General topology proving something for all of its points












2












$begingroup$


My question is: if you prove that something is true for all points in a topological space or a subset of some topological space, does that imply that this property holds for the whole topological space or the subset of the topological space?



EDIT: more concrete if you have a topological space where all of its points are closed then is this space also closed? If that even makes sense.



If this is true am I then allowed to pick an arbitrary point of the space and then show that since it holds for this one point then the topological space has this property?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What kind of property are we talking about?
    $endgroup$
    – st.math
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    $X$ is closed in $X$ by definition...
    $endgroup$
    – YuiTo Cheng
    yesterday








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Well, any space is closed in itself. That's part of the definition of a topology, and doesn't really have anything to do with whether single points are closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Your question is too broad to make much sense. Every point $x$ in a topological space $X$ has the property that $xneq X$ as sets can't contain themselves, but $X$ does not have this property. I can't actually think of a property that applies to points that can also apply to spaces in any meaningful way.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Thingum
    yesterday








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    It's because finite union of closed sets is closed
    $endgroup$
    – YuiTo Cheng
    yesterday


















2












$begingroup$


My question is: if you prove that something is true for all points in a topological space or a subset of some topological space, does that imply that this property holds for the whole topological space or the subset of the topological space?



EDIT: more concrete if you have a topological space where all of its points are closed then is this space also closed? If that even makes sense.



If this is true am I then allowed to pick an arbitrary point of the space and then show that since it holds for this one point then the topological space has this property?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What kind of property are we talking about?
    $endgroup$
    – st.math
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    $X$ is closed in $X$ by definition...
    $endgroup$
    – YuiTo Cheng
    yesterday








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Well, any space is closed in itself. That's part of the definition of a topology, and doesn't really have anything to do with whether single points are closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Your question is too broad to make much sense. Every point $x$ in a topological space $X$ has the property that $xneq X$ as sets can't contain themselves, but $X$ does not have this property. I can't actually think of a property that applies to points that can also apply to spaces in any meaningful way.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Thingum
    yesterday








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    It's because finite union of closed sets is closed
    $endgroup$
    – YuiTo Cheng
    yesterday
















2












2








2





$begingroup$


My question is: if you prove that something is true for all points in a topological space or a subset of some topological space, does that imply that this property holds for the whole topological space or the subset of the topological space?



EDIT: more concrete if you have a topological space where all of its points are closed then is this space also closed? If that even makes sense.



If this is true am I then allowed to pick an arbitrary point of the space and then show that since it holds for this one point then the topological space has this property?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




My question is: if you prove that something is true for all points in a topological space or a subset of some topological space, does that imply that this property holds for the whole topological space or the subset of the topological space?



EDIT: more concrete if you have a topological space where all of its points are closed then is this space also closed? If that even makes sense.



If this is true am I then allowed to pick an arbitrary point of the space and then show that since it holds for this one point then the topological space has this property?







general-topology






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday







Jensens

















asked yesterday









JensensJensens

366




366








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What kind of property are we talking about?
    $endgroup$
    – st.math
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    $X$ is closed in $X$ by definition...
    $endgroup$
    – YuiTo Cheng
    yesterday








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Well, any space is closed in itself. That's part of the definition of a topology, and doesn't really have anything to do with whether single points are closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Your question is too broad to make much sense. Every point $x$ in a topological space $X$ has the property that $xneq X$ as sets can't contain themselves, but $X$ does not have this property. I can't actually think of a property that applies to points that can also apply to spaces in any meaningful way.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Thingum
    yesterday








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    It's because finite union of closed sets is closed
    $endgroup$
    – YuiTo Cheng
    yesterday
















  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What kind of property are we talking about?
    $endgroup$
    – st.math
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    $X$ is closed in $X$ by definition...
    $endgroup$
    – YuiTo Cheng
    yesterday








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Well, any space is closed in itself. That's part of the definition of a topology, and doesn't really have anything to do with whether single points are closed.
    $endgroup$
    – Arthur
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Your question is too broad to make much sense. Every point $x$ in a topological space $X$ has the property that $xneq X$ as sets can't contain themselves, but $X$ does not have this property. I can't actually think of a property that applies to points that can also apply to spaces in any meaningful way.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Thingum
    yesterday








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    It's because finite union of closed sets is closed
    $endgroup$
    – YuiTo Cheng
    yesterday










1




1




$begingroup$
What kind of property are we talking about?
$endgroup$
– st.math
yesterday




$begingroup$
What kind of property are we talking about?
$endgroup$
– st.math
yesterday




1




1




$begingroup$
$X$ is closed in $X$ by definition...
$endgroup$
– YuiTo Cheng
yesterday






$begingroup$
$X$ is closed in $X$ by definition...
$endgroup$
– YuiTo Cheng
yesterday






1




1




$begingroup$
Well, any space is closed in itself. That's part of the definition of a topology, and doesn't really have anything to do with whether single points are closed.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
yesterday




$begingroup$
Well, any space is closed in itself. That's part of the definition of a topology, and doesn't really have anything to do with whether single points are closed.
$endgroup$
– Arthur
yesterday




1




1




$begingroup$
Your question is too broad to make much sense. Every point $x$ in a topological space $X$ has the property that $xneq X$ as sets can't contain themselves, but $X$ does not have this property. I can't actually think of a property that applies to points that can also apply to spaces in any meaningful way.
$endgroup$
– Robert Thingum
yesterday






$begingroup$
Your question is too broad to make much sense. Every point $x$ in a topological space $X$ has the property that $xneq X$ as sets can't contain themselves, but $X$ does not have this property. I can't actually think of a property that applies to points that can also apply to spaces in any meaningful way.
$endgroup$
– Robert Thingum
yesterday






2




2




$begingroup$
It's because finite union of closed sets is closed
$endgroup$
– YuiTo Cheng
yesterday






$begingroup$
It's because finite union of closed sets is closed
$endgroup$
– YuiTo Cheng
yesterday












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

The answer, as far as your specific example is concerned, is negative. Every topological space $X$ is a closed subset of itself. However, there are topological spaces in which not all points are closed.



A better example would be: a set which consists of a single point is always compact and connected, but lots of topological spaces are neither compact nor connected.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    3












    $begingroup$

    As your example property "is closed" illustrates, the properties of single points in a space and the space as a whole are not entirely linked together. At the very least, it's not something you can count on in general. I would personally suggest you instead as a general rule assume they are not connected, and make note of the times it does happen.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      3












      $begingroup$

      Taken literally, your question is ill-posed.



      This is because a topological space and a point in the topological space are different kinds of things. When we say that a point is closed in a topological space, what we really mean is that its singleton is closed. This is literally very different, but because "a point is closed" taken literally is, in general, nonsensical, this short of shorthand is acceptable.



      Having this in mind, you could rephrase your question to a more meaningful (not nonsensical) one:




      Let $X$ be a topological space, and let $Asubseteq X$. If $P$ is a topological property of a subset of $X$ and for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ has the property $P$, does $A$ also have the property $P$?




      The answer is trivially no. If you consider "not being a singleton" a topological property, then it fails spectacularly. Otherwise, the property you consider, "being closed" (definitely a topological property) also fails: for example, if you consider $(0,1)subseteq {mathbf R}$, then (the singleton of) every point in $(0,1)$ is closed in the reals, but $(0,1)$ is not.



      You might ask for what properties $P$ this is true. One such property is being open: if for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ is open in $X$, then $A$ itself is open (as a union of open sets). I strongly suspect that this is just about the only interesting and nontrivial property for which this is true (for suitable notions of "interesting" and "nontrivial").



      A related, far more interesting question is about what topological properties are local, or in other words, what properties of a topological space are true for a space if and only if every point has a neighbourhood with the same property.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        Very good answer appreciate it, yes it was difficult for me to ask the question properly I think know it makes a lot more sense
        $endgroup$
        – Jensens
        22 hours ago











      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%2f3161827%2fgeneral-topology-proving-something-for-all-of-its-points%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      4












      $begingroup$

      The answer, as far as your specific example is concerned, is negative. Every topological space $X$ is a closed subset of itself. However, there are topological spaces in which not all points are closed.



      A better example would be: a set which consists of a single point is always compact and connected, but lots of topological spaces are neither compact nor connected.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        4












        $begingroup$

        The answer, as far as your specific example is concerned, is negative. Every topological space $X$ is a closed subset of itself. However, there are topological spaces in which not all points are closed.



        A better example would be: a set which consists of a single point is always compact and connected, but lots of topological spaces are neither compact nor connected.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          4












          4








          4





          $begingroup$

          The answer, as far as your specific example is concerned, is negative. Every topological space $X$ is a closed subset of itself. However, there are topological spaces in which not all points are closed.



          A better example would be: a set which consists of a single point is always compact and connected, but lots of topological spaces are neither compact nor connected.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          The answer, as far as your specific example is concerned, is negative. Every topological space $X$ is a closed subset of itself. However, there are topological spaces in which not all points are closed.



          A better example would be: a set which consists of a single point is always compact and connected, but lots of topological spaces are neither compact nor connected.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos

          170k23132238




          170k23132238























              3












              $begingroup$

              As your example property "is closed" illustrates, the properties of single points in a space and the space as a whole are not entirely linked together. At the very least, it's not something you can count on in general. I would personally suggest you instead as a general rule assume they are not connected, and make note of the times it does happen.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                3












                $begingroup$

                As your example property "is closed" illustrates, the properties of single points in a space and the space as a whole are not entirely linked together. At the very least, it's not something you can count on in general. I would personally suggest you instead as a general rule assume they are not connected, and make note of the times it does happen.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  3












                  3








                  3





                  $begingroup$

                  As your example property "is closed" illustrates, the properties of single points in a space and the space as a whole are not entirely linked together. At the very least, it's not something you can count on in general. I would personally suggest you instead as a general rule assume they are not connected, and make note of the times it does happen.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  As your example property "is closed" illustrates, the properties of single points in a space and the space as a whole are not entirely linked together. At the very least, it's not something you can count on in general. I would personally suggest you instead as a general rule assume they are not connected, and make note of the times it does happen.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered yesterday









                  ArthurArthur

                  120k7120203




                  120k7120203























                      3












                      $begingroup$

                      Taken literally, your question is ill-posed.



                      This is because a topological space and a point in the topological space are different kinds of things. When we say that a point is closed in a topological space, what we really mean is that its singleton is closed. This is literally very different, but because "a point is closed" taken literally is, in general, nonsensical, this short of shorthand is acceptable.



                      Having this in mind, you could rephrase your question to a more meaningful (not nonsensical) one:




                      Let $X$ be a topological space, and let $Asubseteq X$. If $P$ is a topological property of a subset of $X$ and for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ has the property $P$, does $A$ also have the property $P$?




                      The answer is trivially no. If you consider "not being a singleton" a topological property, then it fails spectacularly. Otherwise, the property you consider, "being closed" (definitely a topological property) also fails: for example, if you consider $(0,1)subseteq {mathbf R}$, then (the singleton of) every point in $(0,1)$ is closed in the reals, but $(0,1)$ is not.



                      You might ask for what properties $P$ this is true. One such property is being open: if for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ is open in $X$, then $A$ itself is open (as a union of open sets). I strongly suspect that this is just about the only interesting and nontrivial property for which this is true (for suitable notions of "interesting" and "nontrivial").



                      A related, far more interesting question is about what topological properties are local, or in other words, what properties of a topological space are true for a space if and only if every point has a neighbourhood with the same property.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$













                      • $begingroup$
                        Very good answer appreciate it, yes it was difficult for me to ask the question properly I think know it makes a lot more sense
                        $endgroup$
                        – Jensens
                        22 hours ago
















                      3












                      $begingroup$

                      Taken literally, your question is ill-posed.



                      This is because a topological space and a point in the topological space are different kinds of things. When we say that a point is closed in a topological space, what we really mean is that its singleton is closed. This is literally very different, but because "a point is closed" taken literally is, in general, nonsensical, this short of shorthand is acceptable.



                      Having this in mind, you could rephrase your question to a more meaningful (not nonsensical) one:




                      Let $X$ be a topological space, and let $Asubseteq X$. If $P$ is a topological property of a subset of $X$ and for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ has the property $P$, does $A$ also have the property $P$?




                      The answer is trivially no. If you consider "not being a singleton" a topological property, then it fails spectacularly. Otherwise, the property you consider, "being closed" (definitely a topological property) also fails: for example, if you consider $(0,1)subseteq {mathbf R}$, then (the singleton of) every point in $(0,1)$ is closed in the reals, but $(0,1)$ is not.



                      You might ask for what properties $P$ this is true. One such property is being open: if for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ is open in $X$, then $A$ itself is open (as a union of open sets). I strongly suspect that this is just about the only interesting and nontrivial property for which this is true (for suitable notions of "interesting" and "nontrivial").



                      A related, far more interesting question is about what topological properties are local, or in other words, what properties of a topological space are true for a space if and only if every point has a neighbourhood with the same property.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$













                      • $begingroup$
                        Very good answer appreciate it, yes it was difficult for me to ask the question properly I think know it makes a lot more sense
                        $endgroup$
                        – Jensens
                        22 hours ago














                      3












                      3








                      3





                      $begingroup$

                      Taken literally, your question is ill-posed.



                      This is because a topological space and a point in the topological space are different kinds of things. When we say that a point is closed in a topological space, what we really mean is that its singleton is closed. This is literally very different, but because "a point is closed" taken literally is, in general, nonsensical, this short of shorthand is acceptable.



                      Having this in mind, you could rephrase your question to a more meaningful (not nonsensical) one:




                      Let $X$ be a topological space, and let $Asubseteq X$. If $P$ is a topological property of a subset of $X$ and for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ has the property $P$, does $A$ also have the property $P$?




                      The answer is trivially no. If you consider "not being a singleton" a topological property, then it fails spectacularly. Otherwise, the property you consider, "being closed" (definitely a topological property) also fails: for example, if you consider $(0,1)subseteq {mathbf R}$, then (the singleton of) every point in $(0,1)$ is closed in the reals, but $(0,1)$ is not.



                      You might ask for what properties $P$ this is true. One such property is being open: if for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ is open in $X$, then $A$ itself is open (as a union of open sets). I strongly suspect that this is just about the only interesting and nontrivial property for which this is true (for suitable notions of "interesting" and "nontrivial").



                      A related, far more interesting question is about what topological properties are local, or in other words, what properties of a topological space are true for a space if and only if every point has a neighbourhood with the same property.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      Taken literally, your question is ill-posed.



                      This is because a topological space and a point in the topological space are different kinds of things. When we say that a point is closed in a topological space, what we really mean is that its singleton is closed. This is literally very different, but because "a point is closed" taken literally is, in general, nonsensical, this short of shorthand is acceptable.



                      Having this in mind, you could rephrase your question to a more meaningful (not nonsensical) one:




                      Let $X$ be a topological space, and let $Asubseteq X$. If $P$ is a topological property of a subset of $X$ and for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ has the property $P$, does $A$ also have the property $P$?




                      The answer is trivially no. If you consider "not being a singleton" a topological property, then it fails spectacularly. Otherwise, the property you consider, "being closed" (definitely a topological property) also fails: for example, if you consider $(0,1)subseteq {mathbf R}$, then (the singleton of) every point in $(0,1)$ is closed in the reals, but $(0,1)$ is not.



                      You might ask for what properties $P$ this is true. One such property is being open: if for every $ain A$, the singleton ${a}$ is open in $X$, then $A$ itself is open (as a union of open sets). I strongly suspect that this is just about the only interesting and nontrivial property for which this is true (for suitable notions of "interesting" and "nontrivial").



                      A related, far more interesting question is about what topological properties are local, or in other words, what properties of a topological space are true for a space if and only if every point has a neighbourhood with the same property.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered 23 hours ago









                      tomasztomasz

                      23.9k23482




                      23.9k23482












                      • $begingroup$
                        Very good answer appreciate it, yes it was difficult for me to ask the question properly I think know it makes a lot more sense
                        $endgroup$
                        – Jensens
                        22 hours ago


















                      • $begingroup$
                        Very good answer appreciate it, yes it was difficult for me to ask the question properly I think know it makes a lot more sense
                        $endgroup$
                        – Jensens
                        22 hours ago
















                      $begingroup$
                      Very good answer appreciate it, yes it was difficult for me to ask the question properly I think know it makes a lot more sense
                      $endgroup$
                      – Jensens
                      22 hours ago




                      $begingroup$
                      Very good answer appreciate it, yes it was difficult for me to ask the question properly I think know it makes a lot more sense
                      $endgroup$
                      – Jensens
                      22 hours ago


















                      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%2f3161827%2fgeneral-topology-proving-something-for-all-of-its-points%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

                      Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

                      He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

                      Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029