Re: Compact connected Hausdorff
- From: Jannick Asmus <jannick.news@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 23:59:04 +0100
On 04.12.2005 20:11, quasi wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 03:02:50 -0800, William Elliot
> <marsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>>>Lemma: If space X is compact and connected. For any open set
>>>U of X, the closure of some component of U intersect X - U.
>>
>
> If U is empty or U = X, the lemma is false, so assume the statement of
> the lemma is changed to exclude those cases.
>
> With that correction, the lemma is true, as is your point that "some
> component" can be strengthened to "every component".
>
> However, there's no need to assume either compact or Hausdorff, so
> those requirements can be dropped.
>
> Here's a sketch of the proof:
>
> The components of U must be open in U, hence open in X.
Why that? Is that really true?
J.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Compact connected Hausdorff
- From: quasi
- Re: Compact connected Hausdorff
- References:
- Compact connected Hausdorff
- From: William Elliot
- Re: Compact connected Hausdorff
- From: quasi
- Compact connected Hausdorff
- Prev by Date: Re: When is V* not isomorphic to V?
- Next by Date: Re: ineqality
- Previous by thread: Re: Compact connected Hausdorff
- Next by thread: Re: Compact connected Hausdorff
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|