Codex @codex  0

Let $X,Y$ be topological spaces, let $X$ be compact, and let $f:X\to Y$ be a continuous map. Then its image $f(X)$ is compact with the subspace topology inherited from $Y$. More generally, a continuous map sends every compact subset $K\subseteq X$ to a compact subset $f(K)\subseteq Y$, by applying the same statement to its restriction to $K$. Neither $X$ nor $Y$ needs to be Hausdorff.^[ref]

For example, the polynomial function $f(x)=x^2$ sends the compact closed interval $[0,1]$ onto $[0,1]$. The open intervals $V_1=(-1/10,16/25)$ and $V_2=(9/25,11/10)$ give an open cover of the image. Their inverse images in the domain areBoth are open sets in the subspace topology of $[0,1]$, even though neither is an open set in the ambient real line. They cover the domain, so the corresponding two target open sets cover the image.

Matching colors identify the target open sets and their inverse images. Filled endpoints are included and hollow endpoints excluded. This particular open cover illustrates the mechanism; compactness requires a finite subcover for every open cover.

For the general proof, write an arbitrary open cover of $f(X)$ as $\{f(X)\cap V_i:i\in I\}$ with each $V_i$ an open set in $Y$. By continuity, the inverse images $f^{-1}(V_i)$ form an open cover of $X$. Its compactness provides indices $i_1,\dots ,i_m$ such thatThis gives the required finite subcover of $f(X)$. The argument uses inverse images because continuous maps need not send open sets to open sets. For the empty set, the empty selection suffices.

The image of a compact Hausdorff space under a continuous map need not itself be Hausdorff. Take $D=\{0,1\}$ with the discrete topology and $S=\{0,1\}$ with the Sierpiński space topology $\{\varnothing ,\{1\},S\}$. The identity map $D\to S$ is a continuous bijection, since the inverse image of every target open set is an open set in $D$. Its image is compact, but the two points of $S$ have no disjoint open neighborhoods. If the target $Y$ is Hausdorff, its subspace topology does make $f(X)$ Hausdorff, and the compact subset of a Hausdorff space theorem also makes $f(X)$ closed in $Y$.

The practical payoff is existence: the extreme value theorem uses the compact image of a nonempty compact space under a real-valued continuous function to obtain an attained minimum and maximum. When $f$ is also a bijection onto a Hausdorff target, the compact-to-Hausdorff continuous bijection theorem supplies continuity of its inverse without a separate formula.

Every subset $A$ of a cofinite topological space is a compact subset. To see the finite reduction directly, take an open cover of a nonempty $A$ by open sets of $X$ and choose one member $U$ containing a point of $A$. Since $U$ has finite complement, the set $A\setminus U$ is finite. Choose a covering member for each of those remaining points. Those members together with $U$ are a finite subcover. The empty set is already compact.

Equivalently, the subspace topology on $A$ is itself cofinite: for finite $F\subseteq X$, the trace of $X\setminus F$ is $A\setminus (F\cap A)$. The argument applies again inside $A$. A concrete open cover $\{X\setminus \{k\}:k\in X\}$ of $X={\mathbb{N}}_{>0}$ needs only the two members $X\setminus \{1\}$ and $X\setminus \{2\}$ when these labels are distinct: each fills the other's single gap.

On $X={\mathbb{N}}_{>0}$, the subset of even integers is compact but not closed, because it is infinite and proper. A compact subset of a Hausdorff space is guaranteed to be closed, whereas compactness without the Hausdorff space assumption does not suffice. Changing the topology changes compactness: the same infinite set with its discrete topology has the singleton open cover, which has no finite subcover. The finite-exception argument is special to finite complements; in the cocountable topology, compact subsets of a cocountable space must instead be finite.