Tychonoff's theorem

A proof of Tychonoff's theorem and its equivalence to the axiom of choice

Definition. Given a family {Xi}\{X_i\} of topological spaces, the product topology on X=∏XiX = \prod X_i is the coarsest topology in which each projection πi:X→Xi\pi_i : X \to X_i is continuous. The open sets of the form πi−1(V)\pi_i^{-1}(V) where VV is open in XiX_i form a subbasis for the product topology.

Tychonoff’s theorem. A product of compact spaces is compact.

Of course, taken with the product topology. Another natural topology for XiX_i is to consider the sets of the form ∏Vi\prod V_i where each ViV_i is open in XiX_i. This forms a basis for the box topology, yet a product of compact spaces may not be compact under the box topology. If the product is finite, the box and product topology coincide, since

∏i=1nVi=⋂i=1nπi−1(Vi)\prod_{i=1}^n V_i = \bigcap_{i=1}^n \pi_i^{-1}(V_i)

But for the infinite product [0,1]ω[0, 1]^\omega, we can define the nbds Un=∏VinU_n = \prod V_{in} where Vin=(0,1/3)V_{in} = (0, 1/3) if i≠ni \ne n and Vin=XiV_{in} = X_i if i=ni = n. Clearly {Un}\{U_n\} must cover [0,1]ω[0, 1]^{\omega}, but the point x=(xn)x = (x_n) defined as xn=2/3x_n = 2/3 cannot be covered by any strict subcover of UnU_n. The box topology, in a sense, has too many open sets.

To prove the theorem, we will prove every FIP (finite-intersection-property) family of closed sets has a nonempty intersection, which is equivalent to being compact. If A\mathcal{A} is FIP, we use Zorn’s lemma to construct a maximal D⊇A\mathcal{D} \supseteq \mathcal{A} which is FIP, and prove the ⋂D∈DD‾\bigcap_{D \in \mathcal{D}} \cl{D} is nonempty by proving it contains a point xx with coordinates xi∈⋂D∈Dπi−1(D‾)x_i \in \bigcap_{D \in \mathcal{D}} \pi_i^{-1}(\cl{D}), using the fact that this is a FIP family of closed sets and that XiX_i is compact.

Lemma 1. For any family A\mathcal{A} totally-ordered by inclusion, if F\mathcal{F} is a collection of FIP families FF such that A⊆F\mathcal{A} \subseteq F, then ⋃F\bigcup \mathcal{F} is also a FIP family containing A\mathcal{A}.

Proof. Clearly A⊆⋃F\mathcal{A} \subseteq \bigcup \mathcal{F}. Let S={x1,…,xn}S = \{x_1, \dots, x_n\} be a finite subset of ⋃F\bigcup \mathcal{F}. Then choose for each ii, an XiX_i such that xi∈Xix_i \in X_i. Since F\mathcal{F} is totally ordered, let XiX_i be the maximum element of {X1,…,Xn}\{X_1, \dots, X_n\} such that S⊆XiS \subseteq X_i. Since XiX_i is FIP, ⋂S\bigcap S is nonempty, proving ⋃F\bigcup \mathcal{F} is FIP.

Lemma 2. Let D\mathcal{D} be a maximal FIP-family of subsets of XX that contains A\mathcal{A}.

(a) For any finite subset {D1,…,Dn}⊆D\{D_1, \dots, D_n\} \subseteq \mathcal{D}, ⋂i=1nDi∈D\bigcap_{i=1}^n D_i \in \mathcal{D}.

(b) If A⊆XA \subseteq X is a set which intersects every element of D\mathcal{D}, then A∈DA \in \mathcal{D}.

Proof. (a) Let D=⋂i=1nDiD = \bigcap_{i=1}^n D_i. We just have to show D′=D∪{D}\mathcal{D}' = \mathcal{D} \cup \{D\} is FIP, and so by maximality of D\mathcal{D}, it must be that D∈DD \in \mathcal{D}. Clearly any finite subset of D′\mathcal{D}' can be written as a finite subset of D\mathcal{D} including or not DD. So it suffices to show that for any {D1′,…,Dm′}⊆D\{D'_1, \dots, D'_m\} \subseteq \mathcal{D}, that

D∩⋂i=1mDi′≠∅D \cap \bigcap_{i=1}^m D'_i \ne \emptyset

This is clearly true, as it is a finite intersection of elements in D\mathcal{D}.

(b) Again, we just have to show D′=D∪{A}\mathcal{D}' = \mathcal{D} \cup \{A\} is FIP, and again, we just have to prove A∩⋂i=1nDiA \cap \bigcap_{i=1}^n D_i is nonempty for any finite selection {D1,…,Dn}⊆D\{D_1, \dots, D_n\} \subseteq \mathcal{D}. But by (a), D=⋂i=1nDi∈DD = \bigcap_{i=1}^n D_i \in \mathcal{D}, and by hypothesis, A∩D≠∅A \cap D \ne \emptyset. □\square


Proposition 1. The axiom of choice implies Tychonoff’s theorem.

Proof. Let {Xi}i∈I\{X_i\}_{i \in I} be a family of compact sets and X=∏i∈IXiX = \prod_{i \in I} X_i. Let A\mathcal{A} be a FIP family in XX and we wish to show ⋂A∈AA‾≠∅\bigcap_{A \in \mathcal{A}} \cl{A} \ne \emptyset. By Lemma 1, using Zorn’s lemma, there must exist a maximal family D\mathcal{D} in XX which is FIP and A⊆D\mathcal{A} \subseteq \mathcal{D}. This means ⋂D∈DD‾⊆⋂A∈AA‾\bigcap_{D \in \mathcal{D}} \cl{D} \subseteq \bigcap_{A \in \mathcal{A}} \cl{A}, so it suffices to show the former is nonempty.

We show Di={πi(D) : D∈D}\mathcal{D}_i = \{ \pi_i(D) \ : \ D \in \mathcal{D} \} is FIP. This follows from basic set operation properties.

⋂j=1nDj≠∅  ⟹  ⋂j=1nπi(Dj)⊇πi(⋂j=1nDj)≠∅\bigcap_{j=1}^n D_j \ne \emptyset \implies \bigcap_{j=1}^n \pi_i(D_j) \supseteq \pi_i\left(\bigcap_{j=1}^n D_j\right) \ne \emptyset

For each i∈Ii \in I, since XiX_i is compact, we can choose (using the axiom of choice again!) an element

xi∈⋂D∈Dπi(D)‾x_i \in \bigcap_{D \in \mathcal{D}} \cl{\pi_i(D)}

and so x=(xi)i∈I∈Xx = (x_i)_{i \in I} \in X. Now we prove x∈⋂D∈DD‾x \in \bigcap_{D \in \mathcal{D}} \cl{D}. For each ii, take any open set V∋xiV \ni x_i of XiX_i. Since xi∈πi(D)‾x_i \in \cl{\pi_i(D)} for all DD, V∩πi(D)≠∅V \cap \pi_i(D) \ne \emptyset and so there must exist some y∈Dy \in D with yi∈Vy_i \in V. This proves πi−1(V)\pi_i^{-1}(V) intersects every DD, and by lemma 2(a), every subbasis element πi−1(V)\pi_i^{-1}(V) which contains xx must be an element of D\mathcal{D}. Every basis element is a finite intersection of subbasis elements, which means every basis element containing xx is an element of D\mathcal{D}. That is, for any basis element B∋xB \ni x, we have that B∩D≠∅B \cap D \ne \emptyset for all D∈DD \in \mathcal{D}, since {B,D}⊆D\{B, D\} \subseteq \mathcal{D} is finite. This proves x∈D‾x \in \cl{D} for all D∈DD \in \mathcal{D}. □\square


Proposition 2. Tychonoff’s theorem implies the axiom of choice.

Proof. We wish to prove a product of nonempty sets is nonempty. Let {Xi}i∈I\{X_i\}_{i \in I} be any family of nonempty sets. The standard trick is to select an element λ∉⋃i∈IXi\lambda \notin \bigcup_{i \in I} X_i so that if we define Yi=Xi∪{λ}Y_i = X_i \cup \{\lambda\}, we have Xi≠YiX_i \ne Y_i. Define Y=∏i∈IYiY = \prod_{i \in I} Y_i. We define the topology τi\tau_i on YiY_i as

τi={∅,Xi,{λ},Yi}\tau_i = \{ \emptyset, X_i, \{\lambda\}, Y_i \}

This way, we have two properties.

  1. Each XiX_i is closed in YiY_i (since its complement is {λ}\{\lambda\}). Since each projection πi:Y→Yi\pi_i : Y \to Y_i is continuous, we have that πi−1(Xi)\pi_i^{-1}(X_i) is closed in YY.

  2. Each YiY_i is compact. Clearly, as there are only finitely many open sets.

By Tychonoff’s theorem, YY is compact. Furthermore, define the family of closed sets

F={πi−1(Xi) : i∈I}\mathcal{F} = \{ \pi_i^{-1}(X_i) \ : \ i \in I \}

If J⊆IJ \subseteq I is finite, we can choose an element xj∈Xjx_j \in X_j for each j∈Jj \in J and define the point y=(yi)y = (y_i) where

yi={xi, i∈Jλ, i∉Jy_i = \begin{cases} x_i, & \ i \in J \\ \lambda, & \ i \notin J \end{cases}

Then y∈Yy \in Y (this is why λ\lambda is introduced in the proof at all, as otherwise how would we construct such an element of YY without the axiom of choice?), and furthermore, y∈⋂i∈Jπi−1(Xi)y \in \bigcap_{i \in J} \pi_i^{-1}(X_i). This proves F\mathcal{F} is a FIP family of closed sets, and so by the compactness of YY,

⋂i∈Iπi−1(Xi)=∏i∈IXi≠∅□\bigcap_{i \in I} \pi_i^{-1}(X_i) = \prod_{i \in I} X_i \ne \emptyset \quad \square


References

Munkres, Topology: 37 - The Tychonoff Theorem

J. L. Kelley (1950) The Tychonoff Theorem Implies the Axiom of Choice