๐Ÿงฎ Brain Teaser

The Topological Space That Is T1T_1 but Not Hausdorff

Let XX be an infinite set equipped with the cofinite topology: a set UโІXU \subseteq X is open if and only if U=โˆ…U = \emptyset or Xโˆ–UX \setminus U is finite.

(a) Show that (X,ฯ„cof)(X, \tau_\text{cof}) is T1T_1: for any two distinct points xโ‰ yx \neq y, there exist open sets Uโˆ‹xU \ni x, Vโˆ‹yV \ni y with yโˆ‰Uy \notin U and xโˆ‰Vx \notin V.

(b) Show that (X,ฯ„cof)(X, \tau_\text{cof}) is not Hausdorff: no two distinct points can be separated by disjoint open sets.

(c) Conclude: T1T_1 does not imply Hausdorff. What goes wrong?

separation axiomscofinite topologyT1Hausdorffcounterexample

Answer: Cofinite Topology: Tโ‚ but Not Hausdorff

Key Idea / Intuition

The cofinite topology is "just barely T1T_1": you can separate any point from any other by removing finitely many points, but any two non-empty open sets must overlap because their complements are finite โ€” so they can never be made disjoint. The subtlety is that T1T_1 only asks for one-sided separation (keep xx, exclude yy, or vice versa), while Hausdorff demands simultaneous disjoint separation. The infinite set is "too large" to be split by finite complements.


Formal Proof / Solution

(a) T1T_1 property

Let xโ‰ yโˆˆXx \neq y \in X. Define:

U=Xโˆ–{y},V=Xโˆ–{x}.U = X \setminus \{y\}, \qquad V = X \setminus \{x\}.

Both are open in the cofinite topology because their complements {y}\{y\} and {x}\{x\} are finite (in fact singletons).

  • xโˆˆUx \in U and yโˆ‰Uy \notin U โœ“
  • yโˆˆVy \in V and xโˆ‰Vx \notin V โœ“

So (X,ฯ„cof)(X, \tau_\text{cof}) is T1T_1. โ–ก\square


(b) Not Hausdorff

Suppose for contradiction that distinct x,yโˆˆXx, y \in X can be separated by disjoint open sets Uโˆ‹xU \ni x and Vโˆ‹yV \ni y with UโˆฉV=โˆ…U \cap V = \emptyset.

Since UU and VV are non-empty open sets in the cofinite topology, their complements are finite:

โˆฃXโˆ–Uโˆฃ<โˆž,โˆฃXโˆ–Vโˆฃ<โˆž.|X \setminus U| < \infty, \qquad |X \setminus V| < \infty.

Therefore:

Xโˆ–(UโˆฉV)=(Xโˆ–U)โˆช(Xโˆ–V)X \setminus (U \cap V) = (X \setminus U) \cup (X \setminus V)

is a finite union of finite sets, hence finite. So UโˆฉVU \cap V is cofinite, in particular non-empty (since XX is infinite).

This contradicts UโˆฉV=โˆ…U \cap V = \emptyset. โ–ก\square


(c) The Gap: T1โ‡’ฬธT_1 \not\Rightarrow Hausdorff

The cofinite topology on any infinite set provides a clean counterexample. What goes wrong conceptually:

  • T1T_1 only requires: for each ordered pair (x,y)(x, y), an open set containing xx but not yy. Complements of singletons do this perfectly.
  • Hausdorff requires: for each unordered pair {x,y}\{x, y\}, simultaneous disjoint open neighborhoods. In the cofinite topology, non-empty open sets always have cofinite (hence huge) intersection โ€” they can never be pulled apart.

The hierarchy of separation axioms is strict:

T0โŠŠT1โŠŠT2ย (Hausdorff)โŠŠโ‹ฏT_0 \subsetneq T_1 \subsetneq T_2\text{ (Hausdorff)} \subsetneq \cdots

and the cofinite topology on an infinite set witnesses the strict inclusion T1โŠŠT2T_1 \subsetneq T_2.

Source: Munkres, Topology, Chapter 2 (Separation Axioms)

Type: topologySource: Munkres, Topology, Chapter 2 (Separation Axioms)Edit on GitHub โ†—