Is a union of closures of cells in a CW complex closed? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InShowing that $bigcap_n=1^inftyV_nneq emptyset$A topological space is extremally disconnected iff every two disjoint open sets have disjoint closuresWhat does the closure of a subset of a CW-complex look like? Like this?Every n-cell of an n-dimensional CW complex is open.Closure of Union contains Union of ClosuresIs a limit point in a sequential space the limit of some sequence?Why is closure finiteness necessary in this proof that every $n$-cell of an $n$-dimensional CW complex is open?$X$ is normal if and only if $Asubseteq U$ implies there exists $V$ such that $Asubseteq VsubseteqoverlineVsubseteq U$Closed Subspace of a Normal Topological Space is NormalIs a bouquet of circles always a CW complex?

How can I define good in a religion that claims no moral authority?

APIPA and LAN Broadcast Domain

Why does the nucleus not repel itself?

Are spiders unable to hurt humans, especially very small spiders?

Are there any other methods to apply to solving simultaneous equations?

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

How to display lines in a file like ls displays files in a directory?

Geography at the pixel level

Why can't devices on different VLANs, but on the same subnet, communicate?

What is the meaning of Triage in Cybersec world?

How come people say “Would of”?

Why “相同意思的词” is called “同义词” instead of "同意词"?

Is it safe to harvest rainwater that fell on solar panels?

Can I have a signal generator on while it's not connected?

The phrase "to the numbers born"?

Match Roman Numerals

I am an eight letter word. What am I?

Can we generate random numbers using irrational numbers like π and e?

Is it okay to consider publishing in my first year of PhD?

What information about me do stores get via my credit card?

Why isn't the circumferential light around the M87 black hole's event horizon symmetric?

Can there be female White Walkers?

Ubuntu Server install with full GUI

Pokemon Turn Based battle (Python)



Is a union of closures of cells in a CW complex closed?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InShowing that $bigcap_n=1^inftyV_nneq emptyset$A topological space is extremally disconnected iff every two disjoint open sets have disjoint closuresWhat does the closure of a subset of a CW-complex look like? Like this?Every n-cell of an n-dimensional CW complex is open.Closure of Union contains Union of ClosuresIs a limit point in a sequential space the limit of some sequence?Why is closure finiteness necessary in this proof that every $n$-cell of an $n$-dimensional CW complex is open?$X$ is normal if and only if $Asubseteq U$ implies there exists $V$ such that $Asubseteq VsubseteqoverlineVsubseteq U$Closed Subspace of a Normal Topological Space is NormalIs a bouquet of circles always a CW complex?










3












$begingroup$


Let $X$ be a CW complex with cell-partition $mathcalC subset mathcalP(X)$, and $mathcalD subset mathcalC$. Is $A = bigcup overlineD(X) : D in mathcalD$ closed in $X$, where $overlineD(X)$ is the closure of $D$ in $X$?



I think I can prove the result when $X$ is first-countable as follows. Suppose $A$ is not closed in $X$. Let $x in overlineA(X) setminus A$. Since $X$ is first-countable, there exists a decreasing neighborhood basis $(U_n in mathcalT_X(x) : n in mathbbN)$ at $x$, where $mathcalT_X(x)$ is the set of neighborhoods of $x$. Let $D_n in mathcalD$ be such that $D_n cap U_n neq emptyset$ and $D_n cap bigcup overlineD_m(X) : m < n = emptyset$. Let $x_n in D_n$. Then $x_n to x$. Since $X$ is Hausdorff, $x_n = overlineD_n(X) cap x_n$ is closed in $overlineD_n(X)$. Since $mathcalT_X$ is coherent with $mathcalC$, $B = x_n : n in mathbbN$ is closed in $X$, which contradicts $x in overlineB(X) setminus B$.



Can this result be proved without assuming first-countability?



EDIT: Seems like the proof above is incomplete. It should also show that $overlineC(X) cap B$ is closed in $X$ for all $C in mathcalC setminus mathcalD$. Following Eric's suggestion below, since $X$ is closure-finite, $overlineC(X)$ intersects only finitely many cells in $mathcalD$, which means $overlineC(X) cap B$ is finite and so closed in $overlineC(X)$. After this, coherence can be applied, which completes the proof.



POST-ACCEPT EDIT: This result is also true for normal CW complexes, which is where the closure of each cell is a sub-complex. This is because sub-complexes are closed under arbitrary unions and intersections. The counter-example given in the accepted answer is neither locally finite or normal, as required. This and other results can be found from the book "The Topology of CW Complexes".










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    3












    $begingroup$


    Let $X$ be a CW complex with cell-partition $mathcalC subset mathcalP(X)$, and $mathcalD subset mathcalC$. Is $A = bigcup overlineD(X) : D in mathcalD$ closed in $X$, where $overlineD(X)$ is the closure of $D$ in $X$?



    I think I can prove the result when $X$ is first-countable as follows. Suppose $A$ is not closed in $X$. Let $x in overlineA(X) setminus A$. Since $X$ is first-countable, there exists a decreasing neighborhood basis $(U_n in mathcalT_X(x) : n in mathbbN)$ at $x$, where $mathcalT_X(x)$ is the set of neighborhoods of $x$. Let $D_n in mathcalD$ be such that $D_n cap U_n neq emptyset$ and $D_n cap bigcup overlineD_m(X) : m < n = emptyset$. Let $x_n in D_n$. Then $x_n to x$. Since $X$ is Hausdorff, $x_n = overlineD_n(X) cap x_n$ is closed in $overlineD_n(X)$. Since $mathcalT_X$ is coherent with $mathcalC$, $B = x_n : n in mathbbN$ is closed in $X$, which contradicts $x in overlineB(X) setminus B$.



    Can this result be proved without assuming first-countability?



    EDIT: Seems like the proof above is incomplete. It should also show that $overlineC(X) cap B$ is closed in $X$ for all $C in mathcalC setminus mathcalD$. Following Eric's suggestion below, since $X$ is closure-finite, $overlineC(X)$ intersects only finitely many cells in $mathcalD$, which means $overlineC(X) cap B$ is finite and so closed in $overlineC(X)$. After this, coherence can be applied, which completes the proof.



    POST-ACCEPT EDIT: This result is also true for normal CW complexes, which is where the closure of each cell is a sub-complex. This is because sub-complexes are closed under arbitrary unions and intersections. The counter-example given in the accepted answer is neither locally finite or normal, as required. This and other results can be found from the book "The Topology of CW Complexes".










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      3












      3








      3





      $begingroup$


      Let $X$ be a CW complex with cell-partition $mathcalC subset mathcalP(X)$, and $mathcalD subset mathcalC$. Is $A = bigcup overlineD(X) : D in mathcalD$ closed in $X$, where $overlineD(X)$ is the closure of $D$ in $X$?



      I think I can prove the result when $X$ is first-countable as follows. Suppose $A$ is not closed in $X$. Let $x in overlineA(X) setminus A$. Since $X$ is first-countable, there exists a decreasing neighborhood basis $(U_n in mathcalT_X(x) : n in mathbbN)$ at $x$, where $mathcalT_X(x)$ is the set of neighborhoods of $x$. Let $D_n in mathcalD$ be such that $D_n cap U_n neq emptyset$ and $D_n cap bigcup overlineD_m(X) : m < n = emptyset$. Let $x_n in D_n$. Then $x_n to x$. Since $X$ is Hausdorff, $x_n = overlineD_n(X) cap x_n$ is closed in $overlineD_n(X)$. Since $mathcalT_X$ is coherent with $mathcalC$, $B = x_n : n in mathbbN$ is closed in $X$, which contradicts $x in overlineB(X) setminus B$.



      Can this result be proved without assuming first-countability?



      EDIT: Seems like the proof above is incomplete. It should also show that $overlineC(X) cap B$ is closed in $X$ for all $C in mathcalC setminus mathcalD$. Following Eric's suggestion below, since $X$ is closure-finite, $overlineC(X)$ intersects only finitely many cells in $mathcalD$, which means $overlineC(X) cap B$ is finite and so closed in $overlineC(X)$. After this, coherence can be applied, which completes the proof.



      POST-ACCEPT EDIT: This result is also true for normal CW complexes, which is where the closure of each cell is a sub-complex. This is because sub-complexes are closed under arbitrary unions and intersections. The counter-example given in the accepted answer is neither locally finite or normal, as required. This and other results can be found from the book "The Topology of CW Complexes".










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Let $X$ be a CW complex with cell-partition $mathcalC subset mathcalP(X)$, and $mathcalD subset mathcalC$. Is $A = bigcup overlineD(X) : D in mathcalD$ closed in $X$, where $overlineD(X)$ is the closure of $D$ in $X$?



      I think I can prove the result when $X$ is first-countable as follows. Suppose $A$ is not closed in $X$. Let $x in overlineA(X) setminus A$. Since $X$ is first-countable, there exists a decreasing neighborhood basis $(U_n in mathcalT_X(x) : n in mathbbN)$ at $x$, where $mathcalT_X(x)$ is the set of neighborhoods of $x$. Let $D_n in mathcalD$ be such that $D_n cap U_n neq emptyset$ and $D_n cap bigcup overlineD_m(X) : m < n = emptyset$. Let $x_n in D_n$. Then $x_n to x$. Since $X$ is Hausdorff, $x_n = overlineD_n(X) cap x_n$ is closed in $overlineD_n(X)$. Since $mathcalT_X$ is coherent with $mathcalC$, $B = x_n : n in mathbbN$ is closed in $X$, which contradicts $x in overlineB(X) setminus B$.



      Can this result be proved without assuming first-countability?



      EDIT: Seems like the proof above is incomplete. It should also show that $overlineC(X) cap B$ is closed in $X$ for all $C in mathcalC setminus mathcalD$. Following Eric's suggestion below, since $X$ is closure-finite, $overlineC(X)$ intersects only finitely many cells in $mathcalD$, which means $overlineC(X) cap B$ is finite and so closed in $overlineC(X)$. After this, coherence can be applied, which completes the proof.



      POST-ACCEPT EDIT: This result is also true for normal CW complexes, which is where the closure of each cell is a sub-complex. This is because sub-complexes are closed under arbitrary unions and intersections. The counter-example given in the accepted answer is neither locally finite or normal, as required. This and other results can be found from the book "The Topology of CW Complexes".







      general-topology algebraic-topology cw-complexes






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Mar 30 at 6:29







      kaba

















      asked Mar 24 at 5:26









      kabakaba

      27417




      27417




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          This is not true in general. For instance, let $Asubset S^1$ be any non-closed subset. For each $ain A$, attach a $2$-cell to $S^1$ via the constant map $S^1to S^1$ with value $a$ and let $X$ be the resulting CW complex. Then the union of the closures of all the $2$-cells in $X$ is not closed, since its intersection with $S^1$ is $A$.



          (Incidentally, your proof in the first-countable case is not quite correct, since you have not actually shown that $B$ has closed intersection with each closed cell; you only checked this for the cells $D_n$. To prove it for an arbitrary closed cell, you need to use the fact that a closed cell can only intersect finitely many of the $D_n$.)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Very nice. Never thought the possibility of having a dense set of vertices.
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 24 at 6:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The points in the set $A$ are not all vertices of the CW complex, i.e. they are not all points in the $0$-skeleton. The 1-skeleton in this example is $S^1$, and it has only finitely many vertices. The definition of a CW complex allows a 2-cell attaching map for this example to be an arbitrary continuous function from $S^1$ to the $1$-skeleton, even a constant function whose image is not a vertex.
            $endgroup$
            – Lee Mosher
            Mar 24 at 13:57











          • $begingroup$
            @LeeMosher I see the 2-cells are non-normal cells (whose closure is not a subcomplex). Thanks for that!
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 25 at 5:13











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3160139%2fis-a-union-of-closures-of-cells-in-a-cw-complex-closed%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2












          $begingroup$

          This is not true in general. For instance, let $Asubset S^1$ be any non-closed subset. For each $ain A$, attach a $2$-cell to $S^1$ via the constant map $S^1to S^1$ with value $a$ and let $X$ be the resulting CW complex. Then the union of the closures of all the $2$-cells in $X$ is not closed, since its intersection with $S^1$ is $A$.



          (Incidentally, your proof in the first-countable case is not quite correct, since you have not actually shown that $B$ has closed intersection with each closed cell; you only checked this for the cells $D_n$. To prove it for an arbitrary closed cell, you need to use the fact that a closed cell can only intersect finitely many of the $D_n$.)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Very nice. Never thought the possibility of having a dense set of vertices.
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 24 at 6:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The points in the set $A$ are not all vertices of the CW complex, i.e. they are not all points in the $0$-skeleton. The 1-skeleton in this example is $S^1$, and it has only finitely many vertices. The definition of a CW complex allows a 2-cell attaching map for this example to be an arbitrary continuous function from $S^1$ to the $1$-skeleton, even a constant function whose image is not a vertex.
            $endgroup$
            – Lee Mosher
            Mar 24 at 13:57











          • $begingroup$
            @LeeMosher I see the 2-cells are non-normal cells (whose closure is not a subcomplex). Thanks for that!
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 25 at 5:13















          2












          $begingroup$

          This is not true in general. For instance, let $Asubset S^1$ be any non-closed subset. For each $ain A$, attach a $2$-cell to $S^1$ via the constant map $S^1to S^1$ with value $a$ and let $X$ be the resulting CW complex. Then the union of the closures of all the $2$-cells in $X$ is not closed, since its intersection with $S^1$ is $A$.



          (Incidentally, your proof in the first-countable case is not quite correct, since you have not actually shown that $B$ has closed intersection with each closed cell; you only checked this for the cells $D_n$. To prove it for an arbitrary closed cell, you need to use the fact that a closed cell can only intersect finitely many of the $D_n$.)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Very nice. Never thought the possibility of having a dense set of vertices.
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 24 at 6:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The points in the set $A$ are not all vertices of the CW complex, i.e. they are not all points in the $0$-skeleton. The 1-skeleton in this example is $S^1$, and it has only finitely many vertices. The definition of a CW complex allows a 2-cell attaching map for this example to be an arbitrary continuous function from $S^1$ to the $1$-skeleton, even a constant function whose image is not a vertex.
            $endgroup$
            – Lee Mosher
            Mar 24 at 13:57











          • $begingroup$
            @LeeMosher I see the 2-cells are non-normal cells (whose closure is not a subcomplex). Thanks for that!
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 25 at 5:13













          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          This is not true in general. For instance, let $Asubset S^1$ be any non-closed subset. For each $ain A$, attach a $2$-cell to $S^1$ via the constant map $S^1to S^1$ with value $a$ and let $X$ be the resulting CW complex. Then the union of the closures of all the $2$-cells in $X$ is not closed, since its intersection with $S^1$ is $A$.



          (Incidentally, your proof in the first-countable case is not quite correct, since you have not actually shown that $B$ has closed intersection with each closed cell; you only checked this for the cells $D_n$. To prove it for an arbitrary closed cell, you need to use the fact that a closed cell can only intersect finitely many of the $D_n$.)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          This is not true in general. For instance, let $Asubset S^1$ be any non-closed subset. For each $ain A$, attach a $2$-cell to $S^1$ via the constant map $S^1to S^1$ with value $a$ and let $X$ be the resulting CW complex. Then the union of the closures of all the $2$-cells in $X$ is not closed, since its intersection with $S^1$ is $A$.



          (Incidentally, your proof in the first-countable case is not quite correct, since you have not actually shown that $B$ has closed intersection with each closed cell; you only checked this for the cells $D_n$. To prove it for an arbitrary closed cell, you need to use the fact that a closed cell can only intersect finitely many of the $D_n$.)







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Mar 24 at 5:53









          Eric WofseyEric Wofsey

          193k14220352




          193k14220352











          • $begingroup$
            Very nice. Never thought the possibility of having a dense set of vertices.
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 24 at 6:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The points in the set $A$ are not all vertices of the CW complex, i.e. they are not all points in the $0$-skeleton. The 1-skeleton in this example is $S^1$, and it has only finitely many vertices. The definition of a CW complex allows a 2-cell attaching map for this example to be an arbitrary continuous function from $S^1$ to the $1$-skeleton, even a constant function whose image is not a vertex.
            $endgroup$
            – Lee Mosher
            Mar 24 at 13:57











          • $begingroup$
            @LeeMosher I see the 2-cells are non-normal cells (whose closure is not a subcomplex). Thanks for that!
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 25 at 5:13
















          • $begingroup$
            Very nice. Never thought the possibility of having a dense set of vertices.
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 24 at 6:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The points in the set $A$ are not all vertices of the CW complex, i.e. they are not all points in the $0$-skeleton. The 1-skeleton in this example is $S^1$, and it has only finitely many vertices. The definition of a CW complex allows a 2-cell attaching map for this example to be an arbitrary continuous function from $S^1$ to the $1$-skeleton, even a constant function whose image is not a vertex.
            $endgroup$
            – Lee Mosher
            Mar 24 at 13:57











          • $begingroup$
            @LeeMosher I see the 2-cells are non-normal cells (whose closure is not a subcomplex). Thanks for that!
            $endgroup$
            – kaba
            Mar 25 at 5:13















          $begingroup$
          Very nice. Never thought the possibility of having a dense set of vertices.
          $endgroup$
          – kaba
          Mar 24 at 6:18




          $begingroup$
          Very nice. Never thought the possibility of having a dense set of vertices.
          $endgroup$
          – kaba
          Mar 24 at 6:18




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          The points in the set $A$ are not all vertices of the CW complex, i.e. they are not all points in the $0$-skeleton. The 1-skeleton in this example is $S^1$, and it has only finitely many vertices. The definition of a CW complex allows a 2-cell attaching map for this example to be an arbitrary continuous function from $S^1$ to the $1$-skeleton, even a constant function whose image is not a vertex.
          $endgroup$
          – Lee Mosher
          Mar 24 at 13:57





          $begingroup$
          The points in the set $A$ are not all vertices of the CW complex, i.e. they are not all points in the $0$-skeleton. The 1-skeleton in this example is $S^1$, and it has only finitely many vertices. The definition of a CW complex allows a 2-cell attaching map for this example to be an arbitrary continuous function from $S^1$ to the $1$-skeleton, even a constant function whose image is not a vertex.
          $endgroup$
          – Lee Mosher
          Mar 24 at 13:57













          $begingroup$
          @LeeMosher I see the 2-cells are non-normal cells (whose closure is not a subcomplex). Thanks for that!
          $endgroup$
          – kaba
          Mar 25 at 5:13




          $begingroup$
          @LeeMosher I see the 2-cells are non-normal cells (whose closure is not a subcomplex). Thanks for that!
          $endgroup$
          – kaba
          Mar 25 at 5:13

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3160139%2fis-a-union-of-closures-of-cells-in-a-cw-complex-closed%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          How should I support this large drywall patch? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?How do I cover large gaps in drywall?How do I keep drywall around a patch from crumbling?Can I glue a second layer of drywall?How to patch long strip on drywall?Large drywall patch: how to avoid bulging seams?Drywall Mesh Patch vs. Bulge? To remove or not to remove?How to fix this drywall job?Prep drywall before backsplashWhat's the best way to fix this horrible drywall patch job?Drywall patching using 3M Patch Plus Primer

          random experiment with two different functions on unit interval Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Random variable and probability space notionsRandom Walk with EdgesFinding functions where the increase over a random interval is Poisson distributedNumber of days until dayCan an observed event in fact be of zero probability?Unit random processmodels of coins and uniform distributionHow to get the number of successes given $n$ trials , probability $P$ and a random variable $X$Absorbing Markov chain in a computer. Is “almost every” turned into always convergence in computer executions?Stopped random walk is not uniformly integrable

          Lowndes Grove History Architecture References Navigation menu32°48′6″N 79°57′58″W / 32.80167°N 79.96611°W / 32.80167; -79.9661132°48′6″N 79°57′58″W / 32.80167°N 79.96611°W / 32.80167; -79.9661178002500"National Register Information System"Historic houses of South Carolina"Lowndes Grove""+32° 48' 6.00", −79° 57' 58.00""Lowndes Grove, Charleston County (260 St. Margaret St., Charleston)""Lowndes Grove"The Charleston ExpositionIt Happened in South Carolina"Lowndes Grove (House), Saint Margaret Street & Sixth Avenue, Charleston, Charleston County, SC(Photographs)"Plantations of the Carolina Low Countrye