Is there an error in Steen and Seebach's Counterexamples space 99 "Maximal Compact Topology"?

61 Views Asked by At

In Counterexamples space 99, the Maximal Compact Topology is asserted to be non-Hausdroff (note 1), KC (compacts are closed, note 3), and first-countable (note 5).

But KC spaces are US, and first countable US spaces are Hausdorff. So where is the error?

1

There are 1 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

Despite this claim from the text:

X is second countable since it is first countable and countable.

the space is not first-countable. Any set containing $x$ and containing all but finitely-many points from each row of $\omega^2$ is open. So given a countable collection $U_n$ of neighborhoods of $x$, let's construct an open set that contains none of these.

For each $n<\omega$ choose $m_n<\omega$ with $(m_n,n)\in U_n$ (which must exist, as $U_n$ contains all but finitely-many points on the $n$th row). Then we may consider $$U=\{x\}\cup\{(m,n):n<\omega,m\geq m_n+1\}$$ noting that $U$ is a neighborhood of $x$ but does not contain $(m_n,n)\in U_n$ for each $n<\omega$.

EDIT: It seems this error depends on your edition of Counterexamples. Here is what I find in the copy via Google Books:

X is not first countable since it is first countable and countable.

However this also has a slight error: $y$ does in fact have a local countable basis; only $x$ is a point without a countable basis.