# Thread: Compact Topological Spaces

1. So it's taken me a few days to put this together, in that time i think i've come to grasp the definition of a Compact Topological Space (as given by Guitarist). But i've been trying to figure out how we prove that a topological space is compact.

In my studies of various other sources it's been stated that if a topological space can be mapped onto a closed and bounded subset of then is compact. To support this statement i guess it's necessary to show that; Closed and bounded subsets of are compact and that the image of a compact space is also compact, provided that the mapping is a bijection. But i'm having trouble following some of the various proofs around on the internet.

That a closed subset of would be compact seems intuitive enough, but i want to understand how we show this in a mathematically rigorous way. The definition of a compact space might come in handy, i'm guessing, so we would be required to show that there is a finite cover of the closed subset in question and that this is a subcover of .  2.

3. Be careful. In the usual topology in R, closed sets are compact only if bounded.  4. Hi wallaby

The Heine-Borel theorem shows that for a metric space (i.e. the reals) being compact is the same as being closed and bounded. Its easy to see that you need the bounded part, as the real space its self is closed but definitely not compact.  5. Actually, I am at a bit of a loss as to why Wallaby thimks that a proof the the Heine-Borel theorem woould help his general understanding of compactness. It is a rather special case applied to .

For what it's worth - probably not much - H-B, is a specialization of the following theorem:

The compact subsets of an Hausdorff space are closed.

The proof is tricky (but not ferocious!), whereas the proof that, when our Hausdorff space is , these closed subsets must also be bounded is much easier.

I repeat - how does help our more general understanding of compactness?  6. Originally Posted by Guitarist Actually, I am at a bit of a loss as to why Wallaby thimks that a proof the the Heine-Borel theorem woould help his general understanding of compactness. It is a rather special case applied to .
As i mentioned in the OP i think i understand the definition of compactness, now i'm just following detours. (since i have nothing else to do) I just got finished with the Heine-Borel theorem so i might take a look at the proof of the more general theorem.  7. Originally Posted by river_rat Hi wallaby

The Heine-Borel theorem shows that for a metric space (i.e. the reals) being compact is the same as being closed and bounded. Its easy to see that you need the bounded part, as the real space its self is closed but definitely not compact.
Oops, just saw a typo - the metric space must be complete as well. So subset of a complete metric space compact subset closed and bounded in that metric.  8. Originally Posted by wallaby As i mentioned in the OP i think i understand the definition of compactness, now i'm just following detours. (since i have nothing else to do) I just got finished with the Heine-Borel theorem so i might take a look at the proof of the more general theorem.
As a general rule, proving compactness is actually quite difficult and technical - looking at the conditions for a function space to be compact for example. In fact just proving that the product of compact spaces is compact is non-trivial.  9. Originally Posted by river_rat As a general rule, proving compactness is actually quite difficult and technical - looking at the conditions for a function space to be compact for example. In fact just proving that the product of compact spaces is compact is non-trivial.
It does seem like compactness is a larger topic than i thought it would be. Since i'm rapidly headed out of my league i think i'll leave it at that, thank you for the help everyone.  Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement