Finite intersection property

Summary

In general topology, a branch of mathematics, a non-empty family A of subsets of a set is said to have the finite intersection property (FIP) if the intersection over any finite subcollection of is non-empty. It has the strong finite intersection property (SFIP) if the intersection over any finite subcollection of is infinite. Sets with the finite intersection property are also called centered systems and filter subbases.[1]

The finite intersection property can be used to reformulate topological compactness in terms of closed sets; this is its most prominent application. Other applications include proving that certain perfect sets are uncountable, and the construction of ultrafilters.

Definition edit

Let   be a set and   a nonempty family of subsets of  ; that is,   is a subset of the power set of  . Then   is said to have the finite intersection property if every nonempty finite subfamily has nonempty intersection; it is said to have the strong finite intersection property if that intersection is always infinite.[1]

In symbols,   has the FIP if, for any choice of a finite nonempty subset   of  , there must exist a point

 
Likewise,   has the SFIP if, for every choice of such  , there are infinitely many such  .[1]

In the study of filters, the common intersection of a family of sets is called a kernel, from much the same etymology as the sunflower. Families with empty kernel are called free; those with nonempty kernel, fixed.[2]

Families of examples and non-examples edit

The empty set cannot belong to any collection with the finite intersection property.

A sufficient condition for the FIP intersection property is a nonempty kernel. The converse is generally false, but holds for finite families; that is, if   is finite, then   has the finite intersection property if and only if it is fixed.

Pairwise intersection edit

The finite intersection property is strictly stronger than pairwise intersection; the family   has pairwise intersections, but not the FIP.

More generally, let   be a positive integer greater than unity,  , and  . Then any subset of   with fewer than   elements has nonempty intersection, but   lacks the FIP.

End-type constructions edit

If   is a decreasing sequence of non-empty sets, then the family   has the finite intersection property (and is even a π–system). If the inclusions   are strict, then   admits the strong finite intersection property as well.

More generally, any   that is totally ordered by inclusion has the FIP.

At the same time, the kernel of   may be empty: if  , then the kernel of   is the empty set. Similarly, the family of intervals   also has the (S)FIP, but empty kernel.

"Generic" sets and properties edit

The family of all Borel subsets of   with Lebesgue measure   has the FIP, as does the family of comeagre sets. If   is an infinite set, then the Fréchet filter (the family  ) has the FIP. All of these are free filters; they are upwards-closed and have empty infinitary intersection.[3][4]

If   and, for each positive integer   the subset   is precisely all elements of   having digit   in the  th decimal place, then any finite intersection of   is non-empty — just take   in those finitely many places and   in the rest. But the intersection of   for all   is empty, since no element of   has all zero digits.

Extension of the ground set edit

The (strong) finite intersection property is a characteristic of the family  , not the ground set  . If a family   on the set   admits the (S)FIP and  , then   is also a family on the set   with the FIP (resp. SFIP).

Generated filters and topologies edit

If   are sets with   then the family   has the FIP; this family is called the principal filter on   generated by  . The subset   has the FIP for much the same reason: the kernels contain the non-empty set  . If   is an open interval, then the set   is in fact equal to the kernels of   or  , and so is an element of each filter. But in general a filter's kernel need not be an element of the filter.

A proper filter on a set has the finite intersection property. Every neighbourhood subbasis at a point in a topological space has the FIP, and the same is true of every neighbourhood basis and every neighbourhood filter at a point (because each is, in particular, also a neighbourhood subbasis).

Relationship to π-systems and filters edit

A π–system is a non-empty family of sets that is closed under finite intersections. The set

 
of all finite intersections of one or more sets from   is called the π–system generated by  , because it is the smallest π–system having   as a subset.

The upward closure of   in   is the set

 

For any family  , the finite intersection property is equivalent to any of the following:

  • The π–system generated by   does not have the empty set as an element; that is,  
  • The set   has the finite intersection property.
  • The set   is a (proper)[note 1] prefilter.
  • The family   is a subset of some (proper) prefilter.[1]
  • The upward closure   is a (proper) filter on  . In this case,   is called the filter on   generated by  , because it is the minimal (with respect to  ) filter on   that contains   as a subset.
  •   is a subset of some (proper)[note 1] filter.[1]

Applications edit

Compactness edit

The finite intersection property is useful in formulating an alternative definition of compactness:

Theorem — A space is compact if and only if every family of closed subsets having the finite intersection property has non-empty intersection.[5][6]

This formulation of compactness is used in some proofs of Tychonoff's theorem.

Uncountability of perfect spaces edit

Another common application is to prove that the real numbers are uncountable.

Theorem — Let   be a non-empty compact Hausdorff space that satisfies the property that no one-point set is open. Then   is uncountable.

All the conditions in the statement of the theorem are necessary:

  1. We cannot eliminate the Hausdorff condition; a countable set (with at least two points) with the indiscrete topology is compact, has more than one point, and satisfies the property that no one point sets are open, but is not uncountable.
  2. We cannot eliminate the compactness condition, as the set of rational numbers shows.
  3. We cannot eliminate the condition that one point sets cannot be open, as any finite space with the discrete topology shows.
Proof

We will show that if   is non-empty and open, and if   is a point of   then there is a neighbourhood   whose closure does not contain   ( ' may or may not be in  ). Choose   different from   (if   then there must exist such a   for otherwise   would be an open one point set; if   this is possible since  is non-empty). Then by the Hausdorff condition, choose disjoint neighbourhoods   and   of   and   respectively. Then   will be a neighbourhood of   contained in   whose closure doesn't contain   as desired.

Now suppose   is a bijection, and let   denote the image of   Let   be the first open set and choose a neighbourhood   whose closure does not contain   Secondly, choose a neighbourhood   whose closure does not contain   Continue this process whereby choosing a neighbourhood   whose closure does not contain   Then the collection   satisfies the finite intersection property and hence the intersection of their closures is non-empty by the compactness of   Therefore, there is a point   in this intersection. No   can belong to this intersection because   does not belong to the closure of   This means that   is not equal to   for all   and   is not surjective; a contradiction. Therefore,   is uncountable.

Corollary — Every closed interval   with   is uncountable. Therefore,   is uncountable.

Corollary — Every perfect, locally compact Hausdorff space is uncountable.

Proof

Let   be a perfect, compact, Hausdorff space, then the theorem immediately implies that   is uncountable. If   is a perfect, locally compact Hausdorff space that is not compact, then the one-point compactification of   is a perfect, compact Hausdorff space. Therefore, the one point compactification of   is uncountable. Since removing a point from an uncountable set still leaves an uncountable set,   is uncountable as well.

Ultrafilters edit

Let   be non-empty,     having the finite intersection property. Then there exists an   ultrafilter (in  ) such that   This result is known as the ultrafilter lemma.[7]

See also edit

  • Filter (set theory) – Family of sets representing "large" sets
  • Filters in topology – Use of filters to describe and characterize all basic topological notions and results.
  • Neighbourhood system – (for a point x) collection of all neighborhoods for the point x
  • Ultrafilter (set theory) – Maximal proper filter

References edit

Notes edit

  1. ^ a b A filter or prefilter on a set is proper or non-degenerate if it does not contain the empty set as an element. Like many − but not all − authors, this article will require non-degeneracy as part of the definitions of "prefilter" and "filter".

Citations edit

  1. ^ a b c d e Joshi 1983, pp. 242−248.
  2. ^ Dolecki & Mynard 2016, pp. 27–29, 33–35.
  3. ^ Bourbaki 1987, pp. 57–68.
  4. ^ Wilansky 2013, pp. 44–46.
  5. ^ Munkres 2000, p. 169.
  6. ^ A space is compact iff any family of closed sets having fip has non-empty intersection at PlanetMath.
  7. ^ Csirmaz, László; Hajnal, András (1994), Matematikai logika (In Hungarian), Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University.

General sources edit

  • Bourbaki, Nicolas (1989) [1966]. General Topology: Chapters 1–4 [Topologie Générale]. Éléments de mathématique. Berlin New York: Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 978-3-540-64241-1. OCLC 18588129.
  • Bourbaki, Nicolas (1989) [1967]. General Topology 2: Chapters 5–10 [Topologie Générale]. Éléments de mathématique. Vol. 4. Berlin New York: Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 978-3-540-64563-4. OCLC 246032063.
  • Bourbaki, Nicolas (1987) [1981]. Topological Vector Spaces: Chapters 1–5. Éléments de mathématique. Translated by Eggleston, H.G.; Madan, S. Berlin New York: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-13627-4. OCLC 17499190.
  • Comfort, William Wistar; Negrepontis, Stylianos (1974). The Theory of Ultrafilters. Vol. 211. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-0-387-06604-2. OCLC 1205452.
  • Császár, Ákos (1978). General topology. Translated by Császár, Klára. Bristol England: Adam Hilger Ltd. ISBN 0-85274-275-4. OCLC 4146011.
  • Dolecki, Szymon; Mynard, Frederic (2016). Convergence Foundations Of Topology. New Jersey: World Scientific Publishing Company. ISBN 978-981-4571-52-4. OCLC 945169917.
  • Dugundji, James (1966). Topology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. ISBN 978-0-697-06889-7. OCLC 395340485.
  • Joshi, K. D. (1983). Introduction to General Topology. New York: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. ISBN 978-0-85226-444-7. OCLC 9218750.
  • Koutras, Costas D.; Moyzes, Christos; Nomikos, Christos; Tsaprounis, Konstantinos; Zikos, Yorgos (20 October 2021). "On Weak Filters and Ultrafilters: Set Theory From (and for) Knowledge Representation". Logic Journal of the IGPL. doi:10.1093/jigpal/jzab030.
  • MacIver R., David (1 July 2004). "Filters in Analysis and Topology" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-10-09. (Provides an introductory review of filters in topology and in metric spaces.)
  • Munkres, James R. (2000). Topology (Second ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc. ISBN 978-0-13-181629-9. OCLC 42683260.
  • Narici, Lawrence; Beckenstein, Edward (2011). Topological Vector Spaces. Pure and applied mathematics (Second ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. ISBN 978-1584888666. OCLC 144216834.
  • Wilansky, Albert (2013). Modern Methods in Topological Vector Spaces. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, Inc. ISBN 978-0-486-49353-4. OCLC 849801114.
  • Wilansky, Albert (17 October 2008) [1970]. Topology for Analysis. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, Inc. ISBN 978-0-486-46903-4. OCLC 227923899.

External links edit