Sequential characterization of topology
$begingroup$
Let $X$ be any set, and consider the following two structures on $X$:
- A topology $T$ on $X$;
- For every sequence $(x_n) in {^mathbb{N}X}$, a subset $L(x_n) subseteq X$ of limits of $(x_n)$, satisfying the inclusion property: if $(y_n)$ can be identified with a subsequence of $(x_n)$ after finitely many terms, then $L(x_n) subseteq L(y_n)$.
It is clear that a topology implies a structure of the second kind. My question is, given such structure as in (2), does a topology exists satisfying it, and if so, is it unique?
Progress so far: Let's denote the structure (2) simply by $L$, and say that $L leq L'$ if $L(x_n) subseteq L'(x_n)$ for every sequence $(x_n)$ (it is a partial ordering). I'm trying to mime the case for metric spaces for proving existence.
Given $L$, we say some subset $U$ of $X$ is open if for every $x in U$ and every sequence $(x_n)$ s.t. $x in L(x_n)$, there exists some $n_0$ such as that $x_n in U$ for all $n > n_0$. We sure have $varnothing, X in T$. Closure under arbitrary unions is trivial, and so is closure under finite intersections by taking maxima over the indexes. So it definitly defines a topology $T$ on $X$. Now, let $L_T$ be the structure (2) induced by this topology $T$. By construction we have $L leq L_T$. I'm not sure yet how to prove the reverse inequality (though I'm sure that here the inclusion property comes into play, as it is necessary for the structure (2) to be induced by a topology).
I'm still not convinced that the inclusion property alone is powerful enough to prove uniqueness, though I still couldn't think of a counterexample and a sequent verifiable reformulation.
EDIT: we can have $L(x_n) = varnothing$ for all $(x_n)$, which is certainly a contradiction for $X neq varnothing$. An extra necessary hypothesis must be included $x in L(x_n)$ when $x_n = x$ is constant. Maybe it is enough now?
sequences-and-series general-topology limits
asked Dec 23 '18 at 18:01
Henrique Augusto SouzaHenrique Augusto Souza
1,313514
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $X$ be any set, and consider the following two structures on $X$:
- A topology $T$ on $X$;
- For every sequence $(x_n) in {^mathbb{N}X}$, a subset $L(x_n) subseteq X$ of limits of $(x_n)$, satisfying the inclusion property: if $(y_n)$ can be identified with a subsequence of $(x_n)$ after finitely many terms, then $L(x_n) subseteq L(y_n)$.
It is clear that a topology implies a structure of the second kind. My question is, given such structure as in (2), does a topology exists satisfying it, and if so, is it unique?
Progress so far: Let's denote the structure (2) simply by $L$, and say that $L leq L'$ if $L(x_n) subseteq L'(x_n)$ for every sequence $(x_n)$ (it is a partial ordering). I'm trying to mime the case for metric spaces for proving existence.
Given $L$, we say some subset $U$ of $X$ is open if for every $x in U$ and every sequence $(x_n)$ s.t. $x in L(x_n)$, there exists some $n_0$ such as that $x_n in U$ for all $n > n_0$. We sure have $varnothing, X in T$. Closure under arbitrary unions is trivial, and so is closure under finite intersections by taking maxima over the indexes. So it definitly defines a topology $T$ on $X$. Now, let $L_T$ be the structure (2) induced by this topology $T$. By construction we have $L leq L_T$. I'm not sure yet how to prove the reverse inequality (though I'm sure that here the inclusion property comes into play, as it is necessary for the structure (2) to be induced by a topology).
I'm still not convinced that the inclusion property alone is powerful enough to prove uniqueness, though I still couldn't think of a counterexample and a sequent verifiable reformulation.
EDIT: we can have $L(x_n) = varnothing$ for all $(x_n)$, which is certainly a contradiction for $X neq varnothing$. An extra necessary hypothesis must be included $x in L(x_n)$ when $x_n = x$ is constant. Maybe it is enough now?
sequences-and-series general-topology limits
asked Dec 23 '18 at 18:01
Henrique Augusto SouzaHenrique Augusto Souza
1,313514
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hope seems to be lost: mat.unimi.it/users/zanco/AnFunzionale/…
$endgroup$
– Henrique Augusto Souza
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
2
$begingroup$
Henrique: your very useful link shows that you aren't guaranteed to recover a topology from its notion of sequential convergence. That means there is no hope for uniqueness, but it leaves hope for an existence proof.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 23 '18 at 19:10
1
$begingroup$
this answer of mine might give you some pointers.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 23 '18 at 23:05
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $X$ be any set, and consider the following two structures on $X$:
- A topology $T$ on $X$;
- For every sequence $(x_n) in {^mathbb{N}X}$, a subset $L(x_n) subseteq X$ of limits of $(x_n)$, satisfying the inclusion property: if $(y_n)$ can be identified with a subsequence of $(x_n)$ after finitely many terms, then $L(x_n) subseteq L(y_n)$.
It is clear that a topology implies a structure of the second kind. My question is, given such structure as in (2), does a topology exists satisfying it, and if so, is it unique?
Progress so far: Let's denote the structure (2) simply by $L$, and say that $L leq L'$ if $L(x_n) subseteq L'(x_n)$ for every sequence $(x_n)$ (it is a partial ordering). I'm trying to mime the case for metric spaces for proving existence.
Given $L$, we say some subset $U$ of $X$ is open if for every $x in U$ and every sequence $(x_n)$ s.t. $x in L(x_n)$, there exists some $n_0$ such as that $x_n in U$ for all $n > n_0$. We sure have $varnothing, X in T$. Closure under arbitrary unions is trivial, and so is closure under finite intersections by taking maxima over the indexes. So it definitly defines a topology $T$ on $X$. Now, let $L_T$ be the structure (2) induced by this topology $T$. By construction we have $L leq L_T$. I'm not sure yet how to prove the reverse inequality (though I'm sure that here the inclusion property comes into play, as it is necessary for the structure (2) to be induced by a topology).
I'm still not convinced that the inclusion property alone is powerful enough to prove uniqueness, though I still couldn't think of a counterexample and a sequent verifiable reformulation.
EDIT: we can have $L(x_n) = varnothing$ for all $(x_n)$, which is certainly a contradiction for $X neq varnothing$. An extra necessary hypothesis must be included $x in L(x_n)$ when $x_n = x$ is constant. Maybe it is enough now?
sequences-and-series general-topology limits
asked Dec 23 '18 at 18:01
Henrique Augusto SouzaHenrique Augusto Souza
1,313514
$endgroup$
Let $X$ be any set, and consider the following two structures on $X$:
- A topology $T$ on $X$;
- For every sequence $(x_n) in {^mathbb{N}X}$, a subset $L(x_n) subseteq X$ of limits of $(x_n)$, satisfying the inclusion property: if $(y_n)$ can be identified with a subsequence of $(x_n)$ after finitely many terms, then $L(x_n) subseteq L(y_n)$.
It is clear that a topology implies a structure of the second kind. My question is, given such structure as in (2), does a topology exists satisfying it, and if so, is it unique?
Progress so far: Let's denote the structure (2) simply by $L$, and say that $L leq L'$ if $L(x_n) subseteq L'(x_n)$ for every sequence $(x_n)$ (it is a partial ordering). I'm trying to mime the case for metric spaces for proving existence.
Given $L$, we say some subset $U$ of $X$ is open if for every $x in U$ and every sequence $(x_n)$ s.t. $x in L(x_n)$, there exists some $n_0$ such as that $x_n in U$ for all $n > n_0$. We sure have $varnothing, X in T$. Closure under arbitrary unions is trivial, and so is closure under finite intersections by taking maxima over the indexes. So it definitly defines a topology $T$ on $X$. Now, let $L_T$ be the structure (2) induced by this topology $T$. By construction we have $L leq L_T$. I'm not sure yet how to prove the reverse inequality (though I'm sure that here the inclusion property comes into play, as it is necessary for the structure (2) to be induced by a topology).
I'm still not convinced that the inclusion property alone is powerful enough to prove uniqueness, though I still couldn't think of a counterexample and a sequent verifiable reformulation.
EDIT: we can have $L(x_n) = varnothing$ for all $(x_n)$, which is certainly a contradiction for $X neq varnothing$. An extra necessary hypothesis must be included $x in L(x_n)$ when $x_n = x$ is constant. Maybe it is enough now?
sequences-and-series general-topology limits
sequences-and-series general-topology limits
asked Dec 23 '18 at 18:01
Henrique Augusto SouzaHenrique Augusto Souza
1,313514
asked Dec 23 '18 at 18:01
Henrique Augusto SouzaHenrique Augusto Souza
1,313514
edited Dec 23 '18 at 18:14
Henrique Augusto Souza
asked Dec 23 '18 at 18:01
Henrique Augusto SouzaHenrique Augusto Souza
1,313514
asked Dec 23 '18 at 18:01
Henrique Augusto SouzaHenrique Augusto Souza
1,313514
asked Dec 23 '18 at 18:01
Henrique Augusto SouzaHenrique Augusto Souza
1,313514
1,313514
$begingroup$
Hope seems to be lost: mat.unimi.it/users/zanco/AnFunzionale/…
$endgroup$
– Henrique Augusto Souza
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
2
$begingroup$
Henrique: your very useful link shows that you aren't guaranteed to recover a topology from its notion of sequential convergence. That means there is no hope for uniqueness, but it leaves hope for an existence proof.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 23 '18 at 19:10
1
$begingroup$
this answer of mine might give you some pointers.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 23 '18 at 23:05
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hope seems to be lost: mat.unimi.it/users/zanco/AnFunzionale/…
$endgroup$
– Henrique Augusto Souza
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
2
$begingroup$
Henrique: your very useful link shows that you aren't guaranteed to recover a topology from its notion of sequential convergence. That means there is no hope for uniqueness, but it leaves hope for an existence proof.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 23 '18 at 19:10
1
$begingroup$
this answer of mine might give you some pointers.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 23 '18 at 23:05
$begingroup$
Hope seems to be lost: mat.unimi.it/users/zanco/AnFunzionale/…
$endgroup$
– Henrique Augusto Souza
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
$begingroup$
Hope seems to be lost: mat.unimi.it/users/zanco/AnFunzionale/…
$endgroup$
– Henrique Augusto Souza
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
2
2
$begingroup$
Henrique: your very useful link shows that you aren't guaranteed to recover a topology from its notion of sequential convergence. That means there is no hope for uniqueness, but it leaves hope for an existence proof.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 23 '18 at 19:10
$begingroup$
Henrique: your very useful link shows that you aren't guaranteed to recover a topology from its notion of sequential convergence. That means there is no hope for uniqueness, but it leaves hope for an existence proof.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 23 '18 at 19:10
1
1
$begingroup$
this answer of mine might give you some pointers.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 23 '18 at 23:05
$begingroup$
this answer of mine might give you some pointers.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 23 '18 at 23:05
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3050570%2fsequential-characterization-of-topology%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3050570%2fsequential-characterization-of-topology%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Hope seems to be lost: mat.unimi.it/users/zanco/AnFunzionale/…
$endgroup$
– Henrique Augusto Souza
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
2
$begingroup$
Henrique: your very useful link shows that you aren't guaranteed to recover a topology from its notion of sequential convergence. That means there is no hope for uniqueness, but it leaves hope for an existence proof.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 23 '18 at 19:10
1
$begingroup$
this answer of mine might give you some pointers.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 23 '18 at 23:05