1

I am studying topology using Serge Lang Real Analysis (second edition).In proposition 3.7 the author writes the following :"Compactness implies sequential compactness " and goes on to give a proof that I find convincing . I am confused because the internet gives me the answer that compact doesn't imply sequential compact and gives counter-examples ( that i find a bit difficult to handle ).Can someone explain to me what is going on here is Serge Lang imposing other conditions that i didn't pay attention to or this is a typing mistakes ?

Mac Sat
  • 61
  • 4
  • Equivalence of various types of compactness is valid only in metric spaces. So there are counterexamples if you go to general topological spaces – happymath Mar 12 '17 at 16:46
  • Lang probably only considers metric spaces (fairly common for a book about real analysis). For metric spaces, compactness and sequential compactness are equivalent. – Daniel Fischer Mar 12 '17 at 16:46
  • 1
    Lang doesn't consider metric spaces but treats topological spaces in general – Mac Sat Mar 12 '17 at 17:21
  • http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/44907/whats-going-on-with-compact-implies-sequentially-compact – Zain Patel Mar 12 '17 at 18:48

0 Answers0