Can we write a locally compact metric space as a union of countable compact sets?

295 Views Asked by At

Let $X$ be a locally compact metric space. Can we choose a sequence $H_i$ of compact sets such that $H_i \subset \operatorname{int}\left(H_{i+1}\right)$ for all $i \geq 1$ and $X =\cup_{i=1}^{\infty} H_i$.

Ignore the counterexample : uncountable set with discrete metric. Please, provide me some other examples if known.

2

There are 2 best solutions below

4
On

This holds (for metric spaces) iff $X$ is separable as well:

If $X$ is locally compact metric and we have the $H_i$ as promised, $X$ is $\sigma$-compact, hence Lindelöf and separable and second countable (as these are equivalent in all metric spaces).

If $X$ is locally compact metric and separable, we can reduce the base of open sets with compact closure to a countable base $\{B_n: n \in \omega\}$ with all $\overline{B_n}$ compact. Then set $H_0 = B_0$ and cover $\overline{B_0}$ by finitely many new $B_n$, whose union we then define to be $H_1$ etc. continuing by recursion.

1
On

In general it is impossible. A space $X$ which is the countable union of compact subsets is called $\sigma$-compact. It is well-known that if $X$ is locally compact, then $X$ is $\sigma$-compact if and and only it is representable as in your question.

So your question is: Is every locally compact space which is not discrete a $\sigma$-compact space?

Consider an uncountable product $P = \prod_{\alpha \in A} I$ of unit intervals $I = [0,1]$ and $x \in P$. Then $X = P \setminus \{ x \}$ is locally compact. If it were the countable union of compact subsets, then $\{ x \}$ would be the intersection of countably many open neighborhoods. A basis of open neighborhoods is given by the family of sets $\bigcap_{i=1}^n p_{\alpha_i} ^{-1}(U_i)$, where $p_\alpha : P \to I$ is the projection onto the coordinate $\alpha$, $U_i \subset I$ an open neighborhood of $x_i = p_{\alpha_i}(x)$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$ is arbitrary. But it is easy to see that any countable intersection of such sets is still an uncountable set since only countably many coordinates are subject to restrictions.