Prove or disprove : A metric space $X$ is compact iff for any sequence ${f_n } $ in $X$ , there exists a...












2












$begingroup$


In Stein's real analysis Page $ 188 $ , the author states that :




Definition $1$ : $H$ is a Hilbert space . A set $X subset H$ is compact is for any sequence ${f_n }$ in $X$ , there exists a subsequence ${ f_{n_k}}$ that converges in the norm to an element in $X$ .




This definition of a compact set is quite different from what I have learned :




Definition $2$: A set $X subset H$ is compact if every open covering of $X$ has a finite subcovering.




I want to show that the two definitions of the compact set above are the same.



My attempt :



First I want to use $2$ to prove $1$ . Since $H$ is a Hilbert space , then it must be a $T_1$ space , so $X$ is closed . Let $X'$ denote the closure of ${f_n }$ , so $X' subset X$ is also a compact set . And the collection of ball $B_{2^{-n}}(f_n)$ covering $X'$ , so that by $2$ , we have a finite subcovering . Notice that there are infinite many elements of ${f_n}$ in some ball $B_{2^{-N}}(f_N)$ . Let $f_{n_1} = f_N$ and we say that $f_{k_2},...,f_{k_n},..$ are the elements in $B_{2^{-N}}(f_{n_1})$ . We can proceed by the same way to find a sequence $f_{n_1} ,..., f_{n_k},...$ and they form a Cauchy sequence . By the completeness of Hilbert space , we then conclude the proof .



The question is how to use $1$ to prove $2$ . I have seen a hint here . Suppose there is family of open sets $O_1,ldots,O_n,ldots$ such that $X subset cup O_n$ but there is no finite subcovering. Construct the sequence $(x_n)$ such that $x_n in X setminus bigcup_{i=1}^n O_i $ , then we can find a subsequence ${x_{n_k} }$ and for some $N$ , each $x_{n_k} notin O_N$ while ${x_{n_k} }$ converges to an element $x in O_N$ . But how to deal with this next ?



For the proof above, we see that we only assume $H$ is a complete metric space. Does the conclusion valid when $H$ is a metric space (might not be complete).



Or more generally , does the conclusion still valid when $H$ is just a topology space . Here definition $1$ is :




for any sequence ${ f_n}$ in $X$ , there exist $f in X$ such that for every open set containing $f$ , it also contains at least one element $f_k$











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    This is in a million texts on basic real analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – zhw.
    Jan 25 at 23:33










  • $begingroup$
    @zhw In my text book , the author only states the first one , so I want to learn the relationship between these two definitions .
    $endgroup$
    – J.Guo
    Jan 25 at 23:41












  • $begingroup$
    @J.Guo I added a paragraph to show you how to do (2) implies (1) without completeness of the space!
    $endgroup$
    – csprun
    Jan 26 at 17:25






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @csprun I see . I think if there exist an infinite set no limit point , we can construct a countable closed set ${f_n }$ . And we let $A_n$ denote ${x_n , x_{n+1} ,... }$ , then by the finite intersection property we can also complete our proof .
    $endgroup$
    – J.Guo
    Jan 27 at 0:45


















2












$begingroup$


In Stein's real analysis Page $ 188 $ , the author states that :




Definition $1$ : $H$ is a Hilbert space . A set $X subset H$ is compact is for any sequence ${f_n }$ in $X$ , there exists a subsequence ${ f_{n_k}}$ that converges in the norm to an element in $X$ .




This definition of a compact set is quite different from what I have learned :




Definition $2$: A set $X subset H$ is compact if every open covering of $X$ has a finite subcovering.




I want to show that the two definitions of the compact set above are the same.



My attempt :



First I want to use $2$ to prove $1$ . Since $H$ is a Hilbert space , then it must be a $T_1$ space , so $X$ is closed . Let $X'$ denote the closure of ${f_n }$ , so $X' subset X$ is also a compact set . And the collection of ball $B_{2^{-n}}(f_n)$ covering $X'$ , so that by $2$ , we have a finite subcovering . Notice that there are infinite many elements of ${f_n}$ in some ball $B_{2^{-N}}(f_N)$ . Let $f_{n_1} = f_N$ and we say that $f_{k_2},...,f_{k_n},..$ are the elements in $B_{2^{-N}}(f_{n_1})$ . We can proceed by the same way to find a sequence $f_{n_1} ,..., f_{n_k},...$ and they form a Cauchy sequence . By the completeness of Hilbert space , we then conclude the proof .



The question is how to use $1$ to prove $2$ . I have seen a hint here . Suppose there is family of open sets $O_1,ldots,O_n,ldots$ such that $X subset cup O_n$ but there is no finite subcovering. Construct the sequence $(x_n)$ such that $x_n in X setminus bigcup_{i=1}^n O_i $ , then we can find a subsequence ${x_{n_k} }$ and for some $N$ , each $x_{n_k} notin O_N$ while ${x_{n_k} }$ converges to an element $x in O_N$ . But how to deal with this next ?



For the proof above, we see that we only assume $H$ is a complete metric space. Does the conclusion valid when $H$ is a metric space (might not be complete).



Or more generally , does the conclusion still valid when $H$ is just a topology space . Here definition $1$ is :




for any sequence ${ f_n}$ in $X$ , there exist $f in X$ such that for every open set containing $f$ , it also contains at least one element $f_k$











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    This is in a million texts on basic real analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – zhw.
    Jan 25 at 23:33










  • $begingroup$
    @zhw In my text book , the author only states the first one , so I want to learn the relationship between these two definitions .
    $endgroup$
    – J.Guo
    Jan 25 at 23:41












  • $begingroup$
    @J.Guo I added a paragraph to show you how to do (2) implies (1) without completeness of the space!
    $endgroup$
    – csprun
    Jan 26 at 17:25






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @csprun I see . I think if there exist an infinite set no limit point , we can construct a countable closed set ${f_n }$ . And we let $A_n$ denote ${x_n , x_{n+1} ,... }$ , then by the finite intersection property we can also complete our proof .
    $endgroup$
    – J.Guo
    Jan 27 at 0:45
















2












2








2





$begingroup$


In Stein's real analysis Page $ 188 $ , the author states that :




Definition $1$ : $H$ is a Hilbert space . A set $X subset H$ is compact is for any sequence ${f_n }$ in $X$ , there exists a subsequence ${ f_{n_k}}$ that converges in the norm to an element in $X$ .




This definition of a compact set is quite different from what I have learned :




Definition $2$: A set $X subset H$ is compact if every open covering of $X$ has a finite subcovering.




I want to show that the two definitions of the compact set above are the same.



My attempt :



First I want to use $2$ to prove $1$ . Since $H$ is a Hilbert space , then it must be a $T_1$ space , so $X$ is closed . Let $X'$ denote the closure of ${f_n }$ , so $X' subset X$ is also a compact set . And the collection of ball $B_{2^{-n}}(f_n)$ covering $X'$ , so that by $2$ , we have a finite subcovering . Notice that there are infinite many elements of ${f_n}$ in some ball $B_{2^{-N}}(f_N)$ . Let $f_{n_1} = f_N$ and we say that $f_{k_2},...,f_{k_n},..$ are the elements in $B_{2^{-N}}(f_{n_1})$ . We can proceed by the same way to find a sequence $f_{n_1} ,..., f_{n_k},...$ and they form a Cauchy sequence . By the completeness of Hilbert space , we then conclude the proof .



The question is how to use $1$ to prove $2$ . I have seen a hint here . Suppose there is family of open sets $O_1,ldots,O_n,ldots$ such that $X subset cup O_n$ but there is no finite subcovering. Construct the sequence $(x_n)$ such that $x_n in X setminus bigcup_{i=1}^n O_i $ , then we can find a subsequence ${x_{n_k} }$ and for some $N$ , each $x_{n_k} notin O_N$ while ${x_{n_k} }$ converges to an element $x in O_N$ . But how to deal with this next ?



For the proof above, we see that we only assume $H$ is a complete metric space. Does the conclusion valid when $H$ is a metric space (might not be complete).



Or more generally , does the conclusion still valid when $H$ is just a topology space . Here definition $1$ is :




for any sequence ${ f_n}$ in $X$ , there exist $f in X$ such that for every open set containing $f$ , it also contains at least one element $f_k$











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




In Stein's real analysis Page $ 188 $ , the author states that :




Definition $1$ : $H$ is a Hilbert space . A set $X subset H$ is compact is for any sequence ${f_n }$ in $X$ , there exists a subsequence ${ f_{n_k}}$ that converges in the norm to an element in $X$ .




This definition of a compact set is quite different from what I have learned :




Definition $2$: A set $X subset H$ is compact if every open covering of $X$ has a finite subcovering.




I want to show that the two definitions of the compact set above are the same.



My attempt :



First I want to use $2$ to prove $1$ . Since $H$ is a Hilbert space , then it must be a $T_1$ space , so $X$ is closed . Let $X'$ denote the closure of ${f_n }$ , so $X' subset X$ is also a compact set . And the collection of ball $B_{2^{-n}}(f_n)$ covering $X'$ , so that by $2$ , we have a finite subcovering . Notice that there are infinite many elements of ${f_n}$ in some ball $B_{2^{-N}}(f_N)$ . Let $f_{n_1} = f_N$ and we say that $f_{k_2},...,f_{k_n},..$ are the elements in $B_{2^{-N}}(f_{n_1})$ . We can proceed by the same way to find a sequence $f_{n_1} ,..., f_{n_k},...$ and they form a Cauchy sequence . By the completeness of Hilbert space , we then conclude the proof .



The question is how to use $1$ to prove $2$ . I have seen a hint here . Suppose there is family of open sets $O_1,ldots,O_n,ldots$ such that $X subset cup O_n$ but there is no finite subcovering. Construct the sequence $(x_n)$ such that $x_n in X setminus bigcup_{i=1}^n O_i $ , then we can find a subsequence ${x_{n_k} }$ and for some $N$ , each $x_{n_k} notin O_N$ while ${x_{n_k} }$ converges to an element $x in O_N$ . But how to deal with this next ?



For the proof above, we see that we only assume $H$ is a complete metric space. Does the conclusion valid when $H$ is a metric space (might not be complete).



Or more generally , does the conclusion still valid when $H$ is just a topology space . Here definition $1$ is :




for any sequence ${ f_n}$ in $X$ , there exist $f in X$ such that for every open set containing $f$ , it also contains at least one element $f_k$








real-analysis general-topology hilbert-spaces






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 26 at 0:52









Namaste

1




1










asked Jan 25 at 23:26









J.GuoJ.Guo

4249




4249








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    This is in a million texts on basic real analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – zhw.
    Jan 25 at 23:33










  • $begingroup$
    @zhw In my text book , the author only states the first one , so I want to learn the relationship between these two definitions .
    $endgroup$
    – J.Guo
    Jan 25 at 23:41












  • $begingroup$
    @J.Guo I added a paragraph to show you how to do (2) implies (1) without completeness of the space!
    $endgroup$
    – csprun
    Jan 26 at 17:25






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @csprun I see . I think if there exist an infinite set no limit point , we can construct a countable closed set ${f_n }$ . And we let $A_n$ denote ${x_n , x_{n+1} ,... }$ , then by the finite intersection property we can also complete our proof .
    $endgroup$
    – J.Guo
    Jan 27 at 0:45
















  • 2




    $begingroup$
    This is in a million texts on basic real analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – zhw.
    Jan 25 at 23:33










  • $begingroup$
    @zhw In my text book , the author only states the first one , so I want to learn the relationship between these two definitions .
    $endgroup$
    – J.Guo
    Jan 25 at 23:41












  • $begingroup$
    @J.Guo I added a paragraph to show you how to do (2) implies (1) without completeness of the space!
    $endgroup$
    – csprun
    Jan 26 at 17:25






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @csprun I see . I think if there exist an infinite set no limit point , we can construct a countable closed set ${f_n }$ . And we let $A_n$ denote ${x_n , x_{n+1} ,... }$ , then by the finite intersection property we can also complete our proof .
    $endgroup$
    – J.Guo
    Jan 27 at 0:45










2




2




$begingroup$
This is in a million texts on basic real analysis.
$endgroup$
– zhw.
Jan 25 at 23:33




$begingroup$
This is in a million texts on basic real analysis.
$endgroup$
– zhw.
Jan 25 at 23:33












$begingroup$
@zhw In my text book , the author only states the first one , so I want to learn the relationship between these two definitions .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Jan 25 at 23:41






$begingroup$
@zhw In my text book , the author only states the first one , so I want to learn the relationship between these two definitions .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Jan 25 at 23:41














$begingroup$
@J.Guo I added a paragraph to show you how to do (2) implies (1) without completeness of the space!
$endgroup$
– csprun
Jan 26 at 17:25




$begingroup$
@J.Guo I added a paragraph to show you how to do (2) implies (1) without completeness of the space!
$endgroup$
– csprun
Jan 26 at 17:25




1




1




$begingroup$
@csprun I see . I think if there exist an infinite set no limit point , we can construct a countable closed set ${f_n }$ . And we let $A_n$ denote ${x_n , x_{n+1} ,... }$ , then by the finite intersection property we can also complete our proof .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Jan 27 at 0:45






$begingroup$
@csprun I see . I think if there exist an infinite set no limit point , we can construct a countable closed set ${f_n }$ . And we let $A_n$ denote ${x_n , x_{n+1} ,... }$ , then by the finite intersection property we can also complete our proof .
$endgroup$
– J.Guo
Jan 27 at 0:45












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

To finish your argument for (1) implies (2), we pick $x_n in Xsetminus cup_{i=1}^n O_i$, then let $(y_n)$ be a subsequence of $(x_n)$ which converges to $yin X$. Since the $O_i$ are an open cover of $X$, there is some $N$ so that $yin O_N$. But there are infinitely many $y_n notin O_N$, which is impossible: if $(y_n)to y$, then for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there must be some $m$ so that for $nge m$, we have $y_nin U$.



To prove that (2) implies (1) without completeness, let me define a limit point of $Y={f_n}$: a point $zin H$ is a limit point of $Y$ if for every open neighborhood $U$ of $z$, we have that $(Usetminus {z}) cap Y ne emptyset$. It's easy to show that in any topological space, the closure of a set $Y$ is equal to $Y$ along with the limit points of $Y$. Moreover, if $z$ is a limit point of $Y = {f_n}$, then it's easy to show that there is a subsequence of $(f_n)$ which converges to $z$: pick $n_1inmathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_1} in (B_{1}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, then let $delta_1 = mbox{dist}(z,f_{n_1})$ and pick $n_2in mathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_2} in (B_{delta_1/2}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, and so on. This subsequence $(f_{n_k})$ converges to $z$. So now, as you say, this closure, which you called $X'$, is compact. If $X'$ contains any limit points of $Y$, then we're done. Otherwise, $X' = Y$ and there are no limit points of $Y$. Thus, for each $ninmathbb{N}$, there is an open neighborhood $U_n$ of $f_n$ with $Ycap U_n = {f_n}$. Now the $U_n$ form an open cover of $Y$ with no finite subcover.



You're right! We didn't use much about the Hilbert space $H$. It's true for all metric spaces. Though you should change your second definition of compactness to




For any sequence $(x_n)$ in $X$, there is some a subsequence $(y_n)$ and some $yin X$ such that for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there is some $min mathbb{N}$ so that if $nge m$, then $y_nin U$.




It's not true for all topological spaces. Not even for Hausdorff topological spaces.






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%2f3087728%2fprove-or-disprove-a-metric-space-x-is-compact-iff-for-any-sequence-f-n%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












    $begingroup$

    To finish your argument for (1) implies (2), we pick $x_n in Xsetminus cup_{i=1}^n O_i$, then let $(y_n)$ be a subsequence of $(x_n)$ which converges to $yin X$. Since the $O_i$ are an open cover of $X$, there is some $N$ so that $yin O_N$. But there are infinitely many $y_n notin O_N$, which is impossible: if $(y_n)to y$, then for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there must be some $m$ so that for $nge m$, we have $y_nin U$.



    To prove that (2) implies (1) without completeness, let me define a limit point of $Y={f_n}$: a point $zin H$ is a limit point of $Y$ if for every open neighborhood $U$ of $z$, we have that $(Usetminus {z}) cap Y ne emptyset$. It's easy to show that in any topological space, the closure of a set $Y$ is equal to $Y$ along with the limit points of $Y$. Moreover, if $z$ is a limit point of $Y = {f_n}$, then it's easy to show that there is a subsequence of $(f_n)$ which converges to $z$: pick $n_1inmathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_1} in (B_{1}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, then let $delta_1 = mbox{dist}(z,f_{n_1})$ and pick $n_2in mathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_2} in (B_{delta_1/2}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, and so on. This subsequence $(f_{n_k})$ converges to $z$. So now, as you say, this closure, which you called $X'$, is compact. If $X'$ contains any limit points of $Y$, then we're done. Otherwise, $X' = Y$ and there are no limit points of $Y$. Thus, for each $ninmathbb{N}$, there is an open neighborhood $U_n$ of $f_n$ with $Ycap U_n = {f_n}$. Now the $U_n$ form an open cover of $Y$ with no finite subcover.



    You're right! We didn't use much about the Hilbert space $H$. It's true for all metric spaces. Though you should change your second definition of compactness to




    For any sequence $(x_n)$ in $X$, there is some a subsequence $(y_n)$ and some $yin X$ such that for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there is some $min mathbb{N}$ so that if $nge m$, then $y_nin U$.




    It's not true for all topological spaces. Not even for Hausdorff topological spaces.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      2












      $begingroup$

      To finish your argument for (1) implies (2), we pick $x_n in Xsetminus cup_{i=1}^n O_i$, then let $(y_n)$ be a subsequence of $(x_n)$ which converges to $yin X$. Since the $O_i$ are an open cover of $X$, there is some $N$ so that $yin O_N$. But there are infinitely many $y_n notin O_N$, which is impossible: if $(y_n)to y$, then for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there must be some $m$ so that for $nge m$, we have $y_nin U$.



      To prove that (2) implies (1) without completeness, let me define a limit point of $Y={f_n}$: a point $zin H$ is a limit point of $Y$ if for every open neighborhood $U$ of $z$, we have that $(Usetminus {z}) cap Y ne emptyset$. It's easy to show that in any topological space, the closure of a set $Y$ is equal to $Y$ along with the limit points of $Y$. Moreover, if $z$ is a limit point of $Y = {f_n}$, then it's easy to show that there is a subsequence of $(f_n)$ which converges to $z$: pick $n_1inmathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_1} in (B_{1}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, then let $delta_1 = mbox{dist}(z,f_{n_1})$ and pick $n_2in mathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_2} in (B_{delta_1/2}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, and so on. This subsequence $(f_{n_k})$ converges to $z$. So now, as you say, this closure, which you called $X'$, is compact. If $X'$ contains any limit points of $Y$, then we're done. Otherwise, $X' = Y$ and there are no limit points of $Y$. Thus, for each $ninmathbb{N}$, there is an open neighborhood $U_n$ of $f_n$ with $Ycap U_n = {f_n}$. Now the $U_n$ form an open cover of $Y$ with no finite subcover.



      You're right! We didn't use much about the Hilbert space $H$. It's true for all metric spaces. Though you should change your second definition of compactness to




      For any sequence $(x_n)$ in $X$, there is some a subsequence $(y_n)$ and some $yin X$ such that for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there is some $min mathbb{N}$ so that if $nge m$, then $y_nin U$.




      It's not true for all topological spaces. Not even for Hausdorff topological spaces.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        2












        2








        2





        $begingroup$

        To finish your argument for (1) implies (2), we pick $x_n in Xsetminus cup_{i=1}^n O_i$, then let $(y_n)$ be a subsequence of $(x_n)$ which converges to $yin X$. Since the $O_i$ are an open cover of $X$, there is some $N$ so that $yin O_N$. But there are infinitely many $y_n notin O_N$, which is impossible: if $(y_n)to y$, then for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there must be some $m$ so that for $nge m$, we have $y_nin U$.



        To prove that (2) implies (1) without completeness, let me define a limit point of $Y={f_n}$: a point $zin H$ is a limit point of $Y$ if for every open neighborhood $U$ of $z$, we have that $(Usetminus {z}) cap Y ne emptyset$. It's easy to show that in any topological space, the closure of a set $Y$ is equal to $Y$ along with the limit points of $Y$. Moreover, if $z$ is a limit point of $Y = {f_n}$, then it's easy to show that there is a subsequence of $(f_n)$ which converges to $z$: pick $n_1inmathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_1} in (B_{1}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, then let $delta_1 = mbox{dist}(z,f_{n_1})$ and pick $n_2in mathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_2} in (B_{delta_1/2}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, and so on. This subsequence $(f_{n_k})$ converges to $z$. So now, as you say, this closure, which you called $X'$, is compact. If $X'$ contains any limit points of $Y$, then we're done. Otherwise, $X' = Y$ and there are no limit points of $Y$. Thus, for each $ninmathbb{N}$, there is an open neighborhood $U_n$ of $f_n$ with $Ycap U_n = {f_n}$. Now the $U_n$ form an open cover of $Y$ with no finite subcover.



        You're right! We didn't use much about the Hilbert space $H$. It's true for all metric spaces. Though you should change your second definition of compactness to




        For any sequence $(x_n)$ in $X$, there is some a subsequence $(y_n)$ and some $yin X$ such that for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there is some $min mathbb{N}$ so that if $nge m$, then $y_nin U$.




        It's not true for all topological spaces. Not even for Hausdorff topological spaces.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        To finish your argument for (1) implies (2), we pick $x_n in Xsetminus cup_{i=1}^n O_i$, then let $(y_n)$ be a subsequence of $(x_n)$ which converges to $yin X$. Since the $O_i$ are an open cover of $X$, there is some $N$ so that $yin O_N$. But there are infinitely many $y_n notin O_N$, which is impossible: if $(y_n)to y$, then for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there must be some $m$ so that for $nge m$, we have $y_nin U$.



        To prove that (2) implies (1) without completeness, let me define a limit point of $Y={f_n}$: a point $zin H$ is a limit point of $Y$ if for every open neighborhood $U$ of $z$, we have that $(Usetminus {z}) cap Y ne emptyset$. It's easy to show that in any topological space, the closure of a set $Y$ is equal to $Y$ along with the limit points of $Y$. Moreover, if $z$ is a limit point of $Y = {f_n}$, then it's easy to show that there is a subsequence of $(f_n)$ which converges to $z$: pick $n_1inmathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_1} in (B_{1}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, then let $delta_1 = mbox{dist}(z,f_{n_1})$ and pick $n_2in mathbb{N}$ so that $f_{n_2} in (B_{delta_1/2}(z)setminus {z}) cap Y$, and so on. This subsequence $(f_{n_k})$ converges to $z$. So now, as you say, this closure, which you called $X'$, is compact. If $X'$ contains any limit points of $Y$, then we're done. Otherwise, $X' = Y$ and there are no limit points of $Y$. Thus, for each $ninmathbb{N}$, there is an open neighborhood $U_n$ of $f_n$ with $Ycap U_n = {f_n}$. Now the $U_n$ form an open cover of $Y$ with no finite subcover.



        You're right! We didn't use much about the Hilbert space $H$. It's true for all metric spaces. Though you should change your second definition of compactness to




        For any sequence $(x_n)$ in $X$, there is some a subsequence $(y_n)$ and some $yin X$ such that for any open neighborhood $U$ of $y$, there is some $min mathbb{N}$ so that if $nge m$, then $y_nin U$.




        It's not true for all topological spaces. Not even for Hausdorff topological spaces.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Jan 26 at 17:18

























        answered Jan 25 at 23:46









        cspruncsprun

        2,077210




        2,077210






























            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%2f3087728%2fprove-or-disprove-a-metric-space-x-is-compact-iff-for-any-sequence-f-n%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

            Mario Kart Wii

            What does “Dominus providebit” mean?

            Antonio Litta Visconti Arese