Processing math: 100%

The Stacks project

Lemma 5.13.6. Let X be a Hausdorff and locally quasi-compact space. Let Z \subset X be a quasi-compact (hence closed) subset. Suppose given an integer p \geq 0, a set I, for every i \in I an open U_ i \subset X, and for every (p + 1)-tuple i_0, \ldots , i_ p of I an open W_{i_0 \ldots i_ p} \subset U_{i_0} \cap \ldots \cap U_{i_ p} such that

  1. Z \subset \bigcup U_ i, and

  2. for every i_0, \ldots , i_ p we have W_{i_0 \ldots i_ p} \cap Z = U_{i_0} \cap \ldots \cap U_{i_ p} \cap Z.

Then there exist opens V_ i of X such that we have Z \subset \bigcup V_ i, for all i we have \overline{V_ i} \subset U_ i, and we have V_{i_0} \cap \ldots \cap V_{i_ p} \subset W_{i_0 \ldots i_ p} for all (p + 1)-tuples i_0, \ldots , i_ p.

Proof. Since Z is quasi-compact, there is a reduction to the case where I is finite (details omitted). Because X is locally quasi-compact and Z is quasi-compact, we can find a neighbourhood Z \subset E which is quasi-compact, i.e., E is quasi-compact and contains an open neighbourhood of Z in X. If we prove the result after replacing X by E, then the result follows. Hence we may assume X is quasi-compact.

We prove the result in case I is finite and X is quasi-compact by induction on p. The base case is p = 0. In this case we have X = (X \setminus Z) \cup \bigcup W_ i. By Lemma 5.13.4 we can find a covering X = V \cup \bigcup V_ i by opens V_ i \subset W_ i and V \subset X \setminus Z with \overline{V_ i} \subset W_ i for all i. Then we see that we obtain a solution of the problem posed by the lemma.

Induction step. Assume the lemma proven for p - 1. Set W_{j_0 \ldots j_{p - 1}} equal to the intersection of all W_{i_0 \ldots i_ p} with \{ j_0, \ldots , j_{p - 1}\} = \{ i_0, \ldots , i_ p\} (equality of sets). By induction there exists a solution for these opens, say V_ i \subset U_ i. It follows from our choice of W_{j_0 \ldots j_{p - 1}} that we have V_{i_0} \cap \ldots \cap V_{i_ p} \subset W_{i_0 \ldots i_ p} for all (p + 1)-tuples i_0, \ldots , i_ p where i_ a = i_ b for some 0 \leq a < b \leq p. Thus we only need to modify our choice of V_ i if V_{i_0} \cap \ldots \cap V_{i_ p} \not\subset W_{i_0 \ldots i_ p} for some (p + 1)-tuple i_0, \ldots , i_ p with pairwise distinct elements. In this case we have

T = \overline{V_{i_0} \cap \ldots \cap V_{i_ p} \setminus W_{i_0 \ldots i_ p}} \subset \overline{V_{i_0}} \cap \ldots \cap \overline{V_{i_ p}} \setminus W_{i_0 \ldots i_ p}

is a closed subset of X contained in U_{i_0} \cap \ldots \cap U_{i_ p} not meeting Z. Hence we can replace V_{i_0} by V_{i_0} \setminus T to “fix” the problem. After repeating this finitely many times for each of the problem tuples, the lemma is proven. \square


Comments (0)


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.