Made up this question while thinking about something in topology and thought I'd post it here for fun, to see how you guys might solve it:  Give an example or disprove the existence of an infinite, topological Hausdorff space $(X,\tau)$ in which every infinite subset is dense.
I dont have a clue about the proof in the reverse implication on the iff statement.  I will show what I have by now:  1) A cofinite topology implies that any infinite subset in $X$ is dense. Let $U\in\tau$ and is cofinite topology so $U=X-\bigcup_{k=1}^{n}\{x_k\}$.  Let $V\in X$ an infinite subset then $$V\cap U=V\cap(X-\bigcup_{k=1}^{n}\{x_k\})=(V\cap X)-(V\cap \bigcup_{k=1}^{n}\{x_k\})=V-(V\cap \bigcup_{k=1}^{n}\{x_k\})$$  and cause $|V|\ge\aleph_0$ and $|\bigcup_{k=1}^{n}\{x_k\}|=n\in\Bbb N\,$ we have that $|V\cap \bigcup_{k=1}^{n}\{x_k\}|\le n$. And finally is obvious that $V-(V\cap \bigcup_{k=1}^{n}\{x_k\})\ne\emptyset$ so any infinite subset is dense on $X$.  2) A cofinite topology implies a $T_1$-space. Let $x, y\in X$ and $U\in\tau: U=X-\{y\}$ so $x\in U\land y\notin U$. We can define too $V\in\tau:V=X-\{x\}$ so $x\notin V\land y\in V$ then a cofinite topology is a $T_1$-space.  But my problem is that I dont have a clue to prove the reverse implication i.e. if we have a $T_1$-space where every infinite subset is dense then it is a cofinite topology. Some hint? Some advice or correction in the proof of above? Thank you in advance.    I will complete the proof with the advice of @Cameron Buie.  1) A $T_1$-space implies that any finite subset is closed. Let the singleton $\{x\}\subset X$. Then $\overline{\{x\}}=\{x\}\cup\{x\}'$ where $\{x\}'=\{y:(\forall U\in\tau : y\in U)\land x\in U\}$, but because we are in a $T_1$-space exist some $U$ for any points $x,y\in X: x\in U\land y\notin U$ so $\{x\}'=\emptyset$ then $\overline{\{x\}}=\{x\}$ and is closed.  This means that for every $T_1$-space it cofinite sets are open.  2) If any infinite subset is dense on $X$ it means that the closure of any infinite subset is $X$ so the only closed sets are finite (and $X$ itself), so the topology is cofinite.
Is there a way to arrange windows within the same application in the taskbar of Windows 7?  Right now we can freely adjust each application's position in the taskbar, but within the app itself the windows can't be reordered, for example multiple windows of firefox or chrome. GSC: How to move a site from a domain to sub domain, sub folder or new domain with a sub folder? What if the hard disk is partitioned into more than 26 sections in Windows? As we know, in Windows the partition location is prefixed with [a-z]:. What happens if there are more than 26 partitions? Using principal component analysis (PCA) for feature selection How to prove Fibonacci sequence with matrices? Sitemaps - one per subdomain or one for the base domain? I have more than 5 subdomains on a project, say developer, www, staff and some more, what is the best practice in creating sitemaps?   All subdomains that share a same sitemap at base domain (example.com/sitemap.xml) ? or different sitemaps for different subdomains?(developer.example.com/sitemap.xml and www.example.com/sitemap.xml)   Since the subdomains are several parts of the main application, what are the pros and cons of each, and what should I consider while choosing the one over the other? (one sitemap per subdomain or one for the whole site) Can someone give me an example of a function $f: I\to \mathbb R$ which is uniform continuous but not Hölder continuous (for any $\alpha$)? Here $I$ is an interval. If $I$ is closed and bounded then we are essentially assuming that $f$ is merely continuous.   By saying that $f$ is not Hölder continuous for any $\alpha$, I mean for all $\alpha &gt;0$,   $$\sup_{x,y\in I, x\neq y} \frac{|f(x) - f(y)|}{|x-y|^\alpha} = \infty.$$  That is, I need to find a function $f$ so that for all $\alpha$ and $M&gt;0$, there are $x, y\in I$ so that   $$ \frac{|f(x) - f(y)|}{|x-y|^\alpha} \ge M.$$  I know that $f(x) = x^\alpha$ are $\alpha$-Hölder continuous. Thus, in some sense, I am looking for $f$ which are worst than the functions $x^\alpha$ for all $\alpha &gt;0$. The velocity of the flowing coming out of the balloons? Last day , when i was working on two interconnected balloons , a question was kicking my brains !!! This is the explanation of the question:  First , suppose a system that composed of two spherical membranes filled with air (two balloons have different initial volumes {means that the pressure inside which balloons are different} and the air pressure is 1 a.t.m) . We connect them with hollow tube and a valve. When we open the valve , one of them shrinks and the other one expands (It depends on their pressure) .  So how can we get the velocity of the flowing air between two balloons? (Consider everything but if you have reasons for not considering one of them -for example the ratio of friction in the tube- Don't consider them and just tell me the reason)  Thanks Guidelines for customizing biblatex styles After discussion with colleagues regarding the use of the 'var' keyword in C# 3 I wondered what people's opinions were on the appropriate uses of type inference via var?  For example I rather lazily used var in questionable circumstances, e.g.:-  foreach(var item in someList) { // ... } // Type of 'item' not clear. var something = someObject.SomeProperty; // Type of 'something' not clear. var something = someMethod(); // Type of 'something' not clear.   More legitimate uses of var are as follows:-  var l = new List&lt;string&gt;(); // Obvious what l will be. var s = new SomeClass(); // Obvious what s will be.   Interestingly LINQ seems to be a bit of a grey area, e.g.:-  var results = from r in dataContext.SomeTable               select r; // Not *entirely clear* what results will be here.   It's clear what results will be in that it will be a type which implements IEnumerable, however it isn't entirely obvious in the same way a var declaring a new object is.  It's even worse when it comes to LINQ to objects, e.g.:-  var results = from item in someList               where item != 3               select item;   This is no better than the equivilent foreach(var item in someList) { // ... } equivilent.  There is a real concern about type safety here - for example if we were to place the results of that query into an overloaded method that accepted IEnumerable&lt;int&gt; and IEnumerable&lt;double&gt; the caller might inadvertently pass in the wrong type.  var does maintain strong typing but the question is really whether it's dangerous for the type to not be immediately apparent on definition, something which is magnified when overloads mean compiler errors might not be issued when you unintentionally pass the wrong type to a method. DNS subdomain (child) NS records If we have example.com we would setup things something like this: $ORIGIN example.com. @  1D  IN  SOA ns1.example.com. hostmaster.example.com. (                   2002022401 ; serial                   3H ; refresh                   15 ; retry                   1w ; expire                   3h ; nxdomain ttl                  )           IN  NS     ns1.example.com.           IN  NS     ns2.example.com.  since in the parent zone .com. there is already NS record for the example.com. child zone and A glue record for the ns1.example.com. for what purpose do we state NS records again in the child zone? and also, do we need to state A record for the name servers in the child zone itself? I'm trying to solve this problem from Hatcher 3.3.24.  Let $M$ be a closed connected 3-manifold, and write $H_1(M, \mathbb{Z})$ as $\mathbb{Z^r} \oplus T$ where $T$ is torsion. Show that $H_2(M, \mathbb{Z})$ is $\mathbb{Z^r}$ if $M$ is orientable or $\mathbb{Z^{r-1}} \oplus \mathbb{Z_2}$ if $M$ is not orientable. In particular $r \geq 1$ if $M$ is not orientable. Using exercise 6 construct examples showing there are no other restrictions on the homology groups of closed 3-manifolds. (In the nonorientable case consider the manifold $N$ obtained from $S^2 \times I$ by identifying $S^2 \times \{0\}$ with $S^2 \times \{1\}$ via a reflection of $S^2$.)  I think I've solved the first part, here's my proof:   First note the following theorem: If $M$ is a closed connected and orientable n-manifold then $H_n(M, \mathbb{Z}) = \mathbb{Z}$ and $Tors(H_{n-1}(M, \mathbb{Z})) = 0$. If nonorientable, then $H_n(M, \mathbb{Z}) = 0$, $Tors(H_{n-1}(M, \mathbb{Z})) = \mathbb{Z_2}$.  Now note by Poincare duality and UCT we have that $H_2(M) \cong H^1(M) \cong \mathbb{Z^r} \oplus T_0 \cong \mathbb{Z^r}$.   In the nonorientable case consider the exact sequence:  $0 \longrightarrow H_2(M) \longrightarrow H_1(M) \longrightarrow H_0(M) \longrightarrow 0$  But we know $H_1(M) = \mathbb{Z^r} \oplus Z_2$ from the earlier theorem and $H_0(M) = \mathbb{Z}$.   Therefore $H_2(M) \cong ker(\mathbb{Z^r} \oplus Z_2 \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}) \cong \mathbb{Z^{r-1}} \oplus \mathbb{Z_2}$.   For the rest of the question I'm quite lost. How to change the desktop wallpaper to a photo of my own selection in Ubuntu 18.04? I'm not interested in downloading some wallpaper changer application, nor am I interested in coding something up. There has to be an easy way to select a photo as a custom wallpaper in Ubuntu 18.04. Error term in equally spaced nodes I have seen this construction quite often:      Online ads have been around since the dawn of the Web, but only in   recent years have they become the rapturous life dream of Silicon   Valley.   What is the rule there?. When your sentence doesn't start with pronoun + verb, invert them as verb + pronoun?. I know it sounds awkward but is it possible (grammatically correct) to use something similar to:      Online ads have been around since the dawn of the Web, but only in   recent years they have become...   And in any case, does this only work with have (or has)? Maybe it works fine with 'had' but I can't think of an example right now. Global variables in AngularJS Can I upload an entire folder using FTP? I need to upload a full folder using FTP.  Is there is any option for transferring a folder and all of its contents at once? Solving $\cos x=x$ I would like to know how can we solve the equation $\cos x = x$, without graphing. I know that  there would only be one solution, that is obvious, that too in between $0$  and $\frac{\pi}{2}$. Is there any real expression in finite terms [perhaps we call that closed form, I am not sure] that could give $x$ or $\cos x$. Although I have not studied Taylor series, I know that it only gives an infinite series, which is not what I want. I suspect that it could not be done, but can anyone explain me why?  Just for completeness, Wolfram Alpha, gives the approximate answer $x = 0.7390851332151606416553120876738734040134$, but fails to give a exact solution. Can somebody tell me why the counting measure (so, if $S=P(X)$, then $\mu(A)$=infinity if $A$ isn't finite and $\mu(A)=$#$A$ if $A$ is finite) is a measure? (The second property of a measure isn't clear for me). I am totally new to Linux, servers and websites. I recently set up Apache2, Python, PHP, and MySQL for setting up a LAMP server. I am using Xubuntu 16.04 and PHP 7.0.11. I followed a guide and placed a PHP file named testing.php in it with:  &lt;?php phpinfo(); ?&gt;    It doesn't show anything on localhost/testing.php All it shows is the code itself.