A cover of Locally connected space with certain compactness property












2












$begingroup$


Suppose $X$ is a locally connected Hausdorff space. If $X$ is $sigma$-compact and locally compact, is it always possible to find a countable set of precompact connected open sets ${U_n}$ (which covers $X$), with the following property?




(*) Any $U_i$ interects at most finitely many $U_j$.




I can produce a precompact connected open cover of $X$ by local compactness and local connectedness, and by $sigma$-compactness, I can choose a countable subcover ${V_n}$.



The problem is how can I meet the additional requirement (*)?



I know that such space must be paracompact but I am not sure if this is related. How can I modify the sets $V_n$ so that the connectedness is preserved?






general-topology compactness connectedness paracompactness







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    By countable do you mean at most countable or countably infinity? An empty set is open, precompact and connected. Do you mean an open cover? And if possible, could you please add more details on how you came up with the problem? Because by a first look it seems like you are just sticking different notions of compactness together.
    $endgroup$
    – William Sun
    Dec 8 '18 at 4:09










  • $begingroup$
    @WilliamSun I meant at most countable. The construction appears here (page 10, Thm 1.6). Maybe, as the author said, it is a well-known construction.
    $endgroup$
    – Eclipse Sun
    Dec 8 '18 at 4:23
















2












$begingroup$


Suppose $X$ is a locally connected Hausdorff space. If $X$ is $sigma$-compact and locally compact, is it always possible to find a countable set of precompact connected open sets ${U_n}$ (which covers $X$), with the following property?




(*) Any $U_i$ interects at most finitely many $U_j$.




I can produce a precompact connected open cover of $X$ by local compactness and local connectedness, and by $sigma$-compactness, I can choose a countable subcover ${V_n}$.



The problem is how can I meet the additional requirement (*)?



I know that such space must be paracompact but I am not sure if this is related. How can I modify the sets $V_n$ so that the connectedness is preserved?






general-topology compactness connectedness paracompactness







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    By countable do you mean at most countable or countably infinity? An empty set is open, precompact and connected. Do you mean an open cover? And if possible, could you please add more details on how you came up with the problem? Because by a first look it seems like you are just sticking different notions of compactness together.
    $endgroup$
    – William Sun
    Dec 8 '18 at 4:09










  • $begingroup$
    @WilliamSun I meant at most countable. The construction appears here (page 10, Thm 1.6). Maybe, as the author said, it is a well-known construction.
    $endgroup$
    – Eclipse Sun
    Dec 8 '18 at 4:23














2












2








2





$begingroup$


Suppose $X$ is a locally connected Hausdorff space. If $X$ is $sigma$-compact and locally compact, is it always possible to find a countable set of precompact connected open sets ${U_n}$ (which covers $X$), with the following property?




(*) Any $U_i$ interects at most finitely many $U_j$.




I can produce a precompact connected open cover of $X$ by local compactness and local connectedness, and by $sigma$-compactness, I can choose a countable subcover ${V_n}$.



The problem is how can I meet the additional requirement (*)?



I know that such space must be paracompact but I am not sure if this is related. How can I modify the sets $V_n$ so that the connectedness is preserved?






general-topology compactness connectedness paracompactness







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Suppose $X$ is a locally connected Hausdorff space. If $X$ is $sigma$-compact and locally compact, is it always possible to find a countable set of precompact connected open sets ${U_n}$ (which covers $X$), with the following property?




(*) Any $U_i$ interects at most finitely many $U_j$.




I can produce a precompact connected open cover of $X$ by local compactness and local connectedness, and by $sigma$-compactness, I can choose a countable subcover ${V_n}$.



The problem is how can I meet the additional requirement (*)?



I know that such space must be paracompact but I am not sure if this is related. How can I modify the sets $V_n$ so that the connectedness is preserved?






general-topology compactness connectedness paracompactness




general-topology compactness connectedness paracompactness






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 8 '18 at 5:38









Eric Wofsey

182k13209337




182k13209337










asked Dec 8 '18 at 3:25









Eclipse SunEclipse Sun

6,9841437




6,9841437












  • $begingroup$
    By countable do you mean at most countable or countably infinity? An empty set is open, precompact and connected. Do you mean an open cover? And if possible, could you please add more details on how you came up with the problem? Because by a first look it seems like you are just sticking different notions of compactness together.
    $endgroup$
    – William Sun
    Dec 8 '18 at 4:09










  • $begingroup$
    @WilliamSun I meant at most countable. The construction appears here (page 10, Thm 1.6). Maybe, as the author said, it is a well-known construction.
    $endgroup$
    – Eclipse Sun
    Dec 8 '18 at 4:23


















  • $begingroup$
    By countable do you mean at most countable or countably infinity? An empty set is open, precompact and connected. Do you mean an open cover? And if possible, could you please add more details on how you came up with the problem? Because by a first look it seems like you are just sticking different notions of compactness together.
    $endgroup$
    – William Sun
    Dec 8 '18 at 4:09










  • $begingroup$
    @WilliamSun I meant at most countable. The construction appears here (page 10, Thm 1.6). Maybe, as the author said, it is a well-known construction.
    $endgroup$
    – Eclipse Sun
    Dec 8 '18 at 4:23
















$begingroup$
By countable do you mean at most countable or countably infinity? An empty set is open, precompact and connected. Do you mean an open cover? And if possible, could you please add more details on how you came up with the problem? Because by a first look it seems like you are just sticking different notions of compactness together.
$endgroup$
– William Sun
Dec 8 '18 at 4:09




$begingroup$
By countable do you mean at most countable or countably infinity? An empty set is open, precompact and connected. Do you mean an open cover? And if possible, could you please add more details on how you came up with the problem? Because by a first look it seems like you are just sticking different notions of compactness together.
$endgroup$
– William Sun
Dec 8 '18 at 4:09












$begingroup$
@WilliamSun I meant at most countable. The construction appears here (page 10, Thm 1.6). Maybe, as the author said, it is a well-known construction.
$endgroup$
– Eclipse Sun
Dec 8 '18 at 4:23




$begingroup$
@WilliamSun I meant at most countable. The construction appears here (page 10, Thm 1.6). Maybe, as the author said, it is a well-known construction.
$endgroup$
– Eclipse Sun
Dec 8 '18 at 4:23










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

We will say a set is "good" if it is precompact, connected, and open. Fix a sequence of compact sets $(K_n)$ which cover $X$. Pick finitely many good sets $U_0,dots,U_{n_0}$ which cover $K_0$. Note that $C_0=overline{U_0}$ is compact, so we can also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_0+1},dots,U_{n_1}$ which cover it.



Now we repeat this process, but make sure none of our new good sets intersect $U_0$. Let $V_0=U_0cupdotscup U_{n_1}$ be the union of all the good sets we've chosen so far. We can pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_1+1},dots,U_{n_2}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover the compact set $K_1setminus V_0$. We can then let $C_1=overline{U_1}$ and also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_2+1},dots,U_{n_3}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover $C_1setminus V_0$.



We continue the process, alternating between picking good sets to cover one of the $K_n$'s, and picking good sets which cover the closure of one of the good sets we chose already. At each stage, we choose all of our new good sets to be disjoint from the closures of the good sets we've covered already. In the end, we get a sequence $(U_n)$ of good sets which cover every $K_n$ and such that only finitely many of them intersect (the closure of) each $U_n$.



(Note that all this argument used about the good sets is that they are a precompact and a basis for the topology. More generally, the same argument shows that given any basis for the topology of a locally compact $sigma$-compact Hausdorff space, there is a countable cover by precompact basis sets such that each one intersects only finitely many others. Taking the basis to consist of all open sets which refine a given open cover, this is one way to prove such a space is paracompact.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3030664%2fa-cover-of-locally-connected-space-with-certain-compactness-property%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    We will say a set is "good" if it is precompact, connected, and open. Fix a sequence of compact sets $(K_n)$ which cover $X$. Pick finitely many good sets $U_0,dots,U_{n_0}$ which cover $K_0$. Note that $C_0=overline{U_0}$ is compact, so we can also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_0+1},dots,U_{n_1}$ which cover it.



    Now we repeat this process, but make sure none of our new good sets intersect $U_0$. Let $V_0=U_0cupdotscup U_{n_1}$ be the union of all the good sets we've chosen so far. We can pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_1+1},dots,U_{n_2}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover the compact set $K_1setminus V_0$. We can then let $C_1=overline{U_1}$ and also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_2+1},dots,U_{n_3}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover $C_1setminus V_0$.



    We continue the process, alternating between picking good sets to cover one of the $K_n$'s, and picking good sets which cover the closure of one of the good sets we chose already. At each stage, we choose all of our new good sets to be disjoint from the closures of the good sets we've covered already. In the end, we get a sequence $(U_n)$ of good sets which cover every $K_n$ and such that only finitely many of them intersect (the closure of) each $U_n$.



    (Note that all this argument used about the good sets is that they are a precompact and a basis for the topology. More generally, the same argument shows that given any basis for the topology of a locally compact $sigma$-compact Hausdorff space, there is a countable cover by precompact basis sets such that each one intersects only finitely many others. Taking the basis to consist of all open sets which refine a given open cover, this is one way to prove such a space is paracompact.)






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      2












      $begingroup$

      We will say a set is "good" if it is precompact, connected, and open. Fix a sequence of compact sets $(K_n)$ which cover $X$. Pick finitely many good sets $U_0,dots,U_{n_0}$ which cover $K_0$. Note that $C_0=overline{U_0}$ is compact, so we can also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_0+1},dots,U_{n_1}$ which cover it.



      Now we repeat this process, but make sure none of our new good sets intersect $U_0$. Let $V_0=U_0cupdotscup U_{n_1}$ be the union of all the good sets we've chosen so far. We can pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_1+1},dots,U_{n_2}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover the compact set $K_1setminus V_0$. We can then let $C_1=overline{U_1}$ and also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_2+1},dots,U_{n_3}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover $C_1setminus V_0$.



      We continue the process, alternating between picking good sets to cover one of the $K_n$'s, and picking good sets which cover the closure of one of the good sets we chose already. At each stage, we choose all of our new good sets to be disjoint from the closures of the good sets we've covered already. In the end, we get a sequence $(U_n)$ of good sets which cover every $K_n$ and such that only finitely many of them intersect (the closure of) each $U_n$.



      (Note that all this argument used about the good sets is that they are a precompact and a basis for the topology. More generally, the same argument shows that given any basis for the topology of a locally compact $sigma$-compact Hausdorff space, there is a countable cover by precompact basis sets such that each one intersects only finitely many others. Taking the basis to consist of all open sets which refine a given open cover, this is one way to prove such a space is paracompact.)






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        2












        2








        2





        $begingroup$

        We will say a set is "good" if it is precompact, connected, and open. Fix a sequence of compact sets $(K_n)$ which cover $X$. Pick finitely many good sets $U_0,dots,U_{n_0}$ which cover $K_0$. Note that $C_0=overline{U_0}$ is compact, so we can also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_0+1},dots,U_{n_1}$ which cover it.



        Now we repeat this process, but make sure none of our new good sets intersect $U_0$. Let $V_0=U_0cupdotscup U_{n_1}$ be the union of all the good sets we've chosen so far. We can pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_1+1},dots,U_{n_2}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover the compact set $K_1setminus V_0$. We can then let $C_1=overline{U_1}$ and also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_2+1},dots,U_{n_3}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover $C_1setminus V_0$.



        We continue the process, alternating between picking good sets to cover one of the $K_n$'s, and picking good sets which cover the closure of one of the good sets we chose already. At each stage, we choose all of our new good sets to be disjoint from the closures of the good sets we've covered already. In the end, we get a sequence $(U_n)$ of good sets which cover every $K_n$ and such that only finitely many of them intersect (the closure of) each $U_n$.



        (Note that all this argument used about the good sets is that they are a precompact and a basis for the topology. More generally, the same argument shows that given any basis for the topology of a locally compact $sigma$-compact Hausdorff space, there is a countable cover by precompact basis sets such that each one intersects only finitely many others. Taking the basis to consist of all open sets which refine a given open cover, this is one way to prove such a space is paracompact.)






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        We will say a set is "good" if it is precompact, connected, and open. Fix a sequence of compact sets $(K_n)$ which cover $X$. Pick finitely many good sets $U_0,dots,U_{n_0}$ which cover $K_0$. Note that $C_0=overline{U_0}$ is compact, so we can also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_0+1},dots,U_{n_1}$ which cover it.



        Now we repeat this process, but make sure none of our new good sets intersect $U_0$. Let $V_0=U_0cupdotscup U_{n_1}$ be the union of all the good sets we've chosen so far. We can pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_1+1},dots,U_{n_2}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover the compact set $K_1setminus V_0$. We can then let $C_1=overline{U_1}$ and also pick finitely many good sets $U_{n_2+1},dots,U_{n_3}subseteq Xsetminus C_0$ which cover $C_1setminus V_0$.



        We continue the process, alternating between picking good sets to cover one of the $K_n$'s, and picking good sets which cover the closure of one of the good sets we chose already. At each stage, we choose all of our new good sets to be disjoint from the closures of the good sets we've covered already. In the end, we get a sequence $(U_n)$ of good sets which cover every $K_n$ and such that only finitely many of them intersect (the closure of) each $U_n$.



        (Note that all this argument used about the good sets is that they are a precompact and a basis for the topology. More generally, the same argument shows that given any basis for the topology of a locally compact $sigma$-compact Hausdorff space, there is a countable cover by precompact basis sets such that each one intersects only finitely many others. Taking the basis to consist of all open sets which refine a given open cover, this is one way to prove such a space is paracompact.)







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Dec 8 '18 at 5:44

























        answered Dec 8 '18 at 5:38









        Eric WofseyEric Wofsey

        182k13209337




        182k13209337






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3030664%2fa-cover-of-locally-connected-space-with-certain-compactness-property%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            To store a contact into the json file from server.js file using a class in NodeJS

            Image
            0 I have created three files -contactPresentation.js, contactService.js, contacts.json. I will run the contactService.js file. And it will navigate to contactPresentation.js file that will only choose an option to either add or display a file. If add(), then add the data into add of service file.And the data will be added to the contacts.json file . And if display(), then display the display() of service file. And the display will take the data from contacts.json file. However, i know my code is flawed. Please correct it . I am also getting an error - this.contacts.push(new ContactService(userName, contactNumber, emailId)); ^ TypeError: Cannot read property 'push' of undefined at ContactService.add (e:NodeJSProjectcontactManager2contactService.js:57:23) at new C
            Read more

            Redirect URL with Chrome Remote Debugging Android Devices

            Image
            1 How can i redirect an URL with Chrome Remote Debugging Android Devices? like Requestly Chrome extension on desktop. google-chrome debugging url redirect testing share | improve this question edited Nov 24 '18 at 8:16 sachinjain024 14.7k 23 73 129 asked Nov 23 '18 at 16:09 Momen Momen 91 10
            Read more

            Dieringhausen

            Image
            Dieringhausen Stadt Gummersbach 50.982777777778 7.5316666666667 165 Koordinaten: 50° 58′ 58″  N , 7° 31′ 54″  O Höhe: 165  (160–245)  m Einwohner: 5055  (30. Jun. 2016) Postleitzahl: 51645 Vorwahl: 02261 Lage von Dieringhausen in Gummersbach Im Hohl ca. 1927–1930 Ansicht von Südwesten bei Bünghausen Dieringhausen (im örtlichen Dialekt Dierkesen ) ist ein Ortsteil von Gummersbach im Oberbergischen Kreis, Regierungsbezirk Köln, Nordrhein-Westfalen (Deutschland). Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Geographie 2 Geschichte 3 Kultur 3.1 Sehenswürdigkeiten 3.2 Regelmäßige Veranstaltungen 4 Infrastruktur und Wirtschaft 4.1 Verkehr 4.1.1 Schienen- und Busverkehr 4.1.2 Straßen 4.2 Öffentliche Einrichtungen 4.2.1 Schulen und Bildungseinrichtungen 4.2.2 Kirchliche Einrichtungen 5 Persönlichkeiten 5.1 In Dieringhausen geboren 5.2 In Dieringhausen gelebt 6 Einzelnachweise 7
            Read more