Filters in Analysis and Topology: David Maciver
Filters in Analysis and Topology: David Maciver
David MacIver
July 1, 2004
Abstract
1
1 Filters and Convergence
1. X ∈ Nx
2. If V ∈ Nx and V ⊆ W then W ∈ Nx
3. If U, V ∈ Nx then U ∩ V ∈ Nx
4. ∅ 6∈ Nx
Before we start discussing filters and convergence, we will want to prove and
define various things about filters.
Thus a set G generates a filter iff it satisfies this condition. Such a G is called a
subbase for F . If G is closed under finite (pairwise) intersection then it is called
a base for F and F takes the simpler form F = {U ⊆ X : ∃V ∈ G V ⊆ U }
2
For example, if x ∈ X and F = {U ⊆ X : x ∈ U } then F is an ultrafilter.
However, we cannot actually explicitly write down any other ultrafilters; this is
admittedly a point where the study of filters loses some of it’s naturalness, but
fortunately much of the theory does not depend on ultrafilters. In light of this,
the following result is perhaps extremely surprising:
Proof
The proof of this is actually quite easy. Consider the set of all filters on X which
contain F , together with the partial ordering ⊆.
S
Let C be a chain in this set. C is closed under pairwise intersection, so forms
a base for a filter. This filter is then an upper bound for C. Hence every chain
has an upper bound, so Zorn’s Lemma gives us a maximal element of the set,
U. It is then easy to check that a maximal filter must be an ultrafilter. So U is
an ultrafilter containing F .
QED
This does not contradict our original assertion that ultrafilters other than the
one generated by a single point cannot be described - the use of the axiom of
choice means that the ultrafilter theorem is highly non-constructive. However it
does prove the existence of such an ultrafilter - let F be an ultrafilter containing
the cofinite filter. Then F cannot be generated by {a}, as X \ {a} ∈ F . Such
an ultrafilter is called free. It is worth noting that any ultrafilter which is not
free is generated by a singleton, as if there exists an a with X \ {a} 6∈ F then
{a} ∈ F . The complements of singletons generate the cofinite filter, so if F is
not generated by a singleton then it contains the cofinite filter and is thus free.
We shall use the following theorem to demonstrate why this is a useful definition
to consider:
Proof:
3
V , and so no filter can converge to both x and y. Hence all filters have at most
one limit.
QED
Proof:
QED
4
In the following theorems we will assume Xi , Fi and F are as above.
Proof:
QED
Q Q
Proof: F contains the product filter i∈I Fi , so if i∈I Fi → x then F → x.
QED
First note that filters work in the opposite direction to sequences (so to speak).
Where in order to get convergence we would take a subsequence, for filters
we want to extend to a larger filter (because the aim is to get it to include a
neighbourhood filter of some point). So we say G extends F if F ⊆ G. It is
trivial to check that if F → x and G extends F then G → X.
5
Proof:
We shall show the equivalence with the closed set definition of compactness.
QED
Proof:
QED
This now leads us to what is, I feel, a huge piece of evidence towards how useful
filters are.
Proof:
QED
It is also worth noting that in the case where each of the Xi is hausdorff, limits
are unique so we don’t need to pick the xi - they are already picked for us. So
Tychnoff’s theorem for the special case of hausdorff spaces doesn’t need the full
6
power of the axiom of choice, and merely the much weaker ultrafilter theorem.
(Whileas Tychonoff’s theorem is equivalent to the axiom of choice).
Proof:
QED
So, having shown that our extension of the definition is consistent, we now prove
a vaguely interesting result:
Proof:
7
QED
Trivial as all this is, it will come in useful when dealing with certain questions,
often about metric spaces.
We will now use filters to provide a more elegant description of convergence and
completeness in metric spaces.
It is easy (but messy) to check that this is equivalent to the sequence definition
of complete, but a proof shall not be included here.
Proof:
Thus Nx ⊆ F , so F → x
QED
Proof:
8
Proposition 5 Let F be a cauchy filter and g : X → Y uniformly continuous.
g(F ) is a cauchy filter.
Proof:
QED