Does there exist a compact topological space that doesn't possess the Bolzano-Weierstrass property?












3














Limit point $a$ of $A$: each neighbourhood of $a$ contains a point of $A$ unequal to $a$ itself.



Point of accumulation $a$ of a set $A$: each neighbourhood of $a$ contains infinitely many distinct points of $A$.



Topological space $X$ with the Bolzano Weierstrass property: each infinite subset of $X$ has at least one point of accumulation.



In my book it was proven that in Hausdorff spaces, a point $a$ is a limit point of the set $A$ if and only if it is an accumulation point of $A$.



Another relevant theorem is that in compact spaces, every infinite subset of a topological space has at least one limit point in the topological space.



I was wondering if there is an example of a topological space which is compact but doesn't possess the Bolzano-Weierstrass property. I couldn't come up with any, but we know that such a space must be non-Hausdorff by the aforementioned theorems and definitions.



Thanks in advance!






general-topology compactness







share|cite|improve this question



























    3














    Limit point $a$ of $A$: each neighbourhood of $a$ contains a point of $A$ unequal to $a$ itself.



    Point of accumulation $a$ of a set $A$: each neighbourhood of $a$ contains infinitely many distinct points of $A$.



    Topological space $X$ with the Bolzano Weierstrass property: each infinite subset of $X$ has at least one point of accumulation.



    In my book it was proven that in Hausdorff spaces, a point $a$ is a limit point of the set $A$ if and only if it is an accumulation point of $A$.



    Another relevant theorem is that in compact spaces, every infinite subset of a topological space has at least one limit point in the topological space.



    I was wondering if there is an example of a topological space which is compact but doesn't possess the Bolzano-Weierstrass property. I couldn't come up with any, but we know that such a space must be non-Hausdorff by the aforementioned theorems and definitions.



    Thanks in advance!






    general-topology compactness







    share|cite|improve this question

























      3












      3








      3







      Limit point $a$ of $A$: each neighbourhood of $a$ contains a point of $A$ unequal to $a$ itself.



      Point of accumulation $a$ of a set $A$: each neighbourhood of $a$ contains infinitely many distinct points of $A$.



      Topological space $X$ with the Bolzano Weierstrass property: each infinite subset of $X$ has at least one point of accumulation.



      In my book it was proven that in Hausdorff spaces, a point $a$ is a limit point of the set $A$ if and only if it is an accumulation point of $A$.



      Another relevant theorem is that in compact spaces, every infinite subset of a topological space has at least one limit point in the topological space.



      I was wondering if there is an example of a topological space which is compact but doesn't possess the Bolzano-Weierstrass property. I couldn't come up with any, but we know that such a space must be non-Hausdorff by the aforementioned theorems and definitions.



      Thanks in advance!






      general-topology compactness







      share|cite|improve this question













      Limit point $a$ of $A$: each neighbourhood of $a$ contains a point of $A$ unequal to $a$ itself.



      Point of accumulation $a$ of a set $A$: each neighbourhood of $a$ contains infinitely many distinct points of $A$.



      Topological space $X$ with the Bolzano Weierstrass property: each infinite subset of $X$ has at least one point of accumulation.



      In my book it was proven that in Hausdorff spaces, a point $a$ is a limit point of the set $A$ if and only if it is an accumulation point of $A$.



      Another relevant theorem is that in compact spaces, every infinite subset of a topological space has at least one limit point in the topological space.



      I was wondering if there is an example of a topological space which is compact but doesn't possess the Bolzano-Weierstrass property. I couldn't come up with any, but we know that such a space must be non-Hausdorff by the aforementioned theorems and definitions.



      Thanks in advance!






      general-topology compactness




      general-topology compactness






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Jan 4 at 17:18









      Steven WagterSteven Wagter

      1348




      1348






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5














          Every compact topological space has the Bolzano-Weierstrass property.



          Let $X$ be a compact space, and suppose that $A subseteq X$ has no accumulation points. That is, every $x in X$ has an open neighbourhood $U_x$ such that $U_x cap A$ is finite. Then ${ U_x : x in X }$ is an open cover of $X$, and so by compactness there are $x_1 , ldots , x_n in X$ such that $U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} = X$. But then $A = A cap ( U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} ) = ( U_{x_1} cap A ) cup cdots cup ( U_{x_n} cap A )$ is a finite union of finite sets, and so is finite.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • In fact $X$ is compact iff for every infinite subset $A$ there is a point $x in X$ such that for all open neighbourhoods $O$ of $x$ we have that $|O cap A| = |A|$. This is the countable case of the right hand property. @StevenWagter
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 4 at 23:40












          • @HennoBrandsma so if I understand you correctly, if $A$ is uncountable, then it doesn't suffice to show that there is an $x$ such that each nbhd contains infinite points of $A$; it would need to contain uncountably infinite points of $A$?
            – Steven Wagter
            Jan 5 at 16:32










          • @StevenWagter as many points as $A$ has, yes, to show compactness. And for all cardinalities. It shows how much stronger compactness is than countable compactness.
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 5 at 17:19











          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%2f3061851%2fdoes-there-exist-a-compact-topological-space-that-doesnt-possess-the-bolzano-we%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









          5














          Every compact topological space has the Bolzano-Weierstrass property.



          Let $X$ be a compact space, and suppose that $A subseteq X$ has no accumulation points. That is, every $x in X$ has an open neighbourhood $U_x$ such that $U_x cap A$ is finite. Then ${ U_x : x in X }$ is an open cover of $X$, and so by compactness there are $x_1 , ldots , x_n in X$ such that $U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} = X$. But then $A = A cap ( U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} ) = ( U_{x_1} cap A ) cup cdots cup ( U_{x_n} cap A )$ is a finite union of finite sets, and so is finite.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • In fact $X$ is compact iff for every infinite subset $A$ there is a point $x in X$ such that for all open neighbourhoods $O$ of $x$ we have that $|O cap A| = |A|$. This is the countable case of the right hand property. @StevenWagter
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 4 at 23:40












          • @HennoBrandsma so if I understand you correctly, if $A$ is uncountable, then it doesn't suffice to show that there is an $x$ such that each nbhd contains infinite points of $A$; it would need to contain uncountably infinite points of $A$?
            – Steven Wagter
            Jan 5 at 16:32










          • @StevenWagter as many points as $A$ has, yes, to show compactness. And for all cardinalities. It shows how much stronger compactness is than countable compactness.
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 5 at 17:19
















          5














          Every compact topological space has the Bolzano-Weierstrass property.



          Let $X$ be a compact space, and suppose that $A subseteq X$ has no accumulation points. That is, every $x in X$ has an open neighbourhood $U_x$ such that $U_x cap A$ is finite. Then ${ U_x : x in X }$ is an open cover of $X$, and so by compactness there are $x_1 , ldots , x_n in X$ such that $U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} = X$. But then $A = A cap ( U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} ) = ( U_{x_1} cap A ) cup cdots cup ( U_{x_n} cap A )$ is a finite union of finite sets, and so is finite.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • In fact $X$ is compact iff for every infinite subset $A$ there is a point $x in X$ such that for all open neighbourhoods $O$ of $x$ we have that $|O cap A| = |A|$. This is the countable case of the right hand property. @StevenWagter
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 4 at 23:40












          • @HennoBrandsma so if I understand you correctly, if $A$ is uncountable, then it doesn't suffice to show that there is an $x$ such that each nbhd contains infinite points of $A$; it would need to contain uncountably infinite points of $A$?
            – Steven Wagter
            Jan 5 at 16:32










          • @StevenWagter as many points as $A$ has, yes, to show compactness. And for all cardinalities. It shows how much stronger compactness is than countable compactness.
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 5 at 17:19














          5












          5








          5






          Every compact topological space has the Bolzano-Weierstrass property.



          Let $X$ be a compact space, and suppose that $A subseteq X$ has no accumulation points. That is, every $x in X$ has an open neighbourhood $U_x$ such that $U_x cap A$ is finite. Then ${ U_x : x in X }$ is an open cover of $X$, and so by compactness there are $x_1 , ldots , x_n in X$ such that $U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} = X$. But then $A = A cap ( U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} ) = ( U_{x_1} cap A ) cup cdots cup ( U_{x_n} cap A )$ is a finite union of finite sets, and so is finite.






          share|cite|improve this answer












          Every compact topological space has the Bolzano-Weierstrass property.



          Let $X$ be a compact space, and suppose that $A subseteq X$ has no accumulation points. That is, every $x in X$ has an open neighbourhood $U_x$ such that $U_x cap A$ is finite. Then ${ U_x : x in X }$ is an open cover of $X$, and so by compactness there are $x_1 , ldots , x_n in X$ such that $U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} = X$. But then $A = A cap ( U_{x_1} cup cdots cup U_{x_n} ) = ( U_{x_1} cap A ) cup cdots cup ( U_{x_n} cap A )$ is a finite union of finite sets, and so is finite.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Jan 4 at 17:53









          1-3-7-Trimethylxanthine1-3-7-Trimethylxanthine

          4,667927




          4,667927












          • In fact $X$ is compact iff for every infinite subset $A$ there is a point $x in X$ such that for all open neighbourhoods $O$ of $x$ we have that $|O cap A| = |A|$. This is the countable case of the right hand property. @StevenWagter
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 4 at 23:40












          • @HennoBrandsma so if I understand you correctly, if $A$ is uncountable, then it doesn't suffice to show that there is an $x$ such that each nbhd contains infinite points of $A$; it would need to contain uncountably infinite points of $A$?
            – Steven Wagter
            Jan 5 at 16:32










          • @StevenWagter as many points as $A$ has, yes, to show compactness. And for all cardinalities. It shows how much stronger compactness is than countable compactness.
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 5 at 17:19


















          • In fact $X$ is compact iff for every infinite subset $A$ there is a point $x in X$ such that for all open neighbourhoods $O$ of $x$ we have that $|O cap A| = |A|$. This is the countable case of the right hand property. @StevenWagter
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 4 at 23:40












          • @HennoBrandsma so if I understand you correctly, if $A$ is uncountable, then it doesn't suffice to show that there is an $x$ such that each nbhd contains infinite points of $A$; it would need to contain uncountably infinite points of $A$?
            – Steven Wagter
            Jan 5 at 16:32










          • @StevenWagter as many points as $A$ has, yes, to show compactness. And for all cardinalities. It shows how much stronger compactness is than countable compactness.
            – Henno Brandsma
            Jan 5 at 17:19
















          In fact $X$ is compact iff for every infinite subset $A$ there is a point $x in X$ such that for all open neighbourhoods $O$ of $x$ we have that $|O cap A| = |A|$. This is the countable case of the right hand property. @StevenWagter
          – Henno Brandsma
          Jan 4 at 23:40






          In fact $X$ is compact iff for every infinite subset $A$ there is a point $x in X$ such that for all open neighbourhoods $O$ of $x$ we have that $|O cap A| = |A|$. This is the countable case of the right hand property. @StevenWagter
          – Henno Brandsma
          Jan 4 at 23:40














          @HennoBrandsma so if I understand you correctly, if $A$ is uncountable, then it doesn't suffice to show that there is an $x$ such that each nbhd contains infinite points of $A$; it would need to contain uncountably infinite points of $A$?
          – Steven Wagter
          Jan 5 at 16:32




          @HennoBrandsma so if I understand you correctly, if $A$ is uncountable, then it doesn't suffice to show that there is an $x$ such that each nbhd contains infinite points of $A$; it would need to contain uncountably infinite points of $A$?
          – Steven Wagter
          Jan 5 at 16:32












          @StevenWagter as many points as $A$ has, yes, to show compactness. And for all cardinalities. It shows how much stronger compactness is than countable compactness.
          – Henno Brandsma
          Jan 5 at 17:19




          @StevenWagter as many points as $A$ has, yes, to show compactness. And for all cardinalities. It shows how much stronger compactness is than countable compactness.
          – Henno Brandsma
          Jan 5 at 17:19


















          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.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • 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.


          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%2f3061851%2fdoes-there-exist-a-compact-topological-space-that-doesnt-possess-the-bolzano-we%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

          An IMO inspired problem

          Image
          14 4 This problem from IMO 1988 is said to be one of the most elegant ones in functional equations. Problem : The function $f$ is defined on the set of all positive integers as follows: begin{align} f(1) = 1, f(3) &= 3, f(2n) = f(n), \ f(4n+1) &= 2f(2n+1) - f(n), \ f(4n+3) &= 3 f(2n+1) - 2f(n) end{align} Find the number of $n$ with $f(n) = n, 1 leq n leq 1988$. The main idea towards the solution is realizing that these conditions stand for the fact that $f(n)$ just reverses the digits in the binary representation of the number $n$. So, essentially the solution is finding the number of binary pallindromes $leq 1988_{10}$. My question is the following : How to reformulate the problem so that $f(n)$ reverses the digits of $n$ in its ternary representation. Or even better, can we reformulate it for a
          Read more

          Management

          Image
          Management From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search "Manager" redirects here. For other uses, see Management (disambiguation) and Manager (disambiguation). An organization chart for the United States Coast Guard shows the hierarchy of managerial roles in that organization. Business administration Management of a business Accounting Management accounting Financial accounting Financial audit Business entities Cooperative Corporation Limited liability company Partnership Sole proprietorship State-owned enterprise Corporate governance Annual general meeting Board of directors Supervisory board Advisory board Audit committee Corporate law Commercial law Constitutional documents Contract Corporate crime Corporate liability Insolvency law International trade law Mergers and acquisitions Economics Commodity Pu
          Read more

          Has there ever been an instance of an active nuclear power plant within or near a war zone?

          Image
          36 3 The question Has there ever been a military combat going on around an active (running or in outage but not decommissioned) commercial nuclear power plant? Or dangerously near it? If yes, how did the plant and its personnel fare in such situation? Why I ask Let's assume for the scope of this question modern commercial nuclear power plants (CANDU, PWR, BWR of generation II plus all of gen III and newer) are usually reasonably safe to operate given that the engineering has been done right and there is a whole cohort of very well trained personnel on-site at all times, well rested and with considerable resources on their hands. Things hard to get with an armed conflict like the recent Syrian war raging around. I can't seem to find any reference or a comprehensive article about this, hence this question.
          Read more