Is the simplified proof of Tychonof theorem correct

compactnessgeneral-topologyset-theorysolution-verificationtransfinite-recursion

I have read the proof of Tychonof theorem from here.

Let $(E_\lambda)_{\lambda \in \mathfrak a}$ be an arbitrary collection of compact topological spaces. We endow $E := \prod_{\lambda \in \mathfrak a} E_\lambda$ with the product topology. Then $E$ is compact.

The main idea is

By transfinite induction, we construct a family $\left(\varphi_{j}\right)_{j \leqslant \alpha}$ of cofinal maps into $D$ such that the following properties hold true (where $\left.S_{j}:=\operatorname{dom}\left(\varphi_{j}\right)\right)$:

  • (1) the net $\left(x_{\varphi_{j}(s)}(i)\right)_{s \in S_{j}}$ is convergent in $X_{i}$ for every $i<j$;

  • (2) $\varphi_{j} \geq \varphi_{i}$ for all $i<j$.

I'm trying to simplify this proof. In my simplified version, I don't need to enforce the condition (2) above. This makes me suspect that I made some subtle mistakes. I posted my proof as an answer below. Could you have a check on my attempt?

PS: I posted my proof separately so that I can accept my own answer to remove my question from unanswered list. Surely, if other people post answers and I will accept theirs.

Best Answer

By axiom of choice, $\mathfrak a$ can be well-ordered. WLOG, we assume $\mathfrak a$ is an ordinal number. Let $(f_d)_{d\in D}$ be a net in $E$ with $f_d := (f_d^\lambda)_{\lambda < \mathfrak a}$. By transfinite recursion, we will define a sequence $(T_\lambda)_{\lambda \le \mathfrak a}$ of monotonic cofinal maps $T_{\lambda}: D_{\lambda} \to D$ between directed sets such that $(f_{T_\lambda(d)}^\eta)_{d\in D_\lambda}$ is convergent for all $\eta < \lambda$.

We initialize with $D_0 : = D$ and $T_0: d \mapsto d$. Let $\mathfrak b \le \mathfrak a$. Assume that $T_\lambda$ is already defined for all $\lambda < \mathfrak b$. Our goal is to define $T_{\mathfrak b}$.

Let $\mathfrak b$ be a successor ordinal. Then there is an ordinal $\mathfrak c$ such that $\mathfrak c+1 = \mathfrak b$. By inductive hypothesis, $T_{\mathfrak c} :D_{\mathfrak c} \to D$ is already defined. Let $h_d := f_{T_\mathfrak c(d)}^\mathfrak b$. Clearly, $(h_d)_{d\in D_\mathfrak c}$ is a net in $E_\mathfrak b$. Because $E_\mathfrak b$ is compact, there is a monotonic cofinal map $K:D_{\mathfrak b} \to D_{\mathfrak c}$ such that $(h_{K(d)})_{d \in D_\mathfrak b}$ is convergent. Let $T_\mathfrak b := K \circ T_\mathfrak c$.

Let $\mathfrak b$ be a limit ordinal. Let $D_{\mathfrak b} := \{(d, \lambda) \mid d \in D_\lambda, \lambda <\mathfrak b\}$. We endow $D_{\mathfrak b}$ with a partial order $\le$ defined by $$(d_1, {\lambda_1}) \le (d_2, {\lambda_2}) \iff T_{\lambda_1} (d_1) \le T_{\lambda_1} (d_2) \text{ and } \lambda_1 < \lambda_2.$$

Let $(d_1, {\lambda_1}), (d_2, {\lambda_2}) \in D_{\mathfrak b}$. WLOG, we assume $\lambda_1 < \lambda_2$. Because $\mathfrak b$ is a limit ordinal, there is $\lambda_3 < \mathfrak b$ such that $\lambda_2 < \lambda_3$. Because $D$ is a directed set, there is $d^\star \in D$ such that $T_{\lambda_1} (d_1) \le d^\star$ and $T_{\lambda_2} (d_2) \le d^\star$. Because $T_{\lambda_3}$ is cofinal, there is $d_3 \in D_{\lambda_3}$ such that $d^\star \le T_{\lambda_3} (d_3)$. Hence $(d_1, {\lambda_1}) \le (d_3, {\lambda_3})$ and $(d_2, {\lambda_2}) \le (d_3, {\lambda_3})$. It follows that $(D_{\mathfrak b}, \le )$ is a directed set.

Let $T_\mathfrak b: D_{\mathfrak b} \to D, (d, \lambda) \mapsto T_\lambda (d)$. Clearly, $T_\mathfrak b$ is monotonic. For $d^\star \in D$, there is $d \in D_{0}$ such that $d^\star \le T_0(d)$ because $T_0$ is cofinal. Then $d^\star \le T_\mathfrak b (d, 0)$ and thus $T_\mathfrak b$ is cofinal. This completes the construction of such required transfinite sequence. Finally, we just pick up $(f_{T_\mathfrak a(d)})_{d\in D_{\mathfrak a}}$.


Update: I have just figured out that the construction in the case of limit ordinal does not guarantee the convergence of coordinates.