1
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ be two disjoint copies of $\mathbb{R}$, that is say $X = (\{a\} \times \mathbb{R}) \cup (\{b\} \times \mathbb{R})$ for real numbers $a<b$ and consider X as a subspace of $\mathbb{R} \times \mathbb{R}$. Define an equivalence relation by $a \times t \sim b \times t$ for all $t \neq 0$. Show that the quotient space $X^{*}$ determined by this equivalence relation is locally Hausdorff, but not Hausdorff.

Definition of Locally Hausdorff: For any $x$ in $X$ there is a neighborhood $U$ of $x$ such that $U$, with the subspace topology, is Hausdorff.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Well we know all open subsets of X* are not necessairly disjoint. I just can't find a way to prove that their intersections are nonempty. $\endgroup$ – KangHoon You Oct 15 '13 at 4:45
1
$\begingroup$

HINT: $X^*$ is almost homeomorphic to $\Bbb R$; there is exactly one pair of points in $X^*$ that cannot be separated by disjoint open sets, and knowing that should make the pair easy to find.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Is the pair when a and b are equal? $\endgroup$ – KangHoon You Oct 15 '13 at 5:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @KangHoonYou: I don’t know what you mean: $a$ and $b$ aren’t equal. $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Oct 15 '13 at 5:19
  • $\begingroup$ Is the pair (a,0) and (b,0)? $\endgroup$ – KangHoon You Oct 16 '13 at 3:34
  • $\begingroup$ @KangHoonYou: Yes, it is. Can you see why they don’t have disjoint nbhds? $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Oct 16 '13 at 3:37
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, is it because these points are not part of the equivalence class? $\endgroup$ – KangHoon You Oct 16 '13 at 3:42

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.