The countable chain condition, appearing in various guises (for topological spaces, for posets, for Boolean algebras), frequently recurs in discussions on forcing in set theory, particularly in discussions about preservation of cardinals and cofinalities in forcing extensions.
It is something of a misnomer because it is really a condition about antichains. But in the topological context it is equivalent to a condition on chains, and the name has stuck.
Suppose is a poset with a bottom element . A (strong) antichain in is a subset such that for all , we have either or is their meet (we need not assume general meets exist in ). If is a poset without a bottom, we define to be an antichain if it becomes an antichain in , the poset obtained by freely adjoining a bottom to ; this is equivalent to saying have no lower bound in .
A poset satisfies the countable chain condition if every antichain in is a countable set (i.e., at most denumerable).
A topological space satisfies the countable chain condition if its frame of open sets does (as a poset).
For future reference, we record a result on the countable chain condition in Heyting algebras . Let denote the Boolean algebra of regular elements ( such that ).
A Heyting algebra satisfies the countable chain condition iff does.
The inclusion preserves meets and , so if every antichain in is countable, then the same is true in .
The quotient map also preserves meets and (details are at Heyting algebra), and moreover the restriction of this map to an antichain is an injection (if for , then or ; in the latter case and similarly , so ). So if every antichain in is countable, the same is true in .
Let be a complete Boolean algebra. For cardinals , there is a bijective correspondence between
maps such that is an antichain in ;
injective colimit-preserving poset maps ,
here regarding as an ordinal.
Given an antichain , define a colimit-preserving chain by (so , as mandated by colimit-preservation). Given an injective colimit-preserving chain , define an antichain by . It is straightforward to verify that these assignments are inverse to one another.
satisfies the countable chain condition iff every chain in is countable.
This corollary is stated in terms of ascending chains, but by self-duality of Boolean algebras, it could equally well be stated in terms of descending chains.
For topological spaces , the frame satisfies the countable chain condition iff , the complete Boolean algebra of regular open sets, satisfies the countable chain condition (Lemma ). Now a regular element is just an element of the form , which for an open set is the complement of its closure. Thus for the topological case we deduce the following formulation in terms of chains:
A space satisfies the countable chain condition if and only if every collection of open sets that satisfies the condition
is countable.
We show in this section that arbitrary products of separable spaces satisfy the countable chain condition.
A separable space satisfies the countable chain condition.
Let be a countable dense set, and suppose given a collection of pairwise disjoint inhabited open sets . Each contains at least one . Thus the map sending to the unique such that is surjective, and so is at most countable.
Next we will need a result in combinatorial set theory. A -system, also called a sunflower, is a collection of finite sets such that any two intersect in the same set: there is some “common core” such that when .
(Sunflower lemma) Let be an uncountable collection of finite sets. Then there is some uncountable subset that is a sunflower.
Without loss of generality, we may suppose all have the same cardinality . We argue by induction on . The case is trivial. Assume the result holds for , and suppose for all . If some belongs to uncountably many , then these form a collection , and by inductive hypothesis the collection has a sunflower . Then induction goes through by forming the sunflower .
Otherwise, each belongs to at most countably many . In this case we may form an uncountable pairwise disjoint sequence by transfinite induction: if have been chosen for all , then only countably many have an inhabited intersection with , and we simply choose an belonging to the uncountable collection that remains after removing such . (So here the common core of the sunflower is the empty set.)
If is an arbitrary family of spaces such that any finite product of the satisfies the countable chain condition, then the full product also satisfies the countable chain condition.
Suppose otherwise, that is an uncountable collection of pairwise disjoint inhabited open sets of . Shrinking them if necessary, we may suppose each is a basic open of the form , where is a finite set. The collection has a sunflower by the Sunflower Lemma, say with common core , and without loss of generality we may suppose is that sunflower (i.e., that the 's used to index the sunflower are just the : throw away any other ). Let be the obvious projection map. We first claim that the sets are pairwise disjoint, a purely set-theoretic matter.
Suppose instead . Regard as a section of the canonical projection . That it belongs to simply means it extends to some section of the canonical map such that the restriction of to factors through the inclusion , as on the left half of the following diagram:
Similarly there is a section and a partial section , as shown on the right half. With the partial sections and in hand, amalgamate them to a partial section over the union (we can do this, as and both restrict to the same map on the intersection ). Then extend the amalgamation however you please to a full section . This belongs to both and , contradicting their disjointness, and proving the claim.
Thus the form an uncountable collection of open, inhabited, pairwise disjoint sets, contradicting the countable chain condition hypothesis on the finite product . With this the proof is complete.
An arbitrary product of separable spaces satisfies the countable chain condition.
Any finite product of separable spaces is separable and thus satisfies the countable chain condition by Proposition , so the full product does as well by Proposition .
Axioms: axiom of choice (AC), countable choice (CC).
second-countable: there is a countable base of the topology.
metrisable: the topology is induced by a metric.
-locally discrete base: the topology of is generated by a -locally discrete base.
-locally finite base: the topology of is generated by a countably locally finite base.
Lindelöf: every open cover has a countable sub-cover.
weakly Lindelöf: every open cover has a countable subcollection the union of which is dense.
metacompact: every open cover has a point-finite open refinement.
countable chain condition: A family of pairwise disjoint open subsets is at most countable.
first-countable: every point has a countable neighborhood base
Frechet-Uryson space: the closure of a set consists precisely of all limit points of sequences in
sequential topological space: a set is closed if it contains all limit points of sequences in
countably tight: for each subset and each point there is a countable subset such that .
a second-countable space has a -locally finite base: take the the collection of singeltons of all elements of a countable cover of .
second-countable spaces are separable: use the axiom of countable choice to choose a point in each set of a countable cover.
weakly Lindelöf spaces with countably locally finite base are second countable.
separable spaces satisfy the countable chain condition: given a dense set and a family , the map assigning to the unique with is surjective.
separable spaces are weakly Lindelöf: given a countable dense subset and an open cover choose for each point of the subset an open from the cover.
Lindelöf spaces are trivially also weakly Lindelöf.
a space with a -locally finite base is first countable: obviously, every point is contained in at most countably many sets of a -locally finite base.
a first-countable space is obviously Fréchet-Urysohn.
a Fréchet-Uryson space is obviously sequential.
a sequential space is obviously countably tight.
paracompact spaces satisfying the countable chain condition are Lindelöf.
Last revised on March 2, 2020 at 16:17:34. See the history of this page for a list of all contributions to it.