Cleanup
This commit is contained in:
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\end{proposition}
|
||||
\begin{proof}
|
||||
(1): Let $A \subset X$ be a path component and $x \in A$, then there exists $U \in \cn(x)$ connected. By \ref{proposition:path-connected-union}, $A \cup U \in \cn(x)$ is also connected. Since $A$ is a path-component, $A \cup U \subset A \in \cn(x)$. Thus $A$ is open by \ref{lemma:openneighbourhood}.
|
||||
(1): Let $A \subset X$ be a path component and $x \in A$, then there exists $U \in \cn(x)$ connected. By \autoref{proposition:path-connected-union}, $A \cup U \in \cn(x)$ is also connected. Since $A$ is a path-component, $A \cup U \subset A \in \cn(x)$. Thus $A$ is open by \autoref{lemma:openneighbourhood}.
|
||||
|
||||
(2): Let $P$ be a path component in $X$ and $C \supset P$ be its connected components. If $C$ is not path-connected, then $P \subsetneq C$ there exists path-components $\seqi{P} \subset 2^C$ such that $C = \bigsqcup_{i \in I}P_i$. In which case, $C \setminus P$ is open by (1), and $C$ is not connected, which is impossible.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user