Alphabeta Math
Session-authored (Fable 5 assisted)
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.

18 results · all verified · 17 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 1 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Convergence: Nets and Filters

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

Open-cover compactness is equivalent to the closed finite-intersection condition, while filters and ultrafilters record upward-closed families of subsets. Neighbourhoods, closure and continuity provide the local topology used here; countable choice enters the published first-countability sequence criterion, and the ultrafilter lemma is stated whenever an ultrafilter extension is used.

Directed preorders, nets, eventuality, subnets and net convergence first characterize closure, continuity and Hausdorff separation. Tail filters and derived nets then give the net-filter dictionary. Universal nets and ultrafilters yield the compactness equivalences and the compact Hausdorff product theorem under the ultrafilter lemma. Fréchet–Urysohn and sequential spaces finish the development with the first-countability implication hierarchy.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Directed preorders and nets

Definition

A directed preorder is a nonempty set DD with a reflexive, transitive relation \le such that every d,eDd,e\in D have a common upper bound: some fDf\in D satisfies dfd\le f and efe\le f. Antisymmetry is not required; thus this is a preorder obtained by omitting antisymmetry from the partial-order axioms of Partial order and partially ordered set.

If XX is the underlying set of a topological space (Topology on a set, open and closed sets, clopen sets, the closed-set axiomatisation, and the coarser/finer comparison), a net in XX indexed by DD is a function x:DXx:D\to X, written (xd)dD(x_d)_{d\in D}. The order on DD records which indices are sufficiently far along; it need not be a linear order.

Remarks

Some texts require a directed set to be a partial order. The present preorder convention is deliberate: none of the convergence arguments needs antisymmetry, and it permits convenient index systems with equivalent stages.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

A net is eventually or frequently in a subset of its codomain

Definition

Let x:DXx:D\to X be a net (Directed preorders and nets) and let SXS\subseteq X.

  • xx is eventually in SS if some d0Dd_0\in D satisfies xdSx_d\in S for every dd0d\ge d_0.
  • xx is frequently in SS if, for every d0Dd_0\in D, there is dd0d\ge d_0 with xdSx_d\in S.

The net is frequently in SS exactly when it is not eventually in XSX\setminus S: negating the first displayed existential-universal condition gives the second one.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space

Definition

Let x:DXx:D\to X be a net in a topological space XX and let pXp\in X.

Convergence implies being a cluster point. If xx is eventually in a neighbourhood NN after d0d_0, then for an arbitrary threshold dd choose a common upper bound ed,d0e\ge d,d_0; one has xeNx_e\in N, so xx is frequently in NN.

DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Subnet via an eventually cofinal index map

Definition

Let x:DXx:D\to X be a net. A net y:EXy:E\to X is a subnet of xx if EE is a directed preorder and there is a map ϕ:ED\phi:E\to D such that ye=xϕ(e)y_e=x_{\phi(e)} for every eEe\in E and

for every dD there is e0E such that ee0ϕ(e)d.\text{for every }d\in D\text{ there is }e_0\in E\text{ such that }e\ge e_0\Longrightarrow\phi(e)\ge d.

The displayed condition says that ϕ\phi is eventually cofinal. No order-preservation condition is imposed on ϕ\phi.

Remarks

Stricter conventions require ϕ\phi to be order-preserving, or formulate subnets through a relation. They are not used here. Eventual cofinality is the property needed to carry eventual statements from a net to its subnet and to turn cluster points into convergent subnets.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Subnets preserve eventual properties and every limit of a net

Statement

If yy is a subnet of a net xx, then every subset in which xx is eventually contained is one in which yy is eventually contained. Consequently every limit of xx is a limit of yy.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A subnet ye=xϕ(e)y_e=x_{\phi(e)} of xdx_d.

[A1]

Eventual cofinality says that for every d0Dd_0\in D some e0Ee_0\in E has ee0ϕ(e)d0e\ge e_0\Rightarrow\phi(e)\ge d_0 (Subnet via an eventually cofinal index map).

[A2]

A net converges to pp exactly when it is eventually in every neighbourhood of pp (Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Suppose xx is eventually in SXS\subseteq X, and choose d0d_0 such that dd0d\ge d_0 implies xdSx_d\in S.

given
2.1

Choose e0e_0 from [A1] for this d0d_0; then ee0e\ge e_0 gives ye=xϕ(e)Sy_e=x_{\phi(e)}\in S. Thus yy is eventually in SS.

step 1.1A1
3.1

If xx converges to pp, apply step 2.1 to each neighbourhood of pp using [A2]; then yy is eventually in every such neighbourhood and converges to pp.

step 2.1A2
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

A point is a cluster point of a net if and only if some subnet converges to it

Statement

For a net x:DXx:D\to X and pXp\in X, pp is a cluster point of xx if and only if xx has a subnet converging to pp.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A net x:DXx:D\to X in a topological space and a point pXp\in X.

[A1]

A cluster point is one for which every neighbourhood is visited frequently, and convergence means eventual membership in every neighbourhood (Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space).

[A2]

Intersections of finitely many neighbourhoods of pp are neighbourhoods of pp (Neighbourhood of a point and neighbourhood base, with this library's convention that a neighbourhood need not be open).

[A3]

A subnet is given by an eventually cofinal index map (Subnet via an eventually cofinal index map).

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1

Suppose pp is a cluster point. Let E={(d,N):NN(p), dD, xdN}E=\{(d,N):N\in\mathcal N(p),\ d\in D,\ x_d\in N\}, ordered by (d,N)(e,M)(d,N)\preceq(e,M) when ded\le e and MNM\subseteq N.

A1construct
1.2

Conversely, suppose a subnet ye=xϕ(e)y_e=x_{\phi(e)} converges to pp. Given a neighbourhood NN and dDd\in D, choose e0e_0 after which yy lies in NN and choose e1e_1 after which ϕ(e)d\phi(e)\ge d; a common upper bound ee of e0,e1e_0,e_1 gives ϕ(e)d\phi(e)\ge d and xϕ(e)=yeNx_{\phi(e)}=y_e\in N. Hence xx is frequently in NN.

A1A3
2.1

The set EE is directed: for (d,N),(e,M)E(d,N),(e,M)\in E, take hd,eh\ge d,e in DD; frequent membership in NMN\cap M gives khk\ge h with xkNMx_k\in N\cap M, and (k,NM)(k,N\cap M) is above both pairs.

step 1.1A1A2
2.2

Put y(d,N)=xdy_{(d,N)}=x_d and ϕ(d,N)=d\phi(d,N)=d. For every d0Dd_0\in D, the pair (d0,X)(d_0,X) lies in EE, and every later pair has first coordinate at least d0d_0. Thus ϕ\phi is eventually cofinal and yy is a subnet of xx.

step 1.1A3
2.3

For a neighbourhood NN of pp, choose (d,N)E(d,N)\in E using frequent membership in NN. Every pair later than it has second coordinate contained in NN, hence its yy-value lies in NN. Thus ypy\to p.

step 1.1A1
3.1

Steps 1.1 and 2.1--2.3 construct a convergent subnet from a cluster point, and step 1.2 gives the converse.

step 2.2step 2.3step 1.2discharge-construct
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

A point lies in the closure of a set if and only if a net in the set converges to it

Statement

For AXA\subseteq X and pXp\in X, one has pAp\in\overline A if and only if there is a net in AA converging to pp.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A subset AA of a topological space XX and a point pXp\in X.

[L2]
[L3]

A net converges exactly when it is eventually in every neighbourhood (Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space).

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1

Suppose pAp\in\overline A. Let E={(N,a):NN(p), aNA}E=\{(N,a):N\in\mathcal N(p),\ a\in N\cap A\}, ordered by (N,a)(M,b)(N,a)\preceq(M,b) when MNM\subseteq N, and put x(N,a)=ax_{(N,a)}=a.

L1construct
1.2

Conversely, if a net xx in AA converges to pp, every neighbourhood NN of pp contains some eventual value xdAx_d\in A, so NAN\cap A\ne\varnothing and pAp\in\overline A.

L1L3
2.1

The index set is directed: for (N,a),(M,b)(N,a),(M,b), the set NMN\cap M is a neighbourhood and meets AA; for c(NM)Ac\in(N\cap M)\cap A, the pair (NM,c)(N\cap M,c) is above both.

step 1.1L1L2
2.2

Given a neighbourhood NN of pp, choose (N,a)E(N,a)\in E. Every later pair has its second coordinate in a subset of NN, so xx is eventually in NN and therefore converges to pp.

step 1.1L3
3.1

Steps 1.1--2.1 construct the required net and step 1.2 proves the converse.

step 2.2step 1.2discharge-construct
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

A map of topological spaces is continuous at a point if and only if it preserves every net converging to that point

Statement

Let f:XYf:X\to Y and pXp\in X. Then ff is continuous at pp if and only if, for every net xdpx_d\to p in XX, the net f(xd)f(x_d) converges to f(p)f(p) in YY.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A function f:XYf:X\to Y and a point pXp\in X.

[A1]

ff is continuous at pp exactly when every neighbourhood VV of f(p)f(p) has f1[V]f^{-1}[V] as a neighbourhood of pp (Continuity of a map of topological spaces at a point and globally).

[A2]

A point is in the closure of a set exactly when a net in that set converges to it (A point lies in the closure of a set if and only if a net in the set converges to it).

[A3]

A net converges exactly when it is eventually in every neighbourhood (Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space).

Proof

technique · contradiction
1.1

If ff is continuous at pp and xdpx_d\to p, then for every neighbourhood VV of f(p)f(p) the net is eventually in f1[V]f^{-1}[V] by [A1], hence f(xd)f(x_d) is eventually in VV and converges to f(p)f(p).

A1A3
1.2

Conversely, assume every net converging to pp has image converging to f(p)f(p), and assume for a contradiction that ff is not continuous at pp. Then some neighbourhood VV of f(p)f(p) has f1[V]f^{-1}[V] not a neighbourhood of pp.

A1assume-contra
2.1

Put A=Xf1[V]A=X\setminus f^{-1}[V]. Every neighbourhood of pp meets AA, for otherwise it would be contained in f1[V]f^{-1}[V]; hence pAp\in\overline A and [A2] gives a net xdx_d in AA converging to pp.

step 1.2A2
3.1

Every f(xd)f(x_d) lies outside VV, so its image net is not eventually in the neighbourhood VV of f(p)f(p) and cannot converge to f(p)f(p), contradicting the assumption of step 1.2.

step 2.1A3
4.1

Therefore ff is continuous at pp; together with step 1.1 this proves the equivalence.

step 1.1step 3.1discharge-contradiction
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

A topological space is Hausdorff if and only if every net has at most one limit

Statement

A topological space XX is Hausdorff if and only if every net in XX has at most one limit.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A topological space XX.

[A2]

A net converges to a point exactly when it is eventually in each of that point's neighbourhoods (Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space).

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1

Suppose XX is Hausdorff and a net converges to both pp and qq. If pqp\ne q, take disjoint neighbourhoods UU of pp and VV of qq; the net is eventually in both, and directedness supplies an index after both thresholds, whose value would lie in UVU\cap V.

A1A2
1.2

Conversely, suppose XX is not Hausdorff. Choose distinct p,qp,q for which every neighbourhood of pp meets every neighbourhood of qq, and let E={(U,V,z):UN(p), VN(q), zUV}E=\{(U,V,z):U\in\mathcal N(p),\ V\in\mathcal N(q),\ z\in U\cap V\}, ordered by reverse inclusion in the first two coordinates.

A1construct
2.1

Thus p=qp=q, so every net has at most one limit.

step 1.1
2.2

The set EE is directed: intersect the first two neighbourhood coordinates of two triples and choose a point in their intersection; the resulting triple is above both. The net sending (U,V,z)(U,V,z) to zz is eventually in every neighbourhood of pp and every neighbourhood of qq, hence converges to both distinct points.

step 1.2A1A2
3.1

Therefore uniqueness of all net limits forces XX to be Hausdorff, and the two implications prove the result.

step 2.1step 2.2discharge-construct
DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

The tail filter of a net

Definition

For a net x:DXx:D\to X, put Td={xe:de}T_d=\{x_e:d\le e\} and Bx={Td:dD}\mathcal B_x=\{T_d:d\in D\}. This is a filter base: it is nonempty, each TdT_d contains xdx_d, and if fd,ef\ge d,e then TfTdTeT_f\subseteq T_d\cap T_e. Its generated filter The upward closure of a filter base is the smallest filter containing it is the tail filter of xx:

Fx={AX:some dD has TdA}.\mathcal F_x=\{A\subseteq X:\text{some }d\in D\text{ has }T_d\subseteq A\}.

Thus AFxA\in\mathcal F_x exactly when the net is eventually in AA. The preceding filter-base verification makes this a well-defined filter in the sense of Filter on a set.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Convergence and cluster points of a filter on a topological space

Definition

Let F\mathcal F be a filter on a topological space XX and let pXp\in X.

  • F\mathcal F converges to pp, written Fp\mathcal F\to p, if every neighbourhood of pp belongs to F\mathcal F.
  • pp is a cluster point of F\mathcal F if NAN\cap A\ne\varnothing for every neighbourhood NN of pp and every AFA\in\mathcal F.

The second condition says precisely that the neighbourhood filter at pp and F\mathcal F have no disjoint members.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

A net and its tail filter have the same limits and cluster points

Statement

For a net xx and its tail filter Fx\mathcal F_x, a point is a limit of xx exactly when it is a limit of Fx\mathcal F_x, and it is a cluster point of xx exactly when it is a cluster point of Fx\mathcal F_x.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A net x:DXx:D\to X, its tail filter Fx\mathcal F_x, and pXp\in X.

[A1]

AFxA\in\mathcal F_x exactly when xx is eventually in AA (The tail filter of a net).

[A2]

Net and filter convergence and cluster points have their stated neighbourhood formulations (Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space, Convergence and cluster points of a filter on a topological space).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

For every neighbourhood NN of pp, xx is eventually in NN exactly when NFxN\in\mathcal F_x by [A1]. Thus the two convergence conditions in [A2] are equivalent.

A1A2
1.2

For every neighbourhood NN of pp, xx is frequently in NN exactly when NN meets every tail TdT_d: a point in NTdN\cap T_d is a value xeNx_e\in N with ede\ge d.

A1A2
2.1

If NN meets every tail, it meets every member of Fx\mathcal F_x, since each such member contains a tail; conversely every tail belongs to Fx\mathcal F_x. Hence the two cluster-point conditions in [A2] are equivalent.

step 1.2A1A2
DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

The canonical net indexed by the pairs (A,x)(A,x) with AA in a filter and xAx\in A

Definition

Let F\mathcal F be a filter on XX. Its derived-net index set is

EF={(A,x):AF, xA},E_{\mathcal F}=\{(A,x):A\in\mathcal F,\ x\in A\},

ordered by (A,x)(B,y)(A,x)\preceq(B,y) when BAB\subseteq A. It is a directed preorder: filters contain no empty set, and for two indices choose zABz\in A\cap B, so (AB,z)(A\cap B,z) is above both. The net derived from F\mathcal F is

x(A,x):=x((A,x)EF).x_{(A,x)}:=x\qquad ((A,x)\in E_{\mathcal F}).

This construction makes no arbitrary choice, because the point xx is included in the index.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

A filter and its canonical derived net have the same limits and cluster points

Statement

A filter F\mathcal F and the net derived from it have exactly the same limits and cluster points.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A filter F\mathcal F on XX, its derived net, and pXp\in X.

[A1]

The derived net is indexed by (A,x)(A,x) with AFA\in\mathcal F, xAx\in A, ordered by reverse inclusion of the first coordinate (The canonical net indexed by the pairs (A,x)(A,x) with AA in a filter and xAx\in A).

[A2]

Filter and net convergence and cluster points have their stated neighbourhood formulations (Convergence and cluster points of a filter on a topological space, Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

If a neighbourhood NN of pp belongs to F\mathcal F, choose xNx\in N; then (N,x)(N,x) is an index, and every later (B,y)(B,y) has BNB\subseteq N, hence yNy\in N. Thus filter convergence implies convergence of the derived net.

A1A2
2.1

If the derived net is eventually in NN, take a threshold (A,x)(A,x). Applying eventuality to indices (A,y)(A,y) with yAy\in A gives ANA\subseteq N; upward closure of the filter gives NFN\in\mathcal F. Thus convergence is equivalent.

step 1.1A1A2
3.1

The derived net is frequently in NN exactly when every AFA\in\mathcal F meets NN: after (A,x)(A,x) a point of ANA\cap N supplies a later index, and conversely frequent membership after (A,x)(A,x) supplies such a point. Therefore its cluster points are exactly those of F\mathcal F.

A1A2
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

The tail-filter and derived-net constructions preserve convergence and cluster points in both directions

Statement

Passing from a net to its tail filter, or from a filter to its derived net, preserves and reflects convergence and cluster points.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A net, a filter, and a point of the relevant topological space.

[L1]

A net and its tail filter have the same limits and cluster points (A net and its tail filter have the same limits and cluster points).

[L2]

A filter and its derived net have the same limits and cluster points (A filter and its canonical derived net have the same limits and cluster points).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Apply [L1] to the given net.

L1
1.2

Apply [L2] to the given filter.

L2
2.1

These are precisely the two asserted correspondences.

step 1.1step 1.2
DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Universal net: eventually in every subset or eventually in its complement

Definition

A net x:DXx:D\to X is universal if, for every subset SXS\subseteq X, it is eventually in SS or eventually in XSX\setminus S.

The two alternatives cannot both occur: directedness would give an index after both thresholds, whose value would belong to the empty intersection S(XS)S\cap(X\setminus S).

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

A net is universal exactly when its tail filter is an ultrafilter, and the canonical net of an ultrafilter is universal

Statement

A net is universal if and only if its tail filter is an ultrafilter. Moreover, the net derived from an ultrafilter is universal.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A net xx in XX and a filter U\mathcal U on XX.

[A1]

SS belongs to the tail filter of xx exactly when xx is eventually in SS (The tail filter of a net).

[A2]

A filter is an ultrafilter exactly when, for every SXS\subseteq X, it contains SS or XSX\setminus S (Characterisation of ultrafilters: every set or its complement).

[A3]

The derived net of U\mathcal U is indexed by (A,a)(A,a) and later indices have first coordinate contained in AA (The canonical net indexed by the pairs (A,x)(A,x) with AA in a filter and xAx\in A).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

By [A1], universality of xx says exactly that its tail filter contains SS or XSX\setminus S for every SXS\subseteq X. By [A2], this is exactly ultrafilterhood.

A1A2
1.2

If U\mathcal U is an ultrafilter and SXS\subseteq X, [A2] gives SUS\in\mathcal U or XSUX\setminus S\in\mathcal U. In the first case an index (S,a)(S,a) exists and every later value lies in SS by [A3]; the second case is identical.

A2A3
2.1

Thus the derived net of an ultrafilter is universal, completing both assertions.

step 1.1step 1.2
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Every cluster point of an ultrafilter is a limit of that ultrafilter

Statement

Every cluster point of an ultrafilter is a limit of that ultrafilter.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An ultrafilter U\mathcal U on XX and a cluster point pp of it.

[A1]

Up\mathcal U\to p means every neighbourhood of pp belongs to U\mathcal U, while clusterhood means every such neighbourhood meets every member of U\mathcal U (Convergence and cluster points of a filter on a topological space).

[A2]

For every subset SS, an ultrafilter contains SS or its complement (Characterisation of ultrafilters: every set or its complement).

Proof

technique · contradiction
1.1

Assume for a contradiction that U\mathcal U does not converge to pp. Then some neighbourhood NN of pp is not in U\mathcal U.

A1assume-contra
2.1

By [A2], XNUX\setminus N\in\mathcal U. But NN must meet every member of U\mathcal U by clusterhood, whereas N(XN)=N\cap(X\setminus N)=\varnothing.

step 1.1A1A2
3.1

This contradiction proves Up\mathcal U\to p.

step 2.1discharge-contradiction
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Assuming the ultrafilter lemma, compactness is equivalent to every net having a cluster point, every net having a convergent subnet, every filter having a cluster point, and every ultrafilter converging

Statement

Assume the ultrafilter lemma. For a topological space XX, the following are equivalent:

  1. XX is compact;
  2. every net in XX has a cluster point;
  3. every net in XX has a convergent subnet;
  4. every filter on XX has a cluster point;
  5. every ultrafilter on XX converges.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A topological space XX and the ultrafilter lemma.

[L1]

Compactness is equivalent to every family of closed sets with the finite-intersection property having nonempty intersection; moreover, a family of subsets of XX has the finite-intersection property exactly when it is contained in a filter on XX (A space is compact exactly when every family of closed subsets with the finite intersection property has nonempty intersection, clauses 1 and 2).

[L2]

A net has pp as a cluster point exactly when it has a subnet converging to pp (A point is a cluster point of a net if and only if some subnet converges to it).

[L3]

A net and its tail filter have the same cluster points, and a filter and its derived net have the same cluster points (The tail-filter and derived-net constructions preserve convergence and cluster points in both directions).

[L4]

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Suppose XX is compact and F\mathcal F is a filter. The closed family {A:AF}\{\overline A:A\in\mathcal F\} has the finite-intersection property, because a finite intersection of members of F\mathcal F is nonempty and is contained in the corresponding intersection of closures. By [L1], choose pAFAp\in\bigcap_{A\in\mathcal F}\overline A.

L1
1.2

If every filter has a cluster point, apply this to a net's tail filter and use [L3]; hence 4 implies 2. By [L2], conditions 2 and 3 are equivalent.

L2L3
1.3

Conversely, if every net has a cluster point and F\mathcal F is a filter, its derived net has a cluster point, which is also a cluster point of F\mathcal F by [L3]. Hence 2 implies 4.

L3
1.4

Condition 4 implies 5 because an ultrafilter is a filter and [L4] turns its cluster point into a limit.

L4
1.5

Suppose every ultrafilter converges and let C\mathcal C be a family of closed subsets of XX with the finite-intersection property. Clause 2 of [L1] gives a filter containing C\mathcal C, and [L4] extends it to an ultrafilter U\mathcal U.

L1L4
2.1

Every neighbourhood of pp meets every AFA\in\mathcal F, since pAp\in\overline A; thus pp is a cluster point of F\mathcal F. Hence 1 implies 4.

step 1.1L1
2.2

Let pp be a limit of U\mathcal U. For CCC\in\mathcal C, every neighbourhood of pp belongs to U\mathcal U and meets CUC\in\mathcal U; therefore pC=Cp\in\overline C=C. Thus C\bigcap\mathcal C\ne\varnothing, and [L1] gives compactness.

step 1.5L1
3.1

The implications in steps 2.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and 2.2 establish all five equivalences.

step 2.1step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4step 2.2
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Every cluster point of a universal net is a limit of that net

Statement

Every cluster point of a universal net is a limit of that net.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A universal net x:DXx:D\to X and a cluster point pp.

[A1]

A universal net is eventually in SS or eventually in XSX\setminus S for every subset SS (Universal net: eventually in every subset or eventually in its complement).

[A2]

Clusterhood is frequent membership in every neighbourhood, while convergence is eventual membership in every neighbourhood (Convergence and cluster points of a net in a topological space).

Proof

technique · contradiction
1.1

Assume for a contradiction that xx does not converge to pp. Then some neighbourhood NN of pp is not an eventual set for xx.

A2assume-contra
2.1

By universality, xx is eventually in XNX\setminus N. This contradicts frequent membership in NN, since an index after both thresholds would lie in N(XN)N\cap(X\setminus N).

step 1.1A1A2
3.1

Therefore xx converges to pp.

step 2.1discharge-contradiction
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

The image of a universal net under any map is universal, and a continuous map preserves its limits

Statement

If xx is a universal net in XX and f:XYf:X\to Y is any map, then f(x)f(x) is universal. If ff is continuous and xpx\to p, then f(x)f(p)f(x)\to f(p).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A universal net x:DXx:D\to X and a map f:XYf:X\to Y.

[A1]

xx is universal precisely when it eventually enters every subset or its complement (Universal net: eventually in every subset or eventually in its complement).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Let SYS\subseteq Y. By [A1], xx is eventually in f1[S]f^{-1}[S] or in its complement f1[YS]f^{-1}[Y\setminus S]; respectively, f(x)f(x) is eventually in SS or in YSY\setminus S.

A1
2.1

Thus f(x)f(x) is universal.

step 1.1A1
3.1

If ff is continuous and xpx\to p, the second assertion is [L1].

L1
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Assuming the ultrafilter lemma, every net has a universal subnet

Statement

Assume the ultrafilter lemma. Every net has a universal subnet.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A net x:DXx:D\to X and its tail filter Fx\mathcal F_x.

[A1]

Fx\mathcal F_x contains every tail TdT_d, and its members contain a tail (The tail filter of a net).

[L1]

The ultrafilter lemma extends Fx\mathcal F_x to an ultrafilter U\mathcal U (The ultrafilter lemma, from the Axiom of Choice: every filter extends to an ultrafilter).

[L2]

An ultrafilter contains every subset or its complement (Characterisation of ultrafilters: every set or its complement).

[A2]

A subnet uses an eventually cofinal index map (Subnet via an eventually cofinal index map).

[A3]

A universal net is eventually in every set or its complement (Universal net: eventually in every subset or eventually in its complement).

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1

Choose an ultrafilter UFx\mathcal U\supseteq\mathcal F_x by [L1]. Let E={(d,A):dD, AU, xdA}E=\{(d,A):d\in D,\ A\in\mathcal U,\ x_d\in A\}, ordered by (d,A)(e,B)(d,A)\preceq(e,B) when ded\le e and BAB\subseteq A, and put y(d,A)=xdy_{(d,A)}=x_d.

L1construct
2.1

The set EE is directed. Given (d,A),(e,B)(d,A),(e,B), choose hd,eh\ge d,e. Since ABA\cap B and the tail ThT_h belong to U\mathcal U, their intersection is nonempty; choose an index khk\ge h with xkABx_k\in A\cap B. Then (k,AB)(k,A\cap B) is above both pairs.

step 1.1A1choose
2.2

The map ϕ(d,A)=d\phi(d,A)=d is eventually cofinal: (d0,X)(d_0,X) is an index for every d0d_0, and every later index has first coordinate at least d0d_0. Thus yy is a subnet of xx.

step 1.1A2
2.3

For SXS\subseteq X, [L2] gives SUS\in\mathcal U or XSUX\setminus S\in\mathcal U. In the first case choose any d0Dd_0\in D. Since STd0US\cap T_{d_0}\in\mathcal U, choose jd0j\ge d_0 with xjSx_j\in S. Then (j,S)E(j,S)\in E, and every later value lies in SS. The complementary case is identical. Thus yy is universal.

step 1.1A1A3L2choose
3.1

The constructed yy is a universal subnet of xx.

step 2.2step 2.3discharge-construct
CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Assuming the ultrafilter lemma, a space is compact if and only if every universal net converges

Statement

Assume the ultrafilter lemma. A topological space is compact if and only if every universal net in it converges.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A topological space XX and the ultrafilter lemma.

[L2]

Every net has a universal subnet (Assuming the ultrafilter lemma, every net has a universal subnet), and a cluster point of a universal net is a limit (Every cluster point of a universal net is a limit of that net).

[L3]

A point is a cluster point of a net exactly when some subnet converges to it (A point is a cluster point of a net if and only if some subnet converges to it).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

If XX is compact, a universal net has a cluster point by [L1], hence converges by [L2].

L1L2
1.2

Conversely, suppose every universal net converges. Every net has a universal subnet by [L2], which then converges; its limit is a cluster point of the original net by [L3]. Thus every net has a cluster point.

L2L3
2.1

By [L1], this makes XX compact.

step 1.2L1
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-08-05 (claude-sonnet-5)Open item page →

Assuming the ultrafilter lemma, an arbitrary product of compact Hausdorff spaces is compact

Statement

Assume the ultrafilter lemma. If (Xi)iI(X_i)_{i\in I} is any family of compact Hausdorff spaces, then iIXi\prod_{i\in I}X_i, with its product topology, is compact.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Compact Hausdorff spaces XiX_i, their product PP, and a universal net xdx_d in PP.

[L2]

Assuming the ultrafilter lemma, a space is compact if and only if every universal net in it converges (Assuming the ultrafilter lemma, a space is compact if and only if every universal net converges).

[L3]

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1

For every iIi\in I, the projection πi\pi_i is continuous, so πi(xd)\pi_i(x_d) is universal by [L1] and converges in compact XiX_i by [L2]. Its limit pip_i is unique by [L3].

L1L2L3
2.1

The uniqueness in step 1.1 defines a point piIXip\in\prod_{i\in I}X_i, namely the function ipii\mapsto p_i, rather than choosing a family of limits.

step 1.1L3construct
2.2

Let NN be a neighbourhood of pp in PP. By [L4], it contains a basic product neighbourhood restricting a finite set JIJ\subseteq I; for each iJi\in J, the coordinate net is eventually in its prescribed neighbourhood of pip_i. Directedness supplies one index after the finitely many thresholds, and after it xdNx_d\in N. Thus xdpx_d\to p.

step 1.1L4
3.1

Every universal net in PP converges by step 2.2. The converse direction of [L2] therefore makes PP compact.

step 2.2L2discharge-construct
RemarkRemark: AI-adaptedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

The compact Hausdorff product theorem uses the ultrafilter lemma, while the published arbitrary compact product theorem assumes the full Axiom of Choice

The proof of Assuming the ultrafilter lemma, an arbitrary product of compact Hausdorff spaces is compact spends the ultrafilter lemma at the universal-subnet step. The published Tychonoff's theorem: an arbitrary product of compact spaces is compact in the product topology, assuming the Axiom of Choice asserts compactness for arbitrary compact factors under the full Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice). These are distinct stated hypotheses; this page makes no claim about their exact relative strength.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Fréchet–Urysohn spaces and sequential spaces

Definition

A topological space XX is Fréchet–Urysohn if, whenever pAp\in\overline A, there is a sequence in AA converging to pp. Equivalently, seqcl(A)=A\operatorname{seqcl}(A)=\overline A for every AXA\subseteq X, since sequential closure is always contained in closure (The sequential closure is contained in the closure, continuity implies sequential continuity, and sequential limits need not be unique).

A subset CXC\subseteq X is sequentially closed if every sequence in CC that converges in XX has its limit in CC. The space is sequential if every sequentially closed subset is closed. Equivalently, seqcl(A)=A\operatorname{seqcl}(A)=A implies A=A\overline A=A for every AXA\subseteq X.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Assuming countable choice, every first countable space is Fréchet–Urysohn; in ZF every Fréchet–Urysohn space is sequential

Statement

Assume countable choice. Every first countable space is Fréchet–Urysohn. In ZF, every Fréchet–Urysohn space is sequential.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A topological space XX.

[L1]

Under countable choice, first countability gives seqcl(A)=A\operatorname{seqcl}(A)=\overline A for every AXA\subseteq X (Assuming Countable Choice, in a first countable space sequential closure equals closure and sequential continuity at a point equals continuity there, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω\mathrm{AC}_\omega)).

[L2]

Aseqcl(A)AA\subseteq\operatorname{seqcl}(A)\subseteq\overline A for every AA (The sequential closure is contained in the closure, continuity implies sequential continuity, and sequential limits need not be unique).

[A1]

A space is Fréchet--Urysohn when seqcl(A)=A\operatorname{seqcl}(A)=\overline A for every subset AA, and it is sequential when every sequentially closed subset is closed (Fréchet–Urysohn spaces and sequential spaces).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Under countable choice, [L1] is exactly the defining equality for a first countable space to be Fréchet–Urysohn.

L1A1
1.2

Now suppose XX is Fréchet–Urysohn and CC is sequentially closed. Then seqcl(C)=C\operatorname{seqcl}(C)=C, because the constant sequence gives Cseqcl(C)C\subseteq\operatorname{seqcl}(C) and sequential closedness gives the reverse inclusion.

L2
2.1

Fréchet–Urysohnness gives C=seqcl(C)=C\overline C=\operatorname{seqcl}(C)=C, so CC is closed. Therefore XX is sequential.

step 1.2A1

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31Open item page →

FALSE: every subnet of a sequence is a subsequence

Statement

FALSE. Every subnet of a sequence is a subsequence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The discrete topological space N\mathbb N and its identity sequence xn=nx_n=n.

[A1]

A subnet may use any eventually cofinal index map; it need not use a strictly increasing map (Subnet via an eventually cofinal index map).

[A2]

A subsequence of xx is a composite xhx\circ h with h:NNh:\mathbb N\to\mathbb N strictly increasing; such an hh is injective (A strictly increasing index map satisfies nkkn_k \ge k).

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1

Put ϕ(0)=0\phi(0)=0 and ϕ(k)=k1\phi(k)=k-1 for k1k\ge1, and let yk=xϕ(k)y_k=x_{\phi(k)}. For every nn, all kn+1k\ge n+1 satisfy ϕ(k)=k1n\phi(k)=k-1\ge n, so ϕ\phi is eventually cofinal and yy is a subnet of xx.

A1
2.1

The subnet has y0=y1=0y_0=y_1=0. Every subsequence of the injective identity sequence is injective by [A2], so yy cannot be a subsequence of xx.

step 1.1A2
3.1

Thus the stated universal claim is false.

step 2.1

Sources