The equivalence of two definitions of sequential pseudocompactness
We show that two possible definitions of sequential pseudocompactness are equivalent, and point out some consequences.[EN] Lipparini, P. (2016). The equivalence of two definitions of sequential pseudocompactness. Applied General Topology. 17(1):1-5. doi:10.4995/agt.2016.4616. SWORD 1 5 17 1 Artico,...
Published in: | Applied General Topology |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Universitat Politècnica de València
2016
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10251/72369 https://doi.org/10.4995/agt.2016.4616 |
Summary: | We show that two possible definitions of sequential pseudocompactness are equivalent, and point out some consequences.[EN] Lipparini, P. (2016). The equivalence of two definitions of sequential pseudocompactness. Applied General Topology. 17(1):1-5. doi:10.4995/agt.2016.4616. SWORD 1 5 17 1 Artico, G., Marconi, U., Pelant, J., Rotter, L., & Tkachenko, M. (2002). Selections and suborderability. Fundamenta Mathematicae, 175(1), 1-33. doi:10.4064/fm175-1-1 Dow, A., Porter, J. R., Stephenson, R. M., & Grant Woods, R. (2004). Spaces whose Pseudocompact Subspaces are Closed Subsets. Applied General Topology, 5(2), 243. doi:10.4995/agt.2004.1973 |
---|