Motivation: Let $(X,\tau)$ be a topological space. Then the set $\beta X$ of ultrafilters on $X$ admits a natural topology (cf. Example 5.14 in Adámek and Sousa - D-ultrafilters and their monads), giving rise to a functor $\beta: \operatorname{Top} \to \operatorname{Top}$ which admits the structure of a monad. It turns out that the algebras for this monad, which I'll call "$\beta$-spaces", admit the following description (which one can alternatively take as a definition).

Definition: A $\beta$-space consists of a topological space $(X,\tau)$ equipped with an additional topology $\tau^\xi$ on $X$ such that

  1. $(X, \tau^\xi)$ is compact Hausdorff;
  2. The topology $\tau^\xi$ refines the topology $\tau$; and
  3. For every $x \in X$ and every $\tau$-open neighborhood $U$ of $x$, there exists a $\tau$-open neighborhood $V$ of $x$ such that the $\tau^\xi$-closure of $V$ is contained in $U$.


  • From (1) and (2) it follows that $(X,\tau)$ is compact.
  • So if $(X,\tau)$ is additionally Hausdorff, then it admits a unique $\beta$-space structure, namely the one with $\tau^\xi = \tau$ (since continuous bijections of compact Hausdorff spaces are homeomorphisms).

  • $(X,\tau)$ need not be Hausdorff—e.g., if $\tau$ is the indiscrete topology, then the topology $\tau^\xi$ can be an arbitrary compact Hausdorff topology.

  • The compact Hausdorff topology $\tau^\xi$ traces back to Manes' theorem, which says that the algebras for the ultrafilter monad on $\operatorname{Set}$ rather than $\operatorname{Top}$ are precisely the compact Hausdorff spaces.


  1. Are there additional restrictions on the topology $(X,\tau)$ such that it admits a refinement $\tau^\xi$ satisfying (1), (2), (3) (i.e. constituting a $\beta$-space), beyond the fact, as noted, that $X$ must be compact?

  2. Do $\beta$-spaces already have some other name? Or at least, is condition (3) above, relating a topology $\tau$ to a refinement $\tau^\xi$, something which has a name?

  • $\begingroup$ This is so cool. I missed good point topology problems :) $\endgroup$ Dec 18, 2019 at 1:12
  • $\begingroup$ @AndreaMarino I agree! I think it's worthwhile to revisit some of these classic things from time to time. Manes' theorem, in particular, is a gem which deserves to be more widely known. The proof -- once you know what the Stone-Cech compactification of a discrete space is -- is an easy, fun application of the Beck Monadicity Theorem. And there's a whole cottage industry of extensions of these ideas, starting with a description of an arbitrary topological space as a kind of "lax algebra" for the ultrafilter monad. $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Dec 18, 2019 at 1:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Condition (3) looks like some sort of regularity of $\tau$ relative to $\tau^\xi$, for if $\tau = \tau^\xi$ it's just ordinary regularity, isn't it? $\endgroup$ Dec 18, 2019 at 8:19
  • $\begingroup$ Well I found a pretty indirect characterization. There exist an explicitly constructible refinement $\tau'$, and $\tau$ defines a $\beta$ space iff $\tau'$ is compact and locally compact. If you want I can post it, but I think we can do better. A necessary condition though is that $X$ must be also locally compact . $\endgroup$ Dec 18, 2019 at 12:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice Eh, you can view it as just being like a prime. It started because I was thinking of a $\beta$ structure in terms of the structure map $\xi: \beta X \to X$, but then the formulation I arrived at didn't mention this map at all. So it's kind of a relic. $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Dec 18, 2019 at 18:07

1 Answer 1


$\DeclareMathOperator\cp{cp}$We will derive some additional necessary conditions from the following

Observation: Let $\tau$ be a topology on $X$ and $\tau'$ a topology refining $\tau$. Suppose that $(X,\tau')$ is compact. Then any $\tau'$-closed set is $\tau$-compact.

Indeed, it is compact in $\tau'$ because it is closed in a compact, and so it is compact also in $\tau$ because the identity $\tau' \to \tau$ is continuous.

Consequences: Let $(X,\tau)$ be a topological space admitting a $\beta$-structure $\tau^\xi$. Then:

  1. $(X,\tau)$ is compact (as noted in the question).

  2. $(X,\tau)$ is locally compact (in the sense that for every $x \in X$ there is a local base of compact neighborhoods). This follows from condition (3) on a $\beta$-space and the Observation.

  3. $(X,\tau)$ is "c-separated": For every disjoint $C,D \subseteq X$ which are either closed or singletons, there exist compact $K,L \subseteq X$ such that $C \cap K = \emptyset$, $D \cap L = \emptyset$, and $K \cup L = X$. This follows from the fact that $(X,\tau^\xi)$ is Hausdorff, regular, and normal and the Observation.

  4. $(X,\tau)$ is "c-completely separated": Let $C,D \subseteq X$ be disjoint and either closed or singletons. Then there exists a (not necessarily continuous) function $f: X \to [0,1]$ such that $f^{-1}(0) = C$, $f^{-1}(1) = D$, and $f^{-1}([a,b])$ is compact for every $a \leq b$. This follows from the fact that $(X,\tau^\xi)$ has the corresponding separation property and the Observation.

Note also that if the collection of sets with compact complement forms a topology, this this topology is the unique $\beta$-structure on $(X,\tau)$. But this is not necessarily the case.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! Remark 2 seems especially insightful to me. But I'm not sure that $cp(\tau)$ is a topology -- it's closed under finite intersections but is it closed under even finite unions? Also, in the absence of Hausdorffness, one needs to be careful about the definition of "locally compact". I see how condition (3) and remark (2) imply that for every $x$ and every open neighborhood $U$ of $x$, there exists an open neighborhood $V$ of $x$ such that $V \subseteq K \subseteq U$ for some compact $K$ -- is this equivalent to a standard definition? $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Dec 18, 2019 at 16:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Note also that if $cp(\tau)$ is a compact Hausdorff topology, then for any $\beta$-structure $\tau^\xi$, the map $id: (X, cp(\tau)) \to (X,\tau^\xi)$ is a continuous bijection of compact Hausdorff spaces and therefore a homeomorphism. So whenever $cp(\tau)$ is a compact Hausdorff topology, it is the unique $\beta$ structure on $(X,\tau)$. So I think $cp(\tau)$ must not be a topology when $X$ is an infinite indiscrete space. $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Dec 18, 2019 at 17:02
  • $\begingroup$ Fiuu! You were right! I hope I fixed this on the edge :) however, the infinite indiscrete topology is not compact, so I don't see any contraddiction! $\endgroup$ Dec 18, 2019 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ By locally compact I mean that - at each point - you have a local basis of compact neighbourhoods. I am quoting for Wikipedia: this is a possible definition of the local compactness, which is equivalent to the classical one if the space is Hausdorff. The definition that I just quoted is indeed equivalent to: for any point x and open $V$ containing x, there exist an open $U$ containing x and a compact $K$ such that $U \subset K \subset V$. $\endgroup$ Dec 18, 2019 at 17:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Indeed, let $(X,\tau)$ be an infinite indiscrete space. This is compact -- every open cover has a singleton subcover! It's also locally compact, and compactly-separated. Then $K \subseteq X$ is $\tau$-compact for every subset $K$, so $cp(\tau)$ is the discrete topology, which is not compact. $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Dec 18, 2019 at 18:04

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.