2
$\begingroup$

I'd like a check about this exercise.

Let $\tau$ be the topology so defined $\tau=\bigl\{A \subset \mathbb{R}\,|\, (\forall x \in A \cap \mathbb{Z})( \exists \epsilon >0): (x-\epsilon,x+\epsilon) \subset A\bigr\}$

(i) Is $\tau$ finer or coarser than the euclidian topology?

(ii) Find $\operatorname{Int}[0,+\infty), \operatorname{Int}[0,1], \operatorname{Int}\mathbb{Z}$

(iii) Find $\overline{[0,1]}$

(iv) Is $\mathbb{R},\tau$ an Hausdorff space?

(v) Is $\mathbb{R}$ compact

(vi) Let $f\colon(\mathbb{R},\tau_e) \rightarrow (\mathbb{R},\tau_e)$ be a continuous function such that $f(\mathbb{Z}) \subset \mathbb{Z}$.

Show that $f\colon(\mathbb{R},\tau) \rightarrow (\mathbb{R},\tau)$ is continuous.


(i) $\tau_e$ is finer than $\tau$ because $\tau \subset \tau_e$. In fact, every open set in $\tau$ is open in the standard euclidian topology. I also have that $\tau_e \subset \tau$, so the two topologies are equivalent.

(ii)$\operatorname{Int}[0,1]=\emptyset$, since the only integers in this set are {$0,1$}, but if $0$ is included, then $(0-\epsilon,0+\epsilon) \notin [0,1]$

With the same argument, $\operatorname{Int}[0,+\infty)=(0,+\infty)$

$\operatorname{Int}\mathbb{Z}=\emptyset$ because every open set which contains integer points, automatically contains also real points.

(iii) $[0,1]$ is closed since $(\infty,0) \cup (1,+\infty)$ is an open set. So $\overline{[0,1]}=[0,1]$.

(iv)Yes, it's an Hausdorff space since for every different points $x,y \in \mathbb{R}$ I can find two open neighborhood $U,V$ such that $U \cap V = \emptyset$.

(v)It's not compact: if I take the open cover $\mathcal{R}= \cup_{i \in \mathbb{N}}A_i$, $A_i=(i,i+2)$, I can't take a finite subcover.

(vi) Since $f$ is continuous (with the euclidean topology), then for every open set $U \in \tau_e$: $f^{-1}(U) \in \tau_e \subset \tau$. So $f:(\mathbb{R},\tau) \rightarrow (\mathbb{R},\tau)$ is continuous.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't understand the definition of $\tau$; what is $\epsilon$? $\endgroup$ – José Carlos Santos Aug 30 '17 at 12:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If there is supposed to be an $\exists \epsilon$ right before the interval in the definition of $\tau$, then your answers are mostly wrong. Note in particular that $(1,2)$ is open in $\tau$. $\endgroup$ – Mees de Vries Aug 30 '17 at 12:29
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I edited my answer $\endgroup$ – VoB Aug 30 '17 at 12:31
  • $\begingroup$ One way to see this topology is as the smallest topology such that $f:(\mathbb R,\tau)\to X$ is continuous for a metric space $X$ if and only if $f:\mathbb R\to X$ is continuous at every point of $\mathbb Z$ (using the $\epsilon-\delta$ definition of 'continuous at a point.' $\endgroup$ – Thomas Andrews Aug 30 '17 at 12:47
  • $\begingroup$ Too many questions. $\endgroup$ – Jack Aug 30 '17 at 13:07
0
$\begingroup$

First of all, you're misunderstanding $\tau.$ Putting the set-builder notation into words, the elements of $\tau$ are the subsets $A$ of $\Bbb R$ which contain euclidean neighborhoods of each of their integer elements. However, this does not mean that they contain euclidean neighborhoods of all of their elements. For example, taking any $x\in\Bbb R\setminus\Bbb Z,$ we have that $\{x\}\in\tau,$ but $\{x\}\notin\tau_e.$

Second of all, you've made correct arguments for determining $\mathrm{Int}[0,1],$ but you've drawn an incorrect conclusion. You're right that $0,1\notin\mathrm{Int}[0,1],$ but those are the only elements of $[0,1]$ you've proved (and indeed, the only ones that you can prove) not to be in $\mathrm{Int}[0,1]$.

Your argument for (iv) needs to be fixed, as it currently says: "Yes, it's a Hausdorff space, because it's a Hausdorff space."

Your argument for (v) needs to be fixed, because $\{A_i:i\in\Bbb N\}$ does not cover $\Bbb R.$ That's an easy fix, though.

Your approach for (vi) needs to be fixed. You must show that for every $U\in\tau,$ we have $f^{-1}[U]\in\tau.$

Let me know if you have trouble with any of these, and I'll see what I can do to get you "unstuck."

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

As pointed out in the comments, some are wrong, but more importantly, you seem to have the wrong intuition about $\tau$. The first answer that is wrong is (i).

From the definition of $\tau$ it follows that $(1,2)\in \tau$ (Because $(1,2)\cap \mathbb Z=\emptyset$ and you take $x$ from an empty set in the definition).

In fact, it can be shown that every subset of $\mathbb R\setminus \mathbb Z$ is in $\tau$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ thanks for the answer ! I just edited ;) $\endgroup$ – VoB Aug 30 '17 at 12:49
0
$\begingroup$

Here's my solution of (vi): Let $f\colon\mathbb{R}\longrightarrow\mathbb R$ be a function which is continuous with respect to the usual topology. You want to prove that it is continuous with respect to $\tau$. Let $x\in\mathbb R$ and let $U$ be a neighborhood of $f(x)$; you want to prove that $f^{-1}(U)$ is a neighborhood of $x$. There are two possibilites:

  1. $x\in\mathbb Z$: then $f(x)\in\mathbb Z$ and therefore $U\supset\bigl(f(x)-\varepsilon,f(x)+\varepsilon\bigr)$ for some $\varepsilon>0$. Since $\bigl(f(x)-\varepsilon,f(x)+\varepsilon\bigr)\in\tau_e$, $f^{-1}\bigl(f(x)-\varepsilon,f(x)+\varepsilon\bigr)\supset(x-\delta,x+\delta)$, for some $\delta>0$. Therefore, $f^{-1}(U)\supset(x-\delta,x+\delta)$ and so $f^{-1}(U)$ is a neighborhood of $x$.
  2. $x\notin\mathbb Z$: then $\{x\}$ is a neighborhood of $x$ and therefore $f^{-1}(U)(\supset\{x\})$ is also a neighborhood of $x$.
$\endgroup$

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.