ and S is regular, there exists some open set,
U1 such that
u1 ∈ U1 ⊆ clS U1 ⊆ S \F1 and clS U1 ⊆ U0 \F1 ⊆ U \F1
We inductively construct a nested set, U = {Ui : i ∈ N}, of open

subsets, by using the recipe just described. Suppose Ui−1 is an open
subset such that
ui−1 ∈ Ui−1 ⊆ clS Ui−1 ⊆ S\Fi−1 and clS Ui−1 ⊆ Ui−2\Fi−1 ⊆ U\Fi−1
Since Fi has empty interior, Ui−1 ⊆ Fi , so there exists ui ∈ Ui \Fi

Since {ui } ∩ Fi = ∅ and S is regular, there exists some open set,
Ui such that
ui ∈ Ui ⊆ clS Ui ⊆ S \Fi and clS Ui ⊆ Ui−1 \Fi ⊆ U \Fi (∗)
Then U is a collection of open subsets of S which satisfies, for all

n ∈ N, the property described in (*). This is the property required
for the lemma.
Theorem 33.4 Suppose S is a compact Hausdorff space. Let F =

{Fi : i ∈ N} be a countable collection of closed subsets, each with
empty interior. Then ∪F has empty interior. So, S is Baire.
Proof. We are given that S is a compact Hausdorff topological
space and F = {Fi : i ∈ N}, is a countably infinite collection of
closed subsets, each with empty interior. Since S is compact Haus-
dorff, S is a normal space (14.3). Let U be any non-empty open
subset of S. To show that ∪F = ∪{Fi : i ∈ N} has empty interior it
suffices to show that U ⊆ ∪F .
By the lemma, the space S contains a countably infinite collec-
tion, U = {Ui : i ∈ N}, of non-empty open subsets and an infinite
sequence, {ui : i ∈ N} such that, for each i ∈ N,
ui ∈ Ui ⊆ clS Ui ⊆ S \Fi and clS Ui ⊆ Ui−1 \Fi ⊆ U \Fi

Baire Spaces 729
Then the collection U ∗ = {clS Ui : i ∈ N}, is a nested collection of

closed subsets such that clS Ui ⊆ Ui−1 ⊆ clS Ui−1 for all i. Since U ∗
satisfies the FIP and S is compact, then ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅. So,
there exists z ∈ ∩{clS Ui : i ∈ N} = ∅.
Since z ∈ clS Ui ⊆ U \Fi for all i ∈ N, then
z ∈ ∩{U \Fi : i ∈ N} = U \∪{Fi : i ∈ N}
Then U ⊆ ∪F . Since U is arbitrarily chosen open subset of S, then

we conclude that ∪F has empty interior. So, S is Baire.
Theorem 33.5 The Baire category theorem I. Complete metric

spaces are Baire.
Proof. We are given that S is a complete metric space, equipped
with the metric ρ. Then S is regular (example on page 225). Let
F = {Fi : i ∈ N} be a countably infinite collection of closed subsets,
each with empty interior. Since S is a metric space, S is a normal
space (9.19). Let U be any non-empty open subset of S. To show
that ∪F = ∪{Fi : i ∈ N} has empty interior it suffices to show that
U ⊆ ∪F .
By Lemma 33.3, the space S contains a countably infinite collec-
tion, U = {Ui : i ∈ N}, of non-empty open subsets and an infinite
sequence, {ui : i ∈ N} such that, for each i ∈ N,
ui ∈ Ui ⊆ clS Ui ⊆ S \Fi and clS Ui ⊆ Ui−1 \Fi ⊆ U \Fi (∗)
The set U can be constructed so that
diam(U0 ) = sup{ρ(x, y) : x, y ∈ U1 } ≤ 1
and for each i > 1,
diam(Ui ) = sup{ρ(x, y) : x, y ∈ Ui } < 1/i
while still maintaining the property described in (*).

Then the collection U ∗ = {clS Ui : i ∈ N}, is a nested collection
of closed subsets such that ui ∈ clS Ui ⊂ Ui−1 ⊆ clS Ui−1 , for all i.
Let ε > 0. We can choose N such that i > N implies
diam(clS Ui ) ≤ 1/i < ε. Since the collection U ∗ is nested, for
i, j > N , ρ(ui , uj ) < ε. Then the sequence {ui : i ∈ N} is Cauchy in

S. Since S is complete, the sequence {ui : i ∈ N} converges to some
point z in ∩U ∗ . So, ∩U ∗ is non-empty. For the reasons stated at the
end of the previous theorem, z ∈ U \∪F . So, U ⊆ ∪F . So ∪F has
empty interior. We conclude that S is a Baire space.
Theorem 33.6 The Baire Category theorem II. Locally compact

Hausdorff spaces are Baire spaces.
Proof. We are given that S is a locally compact Hausdorff space.

Then S is completely regular (by 18.8) and S is an open subset of
βS (by 21.16). Since βS is compact and Hausdorff then βS is Baire
(by 33.5).
Let F = {Fi : i ∈ N} be a countably infinite collection of closed
subsets, each with empty interior. We consider the collection F ∗ =
{clβS Fi : i ∈ N}. If U is an open subset of βS such that U ⊆ clβS Fi
then U ∩ S is an open subset of S contained in Fi contradicting
the hypothesis that Fi has empty interior in S. So, {clβS Fi : i ∈ N}
is a collection of closed subsets of βS each of which has empty
interior.
Since βS is compact Hausdorff, it is Baire. So, ∪F ∗ has empty
interior. Suppose V is an open subset (in S) of ∪F . Since S is open
in βS, V is open (in βS) contrary to the fact that ∪F ∗ has empty
interior. So, ∪F has empty interior. We conclude that S is a Baire
space.
As an example of an application of the Baire Category Theorem

we consider the following proposition.
Recall that an point, p, in a space S is called an isolated point if
{p} is open in S.
Proposition 33.7 Suppose S is a complete metric space which con-

tains no isolated points. Then S is an uncountably large set.
Proof. Let S be a complete metric space which contains no isolated

points. Suppose S is countable. By Theorem 33.5, S is Baire.
Baire Spaces 731
Suppose S = {p0 , p1 , p2 , p3 , . . .} where each pi is a point in S and

{pi } is closed in S. Note that intS {pi } = ∅, for each i. Since S is
Baire, then S = ∪{{pi } : i ∈ N} has empty interior, contradiction.
So, S is an uncountable set.
In an example presented on page 53, we showed that the set, Q, of

all rationals is an Fσ (the countable union of closed sets). We verify,
that Q is not a Gδ (the countable intersection of open sets).
Proposition 33.8 The set of all rational numbers cannot be a Gδ .

Proof. Since R is a complete metric space, R is Baire. By Theorem
33.2, the countable intersection of dense open subsets of R is dense
in R. Since Q is countable, we can also express it as Q = {xi : i ∈ N}.
Suppose Q is a Gδ . That is, suppose Q can be expressed as
Q = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N}
where each Ui is open in R. If x ∈ Ui every open neighborhood U

of x meets Q and so must intersect Ui . This implies that each Ui is
dense in R.
For each i, consider the subset Vi = Ui ∩ R \{xi }. The set Vi is
open and dense in R. See that ∩{Vi : i ∈ N} = ∅. This contradicts
the fact that R is Baire.
Then Q cannot be a Gδ .
Proposition 33.9 The open subset of a Baire space is a Baire

space.
Proof. We are given that S is a Baire space and U is open subspace
of S.
We are required to show that U is Baire.
Let F = {Fi : i ∈ N} be a countably infinite collection of closed
subsets of U , each with empty interior (in U ). It suffices to show that
∪F has empty interior (in U ).
We consider the collection
F ∗ = {clS Fi : i ∈ N}
We claim that each clS Fi has empty interior in S. If V is an open

subset of U such that V ⊆ clS Fi then V ∩ U is a non-empty open
subset of U contained in Fi contradicting the hypothesis that Fi has
empty interior in U . So, {clS Fi : i ∈ N} is a collection of closed
subsets each of which has empty interior in S, as claimed.
Since S is a Baire space, ∪F ∗ has empty interior. To show that
has ∪F empty interior in U we will suppose V is an open subset (in
U ) of ∪F . Since U is open in S, V ∩ U is open (in S) contrary to
the fact that ∪F ∗ has empty interior. So, ∪F has empty interior.
We conclude that U is a Baire space.
Example 2. Show that, if T is a Baire space and T is dense in S,

then S is a Baire space.
Solution: Suppose that T is a dense Baire subspace of a space S.
We must show that S is Baire.
Suppose F = {Fi : i ∈ N}, is a countably infinite collection of
closed subsets of S, each with empty interior (in S). We must show
that ∪F has empty interior.
We consider the collection,
F ∗ = {Fi ∩ T : i ∈ N}
of closed subsets of T .
We claim each Fi ∩ T has empty interior in T . Suppose that V ∗ is
an open subset of T such that V ∗ ⊆ Fi ∩T . Then there exists an open
subset V in S such that V ∗ = V ∩ T . Then V ∗ ⊆ intS clS V ∗ ⊆ Fi .
Since V is non-empty and T is dense in S, intS clS V ∗ ⊆ intS Fi
contradicting our hypothesis. Then each Fi ∩ T has empty interior in
T , as claimed.
Since T is a Baire space, then ∪F ∗ has empty interior.
If W is an open subset in S such that W ⊆ ∪F then W ∩ T ⊆
∪F ∗ . Since T is a Baire space, W ∩ T must be empty. Since T is
dense in S, intS ∪ F is empty. So, S is a Baire space.
Example 3. The space, Q, is not a Baire space.
Solution: Since Q is a countable set, it can be enumerated Q = {xi :
i ∈ N}. So, Q = ∪{{xi } : i ∈ N}, the countable union of sets with
Baire Spaces 733
empty interior in Q (with respect to the subspace topology). Since
intQ [∪{{xi } : i ∈ N}] = Q = ∅
Q is not a Baire space.

Example 4. Let f be a function mapping R into R which is contin-
uous on some non-empty subset of R. Let
Qf = {x ∈ R : f is continuous at x}
be the “largest subset of R on which f is continuous”. Show that Qf

is a Gδ .
Solution: We are given that f : R → R is continuous on some
non-empty subset of R. For each i ∈ N\{0}, let
Ui = ∪{f ← [B1/i (z)] : f ← [B1/i (z)] is open, for all z ∈ R}
Then, for each i ∈ N\{0}, Ui is an open subset of R.

Let
U = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N\{0}}
Then U is a Gδ set in R.
We claim that U = Qf . We first verify that U ⊆ Qf . To do this
we verify that f is continuous on U . The function f is continuous on
U if f pulls back basic open sets in R to open subsets of U (6.4).
For all z and all i ∈ N\{0}, f ← [B1/i (z)] is open in U = ∩{Ui : i ∈
N\{0}} ⊆ R. So, f is continuous on U . Then U ⊆ Qf .
Conversely, if x ∈ Qf and f (x) = z, f ← [Bi/i (z)] is open in Qf so
x ∈ f ← [Bi/i (z)] ⊆ U . Then Qf ⊆ U .
Then
Qf = U = ∩{Ui : i ∈ N\{0}}
Since U is a Gδ , the largest subset of R on which f is continuous is

a Gδ .
Example 5. Is there a function f : R → R which is continuous
precisely on Q (and discontinuous on R\Q)?
Solution: In the previous example, we showed that, given a function

f : R → R, the largest subset of R on which f is continuous
is a Gδ set. So, if f is continuous on Q (and discontinuous else-
where) the set Q is a Gδ . We showed in Proposition 33.8 that Q is
not a Gδ . Contradiction! We must then conclude that there can be
no real-valued function on R which is continuous only on Q (and
discontinuous elsewhere).
Chapter 34
The Class of F -Spaces
Abstract
In this section, we introduce the class of topological spaces called,
F -spaces. In order to better follow the contents of this chapter the reader
is encouraged to first review the contents of Chapters 21, 23, and 24.
34.1 Definition
The notion of those topological spaces, S, called F -spaces is intro-

duced in the text Rings of all Continuous Functions by Gillman and
Jerison.1 We begin by presenting the topological definition.
Definition 34.1 A completely regular topological space S is called

an F -space if every cozero-set in S is C ∗ -embedded in S.
1
In that text an F -space, S, is introduced in the form of a particular algebraic
property of the ring, C(S), of all continuous real-valued functions:
An F -space is a topological space S for which every finitely gen-
erated ideal in C(S) is a principal ideal.
We will discuss those spaces called F -spaces, strictly from a topological point of
view.
735
34.2 A Few Topological Properties and Characterizations

of F -Spaces
Recall that the “cozero-set of f ” in S, denoted by Cz(f ), is the set

S \ Z(f ) = {x ∈ S : f (x) = 0} (also denoted as coz(f )). Suppose
f ∈ C ∗ (S). See that the subsets f ← [(−∞, 0)] and f ← [(0, ∞)] (the
two subsets of S which are mapped by f to negative and positive
numbers, respectively) have the following representations
f ← [(−∞, 0)] = Cz(f ∧ 0) = {x ∈ S : f (x) < 0}

f ← [(0, ∞)] = Cz(f ∨ 0) = {x ∈ S : f (x) > 0}
Then, if f ∈ C ∗ (S), the domain of f can be partitioned into three

sets,
S = Cz(f ∧ 0) ∪ Z(f ) ∪ Cz(f ∨ 0)
Even if the two subsets of S, Cz(f ∧ 0) and Cz(f ∨ 0), are disjoint,
they need not be completely separated. If they are for all f , then
certain interesting topological properties on S will hold true.
The following properties on S, will be useful when discussing its
compactifications.
Lemma 34.2 Suppose S is a completely regular space.

(a) If, for every g ∈ C ∗ (S), Cz(g ∧ 0) and Cz(g ∨ 0) are completely
separated sets in S, then S is an F -space.
(b) If, for every g ∈ C ∗ (S), Cz(g ∧ 0) and Cz(g ∨ 0) are completely
separated sets in S, then βS is an F -space.
(c) If disjoint cozero-sets in S are completely separated then S is an
F -space.
(d) If disjoint cozero-sets in S are completely separated then βS is
an F -space.
Proof. Suppose S is a completely regular space.
(a) We are given that, for every g ∈ C ∗ (S), Cz(g ∧ 0) and Cz(g ∨ 0)
are completely separated sets.
Let H = Cz(h) be a cozero-set in S.
The Class of F -Spaces 737
Let A and B be completely separated subsets of H. To show

that H is C ∗ -embedded in S it suffices to show that A and B
are completed separated (in S) and then invoke the Urysohn
extension theorem.
There exists some function,
k : H → [−1, 1]
in C ∗ (H) such that
k[A] = {1} and k[B] = {−1}
Then
A ⊆ k← [{1}] ⊆ k← [(0, ∞)] = Cz(k ∨ 0)
B⊆ k← [{−1}] ⊆ k← [(−∞, 0)] = Cz(k ∧ 0)
With this in mind, we construct a separating function over S for
A and B. We define f : S → R as:

0 for x in S \Cz(h)
f (x) =
k(x) · |h(x)| for x in Cz(h)
Claim 1: We claim that f is continuous on S.
Proof of claim: See that S is the union of the two S-closed
subsets Z(k) ∪ Z(h) and clS Cz(k). The function f is constant on
Z(k) ∪ Z(h) and so f |Z(k)∪Z(h) is continuous.
For every sequence (net) A in Cz(k) converging to a limit point
a in clS Cz(k)\Cz(k), f [A] converges to f (a) = 0. So, f |clS Cz(k)
is continuous. Then f is continuous on S (Pasting lemma), as
claimed.
Claim 2: We claim that f completely separates A and B in S.
Proof of claim: For the given continuous function f : S → R
f [S \Cz(h)] = {0}
and
f [A] ⊆ f [k← [(0, ∞)]]
= k[k← [(0, ∞)]] · |h| [k← [(0, ∞)]
⊆ (0, ∞)
f [B] ⊆ f [k← [(−∞, 0)]]

= k[k← [(−∞, 0)]] · |h| [k← [(−∞, 0)]
⊆ (−∞, 0)
implies
A ⊆ f ← [(0, ∞)] = Cz(f ∨ 0)

B ⊆ f ← [(−∞, 0)] = Cz(f ∧ 0)
By hypothesis, Cz(f ∧ 0) and Cz(f ∨ 0) are completely separated

in S and so A and B must also be completed separated in S, as
claimed.
By Urysohn’s extension lemma, H is C ∗ -embedded in S. So,
S is an F -space, as required.
(b) Suppose that, for every g ∈ C ∗ (S), Cz(g ∧ 0) and Cz(g ∨ 0) are
completely separated sets in S. We are required to show that βS
is an F -space.
Let h ∈ C(βS). Then Cz(h ∧ 0) and Cz(h ∨ 0) are disjoint
cozero-sets in βS.
Claim: We claim that Cz(h ∧ 0) and Cz(h ∨ 0) are completely
separated in βS. If so then, by part (a), βS is an F -space.
Proof of claim: By hypothesis, Cz(h|S ∧ 0) and Cz(h|S ∨ 0) are
completely separated sets in S. Then there is some t ∈ C ∗ (S)
such that
Cz(h|S ∧ 0) ⊆ Z(t)
Cz(h|S ∨ 0) ⊆ Z(t − 1)
See that Cz(h ∧ 0) ⊆ Z(tβ ): For, if y ∈ Cz(h ∧ 0)\Z(tβ ), then

Cz(h ∧ 0)\Z(tβ ) is an open neighborhood of y contained in βS\S.
Similarly Cz(h ∨ 0) ⊆ Z(tβ − 1). So, Cz(h ∧ 0) and Cz(h ∨ 0) are
completely separated in βS, as claimed.
By part (a), βS is an F -space.
(c) Suppose disjoint cozero-sets in S are completely separated. Then,
for every g ∈ C ∗ (S), Cz(g ∧ 0) and Cz(g ∨ 0) are completely
separated sets in S.
Then, by part (a), S is an F -space.
(d) Suppose disjoint cozero-sets in S are completely separated. Then,

for every g ∈ C ∗ (S), Cz(g ∧ 0) and Cz(g ∨ 0) are completely
separated sets in S. Then, by part (b), βS is an F -space.
Theorem 34.3 A completely regular space S is an F -space if and

only if disjoint cozero-sets of S are completely separated in S.
Proof. Suppose S is a completely regular space.
(⇐) We are given that disjoint cozero-sets in S are completely sep-
arated. By part c) of Lemma 34.2 the space S is an F -space.
(⇒) Suppose S is an F -space.
Let U = Cz(h) and V = Cz(t) be disjoint cozero-sets in S.
We will show that the sets U and V are completely separated
in S.
Given that,
U ∪ V = S \Z(h) ∪ S \Z(t)
= S \ [Z(h) ∩ Z(t)]
= S \Z(h2 + t2 )
= Cz(h2 + t2 )
then U ∪ V is also a cozero-set in S.

Let f : U ∪ V → {0, 1} be a function such that f [U ] = {0} and
f [V ] = {1}. Since U and V are disjoint, f is continuous on U ∪ V .
Since S is an F -space and U ∪ V is a cozero-set, f extends to f ∗ on
S where f ∗ |U ∪V = f . Then
Cz(h) ⊆ Z(f ) ⊆ Z(f ∗ )

Cz(t) ⊆ Z(f − 1) ⊆ Z(f ∗ − 1)
So the disjoint cozero-sets, U = Cz(h) and V = Cz(t), are completely

separated by f ∗ in S, as required.
Theorem 34.4 Let S be a completely regular F -space. Then every

C ∗ -embedded subset of S is itself an F -space.
Proof. Suppose S is an F -space and H is a C ∗ -embedded subspace

of S.
Let f ∈ C ∗ (H). Then, by hypothesis, there exists f ∗ ∈ C ∗ (S)
such that f ∗ |H = f .
The space S and the subspace H can be expressed as the disjoint
unions,
H = Cz(f ∨ 0) ∪ Z(f ) ∪ Cz(f ∧ 0)

S = Cz(f ∗ ∨ 0) ∪ Z(f ∗ ) ∪ Cz(f ∗ ∧ 0)
Since S is an F -space, then, by Theorem 34.3, Cz(f ∗ ∨ 0) and

Cz(f ∗ ∧ 0) are completely separated in S. That is, there exists
t ∈ C ∗ (S) such that
Cz(f ∗ ∨ 0) ⊆ Z(t)
Cz(f ∗ ∧ 0) ⊆ Z(t − 1)
Then for t|H ∈ C ∗ (H),
Cz(f ∨ 0) ⊆ Z(t|H )
Cz(f ∧ 0) ⊆ Z(t|H − 1)
So, Cz(f ∨ 0) and Cz(f ∧ 0) are completely separated in H.

Then, by Theorem 34.2(a), H is an F -space, as required.
Corollary 34.5 Let S be a completely regular space. Then, if βS is

an F -space then S is an F -space.
Proof. By Theorem 34.4, if βS is an F -space then, since S is

C ∗ -embedded in βS, S is an F -space.
Theorem 34.6 Let S be a completely regular F -space. Then βS is

also an F -space.
Proof. Let S be an F -space. The set, S, is dense and C ∗ -embedded

in βS.
We are required to show that βS is an F -space.

Let
H = Cz(h) = S \Z(h)
be a cozero-set in βS for some h ∈ C ∗ (βS).

Then Cz(h|S ) = Cz(h) ∩ S is a non-empty cozero-subset of S.
To show that βS is an F -space it suffices to show that H is
C ∗ -embedded in βS.
Let g : H → R be a bounded continuous real-valued function
on H.
Since S is an F -space, Cz(h|S ) is C ∗ -embedded in S.
Then, for g : H → R,
g|Cz(h) : Cz(h) → R
extends to a function
[g|Cz(h) ]∗ : S → R
Since S is C ∗ -embedded in βS, then [g|Cz(h) ]∗ extends to
[g|Cz(h) ]∗ β : βS → R
where [g|Cz(h) ]∗ β agrees with g on H.

We conclude that H is C ∗ -embedded in βS; so βS is an F -space,
as required.
We summarize the above results in the following corollary.
Corollary 34.7 Let S be a completely regular space. The following

are equivalent.
(a) The space S is an F -space.
(b) Disjoint cozero-sets of S are completely separated in S.
(c) For every f ∈ C ∗ (S), Cz(f ∨ 0) and Cz(f ∧ 0) are completely
separated sets.
(d) The compactification βS is an F -space.
Proof. We are given that S is a completely regular space.

The proof of (a) ⇔ (b) is given in part (a) Theorem 34.3.
The proof of (b) ⇒ (c) is obvious.
The proof of (c) ⇒ (d) is given in part (b) of Theorem 34.2.
The proof of (d) ⇔ (a) is given in Theorem 34.5 and 34.6.
In the following proof we will invoke the four previously estab-

lished results listed below.
— Theorem 23.2, states that if N is C-embedded in S then N is
— Theorem 23.3 states that a subspace U of S which can be mapped
homeomorphically onto a closed subset of R is C-embedded in S.
— Corollary 23.6 states that, if N is a C-embedded copy of N in a
locally compact set S and Z(f β ) is a zero-set in βS, such that
(clβS N )\N ⊆ Z(f β ) ∩ βS \S, then
(clβS N )\N ⊆ intβS\S ( Z(f β ) ∩ βS \S )
— Theorem 24.3, states that a space S is realcompact if and only

if, for any p ∈ βS \ S, there is a function, h ∈ C ∗ (S), such that
p ∈ Z(hβ ) ⊆ βS \S.
— Corollary 34.7 states that a space S is an F -space if and only if
for every f ∈ C ∗ (S), the two corresponding subsets,
Cz(h ∨ 0) = f ← [(0, ∞)] and Cz(h ∧ 0) = f ← [(−∞, 0)]
are completely separated in S.
Theorem 34.8 Let S be a completely regular locally compact and

realcompact space. Then βS \S is an F -space.
Proof. We are given that the completely regular space S is locally
compact and realcompact.
Since S is locally compact, S is open in βS, so βS\S is a compact
set.
Let h ∈ C(βS \S).
To show that βS\S is an F -space, it will suffice to show that the
two subsets, Cz(h ∨ 0) = h← [(0, ∞)] and Cz(h ∧ 0) = h← [(−∞, 0)]
of βS \ S, are completely separated in βS \ S. We can then invoke
Corollary 34.7, part (c). To show that they are completely separated
it will suffice to show that that their closures, clβS\S Cz(h ∨ 0) and
clβS\S Cz(h ∧ 0), have empty intersection.
Since the compact subsets of a completely regular space
are C ∗ -embedded (see example on page 492), then βS \S is a
C ∗ -embedded subset of βS. Then h : βS \S → R extends to
hβ : βS → R
where
h = hβ |βS\S
hβ |S ∈ C ∗ (S)
See that,
βS \S = Cz(h ∨ 0) ∪ Z(h) ∪ Cz(h ∧ 0)
a union of three pairwise disjoint sets.

Suppose p is any point in Z(h). Our plan is to show
that p ∈ intβS\S Z(h); if so then Z(h) = intβS\S Z(h) and
clβS\S Cz(h ∨ 0) = Cz(h ∨ 0). By applying a similar reasoning it will
follow that clβS\S Cz(h∧ 0) = Cz(h∧ 0). Then, Cz(h∧ 0) and Cz(h∨ 0)
would be completely separated.
Step 1: Since S is realcompact, then, by Theorem 24.3, there is
a function t in C ∗ (S) such that p ∈ Z(tβ ) where Z(tβ ) is entirely
contained in βS \S. Let g ∈ C ∗ (S) be such that Z(g β ) = Z(hβ ) ∩
Z(tβ ).2 Then p ∈ Z(gβ ) ⊆ βS \S.
Step 2: We define the function f : S → R as
f = 1/g
Since g does not vanish on S, the function f is well-defined and

continuous on S.
Since gβ is continuous, if A is any net (sequence) in S converging
to a point x in Z(gβ ), then g[A] converges to g β (x) = 0. Then f is
an unbounded function on S.
2
Note that if g β = |hβ | + |tβ | then Z(g β ) = Z(hβ ) ∩ Z(tβ ).
See that the function f : S → ωR3 extends continuously to

f β(ω) : βS → ωR, where
←
f β(ω) [Z(gβ )] = {∞} and f β(ω) {∞} = Z(gβ )
Step 3: For each i ∈ N, choose mi ∈ [2i − 1, 2i + 1] ∩ f [S], if non-

empty and not equal to mi−1 . Since f is unbounded, we can choose
infinitely many such mi ’s to construct the subset
M = {mi : i ∈ N}
in f [S] ⊆ R. See that. . .

— M is an unbounded subset of R,
— Each {mi } is a clopen subset of M
— The set M is a closed subset of R (since M contains all its limit
points).
So M is a closed unbounded copy of N in f [S].
Claim 1: We claim that, S contains a closed C ∗ -embedded copy, N ,
of N.
Proof of claim: For each i ∈ N, choose ni ∈ f ← (mi ) in S. Let
N = {ni : i ∈ N}. Then the function, f |N : N → R, maps N
homeomorphically onto the copy, M , of N in f [S]. Since f [N ] = M
contains all its limit points in R, then so does N . We then have that
N is a closed copy of N in S.
Since f maps N onto a closed subset of R, we then invoke Theorem
23.3 to conclude that N is C-embedded copy of N in S. By Theorem
23.2, N is C ∗ -embedded in S. This establishes the Claim 1.
Step 4: See that clβS N = βN with βN \N ⊆ βS \S.4
Claim 2: We claim that βN \N = Z(g β ).
Proof of claim: If x ∈ βN \N , x is an accumulation point of the
set N ⊆ S. Since f is unbounded on N then g β (x) = 0. So βN \N ⊆
Z(gβ ).
If x ∈ Z(gβ ), then gβ (x) = 0 is a limit point of M . Therefore
f β(ω) (x) = ∞. Then x ∈ clβS N \N . So Z(gβ ) ⊆ βN \N .
3
The set ωR is the one-point compactification, R ∪ {∞}, of R.
4
As shown in the example on page 512.
We conclude that βN \N = Z(g β ) as claimed.

Step 5: We now invoke Theorem 23.6 to deduce that
Z(g β ) = βN \N ⊆ intβS\S Z(gβ )
Since p ∈ Z(g β ) ⊆ Z(h), then p ∈ intβS\S Z(h).

We can then deduce that Z(g β ) = intβS\S Z(h) and so clβS\S
Cz(h ∨ 0) = Cz(h ∨ 0). By applying a similar reasoning , clβS\S Cz(h ∧
0) = Cz(h∧0). Then Cz(h∨0) and Cz(h∧0) are completely separated
in βS \S.
By 34.7, βS \S is an F -space as required.
Theorem 34.9 Let S be a completely regular F -space and {xi : i ∈

N} be a sequence in S which converges to y ∈ S. Then X is constant
on some tail-end of X.
Proof. We are given that S is a completely regular F -space and
X = {xi : i ∈ N} is a sequence in S converging to y. Suppose X is
not constant on any tail-end of X. Then there exists a subsequence
V = {xk(i) : i ∈ N} such that xk(i) = xk(u) if u < i}. Letting
ci = xk(i) , V = {ci : i ∈ N} is a subsequence of distinct elements
converging to y.
Let
A = {cj(i) : i ∈ N}
B = {ct(i) : i ∈ N}
be two subsequences of X where j(i) = 2i and t(i) = 2i + 1. Then
A and B are two infinitely countable disjoint subsets of S where
clS A = A ∪ {y} and clS B = B ∪ {y}. Also A ∩ clS B = ∅ = B ∩ clS A,
but clS A ∩ clS B = {y}.
In an example on page 259 we have shown that there exists disjoint
cozero-sets U and V which contain A and B, respectively. By Corol-
lary 34.7, part (b), since S is an F -space, U and V are completely
separated. Therefore there exists f ∈ C ∗ (S) such that U ⊆ f ← (0)
and V ⊆ f ← (1). Then clS U ⊆ f ← (0) and clS V ⊆ f ← (1). This
means that clS U ∩ clS V = ∅. This cannot be since clS A ⊆ clS U and
clS B ⊆ V and clS A∩ clS B = {y}. Then X must be constant on some
tail-end of X.
Appendix
A.1 Axioms and Set Theory Statements
I Axioms and Classes: 1 — Classes, Sets and Axioms

Axiom A1 (Axiom of extent): For the classes x, A and B, [A =
B] ⇔ [x ∈ A ⇔ x ∈ B].
Axiom A2 (Axiom of class construction): Let P (x) designate
a statement about x which can be expressed entirely in terms
of the symbols ∈, ∨, ∧, ¬, ⇒, ∀, brackets and variables x, y,
z,. . . , A, B,. . . Then there exists a class C which consists of
all the elements x which satisfy P (x).
Axiom A3 (Axiom of pair): If A and B are sets, then the dou-
bleton {A, B} is a set.
Axiom A4 (Axiom of subsets): If S is a set and φ is a formula
describing a particular property, then the class of all sets in S
which satisfy this property φ is a set. More succinctly, every
subclass of a set of sets is a set. (Also called the Axiom of com-
prehension, Axiom of separation or Axiom of specification).
Axiom A5 (Axiom of power set): If A is a set then the power
set P (A) is a set.

Axiom A6 (Axiom of union): If A is a set of sets then C∈A C
is a set.
747
Axiom A7 (Axiom of replacement): Let A be a set. Let φ(x, y)

be a formula which associates to each element x of A a set y
in such a way that, whenever both φ(x, y) and φ(x, z) hold
true, y = z. Then there exists a set B which contains all sets
y such that φ(x, y) holds true for some x ∈ A.
Axiom A8 (Axiom of infinity): There exists a non-empty set A
that satisfies the condition: “X ∈ A” ⇒ “X ∪ {X} ∈ A”.
(A set satisfying this condition is called a successor set or an
inductive set.)
Axiom A9 (Axiom of regularity): Every non-empty set A con-
tains an element x whose intersection with A is empty.
Axiom of choice: For every set A of non-empty sets there is a rule
f which associates to every set A in A an element a ∈ A.
I Axioms and Classes: 2 — Constructing Classes and Sets

Theorem 2.1 For any class C, C = C. If it is not true that A = B
we will write A = B.
Definition 2.2 If A and B are classes (sets) we define A ⊆ B to
mean that every element of A is an element of B. That is,
A ⊆ B iff x ∈ A ⇒ x ∈ B If A ⊆ B we will say that A is a
subclass (subset) of B. If A ⊆ B and A = B we will say that
A is a proper subclass (proper subset) of B and write A ⊂ B
when we explicitly want to say A = B.
Theorem 2.3 If C, D, and E are classes (sets) then:
(a) C = C.
(b) C = D ⇒ D = C.
(c) C = D and D = E ⇒ C = D.
(d) C ⊆ D and D ⊆ C ⇒ C = D.
(e) C ⊆ D and D ⊆ E ⇒ C ⊆ E.
Theorem 2.4 There exists a class which is not an element.
Definition 2.5 The Axiom 2 states that C = {x : x = x} is a
class. It contains no elements. We will call the class with no
elements the empty class and denote it by ∅.
Theorem 2.6 For any class C, ∅ ⊆ C.
Appendix 749
Theorem 2.7 Let S be a set. Then:

(a) ∅ ⊆ S and so ∅ is a set.
(b) The set S is an element. Hence, all sets are elements.
Definition 2.8 If A is a set then we define the power set of A as
being the class P(A) of all subsets of A. It can be described
as follows: P(A) = {X : X ⊆ A}.
II Class Operations: 3 — Operations on Classes and Sets

Definition 3.1 Let A and B be classes (sets). We define the union
A ∪ B of the class A and the class B as
A ∪ B = {x : (x ∈ A) ∨ (x ∈ B)}
That is, the element x ∈ A ∪ B iff x ∈ A or x ∈ B. If A is

a non-empty class of classes then we define the union of all
classes in A as

C = {x : x ∈ C for some C ∈ A }
C∈A

That is, the element x ∈ C∈A C iff there exists C ∈ A such
that x ∈ C.
Definition 3.2 Let A and B be classes (sets). We define the inter-
section A ∩ B of the class A and the class B as
A ∩ B = {x : (x ∈ A) ∧ (x ∈ B)}
That is, the element x ∈ A ∩ B iff x ∈ A and x ∈ B. If A is

a non-empty class of classes then we define the intersection
of all classes in A as

C = {x : x ∈ C for all C ∈ A }
C∈A

That is, the element x ∈ C∈A C iff x ∈ C for every class C
in A .
Definition 3.3 We will say that two classes (sets) C and D are dis-
joint if the two classes have no elements in common. That is,
the classes C and D are disjoint if and only if C ∩ D = ∅.
Definition 3.4 The complement, C , of a class (set) C is the class

of all elements which are not in C. That is, if C is a class,
then
C = {x : x ∈ C}
Hence, x ∈ C iff x ∈ C. Given two classes (sets) C and D,

the difference C − D, of C and D, is the class
C − D = C ∩ D
The symmetric difference, C D, is the class
C D = (C − D) ∪ (D − C)
Theorem 3.5 Let C and D be classes (sets). Then,
(a) C ⊆ C ∪ D
(b) C ∩ D ⊆ C
Theorem 3.6 Let C and D be classes (sets). Then,
(a) C ∪ (C ∩ D) = C
(b) C ∩ (C ∪ D) = C
Theorem 3.7 Let C be a class (a set). Then (C ) = C.
Theorem 3.8 DeMorgan’s laws. Let C and D be classes (sets).
Then,
(a) (C ∪ D) = C ∩ D
(b) (C ∩ D) = C ∪ D
Theorem 3.9 Let C, D, and E be classes (sets). Then,
(a) C ∪ D = D ∪ C and C ∩ D = D ∩ C (Commutative laws)

(b) C ∪ C = C and C ∩ C = C (Idempotent laws)
(c) C ∪ (D ∪ E) = (C ∪ D) ∪ E and C ∩ (D ∩ E) = (C ∩ D) ∩ E
(Associative laws)
(d) C ∪ (D ∩ E) = (C ∪ D) ∩ (C ∪ E) and C ∩ (D ∪ E) =
(C ∩ D) ∪ (C ∩ E) (Distribution)
Appendix 751
Theorem 3.10 Let A be a class (a set) and U denote the class of

all elements.
(a) U ∪A=U
(b) A∩U =A
(c) U=∅
(d) ∅ = U
(e) A ∪ A = U
Theorem 3.11 Let A be a non-empty class (set).

(a) C∈A C = C
C∈A
(b) C∈A C = C∈A C
Theorem 3.12 Let D be a class and A be a non-empty class (set)
of classes.

(a) D ∩ C∈A C = C∈A (D ∩ C)

(b) D ∪ C∈A C = C∈A (D ∪ C)
Theorem 3.13 Let {B(i,j) : i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , j = 1, 2, 3, . . .} be a set
of sets Then ∪∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
i=1 (∩j=1 B(i,j) ) = ∩j=1 (∪i=1 B(i,j) ).
II Class Operations: 4 — Cartesian Products

Definition 4.1 Let c and d be elements. We define the ordered pair
(c, d) as (c, d) = {{c}, {c, d}}.
Theorem 4.2 Let a, b, c, and d be classes (which are elements).
Then (a, b) = (c, d) iff a = c and b = d.
Alternate definition 4.3 If c and d are classes define (c, d) as fol-
lows: (c, d) = {{c, ∅}, {d, {∅}}}.
Definition 4.4 Let C and D be two classes (sets). We define the
Cartesian product, C × D, as follows: C × D = {(c, d) : c ∈
C and d ∈ D}.
Lemma 4.5 Let C and D be two classes (sets). Then the Cartesian
product, C × D, of C and D satisfies the property: C × D ⊆
P(P(C ∪ D)).
Corollary 4.6 If C and D are classes, then the Cartesian product,
C × D, is a class. If C and D are sets, then C × D is a set.
Theorem 4.7 Let C, D, E, and F be a classes. Then

(a) C × (D ∩ E) = (C × D) ∩ (C × E)
(b) C × (D ∪ E) = (C × D) ∪ (C × E)
(c) (C ∩ E) × D = (C × D) ∩ (E × D)
(d) (C ∪ E) × D = (C × D) ∪ (E × D)
(e) (C ∪ D) × (E ∪ F ) = (C × E) ∪ (D × E) ∪ (C × F ) ∪ (D × F )
(f) (C ∩ D) × (E ∩ F ) = (C × E) ∩ (D × E) ∩ (C × F ) ∩ (D × F )
Theorem 4.8 If C ⊆ D and E ⊆ F , then C × E ⊆ D × F .
Theorem 4.9 Given three classes (sets) S, U and V there is a
one-to-one correspondence between the two classes (sets)
S × (U × V ) and (S × U ) × V .
Theorem 4.10 For classes c, d, e and f , if (c, d) = {{c, ∅},
{d, {∅}}} and (e, f ) = {{e, ∅}, {f, {∅}}} then (c, d) = (e, f )
iff c = e and d = f .
III Relations: 5 — Relations on a Class or Set

Definition 5.1
(a) We will call any subset R of ordered pairs in U ×U a binary
relation.
(b) We will say that R is binary relation on a class C if R is a
subclass (subset) of C × C. In such cases we will simply say
that R is a relation in C or on C.
(c) If A and B are classes (sets) and R is a subclass (subset) of
A × B then R can be viewed as a relation on A ∪ B.
Definitions 5.2 Let C be a class (a set). (a) The relation ∈C =
{(x, y) : x ∈ C, y ∈ C, x ∈ y} is called the membership rela-
tion on C. (b) The relation
IdC = {(x, y) : x ∈ C, y ∈ C, x = y}
is called the identity relation on C.

Definitions 5.3 Let R be a relation on a class (set) C. The domain
of R is the class, dom R = {x : x ∈ C and (x, y) ∈
R for some y ∈ C}. The image of R is the class, im R =
{y : y ∈ C and (x, y) ∈ R for some x ∈ C}. The word range
Appendix 753
of R is often used instead of “the image of R”. If R ⊆ A×B is

viewed as a relation on A∪B, then dom R ⊆ A and im R ⊆ B.
Definition 5.4 Let C be a class (a set) and let R be a relation
defined in C. The inverse, R−1 , of the relation R is defined
as follows:
R−1 = {(x, y) : (y, x) ∈ R}
Definition 5.5 Let C be a class (a set) and let R and T be two

relations in C. We define the relation T ◦ R as follows : T ◦
R = {(x, y) : there exists some z ∈ im R such that (x, z) ∈
R and (z, y) ∈ T }
III Relations: 6 — Equivalence Relations and Order Relations

Definition 6.1 Let S be a class and R be a relation on S.
(a) We say that R is a reflexive relation on S if, for every x ∈ S,
(x, x) ∈ R.
(b) We say that R is a symmetric relation on S if, whenever
(x, y) ∈ R then (y, x) ∈ R.
(c) We say that R is an anti-symmetric relation on S if, when-
ever (x, y) ∈ R and (y, x) ∈ R then x = y.
(d) We say that R is an asymmetric relation on S if, whenever
(x, y) ∈ R then (y, x) ∈ R.
(e) We say that R is a transitive relation on S if, whenever
(x, y) ∈ R and (y, z) ∈ R then (x, z) ∈ R.
(f) We say that R is an irreflexive relation on S if, for every
x ∈ S, (x, x) ∈ R.
(g) We say that R satisfies the property of comparability on S
if, for every x, y ∈ S where x = y, either (x, y) ∈ R or
(y, x) ∈ R.
Definition 6.2 Let S be a class and R be a relation on S. We say
that R is an equivalence relation on S if R is simultaneously
(1) reflexive, (2) symmetric, and (3) transitive on S.
Definition 6.3 Let S be a class.
(a) Non-strict order relation. The relation R is a non-strict order
relation on S if it is simultaneously reflexive (aRa holds true
for any a in S), antisymmetric (if aRb and bRa then a = b)
and transitive (aRb and bRc implies aRc) on S. A non-

strict order relation, R, on S is said to be a non-strict linear
order relation if, for every pair of elements a and b in S,
either (a, b) ∈ R, (b, a) ∈ R or a = b. That is, every pair of
elements are comparable under R.1 A non-strict ordering,
R, on S which is not linear is said to be a non-strict partial
ordering relation on S.2
(b) Strict order relation. The relation R is a strict order relation
if it is simultaneously irreflexive ((a, a) ∈ R), asymmetric
((a, b) ∈ R ⇒ (b, a) ∈ R) and transitive on S. If every pair
of distinct elements, a and b, in S are comparable under a
strict order relation, R, then R is a strict linear ordering
on S. Those strict orderings which are not linear are called
strict non-linear orderings or, more commonly, strict partial
ordering relation.
A non-strict partial order R on S always induces a strict
partial order R∗ by defining aR∗ b ⇒ [aRb and a = b]. Simi-
larly, a strict partial order R on S always induces a non-strict
partial order R† by defining aR† b ⇒ [aRb or a = b].
Definition 6.4 Let S be a class and R be a partial ordering or a
strict ordering relation on S. If R is a partial ordering relation
(a, b) ∈ R is represented as a ≤ b and if R is a strict ordering
relation (a, b) ∈ R is represented as a < b. If a ≤ b and a = b,
we will simply write a < b.
(a) A subset of S which is linearly ordered by R is called a chain

in S. If R linearly orders S then S is a linearly ordered subset
of itself and so is a chain.
(b) An element a of S is called a maximal element of S if there
does not exist an element b in S such that a < b. An element
a of S is called a minimal element of S if there does not exist
an element b in S such that b < a.
1
A class on which is defined a linear ordering R is also said to be fully ordered
or totally ordered by R. In certain branches of mathematics “linearly ordered set”
is abbreviated as l.o.set or simply called loset.
2
In certain branches of mathematics “partially ordered set” is abbreviated as
p.o.set or simply called a poset.
Appendix 755
(c) An element m in S is called the minimum element of S if

m ≤ a (m < a) for all a ∈ S. An element M in S is called
the maximum element of S if a ≤ M (a < M ) for all a ∈ S.
III Relations: 7 — The Partition of a Set Induced by an Equiva-

lence Relation
Notation 7.1 Let R be an equivalence relation on a set S and let
x ∈ S. Then the set Sx is defined as follows: Sx = {y : (x, y) ∈
R}. That is, Sx is the set of all elements y in S such that y
is related to x under R.
Theorem 7.2 Let R be an equivalence relation on a set S. Let x
and y be two elements in S which are not related under R.
Then any element z in S which is related to x cannot be
related to y.
and y be two elements in S which are not related under R.
Then Sx ∩ Sy = ∅.
and y be two elements in S which are related under R. Then
Sx = Sy .
Theorem 7.5 Let R be an equivalence relation on a set S. For every
x ∈ S there exists some y ∈ S such that x ∈ Sy .
Theorem
7.6 Let R be an equivalence relation on a set S. Then
x∈S Sx = S.
III Relations: 8 — On Partitions and Quotient Sets of a Set

Definition 8.1 Let S be a set. We say that a set C ⊆ P(S) forms
a partition of S if C satisfies the 3 properties:

(1) A∈C A = S.
(2) If A and B ∈ C and A = B then A ∩ B = ∅.
(3) A = ∅ for all A ∈ C .
Definition 8.2 Let S be a set on which an equivalence relation R
is defined.
(a) Each element Sx of SR = {Sx : x ∈ S} is called an equiva-

lence class of x under R or an equivalence class induced by the
relation R.
(b) The set SR = {Sx : x ∈ S} of all equivalence classes induced
by the relation R is called the quotient set of S induced by
R. The set SR is more commonly represented by the symbol
S/R. So S/R = {Sx : x ∈ S}. From here on we will use the
more common notation, S/R.
Theorem 8.3 Let S be a set and C be a partition of S. Let
RC be the relation such that (x, y) ∈ RC iff {x, y} ⊆ S
for some S in C . Then RC is an equivalence relation on S.
IV Functions: 9 — Functions: A Set-Theoretic Definition

Definition 9.1 A function from A to B is a triple f, A, B satisfy-
ing the following properties:
(1) A and B are classes and f ⊆ A × B.

(2) For every a ∈ A there exists b ∈ B such that (a, b) ∈ f .
(3) If (a, b) ∈ f and (a, c) ∈ f then a = c.
Definition 9.2 If f : A → B is a function and D ⊆ A then we say
that the function f : D → C is a restriction of f to D. In this
case we will use the symbol f |D to represent the restriction
of f to D. Note that, if D ⊆ A, then we can write f |D ⊆ f
since f |D = {(x, y) : x ∈ D and (x, y) ∈ f } ⊆ f .
Theorem 9.3 Let f : A → B be a function and suppose A = C ∪D.
Then f = f |c ∪ f |D .
Theorem 9.4 Two functions f : A → B and g : A → B are equal
if and only if f (x) = g(x) for all x ∈ A.
Definitions 9.5 Let f : A → B be a function.
(a) We say that “f maps A onto B” if im f = B. We often use

the expression “f : A → B is surjective” instead of the words
onto B.
(b) We say that “f maps A one-to-one into B” if whenever f (x) =
f (y) then x = y. We often use the expression “f : A → B is
injective” instead of the words one-to-one into B.
Appendix 757
(c) If the function f : A → B is both one-to-one and onto B then

we can simply say that f is “one-to-one and onto”. Another
way of conveying this is to say that f is bijective, or f is a
bijection. So “injective + surjective ⇒ bijective”.
(d) Two classes (or sets) A and B for which there exists some
bijective function f : A → B are said to be in one-to-one
correspondence.
IV Functions: 10 — Compositions of Function

Definition 10.1 Suppose f : A → B and g : B → C are two func-
tions such that the image of the function f is contained in the
domain of the function g. Let h = {(x, z) : y = f (x) and z =
g(y) = g(f (x)) }. Thus (x, z) ∈ h if and only if (x, z) =
(x, g(f (x)). We will call h the composition of g and f, and
denote it as g ◦ f .
Theorem 10.2 Let f : A → B and g : B → C be two functions
such that the image of the function f is contained in the
domain of the function g. Then the composition of g and f ,
(g ◦ f ) : A → C, is a function.
Theorem 10.3 Let f : A → B, g : B → C and h : C → D be three
functions. Then h ◦ (g ◦ f ) = (h ◦ g) ◦ f .
Theorem 10.4 Let f : A → B. Then IB ◦ f = f and f ◦ IA = f .
Definition 10.5 Let f : A → B. If g : B → A is a function satis-
fying g ◦ f = IA then we will call g an “inverse of f ” and
denote it as f −1 .
Theorem 10.6 Let f : A → B be a one-to-one onto function.
(a) An inverse function f −1 : B → A of f exists.
(b) The function f −1 is one-to-one and onto.
(c) The function f −1 : B → A satisfies the property f ◦ f −1 = IB .
(d) The inverse function, f −1 , of f is unique.
Definition 10.7 A function f : A → B which is one-to-one and
onto is called an invertible function.
Theorem 10.8 Let f : A → B and g : B → C be two onto-to-one
and onto functions.
(a) The function g ◦ f is also one-to-one and onto.

(b) The inverse, g ◦ f , is (g ◦ f )−1 = f −1 ◦ g−1
IV Functions: 11 — Images and Inverse Images of Sets

Definition 11.1 Let A and B be sets and suppose f : A → B
is a function acting on A. If S is a subset of A = dom f
we define the expression f [S] as follows: f [S] = {y : y =
f (x) for some x ∈ S}. We will say that f [S] is the image of
the set S under f .
Definitions 11.2 Let f : A → B be a function where A and B are
sets. We define f ← : P(B) → P(A) as f ← (X) = Y iff Y =
{y : y ∈ A, f (y) ∈ X}. In particular, f ← ({x}) = Y iff Y =
{y : y ∈ A, f (y) = x}. We will refer to it as the set-valued
inverse function f ← .
Theorem 11.3 Let f : A → B be a function. Then f ← :
P(im f ) → P(A) is a one-to-one function on its domain
P(im f ).
Theorem 11.4 Let f : A → B be a function mapping the set A to
the set B. Let A be a set of subsets of A and B be a set of
subsets of B. Let D ⊆ A and E ⊆ B. Then:

(a) f S∈A S = S∈A f [S]

(b) f S∈A S ⊆ S∈A f [S] with equality only if f is one-to-one
(c) f [A − D] ⊆ B − f [D] with equality only if f is one-to-one and
onto B

(d) f ← S∈B S = S∈B f ← (S)

(e) f ← S∈B S = S∈B f ← (S)
(f) f ← (B − E) = A − f ← (E)
IV Functions: 12 — Equivalence Relations Defined by Functions

Definition 12.1 Let f : A → B be a function which maps a set A
into a set B. We define an equivalence relation Rf on A as
follows: Two elements a and b are related under Rf if and only
if {a, b} ⊆ f ← (x) for some x in im f . The quotient set of A
induced by Rf is then A/Rf = ARf = {f ← ({x}) : x ∈ f [A]}
We will refer to Rf as the equivalence relation determined by
Appendix 759
f and A/Rf (or ARf ) as the quotient set of A determined

by f.
Theorem 12.2 Let f : S → T be a function where S and T are
sets. There exists an onto function gf : S → S/Rf and a one-
to-one function hf : S/Rf → T such that hf ◦ gf = f . The
function, hf ◦ gf = f , is called the canonical decomposition
of f.
V From Sets to Numbers: 13 — The Natural Numbers

Definition 13.1 For any set x, we define the successor x+ , of x as
x+ = x ∪ {x}.
Definition 13.2 If x is a set then x+ = x ∪ {x}. A set A is called
an inductive set if it satisfies the following two properties:
(a) ∅ ∈ A.
(b) x ∈ A ⇒ x+ ∈ A.
Definition 13.3 We define the set of all natural numbers, N, as the
intersection of all inductive sets. That is N = {x : x ∈ I
for any inductive set I}.
Theorem 13.4 Let A be a subset of N. If A satisfies the two prop-
erties:
(a) 0 ∈ A
(b) m ∈ A ⇒ m+ ∈ A
then A = N.
Corollary 13.5 (The Principle of mathematical induction.) Let P
denote a particular set property. Suppose P (n) means “the
property P is satisfied depending on the value of the natural
number n”. Let
A = {n ∈ N : P (n) holds true}
If A satisfies the two properties:
(a) 0 ∈ A. That is P (0) holds true,
(b) (n ∈ A) ⇒ (n+ ∈ A). That is, P (n) holds true ⇒ P (n+ )
holds true.
then A = N. That is, P (n) holds true for all natural num-
bers n.
Definition 13.6 A set S which satisfies the property “x ∈ S ⇒ x ⊂

S” is called a transitive set.
Theorem 13.7 The non-empty set S is a transitive set if and only
if the property “x ∈ y and y ∈ S” ⇒ “x ∈ S”.
Theorem 13.8 The set N of natural numbers is a transitive set.
Theorem 13.9
(a) For natural numbers n, m, m ∈ n ⇒ m ⊆ n. Hence, every
natural number is a transitive set.
(b) For any natural number n, n = n+ .
(c) For any natural number n, n ∈ n.
(d) For any distinct natural numbers n, m, m ⊂ n ⇒ m ∈ n.
Theorem 13.10 Let m and n be distinct natural numbers.
(a) If m ⊂ n then m+ ⊆ n.
(b) All natural numbers are comparable. Either m ⊂ n or n ⊂ m.
Equivalently, m ∈ n or n ∈ m. Hence, both “⊂” and “∈”
linearly order N.
(c) There is no natural number m such that n ⊂ m ⊂ n+ .
Theorem 13.11 Every natural number has an immediate predeces-
sor. If k and n are natural numbers such that k + = n then
k is called an immediate
predecessor of n. For any non-zero
natural number n, k = m⊂n m is an immediate predecessor
of n.
Theorem 13.12 Unique immediate predecessors. Any non-zero nat-
ural number has a unique immediate predecessor.
Theorem 13.13 (The Principle of mathematical induction: second
version.) Let P denote a particular property. Suppose P (n)
means “the property P is satisfied depending on the value of
the natural number n”. Let
A = {n ∈ N : P (n) holds true}
Suppose that, for any natural number n,
P (k) is true for all k < n ⇒ P (n) is true
Then P (n) holds true for all natural numbers n.
Appendix 761
V From Sets to Numbers: 14 — The Natural Numbers as a

Well-Ordered Set
Notation 14.1 We define the relation “∈= ” on N as follows:
m ∈= n if and only if m = n or m ∈ n
If m ∈= n and we want to state explicitly that m = n we

write m ∈ n.
Theorem 14.2 Let (S, ≤) be a linearly ordered set. Suppose T ⊆ S.
The element q is a least element of T with respect to “≤” if
q ∈ T and q ≤ m for all m ∈ T . If S is equipped with a
strict linear ordering “<” a least element of T with respect to
< is an element q ∈ T such that q < m for all m ∈ T where
m = q. The set (S, ≤) is said to be well-ordered with respect
to “≤” if every non-empty subset T of S contains its least
element with respect to ≤. Similarly, the set (S, <) is said
to be well-ordered with respect to “<” if every non-empty
subset T of S contains its least element with respect to <.
Theorem 14.3 The natural numbers N is a strict ∈-well-ordered
set.
Corollary 14.4 Every natural numbers n is a ∈-well-ordered set.
Theorem 14.5 Any bounded non-empty subset of (N, ∈) has a
maximal element.
Definition 14.6 Consider the set {1, 2}N of all functions map-
ping natural numbers to 1 or 2. We define the lexicographic
order “<” on {1, 2}N as follows: For any two elements f =
{a0 , a1 , a2 , a3 , . . .} and g = {b0 , b1 , b2 , b3 , . . .} in {1, 2}N , f = g
if and only if ai = bi for all i ∈ N and f < g if and only if for
the first two unequal corresponding terms ai and bi , ai ∈ bi . A
lexicographic ordering can similarly be defined on S N where
S is any subset of N.
V From Sets to Numbers: 15 — Arithmetic of the Natural

Numbers
Definition 15.1 Let m be a fixed natural number. Addition of
a natural number n with m is defined as the function
rm : N → N satisfying the two conditions
rm (0) = m
rm (n+ ) = [rm (n)]+
The expression m+n as simply another way of writing rm (n).

Thus,
rm (0) = m ⇔ m+0=m (3)

rm (n+ ) = [rm (n)]+ ⇔ m + n+ = (m + n)+ (4)
Theorem 15.2 Let m be a fixed natural number and let rm : N → N

be a function satisfying the two properties
rm (0) = m
rm (n+ ) = [rm (n)]+
Then rm is a well-defined function on N.

Definition 15.3 For any natural number m, multiplication with the
natural number m is defined as the function sm : N → N
satisfying the two conditions
sm (0) = 0
sm (n+ ) = sm (n) + m
We define the expression mn and m × n as alternate ways of

writing sm (n). Thus,
sm (0) = 0 ⇔ m0 = m × 0 = 0 (5)
sm (n+ ) = sm (n) + m ⇔ mn+ = mn + m = m × n + m (6)
Theorem 15.4 Let m be a fixed natural number and let sm : N → N

be a function satisfying the two properties
sm (0) = 0
sm (n+ ) = sm (n) + m
Then sm is a well-defined function on N.

Appendix 763
Theorem 15.5 For any two natural numbers m and n, m ∈= n if

and only if there exists a unique natural number k such that
n = m + k.
Definition 15.6 For any two natural numbers m and n such that
m ≤ n, the unique natural number k satisfying n = m + k
is called the difference between n and m and is denoted by
n − m. The operation “−” is called subtraction.
V From Sets to Numbers: 16 — The Integers Z and the Ratio-

nals Q
Theorem 16.1 Let Z = N × N. Let Rz be a relation on Z that is
defined as follows: (a, b)Rz (c, d) if and only if a + d = b + c.
Then Rz is an equivalence relation on Z.
Corollary 16.2 Let Z = N × N be equipped with the equivalence
relation Rz defined as:
(a, b)Rz (c, d) ⇔ a+d=b+c
For each n ∈ N let [(0, n)] and [(n, 0)] denote the Rz -
equivalence classes containing the elements (0, n) and (n, 0)
respectively. Then the quotient set induced by Rz can be
expressed as
Z/Rz = {[(0, n)] : n ∈ N} ∪ {[(n, 0)] : n ∈ N}
Definitions 16.3 The set of integers, Z, is defined as:
Z = Z/Rz = {[(a, b)] : a, b ∈ N}

= {[(0, n)] : n ∈ N} ∪ {[(n, 0)] : n ∈ N}
(a) Negative integers: The set of negative integers is defined as

being the set
Z− = {[(0, n)] : n ∈ N}
Positive integers: The set of positive integers is defined as

being the set
Z+ = {[(n, 0)] : n ∈ N}
The elements of the form [(0, n)] can be represented by

−n = [(0, n)] while the elements of the form [(n, 0)] can
be represented as n = [(n, 0)].
(b) Order relation on Z: We define a relation ≤z on Z as follows:
[(a, b)] ≤z [(c, d)] if and only if a + d ≤ b + c. It is a routine
exercise to show that ≤z is a linear ordering of Z.
(c) Addition on Z: We must sometimes distinguish between
addition of natural numbers and addition of integers. Where
there is a risk of confusion we will use the following notation:
“+n ” means addition of natural numbers while “+z ” means
addition of integers.
Addition +z on Z is defined as:
[(a, b)] +z [(c, d)] = [(a +n c, b +n d)]
(d) Opposites of integers: The opposite −[(a, b)] of [(a, b)] is

defined as
−[(a, b)] = [(b, a)]3
(e) Subtraction on integers: Subtraction “−z ” on Z is defined

as:
[(a, b)] −z [(c, d)] = [(a, b)] + (−[(c, d)])4
(f) Multiplication of integers: Multiplication ×z on Z is defined

as
[(a, b)] ×z [(c, d)] = [(ac + bd, ad + bc)].5
In particular, [(0, n)] ×z [(m, 0)] = [(0 + 0, 0 + nm)] =

[(0, nm)] = −[(nm, 0)] and [(n, 0)] ×z [(m, 0)] = [(nm, 0)].
3
Note that −[(n, 0)] = [(0, n)] = −n.
4
When there is no risk of confusion with subtraction of other types of numbers
we will simply use “−”.
5
Note that the “center dot” can be used instead of the “×z symbol. When there
is no risk of confusion with multiplication of other types of numbers we will simply
use “×”.
Appendix 765
(g) Absolute value of an integer: The absolute value, |n|, of an

integer n is defined as
n if 0 ≤z n
|n| =
−n if n <z 0
(h) Equality of two integers: If (a, b) and (c, d) are ordered pairs
which are equivalent under the relation Rz , then the Rz -
equivalence classes [(a, b)] and [(c, d)] are equal sets. To
emphasize that they are equal sets under the relation Rz
we can write
[(a, b)] =z [(c, d)]
(i) Distribution properties: If [(a, b)], [(c, d)] and [(e, f )] are inte-
gers then
[(a, b)] ×z ([(c, d)] +z [(e, f )])

=z [(a, b)] ×z [(c, d)] +z [(a, b)] ×z [(e, f )]
and
([(c, d)] +z [(e, f )]) ×z [(a, b)]

=z [(c, d)] ×z [(a, b)] +z [(e, f )] ×z [(a, b)]
Theorem 16.4 Let Q = Z × Z∗ where Z∗ = Z − {0}. Let Rq be a

relation on Q defined as follows: (a, b)Rq (c, d) if and only if
a ×z d = b ×z c. Then Rq is an equivalence relation on Q.
Definitions 16.5 The set of rational numbers, Q, is defined as:
Q = Q/Rq = {[(a, b)] : a ∈ Z, b ∈ Z∗ }6
The expression [(a, b)] is normally written in the form ab .

(a) We define a relation ≤q on Q as follows: If b and d are
both positive, [(a, b)] ≤q [(c, d)] if and only if a ×z d ≤z
b ×z c.
6
Recall that a and b is shorthand for expressions of the form [(0, a)] or −[(0, b)].
(b) Addition +q on Q is defined as:
[(a, b)] +q [(c, d)] = [(ad +z bc, b ×z d)]
(c) Subtraction −q on Q is defined as:
[(a, b)] −q [(c, d)] = [(a, b)] +q [(−c, d)]
(d) Multiplication ×q on Q is defined as
[(a, b)] ×q [(c, d)] = [(a ×z c, b ×z d)]
(e) Equality of two rational numbers: If (a, b) and (c, d) are

ordered pairs of integers (b, d = 0) which are equivalent
under the relation Rq , then the Rq -equivalence classes
[(a, b)] and [(c, d)] are equal sets. To emphasize that they
are equal sets under the relation Rq we can write
[(a, b)] =q [(c, d)]
(f) Opposites of rational numbers. If (a, b) is an ordered

pair of integers (b = 0) and [(a, b)] is its Rq -equivalence
class then the opposite of the rational number [(a, b)]
is defined as [(−a, b)] and is denoted as −[(a, b)] =q
[(−a, b)].
Theorem 16.6 Suppose a and b are positive integers where b = 0
and [(a, b)] is an Rq equivalence class. Then
(a) [(−a, −b)] = −a a
−b = b = [(a, b)].
(b) −[(a, b)] =q [(−a, b)] = −a a
b = −b = [(a, −b)]
V From Sets to Numbers: 17 — Dedekind Cuts: “Real Numbers

Are Us!”
Definition 17.1 For any real number r, let R Sr denote the interval
(−∞, r) in R. It is the subset of all real numbers strictly
smaller than r. The subset R Sr is called an initial segment in
R. For any real number r, the subset Q Sr = (−∞, r) ∩ Q =
R Sr ∩ Q is called an initial segment in Q. For each of R Sr and
Q Sr the real number r is the least upper bound of (−∞, r) and
(−∞, r) ∩ Q respectively. Note that r may be a non-rational
number even for Q Sr a proper subset of Q.
Appendix 767
Definition 17.2 The elements Q Sr = (−∞, r) ∩ Q of the set D =

{Q Sr : r ∈ R} are called Dedekind cuts.
Definition 17.3 The set of all Dedekind cuts D, linearly ordered by
inclusion with addition + and multiplication × as described
above is called the real numbers. Those Dedekind cuts which
do not have a least upper bound in Q are called irrational
numbers.
Lemma 17.4 The union of a set of Dedekind cuts is either Q or a
Dedekind cut.
Theorem 17.5 Every non-empty subset of R which has an upper
bound has a least upper bound.
VI Infinite Sets: 18 — Infinite Sets versus Finite Sets

Definition 18.1 A set S is said to be an infinite set if S has a proper
subset X such that a function f : S → X maps S one-to-one
onto X. If a set S is not infinite then we will say that it is a
finite set.
Theorem 18.2 Basic properties of infinite and finite sets.
(a) The empty set is a finite set.

(b) Any singleton set is a finite set.
(c) Any set which has a subset which is infinite must itself be
infinite.
(d) Any subset of a finite set must be finite.
Theorem 18.3 Let f : X → Y be a one-to-one function mapping
X onto Y . The set Y is infinite if and only if the set X is
infinite.
Corollary 18.4 The one-to-one image of a finite set is finite.
Lemma 18.5 Let S be an infinite set and x ∈ S. Then S − {x} is
an infinite set.
Theorem 18.6 Every natural number n is a finite set.
Corollary 18.7 [AC] A set S is finite if and only if S is empty or
in one-to-one correspondence with some natural number n.
Theorem 18.8 The recursively constructed function theorem. Let S

be a set, k : P(S) → S be a well-defined function on P(S)
and f ⊆ N × S be a relation. We write f (n) = a if and only
if (n, a) ∈ f . Let m ∈ S. Suppose the relation f satisfies the
two properties
⎧
⎪
⎪ f (0) = m ⇒ (0, m) = (0, f (0)) ∈ f
⎨
(n, f (n)) ∈ f ⇒ (n + 1, k(S − {f (0), f (1), . . . , f (n)})
⎪
⎪
⎩ = (n + 1, f (n + 1)) ∈ f
Then f is a well-defined function on N.

Theorem 18.9 [AC] A set S is an infinite set if and only if it con-
tains a one-to-one image of the N.
Theorem 18.10 If the set S is a finite set and f : S → X is a
function, then f [S] is finite.
Theorem 18.11 If a set S contains n elements then P(S) contains
2n elements. Hence, if a set S is a finite set, then the set
P(S) is finite.
VI Infinite Sets: 19 — Countable and Uncountable Sets

Definition 19.1 Two sets A and B are said to be equipotent sets if
there exists a one-to-one function f : A → B mapping one
onto the other. If A and B are equipotent we will say that “A
is equipotent to B” or “A is equipotent with B”.
Definition 19.2 Countable sets are those sets that are either finite
or equipotent to N. All infinite sets which are not countable
are called uncountable sets.
Theorem 19.3 A subset of a countable set is countable.
Theorem 19.4 Any finite product, N × N × · · · × N, of N is a count-
able set.
Lemma 19.5 Suppose f maps an infinite countable set A onto a set
B = f [A]. Then B is countable.
Appendix 769
Theorem 19.6 Let {Ai : i ∈ S ⊆ N}be a countable set of non-

empty countable sets Ai . Then i∈S Ai is countable.
Theorem 19.7 The set of all real numbers R is uncountable.
VI Infinite Sets: 20 — Properties of the Equipotence Relation

Theorem 20.1 Let S be a class of sets. The equipotence relation
Re on S is an equivalence relation on S .
Theorem 20.2 Suppose A, B, C, and D are sets such that A ∼e B
and C ∼e D where A ∩ C = ∅ = B ∩ D. Then (A ∪ C) ∼e
(B ∪ D).
Theorem 20.3 Suppose A, B, C and D are sets such that A ∼e B
and C ∼e D. Then A × C ∼e B × D.
Corollary 20.4 Suppose A and B are infinite sets.
(1) If {A, B} ⊂ [N]e then A × B ∈ [N]e .
(2) If {A, B} ⊂ [R]e then A × B ∈ [R]e .
Theorem 20.5 If {Ai : i = 0, 1, 2, . . . , n} is a set of n non-empty
countable sets then ni=0 Ai is countable for all n.
Theorem 20.6 Suppose S is and infinite set and T is a countable
set such that S ∩ T = ∅. Then S ∼e S ∪ T .
Theorem 20.7 If the sets A and B are equipotent, then so are their
associated power sets P(A) and P(B).
Theorem 20.8 Any non-empty set S is embedded in its power set
P(S). But no subset of S is equipotent with P(S).
Definition 20.9 We will say that the non-empty set A is properly
embedded in the set B if A is equipotent to a proper subset
of B but B is not equipotent to A or any of its subsets. To
represent the relationship “A is properly embedded in B” we
will write
A →e B
If A and B are sets such that A is equipotent to a subset of

B (where B may, or may not, be embedded in A), we will say
that A is embedded in B. To represent the relationship “A is
embedded in B” we will write
A →e∼ B
Definition 20.10 Let S = {S : S is a set} and E = {[S]e :

S ∈ S }. Let [A]e and [B]e be elements of E . We write
[A]e <e [B]e
if and only if A →e B. We write
[A]e ≤e [B]e
if and only if A →e∼ B.

Proposition 20.11 Let S be any set. Suppose P 0 (S) =
S, P 1 (S) = P(S) and P n (S) = P(P n−1 (S)) for all n ≥ 1.
The set
{[S]e , [P(S)]e , [P 2 (S)]e , [P 3 (S)]e , . . . , [P n (S)]e . . .}
forms an infinite <e -ordered chain of distinct classes in E .

Theorem 20.12 For every any non-empty set S, 2S = {χT : T ∈
P(S)} ∼e P(S)
Theorem 20.13 The set R is embedded in P(N).
Theorem 20.14 The set P(N) is embedded in R.
VI Infinite Sets: 21 — The Shröder–Bernstein Theorem

Theorem 21.1 (The Schröder–Bernstein theorem) If S and T are
infinite subsets where S is embedded in T and T is embedded
in S then S and T are equipotent.
Lemma 21.2 Let T be a proper subset of the set S and f : S → T
be a one-to-one function mapping S into T . Then there exists
a one-to-one function h : S → T mapping S onto T .
Theorem 21.3 The set R of all real numbers is equipotent to P(N).
Theorem 21.4 The sets NN and R are equipotent.
Definition 21.5 If A and B are two sets, then the symbol B A refers
to the set of all functions mapping A into B.
Appendix 771
VII Cardinal Numbers: 22 — An Introduction to Cardinal

Numbers
Postulate 22.1 There exists a class of sets C which satisfies the
following properties:
(1) Every natural number n is an element of C .
(2) Any set S ∈ S is equipotent with precisely one element
in C .
The sets in C are called cardinal numbers. When we say that a
set S has cardinality κ we mean that κ ∈ C and that S ∼e κ.
If the set S has cardinality κ, we will write |S| = κ.
Definition 22.2 If S and T are sets and κ = |S| and λ = |T | then
we define addition“+”, multiplication “×” and exponentiation
of two cardinal numbers as follows:
(a) If S ∩ T = ∅,
κ + λ = |S ∪ T |
(b) κ × λ = |S × T |
(c) κλ = |S T |
where S T represents the set of all functions mapping T

into S (as previously defined). That is, |S||T | = |S T |.
For convenience we define 0λ = 0 and κ0 = 1.
Theorem 22.3 The class C of all cardinal numbers is a proper class.
VII Cardinal Numbers: 23 — Arithmetic of Cardinal Numbers

Theorem 23.1 Addition on C is well-defined. That is, if S1 , S2 , T1
and T2 are sets such that κ = |S1 | = |S2 | and λ = |T1 | = |T2 |,
then |S1 ∪ T1 | = κ + λ = |S2 ∪ T2 |.
Theorem 23.2 Let κ, λ, φ, and ψ be any four cardinal numbers.
Then
(a) κ + λ = λ + κ (Commutativity of addition)
(b) (κ + λ) + φ = κ + (λ + φ) (Associativity of addition)
(c) κ ≤ κ + λ
(d) κ ≤ λ and φ ≤ ψ ⇒ κ + φ ≤ λ + ψ.
Theorem 23.3 Multiplication on C is well-defined. That is, if S1 ,
S2 , T1 and T2 are sets such that κ = |S1 | = |S2 | and λ =
|T1 | = |T2 |, then |S1 × T1 | = κ × λ = |S2 × T2 |.
Theorem 23.4 Let κ, λ, φ, and ψ be any three cardinal numbers.
Then
(a) κ × λ = λ × κ. (Commutativity of multiplication)

(b) (κ × λ) × φ = κ × (λ × φ). (Associativity of multiplication)
(c) κ × (λ + φ) = (κ × λ) + (κ × φ). (Left-hand distributivity)
(d) λ > 0 ⇒ κ ≤ (κ × λ).
(e) κ ≤ λ and φ ≤ ψ ⇒ κ × φ ≤ λ × ψ.
(f) κ + κ = 2 × κ.
(g) κ + κ ≤ κ × κ when κ ≥ 2.
VII Cardinal Numbers: 24 — Exponentiation of Cardinal

Numbers
Theorem 24.1 Exponentiation on C is well-defined. That is, if S,
S ∗ , T and T ∗ are sets such that |S| = |S ∗ | and |T | = |T ∗ |,
∗
then |S T | = |S ∗T |.
Theorem 24.2 Let κ, λ, and φ be any three cardinal numbers. Then
(a) κλ+φ = κλ × κφ
(b) (κλ )φ = κλ×φ
(c) (κ × λ)φ = κφ × λφ
Theorem 24.3 Let κ, λ, and α be infinite cardinal numbers. Then
(a) κ ≤ κλ
(b) α ≤ κ ⇒ αλ ≤ κλ
(c) α ≤ λ ⇒ κα ≤ κλ
VII Cardinal Numbers: 25 — Sets of Cardinality c

Theorem 25.1 Let C denote the set of all complex numbers and
J denote the set of all irrational numbers. Let n denote the
cardinality of a non-empty finite set.
Appendix 773
(a) The cardinality of Rn is c

(b) The cardinality of C is c
(c) The cardinality of J is c
Theorem 25.2
(a) Let SR denote the set of all countably infinite sequences of
real numbers. The cardinality of SR is c.
(b) Let SN denote the set of all countably infinite sequences of
natural numbers. The cardinality of SN is c.
(c) Let NN(1−1) denote the set of all one-to-one functions mapping
N to N. The cardinality of NN (1−1) is c.
N
(d) Let R(1−1) denote the set of all one-to-one functions mapping
N to R. Then the cardinality of RN (1−1) is c.
Proposition 25.3 The Cantor set has cardinality c.
VIII Ordinal Numbers: 26 — Well-Ordered Sets

Theorem 26.1 Let f : T → S be a one-to-one function mapping T
onto S. If T is a well-ordered then T induces a well-ordering
on S. In particular, every countable set can be well-ordered.
Definition 26.2 Given a well-ordered set (S, ≤), a proper subset U
satisfying the property
[u ∈ U and x ≤ u] ⇒ [x ∈ U ]
is called an initial segment of S. In this definition the strict
order relation < can be used instead of ≤ without altering
the meaning of “initial segment”.
Theorem 26.3 If (S, ≤) is a well-ordered set then every initial seg-
ment in S is of the form Sa = {x ∈ S : x < a} for some
a ∈ S.
Definition 26.4 Let f : (S, ≤S ) → (T, ≤T ) be a function mapping a
well-ordered class, (S, ≤S ), onto a well-ordered class, (T, ≤T ).
Note that the symbols ≤S and ≤T will allow us to distinguish
between the order relations applied to each set S and T .
(a) We will say that the function f is increasing on (S, ≤S )
if
(x ≤S y) ⇒ (f (x) ≤T f (y))
(b) We will say that the function f is strictly increasing on

(S, ≤S ) if
(x <S y) ⇒ (f (x) <T f (y))
A strictly increasing function must be one-to-one.

(c) If f : (S, ≤S ) → (T, ≤T ) is strictly increasing then f is
said to be an order isomorphism mapping S into T .
If there exists an onto order isomorphism between the two
well-ordered classes, (S, ≤S ) and (T, ≤T ), we will say that
the classes are order isomorphic, or that a function maps S
order isomorphically onto T .
If there exists an onto order isomorphism between the two
well-ordered classes (S, ≤S ) and (T, ≤T ) we will say that the
classes are order isomorphic or that a function maps S order
isomorphically onto T .
Theorem 26.5 Let (S, ≤S ) and (T, ≤T ) be two well-ordered sets.
(a) The inverse of an order isomorphism is an order isomor-
phism.
(b) If f : (S, ≤S ) → (S, ≤S ) is a strictly increasing function
mapping S into itself then f (x) ≥ x for all x ∈ S.
(c) The set S cannot be order isomorphic to an initial segment
of itself.
(d) If f : (S, ≤S ) → (S, ≤S ) is an order isomorphism then f is
the identity function.
(e) If f : (S, ≤S ) → (T, ≤T ) and g : (S, ≤S ) → (T, ≤T ) are order
isomorphisms mapping S onto T then f = g.
(f) Suppose f : (S, ≤S ) → (T, ≤T ) is an order isomorphism
mapping S onto an initial segment of T . Then S and T
cannot be order isomorphic.
Notation 26.6 Let S and T be two well-ordered sets. Then the
expression
S ∼WO T
means “S and T are order isomorphic”. The expression
S <WO T
Appendix 775
means “S ∼WO Ta ” where Ta is some initial segment of T .

The expression
S ≤WO T
means “S ∼WO T or S <WO T ”.

Then either S ≤WO T or T ≤WO S.
Proposition 26.8 For every natural number n, the lexicographi-
cally ordered set S = {1, 2, . . . , n} × N is well-ordered.
VIII Ordinal Numbers: 27 — Ordinal Numbers: Definition and

Properties
Definition 27.1 Let S be a set. If S satisfies the two properties,
(1) S a transitive set,
(2) S is strictly ∈-well-ordered
then S is called an ordinal number.
Notation 27.2 When viewed as an ordinal number, N will be rep-
resented by the lower-case Greek letter ω.
Theorem 27.3 If α is an ordinal number then so is its successor
α+ = α ∪ {α}.
Definition 27.4 Suppose the set S is <-ordered. We say that an
element y in S is an immediate successor of the element x if
x < y and there does not exist any element z in S such that
x < z < y. We say that x is an immediate predecessor of y if
y is an immediate successor of x.
Theorem 27.5 Let α be an ordinal number greater than zero.
(a) Every element x of the ordinal α is an initial segment of α.
(b) The ordinal α is an initial segment of some ordinal.
(c) Every initial segment x in α is an ordinal number.
(d) Every element of the ordinal α is an ordinal number.
Proposition 27.6 Any infinite ordinal not equal to ω contains ω.
Proposition 27.7 Let α and β be distinct ordinal numbers. If
α ⊂ β, then α ∈ β.
Lemma 27.8 If the ordinals α and β are order isomorphic, then

α = β.
Theorem 27.9 The relation “∈” linearly orders the class of all
ordinals.
Definition 27.10 An ordinal α which does not contain a maximal
element is called a limit ordinal.
Proposition 27.11 If U is a non-empty set of ordinals which con-
tains a maximal element β with respect to ∈, then the union,
∪{α : α ∈ U }, is equal to the maximal ordinal, β, of U .
Theorem 27.12 If U is a set of ordinals which does not contain a
maximal element with respect to “∈”, then γ = ∪{α : α ∈ U }
is a limit ordinal which is not contained in U . Furthermore,
γ is the ∈-least ordinal which contains all elements of U .
Corollary 27.13 Let U be a non-empty set of ordinals which con-
tains no maximal element. If U satisfies the “initial segment
property”, then U is the limit ordinal ∪{α : α ∈ U }.
Definition 27.14 Let T be a non-empty subset of an ordered set
(S, <). If u is an upper bound of the set T and, for any
other upper bound v of T , u ≤ v, then we say that u is the
least upper bound of T . We also abbreviate the expression by
writing u = lub T or u = lub(T ).
Theorem 27.15 Let γ be a non-zero ordinal number. The following
are equivalent:
(1) The ordinal γ is a limit ordinal

(2) The ordinal γ is such that γ = ∪{α : α ∈ γ}
(3) The ordinal γ is such that lub(γ) = γ
VIII Ordinal Numbers: 28 — Properties of the Class of Ordinal

Numbers
Theorem 28.1 The class, O, of ordinal numbers is a strict ∈-
linearly ordered class.
Theorem 28.2 The class O of all ordinal numbers is ∈-well-ordered.
Appendix 777
Theorem 28.3 A set S is an initial segment of O if and only if S

is an ordinal number.
Theorem 28.4 The class O of all ordinal numbers is not a set.
Theorem 28.5 Principle of transfinite induction. Let {xα : α ∈ O}
be a class whose elements are indexed by the ordinals. Let P
denote a particular element property. Suppose P (α) means
“the element xα satisfies the property P ”. Suppose that, for
any β ∈ O,
“P (α) is true ∀ α ∈ β” implies “P (β) is true”
Then P (α) holds true for all ordinals α ∈ O.

Corollary 28.6 Transfinite induction. Version 2. Let {xα : α ∈ O}
be a class whose elements are indexed by the ordinals. Let P
denote a particular element property. Suppose P (α) means
“the element xα satisfies the property P ”. Suppose that:
(1) P (0) holds true,
(2) P (α) holds true implies P (α + 1) holds true,
(3) If β is a limit ordinal, “P (α) is true for all α ∈ β implies
P (β) is true”.
Then P (α) holds true for all ordinals α.
Theorem 28.7 Let S be a <-well-ordered set. Then S is order iso-
morphic to some ordinal number α ∈ O. Furthermore this
order isomorphism is unique.
Definition 28.8 Let S be a <-well-ordered set. If α is the unique
ordinal which is order isomorphic to S then we will say that
S is of order type α, or of ordinality α. of S is α. If S is of
ordinality α, we will write ord S = α.
Lemma 28.9 Hartogs’ lemma. Let S be any set. Then there exists
an ordinal α which is not equipotent with S or any of its
subsets.
Theorem 28.10 There exists an uncountable ordinal.
Corollary 28.11 The class ω1 = {α ∈ O : α is a countable ordinal}
is the least uncountable ordinal.
Definition 28.12 Let S be any set. Let
U = {α ∈ O : α not equipotent to any subset of S}
By Hartogs’ lemma the class U is non-empty. Since O is

∈-well-ordered, U contains a unique least ordinal h(S). We
will call the ordinal h(S) the Hartogs number of S. Then h
can be viewed as a class function which associates each set
S in the class of all sets to a unique ordinal number α in the
class of all ordinals O.
Theorem 28.13 There exists a strictly increasing class {ωα : α ∈ O}
of pairwise non-equipotent infinite ordinals all of which are
uncountable except for ω0 = ω.
Theorem 28.14 Let {ωα : α ∈ O} be the class of ordinals as defined
in the previous theorem.
(a) Every element of {ωα : α ∈ O} is a limit ordinal.
(b) For every ordinal α, either α ∈ ωα or α = ωα .
Theorem 28.15 The Transfinite recursion theorem. Let W be a
well-ordered class and f : W → W be a class function map-
ping W into W . Let u ∈ W . Then there exists a unique class
function g : O → W which satisfies the following properties:
(a) g(0) = u
(b) g(α+ ) = f (g(α)), ∀α ∈ O
(c) g(β) = lub{g(α) : α ∈ β}, ∀ limit ordinals β
VIII Ordinal Numbers: 29 — Initial Ordinals: “Cardinal Num-

bers Are Us!”
Definition 29.1 We say that β is an initial ordinal if it is the least
of all ordinals equipotent with itself. That is, β is an initial
ordinal if α ∈ β ⇒ α ∼e β.
Lemma 29.2 The class of all initial ordinals is a subclass of I .
Theorem 29.3 The class I is precisely the class of all initial
ordinals.
Theorem 29.4 [AC] The Well-ordering theorem. Every set can be
well-ordered.
Appendix 779
Theorem 29.5 The class of all initial ordinals I = ω0 ∪ {ωα : α ∈

O} satisfies the following properties:
(1) Every set S is equipotent to exactly one element in I .
(2) Two sets S and T are equipotent if and only if they are
equipotent to the same element of I .
(3) The class I is ∈-linearly ordered.
Definition 29.6 Cardinal numbers. An ordinal is called a cardinal
number if and only if this ordinal is an initial ordinal. The
class, I , is also referred to as the class, C , of all cardinal
numbers.
Lemma 29.7 For any infinite cardinal number κ, define a relation
<∗ on κ × κ as follows. For pairs (α, β) and (γ, ψ) of ordinal
pairs in κ × κ,
⎧
⎪ α∪β ∈ γ ∪ψ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ or
(α, β) <∗ (γ, ψ) β ∈ ψ when α ∪ β = γ ∪ ψ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ or
⎪
⎩
α ∈ γ when α ∪ β = γ ∪ ψ and β = ψ
Then <∗ well-orders κ × κ.
Theorem 29.8 [AC] For any ordinal α, ℵα × ℵα = ℵα .
Corollary 29.9 Let κ be an infinite cardinal and {Aα : α ∈ β} be a
set of non-empty sets indexed by the elements of the ordinal
β ∈= κ where |Aα | ∈= κ for all α ∈ β. Then | ∪ {Aα : α ∈
β}| ∈= κ.
Corollary 29.10 For any infinite cardinal number κ, κκ = 2κ .
Definition 29.11
(a) We say that an infinite cardinal number, ℵγ , is a successor

cardinal if the index, γ, has an immediate predecessor (i.e.,
γ = β +1, for some β). The expression, ℵα+ = ℵα+1 , denotes
a successor cardinal. We say that an infinite cardinal num-
ber, ℵγ , is a limit cardinal if γ is a limit ordinal (i.e., γ =
lub{α : α ∈ γ}).
(b) We say that a limit cardinal ℵγ is a strong limit cardinal if
ℵγ is uncountable and {2ℵα : α ∈ γ} ⊆ ℵγ .
Theorem 29.12 [GCH] Every uncountable limit cardinal is a strong

limit cardinal.
Theorem 29.13 [AC] There exists a strong limit cardinal number.
Definition 29.14
(a) We say that an infinite cardinal ℵγ is a singular cardinal

number if ℵγ is the least upper bound of a strictly increasing
sequence of ordinals, {ακ : κ ∈ β}, indexed by the elements
of some ordinal β in ℵγ .
(b) An infinite cardinal ℵγ is said to be a regular cardinal number
if it is not a singular cardinal number. That is, there does not
exist an ordinal, β, in ℵγ such that ℵγ = lub{ακ : κ ∈ β}.
Theorem 29.15 Every infinite successor cardinal, ℵα+ = ℵα+1 , is
a regular cardinal.
Theorem 29.16 Let γ be an infinite cardinal number. If γ is a
singular cardinal then the cardinal number ℵγ is a singular
cardinal.
Definition 29.17 A regular cardinal number which a limit cardinal
is called an inaccessible cardinal. A regular cardinal number
which is a strong limit cardinal is called a strongly inaccessible
cardinal.
Definition 29.18 Let ℵγ be an infinite cardinal. We say the cofinal-
ity of ℵγ is β and write cf(ℵγ ) = β if β is the least ordinal in
ℵγ which indexes an increasing set of ordinals {θα : α < β}
such that ℵγ = lub{θα : α < β}. If no such β exists in ℵγ then
we say the cofinality cf(ℵγ ) of is ℵγ and write cf(ℵγ ) = ℵγ .
Theorem 29.19 The cofinality cf(ℵγ ) of an infinite cardinal num-
ber ℵγ is a cardinal number. Hence, cf(ℵγ ) is the smallest
cardinality of all sets which are cofinal in ℵγ .
Theorem 29.20 The cofinality cf(ϕ) of an infinite cardinal number
ϕ is a regular cardinal.
Theorem 29.21 If κ is an infinite cardinal and cf(κ) ≤ λ, then
κ < κλ .
Appendix 781
IX More on Axioms: Choice, Regularity, and Martin’s

Axiom: 30 — Axiom of Choice
Theorem 30.1 Suppose S is a finite set of non-empty sets whose
union is the set M . Then there exists a function f : S → M
which maps each set to one of its elements.
Theorem 30.2 Let AC∗ denote the statement:
For any set S = {Sα : α ∈ γ} of non-empty sets,

Πα∈γ Sα is non-empty.
The Axiom of choice holds true if and only if AC∗ holds true.
The Axiom of choice holds true if and only if AC∗ holds true.
Theorem 30.3 The statement “Every set is well-orderable” holds
true if and only if the Axiom of choice holds true.
Theorem 30.4 [AC] Any infinite set can be expressed as the union
of a pairwise disjoint set of infinite countable sets.
Theorem 30.5 [AC] Let (X, <) be a partially ordered set. If every
chain of X has an upper bound then X has a maximal
element.
Theorem 30.6 Suppose that those partially ordered sets (X, <) in
which every chain has an upper bound must have a maximal
element. Then given any subset S ⊆ P(S) − ∅ there exists
a choice function f : S → S which maps each set in S to
one of its elements.
Theorem 30.7 [ZL] Every vector space has a basis.

Axiom: 31 — Axiom of Regularity and Cumulative
Hierarchy
Theorem 31.1 The Axiom of regularity holds true if and only
if every non-empty set S contains a minimal element with
respect to the membership relation “∈”.
Theorem 31.2 [Axiom of regularity] No set is an element of itself.
Definition 31.3 We say that a class is well-founded if it does not

contain an infinite descending chain of sets. That is, there
does not exist an infinite sequence {xn : n ∈ ω} such that
· · · ∈ x4 ∈ x3 ∈ x2 ∈ x1 ∈ x0 .
Theorem 31.4 [AC] The Axiom of regularity and the statement
“Every set is well-founded ” are equivalent statements.
Definition 31.5 Let x be a set. The transitive closure of x is a set
tx satisfying the following three properties:
(1) The set tx is a transitive set
(2) x ⊆ tx
(3) tx is the ⊆-least transitive set satisfying properties 1
and 2
Theorem 31.6 Let x be a set. Then there exists a smallest transi-
tive set tx which contains all elements of x. That is, if s is a
transitive set such that x ⊆ s, then x ⊆ tx ⊆ s.
Definition 31.7 Define the class function f : S → S as f (S) =
P(S). The elements of the class {Vα : α ∈ O} belong to the
image of the class function g(α) = Vα recursively defined as
follows:
g(0) = V0 =∅ =0
g(1) = V1 = f (V0 ) = P(0) = {∅} = 1
g(2) = V2 = f (V1 ) = P(1) = {{∅}, ∅} = 21 = 2
g(3) = V3 = f (V2 ) = P(2) = {{{{∅}, ∅}},
{{∅}}, {∅}, ∅}
g(4) = V4 = f (V3 ) = P(4) (16 elements)
.. ..
. .
+
g(α ) = Vα+ = f (Vα ) = P(Vα )
.. ..
. .
If λ = limit ordinal, g(λ) = Vλ = ∪α∈λ Vα
.. ..
. .
The class {Vα : α ∈ O} is called the Cumulative hierarchy of

sets. We define V = ∪α∈O Vα .
Appendix 783
Lemma 31.8 (a) Each set Vα is a transitive set.

(b) If α ∈ β then Vα ∈ Vβ . Hence, Vα ⊂ Vβ .
Lemma 31.9 For any non-empty set B, B ⊂ V implies B ∈ V .
Theorem 31.10 For every set x, x ∈ V = ∪α∈O Vα .
Theorem 31.11 Let V = ∪α∈O Vα be the class of sets constructed
as described above. If V contains all sets then every set has
a ∈-minimal element.
Theorem 31.12 Let V = ∪α∈O Vα be the class of sets constructed
as described above.
(a) The rank of the empty set ∅ is zero.
(b) If U ∈ Vβ then rank(U ) < β; hence, U ∈ Vrank(U ) for all
sets U . Conversely, rank(U ) < β ⇒ U ∈ Vβ .
(c) If U and V are sets such that U ∈ V then rank(U ) <
rank(V ).
(d) If γ is an ordinal then rank(γ) = γ.
Proposition 31.13 Let β be a limit ordinal. If a and b are two
elements of Vβ . Then {a, b} is an element of Vβ . That is, Vβ
satisfies the property described by the Axiom of pair.
Proposition 31.14 Let β be any ordinal. If U is an element of Vβ
then ∪{x : x ∈ U } ∈ Vβ . That is, Vβ satisfies the property
described by the Axiom of union.
Proposition 31.15 Let β be a limit ordinal. If U is an element of
Vβ then Vβ also contains a set Y = P(U ) such that S ⊆ U
implies S ∈ Y . That is, Vβ satisfies the property described by
the Axiom of power set.
Proposition 31.16 Let α be any ordinal. For any two elements x
and y of Vα , if for all z ∈ Vα (z ∈ x ⇔ z ∈ y), then x and y
are the same set.
Proposition 31.17 Let α be an ordinal number such that α > ω0 .
Then ω0 ∈ Vα .
Proposition 31.18 Let α be an ordinal number. Then the Axiom
of subsets holds true in Vα .
Proposition 31.19 The set Vω0 satisfies the property described by
the Axiom of replacement.
Proposition 31.20 Let γ be a limit ordinal. Then the set Vγ satis-

fies the property described by the Axiom of choice.
Proposition 31.21 Let α be an ordinal. Then the set Vα satisfies
the property described by the Axiom of construction.

Axiom: 32 — Martin’s Axiom
Definition 32.1 Let (P, ≤) be a partially ordered set. If P contains
no uncountable strong antichain then (P, ≤) is said to satisfy
the countable chain condition. In this case, we say that (P, ≤)
satisfies the ccc or that (P, ≤) is a ccc partial order.
Definition 32.2 Let (P, ≤) be a partially ordered set. Let D be a
subset of P such that for every element p in P there exists an
element d in D such that d ≤ p. A subset D satisfying this
property is said to be dense in the partial ordering (P, ≤).
Definition 32.3 Let F be a subset of a partially ordered set (P, ≤).
If F is non-empty and satisfies the two properties, (1) If x
and y belong to F there exists z in F which is less than or
equal to both x and y (i.e., F is a filter base or downward
directed), (2) if x belongs to F and x is less than or equal
to an element y of P , then y belongs to F (i.e., F is upward
closed). A filter in (P, ≤) is a proper filter if it is not all of
P . If x ∈ P then the set of all elements above x is called a
principal filter with principal element x. Such a filter is the
smallest filter which contains x.
Theorem 32.4 MA(κ): Let κ be an infinite cardinal and (P, ≤) be
a non-empty partially ordered set satisfying the countable
chain condition. Let D = {D ∈ P(P ) : D is dense in P }
such that |D| ≤ κ. Then there is a proper filter F ⊆ P such
that, F ∩ D = ∅ for every set D ∈ D. The statement MA(ℵ0 )
holds true in ZFC.
Theorem 32.5 The statement MA(2ℵ0 ) fails in ZFC.
Definition 32.6 Martin’s axiom, MA, is defined as being MA(κ)
where κ satisfies ℵ0 ≤ κ < 2ℵ0
Appendix 785
Theorem 32.7 [MA] Suppose κ is an infinite cardinal such that

κ < 2ℵ0 . If X is a Hausdorff compact space with ccc and
{Uα : α ≤ κ} is a family of open dense subsets of X then
∩{Uα : α} = ∅.
X Ordinal Numbers Arithmetic: 33 — Addition

Definition 33.1 Let (S, ≤S ) and (T, ≤T ) be two disjoint well-
ordered sets. We define the relation “≤S∪T ” on S ∪ T as
follows:
(a) u ≤S∪T v if {u, v} ⊆ S and u ≤S v.
(b) u ≤S∪T v if {u, v} ⊆ T and u ≤T v.
(c) u ≤S∪T v if u ∈ S, v ∈ T .
Theorem 33.2 Let (S, ≤S ) and (T, ≤T ) be two disjoint well-ordered
sets. Then the relation ≤S∪T well-orders the set S ∪ T .
Definition 33.3 Let α and β be two ordinal numbers. Let (S, ≤S )
and (T, ≤T ) be two disjoint well-ordered sets of order type α
and β respectively.7 We define α + β as follows:
α + β = ord(S ∪ T, ≤S∪T )
Theorem 33.4 Let (S, ≤S ), (T, ≤T ) and (U, ≤U ), (V, ≤V ) be two

pairs of disjoint well-ordered sets such that
ord
S = α = ord U
ord
T = β = ord V
Then ord (S ∪ T, ≤S∪T ) = α + β = ord (U ∪ V, ≤U ∪V ). Hence,

addition of ordinal numbers is well-defined.
Theorem 33.5 Let α, β, and γ be three ordinal numbers. Then:
(a) (α + β) + γ = α + (β + γ) (Addition is associative)
(b) For any ordinal γ > 0, α < α + γ
(c) For any ordinal γ, γ ≤ α + γ
7
Addition can also be defined inductively as follows: For all α and β,
(a) β + 0 = β, (b) β + (α + 1) = (β + α) + 1, (c) β + α = lub{β + γ : γ < α}
whenever α is a limit ordinal.
(d) α < β ⇒ α + γ ≤ β + γ
(e) α < β ⇒ γ + α < γ + β
(f) α + β = α + γ ⇒ β = γ (Left term cancellation
is acceptable)
(g) α + 0 = α
Theorem 33.6 Let β be a limit ordinal. Then, for any ordinal, α,
α + β = sup {α + γ : γ < β}
X Ordinal Numbers Arithmetic: 34 — Multiplication
Definition 34.1 Let (S, ≤S ) and (T, ≤T ) be two well-ordered sets.
We define the lexicographic ordering on the Cartesian product
S × T as follows:
⎧
⎪
⎨ s1 <S s2
(s1 , t1 ) ≤S×T (s2 , t2 ) provided or
⎪
⎩ s =s
1 2 and t1 ≤T t2

The lexicographic ordering of the Cartesian product S × T is
a well-ordering.
Theorem 34.3 If the well-ordered sets S1 and S2 are order isomor-
phic and the well-ordered sets T1 and T2 are order isomorphic
then the lexicographically ordered Cartesian products S1 ×T1
and S2 × T2 are order isomorphic.
Definition 34.4 Let α and β be two ordinals with set represen-
tatives A and B respectively. We define the multiplication
α × β as:
α × β = ord(B × A)
The product α × β is equivalently written as αβ, (respecting
the order). Note the order of the terms in the Cartesian prod-
uct B × A is different from the order α × β of their respective
ordinalities.
Theorem 34.5 Let α, β, and γ be three ordinal numbers. Then:
(a) (γβ)α = γ(βα) (Multiplication is associative)
(b) For any γ > 0, α < β ⇒ γα < γβ
Appendix 787
(c) γ(α + β) = γα + γβ (Left-hand distribution is

acceptable)
(d) For any γ > 0, γα = γβ ⇒ α = β (Left-hand
cancellation is acceptable)
(e) γ0 = 0
(f) For any limit ordinal β = 0, αβ = sup {αγ : γ < β}.
Definition 34.6 Let γ be any non-zero ordinal. We define the
γ-based exponentiation function gγ : O → O as follows:
(1) gγ (0) = 1
(2) gγ (α+ ) = gγ (α)γ
(3) gγ (α) = lub{gγ (β) : β < α} whenever α is a limit
ordinal.
Whenever γ = 0 we represent gγ (α) as γ α . Then γ α+1 = γ α γ.
If γ = 0 we define γ α = 0α = 0.
Theorem 34.7 Let α, β, and γ be three ordinal numbers. Then,
assuming γ > 1,
α<β ⇔ γα < γβ
Theorem 34.8 Let α, β, and γ be three ordinal numbers where
α = 0.
(a) γ β γ α = γ β+α
(b) (γ β )α = γ βα
A.2 Boolean Algebras and Martin’s Axiom
Definition A.1 A partially ordered set (P, ≤) is called a lattice if

a ∨ b = max{a, b} and a ∧ b = min{a, b} both exist in P for
all pairs a, b in P .
Definition A.2 If B is a subset of a partially ordered set, (P, ≤),
∨B denotes the least upper bound of B and ∧B denotes the
greatest lower bound of B (both with respect to ≤). Note that
∨B and ∧B may or may not be an element of B. A lattice
(P, ≤) is said to be a complete lattice if for any non-empty
subset B of P , both ∨B and ∧B exist and belong to P .
Definition A.3 Let X be a topological space. A subset B is said
to be regular open in X if B = intX (clX (B)). The set of all
regular open subsets of X will be denoted as Ro(X).
Theorem A.4 Let X be a topological space. Then (Ro(X), ⊆, ∨, ∩)

is a complete lattice in (τ (X), ⊆).
Definition A.5 Let (L, ≤, ∨, ∧) be a lattice. An L-ultrafilter is a
proper filter F in L which is not properly contained in any
other proper filter in L. If the filter F is such that ∩{F : F ∈
F } = ∅ then we say that the filter F is a fixed ultrafilter.
Ultrafilters which are not fixed are said to be free ultrafilters.
Theorem A.6 Let X be a topological space.
(a) Suppose F is a proper L-filter where (L, ⊆, ∨, ∧) is a
lattice in (P(X), ⊆). Then F can be extended to an
L-ultrafilter.
(b) Suppose F is an L-filter in (L, ⊆, ∨, ∧) a lattice in
(P(X), ⊆). Then F is an L-ultrafilter if and only if
for every A ⊆ X, either A ∈ F or X − A ∈ F .
Theorem A.7 Let X be a topological space. Then (Ro(X), ⊆, ∨, ∩)
is a complete lattice in (τ (X), ⊆). An Ro(X)-filter, F , is an
Ro(X)-ultrafilter if and only if, for any A ∈ Ro(X), either A
or X − clX (A) belongs to F .
Definition A.8 A lattice (L, ∨, ∧) is said to be a distributive lattice
if, for any x, y, and z in L, x ∨ (y ∧ z) = (x ∨ y) ∧ (x ∨ z) and
x ∧ (y ∨ z) = (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ z).
— The lattice (L, ∨, ∧) is said to be a complemented lattice
it has a maximum element, denoted by 1, and a mini-
mum element, denoted by 0, and for every x ∈ L there
exists a unique x such that x ∨ x = 1 and x ∧ x = 0.
— A complemented distributive lattice is referred to as
being a Boolean algebra. A Boolean algebra is denoted
as (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) when we explicitly want to express
what the maximum and minimum elements are.
Definition A.9 Suppose we are given two lattices (B1 , ≤1 , ∨1 , ∧1 ,
0, 1, ) and (B2 , ≤2 , ∨2 , ∧2 , 0, 1, ) and a function f which maps
elements of B1 to elements of B2 . We say that f : B1 → B2
is a Boolean homomorphism if, for any x, y ∈ B,
(1) f (x ∨1 y) = f (x) ∨2 f (y),
(2) f (x ∧1 y) = f (x) ∧2 f (y),
(3) f (x ) = f (x) .
Appendix 789
The function f : B1 → B2 is a Boolean isomorphism if f is a

bijection and both f and f ← are Boolean homomorphisms.
Definition A.10 Let (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra. Let
S (B) = {U : U is a B-ultrafilter}. We define the function
fB : B → P(S (B)) as follows: fB (x) = {F ∈ S (B) :
x ∈ U }.
Theorem A.11 Let (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra. Then
the set {fB (x) : x ∈ B} is a base for the open sets of some
topology, τ (S (B)), on the set S (B) of all B-ultrafilters.
Theorem A.12 Let (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, 0, 1, ) be a Boolean algebra.
(1) The function fB : B → P(S (B)) is a Boolean homo-

morphism mapping B into P(S (B)).
(2) For every x ∈ B, fB (x) is clopen in S (B). Hence,
fB [B] ⊆ B(S (B)) (the set of all clopen sets in S (B)).
(3) The function fB : B → S (B) is a Boolean isomorphism
mapping B into B(S (B)) (the set of all clopen sets in
S (B)).
(4) The topological space (S (B), τ (S (B))) where τ (S (B))
is the topology generated by the open base {fB (x) :
x ∈ B} is a compact zero-dimensional Hausdorff topo-
logical space.
(5) The Boolean isomorphism fB : B → S (B) maps B onto
B(S (B)) (the set of all clopen sets in S (B)).
Theorem A.13 Let κ be an infinite cardinal number such that
κ < 2ℵ0 . Then the following are equivalent:
(1) (Martin’s axiom MA) If (P, ≤) is a partially ordered set
satisfying ccc and D = {Dα : α ≤ κ} is a family of dense
subsets of P , then there exists a filter F on P such that
F ∩ Dα = ∅ for each α ≤ κ.
(2) If X is a compact Hausdorff topological space satisfying
ccc and D = {Dα : α ≤ κ} is a family of dense open
subsets of X, then ∩{Dα : α ≤ κ} = ∅.
(3) If (B, ≤, ∨, ∧, ) is a Boolean algebra with the ccc prop-
erty and D = {Dα : α ≤ κ} is a family of dense sub-
sets of B, then there exists a filter F on B such that
(4) If (P, ≤) is a partially ordered set satisfying ccc and

|P | ≤ κ and D = {Dα : α ≤ κ} is a family of dense
subsets of P , then there exist a filter F on P such that
Theorem A.14 Let κ be a cardinal such that ℵ0 ≤ κ < 2ℵ0 . Let
X be a Hausdorff topological space satisfying ccc such that
{x ∈ X : x has a compact neighborhood} is dense in X.
Suppose that D = {Dα : α ≤ κ} is a family of dense open
subsets of X. Then ∩{Dα : α ≤ κ} is dense in X if and only
if Martin’s axiom holds true.
Bibliography
André, R., Axioms and set theory, www.math.uwaterloo.ca/∼randre/1aase

t theory 140613.pdf, 2015.
André, R., When does the family of singular compactifications form a com-
plete lattice? Rocky Mountain J. Math., 27(4) (Fall 1997), 979–1007.
André, R., Compactifying a convergence space with functions, Int.
J. Math. Math. Sci., 19(4) (1996), 657–666, https://core.ac.uk/
download/pdf/208409171.pdf.
Bell, M.G. and Ginsburg, J., First countable Lindelöf extensions of uncount-
able discrete spaces, Can. Math. Bull., 23 (1980), 397–399.
Caterino, A., Faulkner, G.D., and Vipera, M.C., Two applications of sin-
gular sets to the theory of compactifications, Rendiconti Dell’Institue
di Mat. dell’ Univ. di Thieste (1989).
Chandler, R.E., Hausdorff Compactifications, Marcel Dekker, New York,
1976.
Chandler, R.E., Cain G.L., and Faulkner, G.D., Singular sets and remain-
ders, Trans. Amer. Math Soc., 268 (1981), 161–171.
Chandler, R.E. and Faulkner, G.D., Singular compactifications: The order
structure, Proc. Am. Math. Soc., 100(2) (1987), 377–382.
Comfort, W.W. and Negropontis, S., The Theory of Ultrafilters, Springer-
Verlag, New York, 1974.
Comfort, W.W., Retractions and other continuous maps, from βX onto
βX \X, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 114 (1965), 843–847.
Devlin, K.J., Fundamentals of Contemporary Set Theory, Springer-Verlag,
New York, 1974.
Diamond, B., Algebraic subrings and perfect compactifications, Topol.
Appl., 39 (1991), 217–228.
Dugundji, J., Topology, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, Massachusetts, 1967.
791
Enderton, H.B., Elements of Set Theory, Academic Press, Inc., California,

1977.
Engelking, R., General Topology, Polish Scientific Publishers, Warsaw, 1977.
Gillman, L. and Jerison, M., Rings of Continuous Functions, Van Nostrand,
Princeton, New Jersey, 1960.
Ginsburg, J. and Saks, V., Some applications of ultrafilters in topology,
Pac. J. Math., 57 (1975), 403–417.
Glicksberg, I., Stone–Čech compactifications of products, Trans. Am. Math.
Soc., 90 (1959), 369–382.
Hall, D.W. and Spencer, G.L., Elementary Topology, John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York, 1955.
Henricksen, M. and Isbell, J.R., Some properties of compactifications, Duke
Math. J., 25 (1958), 83–106.
Hrbacek, K. and Jech, T., Introduction to Set Theory, Marcel Dekker, Inc.,
New York and Basel, 1984.
Isbell, J.R., Zero-dimensional spaces, Tohoku Math. J., 7 (1955), 1–8.
Kelley, J.L., General Topology, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991.
Monk, J.D., Introduction to Set Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969.
Munkres, J.R., Topology, Prentice Hall Inc., 2000.
Ponomarev, V.I., On paracompact spaces and their continuous mappings,
Dokl. Aked. Nauk SSSR, 143 (1962), 46–49 — Soviet Math. Dokl., 3
(1962), 347–350.
Porter, J.R. and Woods, R.G., Extensions and Absolutes of Hausdorff
Spaces, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988.
Rayburn, M.C., On Hausdorff compactifications, Pac. J. Math., 44 (1973),
707–714.
Rudin, M.E., The box product of countably many compact metric spaces,
General Topol Appl., 2 (1972), 293–298.
Roitman, J., Introduction to Modern Set Theory, John Wiley & Sons, New
York, 1990.
Rudin, M.E., A new proof that metric spaces are paracompact, Proc. Am.
Math. Soc., 20 (1969), 603.
Simmons, G.F., Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis, Robert E.
Krieger Publishing Company, Florida, 1983.
Steen, L.A. and Seebach, J.A. Jr., Counterexamples in Topology, Springer-
Verlag, New York, 1986.
Stephenson, R. M. Jr., Pseudocompact spaces, Trans. Am. Math. Soc., 134
(1968), 437–448.
Thomas, J., A regular space not completely regular, Am. Math. Month.,
76 (1969), 181–182.
Thrivikraman, T., On compactifications of Tychonoff spaces, Yokohama
Math. J., 20 (1972), 99–106.
Bibliography 793
Walker, R.C., The Stone–Čech Compactification, Springer-Verlag, New

York, 1974.
Willard, S., General Topology, Dover Publication Inc., New York, 2004.
Weese, M. and Winfried, J., Discovering modern set theory. I. The basics,
volume 8 of graduate studies in mathematics, (1996), xvii–210. Ameri-
can Mathematical Society, Providence.
Index
A Bolzano-Weierstrass property
a(F ), 312 (BWP), 366–367
accumulation point, 278 Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem (BWT),
367
agree, two functions, 133
Boolean algebra, 705–706
algebra C(S), 134
ϕ properties, 713
algebraic subring, 601
filter, 709
axiom of choice, 145
isomorphism, 712
topological representation, 720
B
ultrafilter characterization, 710
βN is Freudenthal, 609 Boolean homomorphism, 712
β(S × T ), 553 Borel sets, 56
βN cardinality, 506 properties, 56
Baire category, 728 boundary of a set, 77
application, 730 bounded in Rn , 347
application two, 731 box topology, 150
open-hereditary, 731 Brouwer’s fixed point theorem, 447
theorem one, 729
theorem two, 730 C
Baire space, 724 C(S), 134
characterization, 725 C[a, b], 627
lemma, 727 Cα (S), 492–493, 676
Banach space, 16 C-embedded, 571
base a sufficient condition, 541
zero-sets as base, 256 closed subsets of R, 540
base for a topology, 87 property, 543–544
base for closed sets, 88 C ∗ -embedded
base property, 91 closed subset in compl. reg., 511
basis, 88 closed subset of R, 491
bdS A, 77 closed subset of a metric, 491
795
implies C-embedded, 539 non-Hausdorff, 345

of a dense subset, 496 one-to-one continuous image of,
C ∗ -embedded subsets, 252, 483 345
N in R, 488 products of compact, 345
compact subset, 490 realcompact and pseudocompact,
compact subsets in R, 487 573
Urysohn’s extension theorem, 488 subspaces, 342
C ∗ (S), 266 with T 2 implies normal, 342
Cγ (S), 492 compact function, 582
Cω (S), 493 compactification, 478
C-embedded subsets, 538 cardinality, 508
implies C ∗ -embedded, 538 equivalent, 480
Cantor set, 174 induced by a non-singular function,
graphic construction, 175 520
maps continuously onto [0, 1]3 , 181 induced by a singular function, 517
Cartesian product, 144 one-point, 500
factor, 144 partial ordering, 492
projection map, 146 partial ordering of family of, 482,
set theoretic properties, 146 675
Cauchy sequence, 15, 28 singular, 517
is not a topological property, 127 Stone-Čech, 479
Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, 6 extends, 484
clopen, 49 maximal, 486
closed function, 123 uniqueness, 490
closed set axioms, 46 subalgebra of C ∗ (S), 493
closed subsets, 29 two-point compactification, 526
basic properties, 45 compactness characterizations, 340
closure, 62 complemented lattice, 705
properties, 62, 64 complete, 16
closure viewed as an operator, 65 C(S), 17
cluster point, 62 R, 16
coarser topology, 43 complete lattice, 694
cocountable topology on R2 , 68 complete metric space, 28
cofinality of a cardinal number, 780 completely Hausdorff, 220
cofinite topology, 47 completely normal, 351
not Hausdorff, 215 completely reg
compact, 338 sep ctbles disj coz, 257
σ, 418 completely regular, 245
characterization, 358 carry over on products, 248
closed and bounded subsets of Rn , characterization, 266
347 characterization, 350
continuous image, 342 closed base of zero-sets implies, 256
countably, 363, 367 closed subset of, 511
in metric space, 389 if loc. cpct + T2 , 417
in normed vector space, 18 metrizable spaces, 246
maximum value theorem, 347 subspace is completely regular, 248
Index 797
Z[S] as base ⇒, 256 coz, 249

zero sets are base for closed sets, coz[S], 255
255 cozero-set, 249
completely separated forms a base for open sets, 256
if and only if, 244 cube, 184, 269
completely separated in S, 243 curve, 184
completely separated sets (redefined), Cz, 249, 736
251, 253
completion of a metric space, 641 D
Component decomposition map, 197
in a compact set, 469 decomposition of S, 197
component, 448 decomposition space, 197
pathwise, 465 by components, 452
prod. of components is a, 451 zero-dimensional, 472
components deleted Tychonoff plank, 578
are closed, 450 dense subset, 79
connected cardinality, 105
not locally connected, 454 derived set, 62
connected components, 448 directed set, 286
prod. of components is a, 451 discrete metric, 25
connected space, 442 discrete topology, 44
closure of, 445 discrete uniformity, 645
continuous image, 443 distance
products, 445 a pt to closed set, 256
unions, 444 distributive lattice, 705
dense subset, 445
continuity, sequential, 34 E
continuity, topological, 34
continuous embedding, 127
on Q, 733 embedding theorem I, 169
continuous function, 32, 120 embedding theorem II, 269
characterizations, 122 embedding theorem III, 349
composition, 122 equivalent bases, 99
iff f pulls back closed sets, 122 equivalent functions, 493
on a set iff at every point, 121 equivalent topological sets, 43
restriction to a subset, 122 Euclidean topology, 42
countability properties, 101 evaluation map, 168
countable intersection property, 379 extending a topology over a set, 51
countably compact, 363, 367 extension of a function, 484
[0, ω1 ) is, 371
closed subsets of, 367 F
characterizations, 364 f pulls back open sets to open sets,
continuous image of, 368 121
implies pseudocompact, 373–374 f [A], 117
in second countable spaces, 372 f −1 , 118
products, 368 f ← , 118
f ← [B], 117 fixed point, 446

f ← [U ], 33 Brouwer’s fixed point, 447
f β(ω) , 562 Fréchet space, 211
f υ , 564 free union, 51
f+ , 561 disjoint union topology, 51
F, 322 example, 52
F → x, 312 Freudenthal compactification,
F ∗ , 310, 354 598
F -space, 735 βN is, 609
C ∗ -embedded, 739
βS \S, 742 G
characterizations, 736, 739, 741
conv. sequence has cst tail-end, 745 g-saturated, 195
dense, 740 Gδ -topology, 92
subspace, 740 Gδ , 53
F (N, S) is separable, 619 examples, 53
Fσ , 53 properties, 53
examples, 53 Q is not, 731
properties, 53
Q is, 53 H
feebly compact, 395 H = C(S)\C ∗ (S), 589
characterization, 395 Hausdorff
implies pseudocompact, 402
carried over by 1-1 closed function,
fibre, 582
216
of a continuous function is a
carries over to products, 216
zero-set, 249
characterizations, 215
fibre of an element under a map, 192
cofinite topology is T2 , 215
filter, 309, 701
completely, 220
closed subsets, 320
continuous functions, 320 hereditary, 216
derived from a net, 314 not completely Hausdorff, 220
fixed, 311 Hausdorff space, 215
free, 311 Heine–Borel theorem (generalized),
filter base, 309 19
accumulation point, 312 hereditary topological property,
adherence, 312 107
convergence, 312 Hewitt–Nachbin realcompactification,
finer, coarser, 322 573
generates, 310, 354 Hilbert space, 16
limit point, 312 Holder’s inequality, C[a, b], 615,
finer topology, 43 628
finite intersection property, 339 homeomorphic index sets, 166
first countable, 101 homeomorphic topological spaces,
metrizable spaces, 103 126
radial plane not, 104 homeomorphism, 126
under open fcn, 130 characterizations, 126
Index 799
I Lindelöf
ideal, 355 carried over by continuous
maximal, 355 functions, 384
properties, 355 hereditarily closed, 383
identification map, 197 regular implies normal, 384
identity map not cts, 124 second countable implies Lindelöf,
identity of indiscernibles, 24 378
indiscernibility of identicals, 24 are realcompact, 575
indiscrete topology, 44 is realcompact, 575
infinity norm, 13 local connectedness, 454
inner product, 4 locally compact, 408
interior of a set, 69 +T2 ⇒ compl. reg., 417
interior operator axioms, 72 Q is not, 412
interior point, 69 arbitrary products, 414
interior properties, 70 completely regular, 417
interior viewed as an operator, 71 dense subsets, 412
finite products are, 414
K hereditary properties, 410
Kolmogorov space, 209 image under open continuous
Kuratowski closure operator, function, 412
65–66 neighbourhood base, 408
one point compactification, 416
L open in all compactifications, 501
locally connected
p -space, 612
characterization, 455
is Lindelöf, 621
components that are open, 456
is normal, 621
products, 457
is sec. ctble, 621
locally finite, 135, 395, 682
is separable, 621
σ-locally finite, 429
not compact, 621
locally finite family of sets, 423
not seq. compact, 621
lower limit topology, 98
∞ -norm, 624
≡, 480
M
Lp -norm, 12, 627
lattice, 693–694 maximal filter, 323
complete, 694 meager, 724
filter, 701 metric
ultrafilter, 702 ρ(x, F ), 63
lattice from a partial order, 669 compact is complete, 393
limit point, 27 separable is realcompact, 575
limit point of a sequence, 278 uniform on prod, 151
limit point of a set, 278 metric axioms, 24
limits, 13 metric space, 24
limits in metric space, 27 closed sets are zero-sets, 256
Lindelöf, 378 closed subsets of, 256
characterizations, 379 compact ⇒ totally bounded, 393
countable product of, 680 Nagata and Smirnov, 691

is perfectly normal, 260 neighbourhood base at x, 85–86
metric subspace, 26 neighbourhood of x with respect to τ ,
metric uniformity, 651 43, 85
metrizability neighbourhood system of x with
characterization, 691 respect to τ , 86
hereditary, 107 net generated by a filter, 315
lemma, 683 nets, 287
lemma one, 685 accumulation point, 287
lemma two, 687 convergence, 287
with separable, 682 limit point, 287
metrizable, 41 subnets, 291
[0, 1]3 is, 151 ultranet, 328
R3 is, 151 Niemytzki’s tangent disc topology, 93
σ-locally finite subcover, 430 non-Borel set, 76
and paracompact, 433 norm, 4
closed subsets = zero-sets, 256 p , 612
countable product, 680 ∞ , 624
implies completely regular, 246 norm axioms, 10
implies normal, 230 normal
is regular, 223 F closed ⇒ F C-emb., 251, 253
metrizable space F closed ⇒ F C ∗ -emb., 251, 253
is Hausdorff, 215 and second ctble ⇒ perfectly, 259
metrizable spaces characterizations, 251, 253
are first countable, 103 compact +T2 ⇒, 342
Metrization theorem, 681 completely, 351
Minkowski’s inequality, C[a, b], 13, perfectly, 258
628 subspace of normal spaces, 234
Mobius strip, 201 normal spaces, 228
Moore plane, 93 characterizations, 229
completely regular, 263 closed G-delta’s, 254
is regular, 226 metrizable implies normal, 230
not normal, 264 not perfectly normal, 260–261,
not paracompact, 429 352
topology is stronger than usual, properties, 231
93 norms, 10
nowhere dense, 79, 723
N number of finite subsets of N, 155,
1-norm, 10 397
n-sphere, 204
homeomorphic to, 204 O
homeomorphic to Rn , 504 ωS, 500, 676
N ωR, 561
number of finite subsets, 397 one point compactification, 502
N, # of finite subsets of, 155, 397 unique, 502
Index 801
one-to-one fcn, 124 terminal point, 459

f ← cts iff f open, 125 pathwise connected, 459
open iff closed, 124 components, 465
open ball, 29 components may be clopen, 465
open base for a topology, 88 equivalent to connected, 466
open cover, 338 implies connected, 460
open function, 123 invariant over products, 462
iff closed if 1-1, 124 invariant with continuity, 462
open neighbourhood, 43 open subsets of Rn , 466
open set axioms, 40 unions, 464
open subsets, 29 Peano’s curve, 181
ordinal space, 110, 371 perfect compactification, 600
interval topology, 110 βN is, 609
is normal, 232 characterization, 607
ordinal space compactification, 503 perfect function, 582
outgrowth, 480, 534 and realcompactness, 590, 592–594
and singular map, 586
P characterization, 583
perfectly normal, 258
2-piadic, 26 characterization, 259, 262
p-norm, 11 metric spaces are, 260
φS, 598 second ctble normal space is, 259
πβ→α , 487 point-wise convergence, 303
πγ→α , 483, 676 power set, 43
, 482, 675 prod. of discrete spaces
P(S), 43 need not be discrete, 452
P -points, 270 product topology, 99, 148
P -space, 270 base for product topology, 149
pseudocompact, 271, 547 closure, 152
zero-dimensional, 270 convergence of functions, 301
p-point, 544 embedding of each factor, 162
paracompact homeo. factors form homeo. prod.,
and metrizable space, 433, 435–436 161
Tychonoff plank (deleted) not, 429 interior, 153
paracompact space, 424 product space, 148
compact spaces are paracompact, second countable, 154
425 separable, 156
continuous image of, 428 projection map, 146
hereditarily closed, 429 case where closed, 348
if Hausdorff, are normal, 427 is open, 149
partial order of C(S), 134 proper filter, 702
partially ordered set, 134 pseudocompact, 403
Pasting lemma, 135 Z(f β ) ⊆ βS \S, 498
path, 459 f β [βS \S] ⊆ f [S], 499
direction, 459 but not compact, 404
initial point, 459 C-embedded copy of N, 542
characterization, 404, 498, 542, regular open subsets, 80–81

551, 573 regular space, 221
locally finite, 551 are hereditary, 224
not ⇒ βS \S contains zero-set, 499 carries over products, 225
pulls back, 118 Hausdorff and not regular, 222
is completely Hausdorff, 225
Q is semiregular, 225
Q not a Gδ , 731 metrizable implies regular, 223
quotient set, 193 regular spaces
quotient topology characterizations, 223
quotient map, 190 regular is Hausdorff, 222
quotient space, 190 relation, 644
recognizing a, 191 symmetric, 644
relative topology, 48
R remainder of αS, 480
residual, 724
RN , 144
retraction, 517
RR , 144
retract, 517
Ro(S), 112, 697
ring
radial plane, 93
subring, 670
not first countable, 104
ring C(S), 134
not first ctble, 104
ring Cb (S), 669
real z-ultrafilter, 565
real points of f , 563
S
realcompact, 564
N is, 575 σ-compact, 418
R is, 569 σ-locally finite, 429, 683
υS is, 564, 572 Gδ , 684
characterization, 565, 590, 592–593 σ-locally finite subcover, 430
closed subspace, 577 σ-ring, 55
closed under intersections of, 576 S ∪ S(f ), 521
closed under products, 576 S ∪f S(f ), 521
deleted Tychonoff plank is not, 578 S-open, 49
every subspace of Rn is, 575 S \F , 45
Lindelöf spaces are, 575 S \A, 42
loc. comp. Hausd. σ-compact are, S n , 204
575 homeomorphic to Rn , 504
I
property, 594 S , 144
separable metric space is, 575 Sx , 193
realcompactification, 573 scattered line, 100
regular, 221 second countable, 101
regular open, 224, 697 R is, 103
properties, 81 R with usual topology, 103
regular open sets compact iff c.c. iff seq. c, 388
complete lattice, 698 compact iff countbly compact, 372
generate a topology, 111 hereditary, 107
Index 803
implies first countable, 102 singular function, 515

implies separable, 105 singular set, 517
Lindelof, 378 characterization, 528
metriz. plus separable are, 106 is closed, 516
products, 154 lemma, 529
under open fcn, 130 Sorgenfrey
second countable normal 1st countable, 102
implies perfectly, 259 not 2nd countable, 102
semiregular Sorgenfrey line, 98
assumed to be Hausdorff, 224 space filling curve, 181
does not imply completely standard uniformity on R, 650
Hausdorff, 225 stationary set, 601
implication chart, 225 connected, 603
regular implies, 224 maximal, 601
semiregular space, 112 Stone-Čech
semiregularization of S, 112 T subset of S, 510
separable Stone representation theorem, 721
F (N, S), 619 Stone space, 716
continuous image of, 129 Stone space is zero-dim. and
metric is realcompact, 575 compact, 718
outgrowth of N is not, 512 Stone space property, 720
plus metriz are sec. ctble, 106 Stone–Weierstrass theorem, 673
products of, 156 stronger topology, 43
second countable implies, 105 subalgebra of C ∗ (S), 493
separable space, 79 subbase for the topology τ , 95
separated subbase theorem, 97
completely, 243 subcover, finite, 338
if and only if, 244
subnet, 291
separates A and B, 237
subring, 355
separates points and closed sets, 168
complete, 676
also see Completely sep. pts + cl.
subsequence, 281
sets, 168
subsets of N, 397
sequence, 278
subspace metric, 26
sequence p-norm, 612
subspace topology, 48
sequentially compact, 387
sup-norm on C ∗ (S), 13
continuous image of, 390
sup-norm, 13, 624
implies countably compact, 389
sup-norm, C[a, b], 628
in second countable spaces, 388
supremum, 13
sequentially continuous, 279
sigma-compact, 418 symmetric relation, 644
characterization, 418
singular compactification, 517 T
βS, 534, 548 τB extends τ over B, 51
equivalent, 531 τI , 73
property, 519 τd , 44
retract, 518, 534, 548 T0 -space, 209
T1 -space, 211 (u, v) ∈ Rf , 193

a T0 -space not T1 , 212 ultrafilter, 323, 702
carries over products, 213 every filter is contained in, 325
decomposition space, 214 characterizations, 323
hereditary, 213 uniform
singleton sets are closed, 212 metric, 151
transmitted by closed functions, uniform continuity, 665
213 implies continuity, 667
T2 -space, 215 isomorphic, 666
T3 -space, 221 uniform convergence, 303
T4 -space, 227–228 uniform limit, 14
T2 1 , 220 uniform metric
2
T3 1 -space, 245–246 on a product, 151
2
T4 , not T3 , 228 uniform norm, 13
Tietze’s theorem, 557 uniform norm topology, 303
topological invariant, 127 uniform space
topological property, 127 T3 , 663–664
Cauchy sequence is not, 127 uniform topology, 653–654
topological space, 40 closure, 657
induced by a metric, 41 T3 , 663–664
topologizing a set S by using a uniform topology on a product,
closure operator, 66 151
topologizing as set S by using an uniformity, 644
interior operator, 72 and products, 659
topology induced by a metric, 41 base, 646, 662
totally bounded, 393 base characterization, 647
totally disconnected, 467 base of symmetric sets, 648
product, 467 closure, 657, 662
subspace, 472 diagonal, 644
zero-dimensional, 471 discrete, 645
triangle inequality, 8 interior, 656
Tychonoff corkscrew, 245 metric, 651
Tychonoff plank, 167, 578 property, 645
deleted, 168 topology generated by, 652
deleted is not normal, 233 usual on R, 650
Tychonoff plank (deleted) upper limit topology
not paracompact, 429 first ctble not second ctble, 102
Tychonoff theorem, 345 Urysohn separating function
separates closed sets, 243
U Urysohn separating function for two
uRf v, 193 closed sets, 243
υS, 564, 590 Urysohn space, 220
υf S, 564 Urysohn’s lemma, 239
∨, ∧, 134 usual topology on R, 41
U [T ], 657 usual uniformity on R, 650
Index 805
W z-ultrafilters
weak topology induced by functions, in βS, 495
132 Z+ , 171
weaker topology, 43 Z(f ), 249
well-ordered set, 108 Z[S], 255
Zariski topology, 47
Z zero-dimensional, 113
z-filter, 354 if T1 is regular, 227
base, 354 plus T1 is tot. disconn., 468
fixed, 358 zero-set, 249
free, 358 closed G-delta in normal sp., 254
properties, 355 countable intersection, 251
z-ultrafilter G-delta need not be, 254
every z-filter is contained in, 357 in metric closed sets are, 256
real, 565 is a Gδ , 250

Point-Set Topology With Topics Basic General Topology

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Point-Set Topology With Topics Basic General Topology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Point-Set Topology With Topics Basic General Topology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Point-Set

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

Copyright © 2024 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

For any available supplementary material, please visit

Desk Editors: Logeshwaran Arumugam/Rosie Williamson

Typeset by Stallion Press

I like it when the longing becomes belonging, dance of polar-

This text was prepared to serve as an introduction to the study of

a summary of the main set theory concepts appear at the end of

Robert André is a Ph.D. graduate from the University of Manitoba

Part I Norms and Metrics 1

Chapter 2. Metrics on Sets 23

Part II Topological Spaces: Fundamental

Chapter 4. Set Closures, Interiors and Boundaries 61

Chapter 5. Bases of Topological Spaces 85

Chapter 6. Continuity on Topological Spaces 117

Chapter 7. Product Spaces 143

Chapter 8. The Quotient Topology 189

Part III Topological Spaces: Separation Axioms 207

Chapter 10. Separation with Continuous Functions 237

Part IV Limit Points in Topological Spaces 275

Chapter 12. Limit Points of Nets 285

Chapter 13. Limit Points of Filters 309

Part V Compact Spaces and Relatives 335

Chapter 15. Countably Compact Spaces 363

Chapter 16. Lindelöf Spaces 377

Chapter 17. Sequentially and Feebly Compact Spaces 387

Chapter 18. Locally Compact Spaces 407

Chapter 19. Paracompact Topological Spaces 423

Part VI The Connected Property 439

Part VII Topics 475

Chapter 22. Singular Sets and Singular Compactiﬁcations 515

Chapter 23. On C-Embeddings and Pseudocompactness 537

Chapter 24. Realcompact Spaces 561

Chapter 25. Perfect Functions 581

Chapter 26. Perfect and Freudenthal Compactiﬁcations 597

Chapter 27. Spaces Whose Elements Are Sequences 611

Chapter 28. Completing Incomplete Metric Spaces 633

Chapter 29. The Uniform Space and the Uniform

Chapter 30. The Stone–Weierstrass Theorem 669

Chapter 31. Metrizability 679

Chapter 32. The Stone Space 693

Chapter 33. Baire Spaces 723

Chapter 34. The Class of F -Spaces 735

Norms and Metrics

Norms on Vector Spaces

1.1 Review of Inner Product Spaces

We begin by reviewing a few basic notions about those vector

Definition 1.1 Let V be a vector space over the reals. An inner

IP1: The number v , v is greater than or equal to 0 for all v in V.

A vector space V is called an inner product space if it is equipped

Definition 1.2 Let V be an inner product space. If v is a vector in

Example 1. It is easily veriﬁed that, for x = (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) and

satisﬁes the four axioms above and so is an inner product on the

by the dot product is

This particular norm is referred to as the Euclidean norm on Rn .

In the case where n = 2 or 3, this represents the usual distance

It is also referred to as the L2 -norm on C[a, b] and we represent it as

= x2 − 2tx, y + t2 y 2

The inequality, |x, y | ≤ xy , follows.

We now verify that a norm, , which is induced by an inner product

x + y2 = x + y , x +

Thus x + y ≤ x + y , as required.

b − a2 = a2 + b2 − 2a b cos θ

a2 − 2b,a + b2 = a2 + b2 − 2a b cos θ

This function, : V → R, will be used to measure the “distance”,

x∞ = (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn )∞ = max{|x1 |, |x2 |, . . . , |xn |}

Theorem 1.6 Suppose is a norm on a vector space V. There

2(x2 + y 2 ) = x + y2 + x − y 2

Proof. The proof involves showing that, if satisﬁes the paral-

It is straightforward to show that, for all p ≥ 1, f p satisﬁes N1

f ∞ = sup {|f (x)| : x ∈ S}

Definition 1.7 Let (V, +, α, ) be a vector space equipped with

|fn (x) − fm (x)| ≤ fn − fm ∞ < ε for all m, n > N

N independent of the value of x in S. Then f −fn ∞ ≤ ε. Therefore,

Show that 1 is a valid norm on C[a, b].