Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am stuck on the following thing, which I do not know to be true or not.

If we have $X$ and $\mathcal{T_1}$ and $\mathcal{T_2}$ be topologies with neighborhood basis at each $x\in X$, $\mathcal{B}^x_1$ and $\mathcal{B}^x_2$ respectively, is it true that these topologies are equivalent if for every $B_1\in \mathcal{B}_1$ there exists a $B_2\in \mathcal{B}_2$ such that $B_2\subseteq B_1$, then the topologies must be same.

I am getting stuck because I cannot see how this implies, if it even does, however the elements of $\mathcal{B}^x_1$ and $\mathcal{B}^x_2$ are open in the other topology. I also guess I have the question of does neighborhood even have to have only open sets in it. As you can see I am generally confused, so any help would be appreciated.

Also if this is not true are there conditions that make it true?

share|cite|improve this question
$\mathcal T_1\subseteq\mathcal T_2$ iff every neighborhood of $x$ with regards to $\mathcal T_1$ is also a neighborhood of $x$ with regards to $\mathcal T_2$, which is equivalent to the property you describe in the second paragraph. – Stefan Hamcke Mar 6 '13 at 0:32
I'm sorry. Why is that? – user45150 Mar 6 '13 at 0:37
do you mean the first or the second equivalence? – Stefan Hamcke Mar 6 '13 at 0:38
Actually. After some thinking I see why it is true, and I think I understand the answer to this question. Thank you, for your comment. – user45150 Mar 6 '13 at 0:40
By the way: If your interested how a topology can also be defined via neighborhood bases take a look at… – Stefan Hamcke Mar 6 '13 at 0:44
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Ok, I've edited my answer.

Let $\mathcal{T}_1$ be the topology generated by $\mathcal{B}_1$, and $\mathcal{T}_2$ the topology generated by $\mathcal{B}_2$.

Suppose $U$ is open in $\mathcal{T}_1$. Then if $x\in{U}$ we know we can find a $B_1\in{\mathcal{B_1}^x}$ such that $x\in{B_1}\subset{U}$. By the property you mention, we can also find a $B_2\in{\mathcal{B}_{2}^x}$ such that ${B_2}\subset{B_1}$, and so $x\in{B_2}\subset{U}$. Therefore, $U$ is open in $\mathcal{T}_2$ also.

Does this make sense?

share|cite|improve this answer
I guess my question was that could you phrase this differently if you were talking about the neighborhood bases. That is if $B_1$ is in the neighborhood basis for $x$ in $\mathcal{T_1}$, is it necessary to check that for all $y\in B_1$ there is a $B_2$ in the neighborhood basis for $x$ in $B_2$ such that $y\in B_2\subseteq B_1$ or is it necessary only to check this for $x=y$. – user45150 Mar 6 '13 at 0:19
Oh, I am sorry, I had completely forgotten that there were even something called "neighbourhood bases" (I assumed you talked about ordinary bases). By the way, what do you really mean by $\mathcal{B}_1$? The collection of all neighbourhood bases at all points, or just at one particular point? Or do you use the notation $\mathcal{B}_{1}(x)$ for the latter? – Axiom Mar 6 '13 at 0:32
one particular point. I will edit in some $x$s to show this – user45150 Mar 6 '13 at 0:33
Yes. Thank you! – user45150 Mar 6 '13 at 0:40

Your Answer


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.