|
|
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
− | A point in a [[Topological space|topological space]] that is not an [[Accumulation point|accumulation point]] of any countable subset of the space. Every [[P-point|<img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w1300302.png" />-point]] is a weak <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w1300303.png" />-point. Weak <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w1300304.png" />-points were introduced by K. Kunen [[#References|[a2]]] in his proof that <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w1300305.png" />, the remainder <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w1300306.png" /> of the [[Stone–Čech compactification|Stone–Čech compactification]] of the natural numbers, is not homogeneous (cf. [[Cech-Stone compactification of omega]]). In fact, Kunen proved that <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w1300307.png" /> contains points that are very much like <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w1300308.png" />-points, so-called <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w1300309.png" />-OK points: A point is <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003011.png" />-OK if for every sequence <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003012.png" /> of neighbourhoods there is a <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003013.png" />-sequence <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003014.png" /> of neighbourhoods such that <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003015.png" /> whenever <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003016.png" /> has <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003017.png" /> elements. A <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003018.png" />-OK point cannot be an accumulation point of any set that satisfies the countable chain condition (cf. [[Chain condition|Chain condition]]), hence it is not an accumulation point of any countable set either. | + | A point in a [[topological space]] that is not an [[accumulation point]] of any countable subset of the space. Every [[P-point|$P$-point]] is a weak $P$-point. Weak $P$-points were introduced by K. Kunen [[#References|[a2]]] in his proof that $\mathbf{N}^*$, the remainder $\beta\mathbf{N}\setminus\mathbf{N}$ of the [[Stone–Čech compactification]] of the natural numbers, is not homogeneous (cf. [[Cech-Stone compactification of omega]]). In fact, Kunen proved that $\mathbf{N}^*$ contains points that are very much like $P$-points, so-called $\mathfrak{c}$-OK points: A point is $\mathfrak{c}$-OK if for every sequence $(U_n)_{n\in\mathbf{N}}$ of neighbourhoods there is a $\mathfrak{c}$-sequence $(V_\alpha)_{\alpha<\mathfrak{c}}$ of neighbourhoods such that $\cap_{\alpha\in F} V_\alpha \subseteq U_n$ whenever $F$ has $n$ elements. A $\mathfrak{c}$-OK point cannot be an accumulation point of any set that satisfies the [[countable chain condition]] (cf. [[Chain condition]]), hence it is not an accumulation point of any countable set either. |
| | | |
− | Weak <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003019.png" />-points and similar types of points have been used to give so-called "effective" proofs that many spaces are not homogeneous [[#References|[a3]]], [[#References|[a4]]]. These proofs are generally considered simpler than the proof by Z. Frolík [[#References|[a1]]] of the non-homogeneity of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003020.png" />, which takes a countably infinite discrete subset <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003021.png" /> of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003022.png" /> (whose closure is homeomorphic to <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003023.png" />) and shows that a point <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003024.png" /> of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003025.png" /> cannot be mapped by any auto-homeomorphism of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003026.png" /> to its copy in the closure of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003027.png" />. "Simpler" does not necessarily mean that the proof is easier, but that the properties used to distinguish the point are of a simpler nature. | + | Weak $P$-points and similar types of points have been used to give so-called "effective" proofs that many spaces are not homogeneous [[#References|[a3]]], [[#References|[a4]]]. These proofs are generally considered simpler than the proof by Z. Frolík [[#References|[a1]]] of the non-homogeneity of $\mathbf{N}^*$, which takes a countably infinite discrete subset $D$ of $\mathbf{N}^*$ (whose closure is homeomorphic to $\beta\mathbf{N}$) and shows that a point $p$ of $\mathbf{N}^*$ cannot be mapped by any auto-homeomorphism of $\mathbf{N}^*$ to its copy in the closure of $D$. "Simpler" does not necessarily mean that the proof is easier, but that the properties used to distinguish the point are of a simpler nature. |
| | | |
| ====References==== | | ====References==== |
− | <table><TR><TD valign="top">[a1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> Z. Frolík, "Non-homogeneity of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003028.png" />" ''Comment. Math. Univ. Carolinae'' , '''8''' (1967) pp. 705–709</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a2]</TD> <TD valign="top"> K. Kunen, "Weak <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003029.png" />-points in <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003030.png" />" Á. Császár (ed.) , ''Topology (Proc. Fourth Colloq., Budapest, 1978)'' , '''II''' , North-Holland (1980) pp. 741–749</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a3]</TD> <TD valign="top"> J. van Mill, "Weak <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003031.png" />-points in Čech–Stone compactifications" ''Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.'' , '''273''' (1982) pp. 657–678</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a4]</TD> <TD valign="top"> J. van Mill, "Sixteen topological types in <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/w/w130/w130030/w13003032.png" />" ''Topol. Appl.'' , '''13''' : 1 (1982) pp. 43–57</TD></TR></table> | + | <table><TR><TD valign="top">[a1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> Z. Frolík, "Non-homogeneity of $\beta P-P$" ''Comment. Math. Univ. Carolinae'' , '''8''' (1967) pp. 705–709 {{ZBL|0163.44601}}</TD></TR> |
| + | <TR><TD valign="top">[a2]</TD> <TD valign="top"> K. Kunen, "Weak $P$-points in $\mathbf{N}^*$" Á. Császár (ed.) , ''Topology (Proc. Fourth Colloq., Budapest, 1978)'' , '''II''' , North-Holland (1980) pp. 741–749 |
| + | {{ZBL|0435.54021}}</TD></TR> |
| + | <TR><TD valign="top">[a3]</TD> <TD valign="top"> J. van Mill, "Weak $P$-points in Čech–Stone compactifications" ''Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.'' , '''273''' (1982) pp. 657–678 {{ZBL|0498.54022}}</TD></TR> |
| + | <TR><TD valign="top">[a4]</TD> <TD valign="top"> J. van Mill, "Sixteen topological types in $\beta\omega-\omega$" ''Topol. Appl.'' , '''13''' : 1 (1982) pp. 43–57 {{ZBL|0489.54022}}</TD></TR> |
| + | </table> |
| + | |
| + | {{TEX|done}} |
A point in a topological space that is not an accumulation point of any countable subset of the space. Every $P$-point is a weak $P$-point. Weak $P$-points were introduced by K. Kunen [a2] in his proof that $\mathbf{N}^*$, the remainder $\beta\mathbf{N}\setminus\mathbf{N}$ of the Stone–Čech compactification of the natural numbers, is not homogeneous (cf. Cech-Stone compactification of omega). In fact, Kunen proved that $\mathbf{N}^*$ contains points that are very much like $P$-points, so-called $\mathfrak{c}$-OK points: A point is $\mathfrak{c}$-OK if for every sequence $(U_n)_{n\in\mathbf{N}}$ of neighbourhoods there is a $\mathfrak{c}$-sequence $(V_\alpha)_{\alpha<\mathfrak{c}}$ of neighbourhoods such that $\cap_{\alpha\in F} V_\alpha \subseteq U_n$ whenever $F$ has $n$ elements. A $\mathfrak{c}$-OK point cannot be an accumulation point of any set that satisfies the countable chain condition (cf. Chain condition), hence it is not an accumulation point of any countable set either.
Weak $P$-points and similar types of points have been used to give so-called "effective" proofs that many spaces are not homogeneous [a3], [a4]. These proofs are generally considered simpler than the proof by Z. Frolík [a1] of the non-homogeneity of $\mathbf{N}^*$, which takes a countably infinite discrete subset $D$ of $\mathbf{N}^*$ (whose closure is homeomorphic to $\beta\mathbf{N}$) and shows that a point $p$ of $\mathbf{N}^*$ cannot be mapped by any auto-homeomorphism of $\mathbf{N}^*$ to its copy in the closure of $D$. "Simpler" does not necessarily mean that the proof is easier, but that the properties used to distinguish the point are of a simpler nature.
References
[a1] | Z. Frolík, "Non-homogeneity of $\beta P-P$" Comment. Math. Univ. Carolinae , 8 (1967) pp. 705–709 Zbl 0163.44601 |
[a2] | K. Kunen, "Weak $P$-points in $\mathbf{N}^*$" Á. Császár (ed.) , Topology (Proc. Fourth Colloq., Budapest, 1978) , II , North-Holland (1980) pp. 741–749
Zbl 0435.54021 |
[a3] | J. van Mill, "Weak $P$-points in Čech–Stone compactifications" Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 273 (1982) pp. 657–678 Zbl 0498.54022 |
[a4] | J. van Mill, "Sixteen topological types in $\beta\omega-\omega$" Topol. Appl. , 13 : 1 (1982) pp. 43–57 Zbl 0489.54022 |