Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I can find good explanations of how the disjoint union topology is constructed, but I am confused about how things such as complements, boundaries, limit points, etc. are to be understood in this context. For example, suppose we have two spaces, P and M and create their disjoint Union X with the disjoint union topology. It would seem that subsets of P and M must then be subsets of X that are disjoint. However, do they need to be separate as well or could a subset of P have limit points in a subset of M? With what open sets would the limit points be defined? How about the closure or boundary of unions of subsets of P and M? It seems from what I have been able to find that you could not define an open set in X that did not already exist in P or M, so I am confused. Any clarification or a pointer to a relevant treatment would be greatly appreciated.

Ernie

share|improve this question
    
Great questions Ernie! I had the same ones. –  Andrew Sep 5 '12 at 0:34
add comment

3 Answers 3

Another very useful property of $P \sqcup M$ is that for any space $X$ and any continuous functions $p:P \to X$, $m: M \to X$ , the unique function $f: P \sqcup M \to X$ which agrees with $p,m$ on $P,M$ respectively, is continuous. Thus the disjoint union is good for constructing continuous functions from it, which is a kind of dual to the product, which is good for constructing functions $ X \to P \times M$ in terms of its components.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you. I have seen that fact mentioned, but I have to confess I do not really understand the import of it. –  ernie Apr 10 '12 at 21:32
    
A major import is that many topological constructions, such as this one, have a major role in constructing continuous functions either into or out of the space. The disjoint union is a special case of more general constructions, such as adjunction spaces, which are very useful in algebraic topology. –  Ronnie Brown Apr 29 '12 at 11:35
    
I see. That's not where I'm trying to go with this at the moment, but useful to understand for the future. Thanks you. –  ernie Apr 29 '12 at 15:34
add comment

In this case both $P$ and $M$ are clopen (closed and open). So in particular the boundary of $P$ and $M$ is empty and no element of $P$ is a limit point of $M$ and vice-versa. On the other hand, an arbitrary subset $U$ of $X$ is open if and only if both $U\cap P$ and $U\cap M$ are open.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you. I assume then that if U is open in X its closure in X must be the union of the closure of U in P and the closure of U in M? –  ernie Apr 10 '12 at 21:26
    
@ernie $cl(U)=cl(U\cap P)\cup cl(U\cap M)$ –  azarel Apr 10 '12 at 22:44
    
@azarel : an arbitrary subset $U$ of $X$ is open if and only if both $U∩P$ and $U∩M$ are open. but one of these intersections must be empty, am i right? –  palio Aug 26 '12 at 16:45
1  
@palio No, both intersections can be non-empty. –  azarel Aug 26 '12 at 18:04
add comment

If $P$ and $M$ are disjoint topological spaces and $X = P\cup M$, then $X$ inherits a natural topology from $P$ and $M$, sometimes called the disjoint union topology. The open sets in this topology are all sets of the form $U\cup V$, where $U$ is open and $P$ and $V$ is open in $M$. In particular, since the empty set is open, any open subset of $P$ is open in $X$, and any open subset of $M$ is open in $X$.

The idea of this topology is that $P$ and $M$ form disconnected pieces of $X$, and do not interact in any way. Here are some basic properties:

  • No sequence in $P$ or subset of $P$ has a limit point in $M$, and vice-versa.

  • If $S\subset P$, then the closure of $S$ is also a subset of $P$. The same holds for $M$.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you, that's very helpful. If two sets in P and M have a union that is open in X, and if both sets have boundaries in their respective subspaces, would the boundary of their union in X be the union of their individual boundaries in P and M? –  ernie Apr 10 '12 at 21:30
    
@ernie Yes. If $S\subset P$ and $T\subset M$, then the boundary of $S\cup T$ will be the union of the boundaries of $S$ and $T$. –  Jim Belk Apr 10 '12 at 22:56
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.