3
$\begingroup$

I stumbled upon this link while googling for an answer to the same question.

Under point number 3, the sole answer mentions an example where it is said $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}$ is not Hausdorff, because the topology generated is trivial, assuming $\mathbb{R}$ has the standard topology. I agree with the conclusion but I think the reason given is wrong. I just wanted to cross-check my argument.

If I take $ (\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}) \backslash [e] $ where e is the equivalence class of the Euler number $e$,

then the inverse of the projection map $\pi: \mathbb {R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}$ is $\mathbb{R}\backslash \{e\}$ which is an open set in $\mathbb{R}$.

And so the topology consists of open sets other than $X$ and $\phi$, which means the topology is not trivial.

Is there something wrong with the above argument?

NOTE: I agree with the conclusion though. Let $U \neq \phi$ be an open set in $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}$ . Let $q\in \mathbb{Q}$ then if $[q] \notin U$, $\pi^{-1}(U)$ will consist of only irrationals which cannot be open, and so the space is not hausdorff, since any two non-empty open sets have non-empty intersection containing atleast $[q]$.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ $\pi^{-1}(\mathbb{R/Q} \setminus [e]) = \mathbb{R} \setminus (e + \mathbb{Q})$, which contains no intervals. $\endgroup$ – Anthony Carapetis Aug 28 '13 at 1:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The inverse of the projection map seems to also contain $e+0.0123$. $\endgroup$ – André Nicolas Aug 28 '13 at 2:11
4
$\begingroup$

Let's get really broad, and also hope I'm not making any major errors. Forgive (or fix) the awful variable names.

Let $D$ be a dense set in a space $S$.

Let $f\colon S \to X$ be any quotient map that is constant on $D$, and suppose that $f$ maps every element of $D$ to $q$.

Let $y \in X\setminus\{q\}$.

Let $U$ be an open set about $y$, so $f^{-1}[U]$ is a non-empty open set.

Then $f^{-1}[U]$ contains an element, $b$, of $D$, so $q\in U$.

So we see that every non-empty open set in $X$ contains $q$, so $X$ cannot even be $T_1$, let alone Hausdorff.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

The topology is trivial: every open set in $\mathbb{R}$ contains a complete set of coset representatives for $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}$. So if $U\subseteq\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}$ is open and nonempty, $\pi^{-1}(U)$ is open in $\mathbb{R}$ and $\pi(\pi^{-1}(U))$ is all of $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Oh I see where my confusion is occuring. The answer uses $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}$ as the collection of cosets of $\mathbb{Q}$ where $\mathbb{R}$ is considered as a group, but the book I am using uses this notation for the concept of adjunction space, as mentioned in this link on Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotient_space under the tag adjunction space. Well, anyway the topologies in both senses are non-Hausdorff. :-) $\endgroup$ – smilingbuddha Aug 28 '13 at 2:27

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.