Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)verified 2026-07-29 (claude-fable-5)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Every quasicomponent is a closed union of components, so each component is contained in a quasicomponent, and the quasicomponents partition the space

Statement

Let XX be a topological space, let C(x)C(x) and Q(x)Q(x) be the component and the quasicomponent of xXx \in X (Connected components, quasicomponents, and totally disconnected spaces). Then:

  1. Containment. C(x)Q(x)C(x) \subseteq Q(x).
  2. Closedness. Q(x)Q(x) is closed in XX.
  3. Saturation. If yQ(x)y \in Q(x) then Q(y)=Q(x)Q(y) = Q(x); consequently C(y)Q(x)C(y) \subseteq Q(x) for every yQ(x)y \in Q(x), and Q(x)  =  {C(y):yQ(x)},Q(x) \;=\; \bigcup \{\, C(y) : y \in Q(x) \,\}, so every quasicomponent is a union of components.
  4. Partition. The quasicomponents are nonempty, pairwise disjoint, and cover XX.

No converse is asserted. Claim 1 is an inclusion and this theorem does not claim it is an equality; the question of when C(x)=Q(x)C(x) = Q(x) is not settled on this page, and nothing here may be read as settling it.

Facts & Assumptions

[A1]

C(x)C(x) is the largest connected subset of XX containing xx, and Q(x)Q(x) is the intersection of all clopen KXK \subseteq X with xKx \in K; that family is nonempty, XX being clopen; every point lies in its own component (Connected components, quasicomponents, and totally disconnected spaces, The components of a space are its maximal connected subsets, they partition it, and each of them is closed, claims 1 and 2).

[A2]

A connected space has no clopen subset other than \varnothing and the whole space; a subset AXA \subseteq X is connected exactly when the only subsets of AA clopen in (A,TA)(A,\mathcal{T}_A) are \varnothing and AA (For a topological space the following agree: no separation exists, the only clopen subsets are \varnothing and XX, and every continuous map to the two-point discrete space is constant, claims 1 and 2, Separation of a topological space, connected and disconnected spaces, clopen sets, and connected subsets).

[A3]

The traces UAU \cap A of open sets are the open sets of AA, and the traces FAF \cap A of closed sets are the closed sets of AA (Subspace topology: the traces of the open sets, its closed sets and its bases, the continuity of the inclusion, and the characteristic property of a map into a subspace).

[A4]

A clopen set is closed; a nonempty intersection of closed sets is closed; the complement of a clopen set is clopen (Topology on a set, open and closed sets, clopen sets, the closed-set axiomatisation, and the coarser/finer comparison).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Let KXK \subseteq X be clopen with xKx \in K. Then KC(x)K \cap C(x) is both open and closed in the subspace C(x)C(x) by [A3], and it contains xx, so it is nonempty.

A1A3
1.2

Every clopen KyK \ni y also contains xx whenever yQ(x)y \in Q(x): otherwise XKX \setminus K is a clopen set containing xx by [A4], so Q(x)XKQ(x) \subseteq X \setminus K by [A1], contradicting yQ(x)Ky \in Q(x) \cap K.

A1A4
1.3

Q(x)Q(x) is closed, being by [A1] the intersection of a nonempty family of clopen, hence closed, sets, and such an intersection is closed by [A4]; this is claim 2. And xQ(x)x \in Q(x), every member of that family containing xx.

A1A4
2.1

Since C(x)C(x) is connected by [A1], its only clopen subsets are \varnothing and C(x)C(x) by [A2]; so step 1.1 forces KC(x)=C(x)K \cap C(x) = C(x), that is C(x)KC(x) \subseteq K.

step 1.1A1A2
2.2

Let yQ(x)y \in Q(x). Every clopen KK with xKx \in K contains yy, since Q(x)KQ(x) \subseteq K by [A1], so Q(y)KQ(y) \subseteq K; hence Q(y)Q(x)Q(y) \subseteq Q(x). Conversely every clopen KK with yKy \in K contains xx by step 1.2, so Q(x)KQ(x) \subseteq K and therefore Q(x)Q(y)Q(x) \subseteq Q(y). Thus Q(y)=Q(x)Q(y) = Q(x).

step 1.2A1
3.1

As KK was an arbitrary clopen set containing xx, it follows that C(x)C(x) is contained in the intersection of all of them, that is C(x)Q(x)C(x) \subseteq Q(x); this is claim 1.

step 2.1A1
4.1

So for yQ(x)y \in Q(x) one has C(y)Q(y)=Q(x)C(y) \subseteq Q(y) = Q(x) by step 3.1 and step 2.2; and each such yy lies in C(y)C(y) by [A1], so Q(x)={C(y):yQ(x)}Q(x) = \bigcup \{\, C(y) : y \in Q(x) \,\}. This is claim 3.

step 3.1step 2.2A1
5.1

For claim 4: each Q(x)Q(x) is nonempty by step 1.3; if zQ(x)Q(y)z \in Q(x) \cap Q(y) then Q(z)=Q(x)Q(z) = Q(x) and Q(z)=Q(y)Q(z) = Q(y) by step 2.2, so Q(x)=Q(y)Q(x) = Q(y), and hence two quasicomponents are equal or disjoint; and xQ(x)x \in Q(x) by step 1.3, so they cover XX.

step 1.3step 2.2

Remarks

  • Where the inclusion can be strict, and why the proof cannot be improved. Step 2.1 uses connectedness of C(x)C(x) to promote "meets KK" to "is contained in KK". Running the argument backwards would need every point of Q(x)Q(x) to be joined to xx by a connected set, and nothing in the definition of QQ provides one: Q(x)Q(x) records only that no clopen set separates the two points. That gap is real and not an artefact of this proof.

  • Both partitions are into closed sets, and they are nested. The components partition XX into closed sets (The components of a space are its maximal connected subsets, they partition it, and each of them is closed), the quasicomponents partition XX into closed sets by claims 2 and 4, and by claim 3 the second partition is coarser: every quasicomponent is a union of whole components.

  • Claim 3 is what makes the notion useful. A clopen set never cuts a component in half, so any argument that produces a clopen set separating two points has automatically shown that they lie in different components. That implication runs only in this direction, which is exactly claim 1.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 33 results over 13 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources