A while ago I was dreaming up point-set topology exam questions, and this one came to mind:

Is $\mathbb Q\setminus \{0\}$ homeomorphic to $\mathbb Q$? (Where both sets have the subspace topology induced from the standard topology on $\mathbb R$.)

However, I couldn't figure this out at the time, and I'm curious to see whether anyone has a nice argument. I'm not even willing to take a guess as to whether they are or aren't homeomorphic.


3 Answers 3


A well-known theorem of Cantor says that any two countable dense linear orderings without endpoints are isomorphic as linear orders. So in particular there is an order-preserving bijection between $\mathbb{Q}$ and $\mathbb{Q}\setminus\{0\}$. This bijection will be a homeomorphism if you give each space the order topology, which is the standard topology inherited from $\mathbb{R}$.


Since the technique proving the homeomorphism is useful in many other situations, it may be worth adding some details to Carl's answer:

Suppose $A,B$ are two countable, dense linear orders without end points. We show that they are isomorphic by building an isomorphism $f:A\to B$. This is done by what we call a back-and-forth argument. Say that $A=\{a_n\mid n\in{\mathbb N}\}$ and $B=\{b_n\mid n\in{\mathbb N}\}$. We build $f$ by stages. At the end of stage $2n$ we have ensured that $a_n\in{\rm dom}(f)$, and at the end of stage $2n+1$, we have ensured that $b_n\in{\rm ran}(f)$.

The construction is simple. Begin by picking any $b\in B$ and letting $f(a_0)=b$. This completes stage 0.

Then we do stage 1: If $b=b_0$ we are done and go to stage 2. If $b<b_0$, we pick an $a\in A$ and set $f(a)=b_0$. Of course, since $f$ is to be an isomorphism, we better ensure that $a_0<a$. But this is trivial to accomplish, since $A$ has no endpoints. Similarly, if $b_0<b$, then we pick $a$ so that $a<a_0$.

In general, at stage $2n$ do the following: If $a_n$ is already in the domain we have built, we are done with this stage. Otherwise, if $a_n$ is larger than all the elements in the domain of $f$ so far, pick an element $c$ of $B$ larger than all the elements in the range of $f$ so far and set $f(a_n)=c$; this is possible since $B$ has no largest element. If $a_n$ is smaller than all elements in the current domain of $f$, pick $c$ in $B$ smaller than all elements in the current range of $f$, and set $f(a_n)=c$. Again, this is possible, since $B$ has no smallest element. Finally, if $a_n$ is between elements of the current domain of $f$, pick $d,e$ in the current domain of $f$ so $d<a_n<e$, $d$ is largest below $a_n$, and $e$ is smallest above $a_n$. Then pick in $B$ some $c$ between $f(d)$ and $f(e)$ and set $f(a_n)=c$. This is possible, since $B$ is dense in itself. This completes this stage.

At stage $2n+1$ we do the same, but now ensuring that $b_n$ is put in the range of $f$.

This construction gives us an isomorphism $f$ at the end: Even stages ensure the domain of $f$ is all of $A$, odd stages that the range is all of $B$. The construction is designed so for $\alpha,\beta$ in the domain of $f$, $\alpha<\beta$ iff $f(\alpha)<f(\beta)$. But this is precisely what it means to be an isomorphism.

The method of back-and-forth is very flexible. For example, it shows that any two countable random graphs are isomorphic. There are plenty of applications of this technique.

  • $\begingroup$ I'm a big fan of this argument in general, but for some reason, I especially like packaging it as the Rasiowa-Sikorski Lemma applied to the set of partially defined order preserving maps from $A$ to $B$. $\endgroup$ Dec 11, 2010 at 0:17
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for giving the argument here for easy reference. $\endgroup$ Dec 11, 2010 at 12:44
  • $\begingroup$ Hi Andres, I hope you don't mind that I added a missing $. This answer was linked to me to answer one of my own questions. $\endgroup$
    – yunone
    May 5, 2011 at 21:01

The ordered approach is fine. A classical theorem by Sierpinski says that all countable metric spaces without isolated points are homeomorphic. $\mathbf{Q}$ is such a space. It also implies $\mathbf{Q} \setminus \{0\}$ is homeomorphic to $\mathbf{Q}$ and $\mathbf{Q} \times \mathbf{Q}$ e.g., or any finite product for that matter. A proof is at the topology atlas, topology explained

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Wow, that really defies intuition. $\endgroup$ Dec 13, 2010 at 8:50
  • $\begingroup$ Such characterizations are very nice, though. And in a way, it is intuitive, if you think longer about it. Other spaces that have such characterisations are R, the irrationals, the Cantor set, the Cantor set minus a point, to name the most famous ones.. $\endgroup$ Dec 13, 2010 at 21:51
  • $\begingroup$ I know this an old thread, but what is the characterization of the irrationals you are referring to in your last comment? $\endgroup$ Mar 6, 2015 at 22:26
  • $\begingroup$ Hmm, I think I found the characterization you were referring to: "In 1928, Alexandroff & Urysohn characterized the irrationals as the unique separable, completely metrizable, zero-dimension al space for which every compact subset has empty interior." $\endgroup$ Mar 6, 2015 at 22:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @GrumpyParsnip Yes, that's the one. It's from the same era as the ones for the Cantor set (due to Brouwer) e.g. There are also characterisations for other spaces like $\mathbb{Q} \times \mathbb{P}$ etc. See Fons van Engelen's thesis "Homogeneous Zero-Dimensional Absolute Borel Sets", e.g. $\endgroup$ Mar 7, 2015 at 6:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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