Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mason Keller
1.(Theorem 19.2) In order to prove Theorem 19.2, one can use the results of Lemma 13.3
to show that the topology generated by the basis given in Theorem 19.2 (called the basis-
basis B
b
) is the same as the topology generated by the basis given in Theorem 19.1 (called
the open set-basis B
U
).
Now, let x be a point in
J
X
(B
U
)
(B
b
) for all J. Further,
recall that both
(B
U
) and
(B
b
) are sets in the same topology (X
(B
b
) is a basis for X
(B
U
) is
(B
b
), which as per the previous argument makes the relation x B
U
B
b
hold
for any B
b
containing some x.
To prove the other inclusion, one proceeds as before but instead of choosing
(B
U
) =
(B
b
),
one chooses
(B
b
) to be one of the basis elements that makes up
(B
U
) and contains x.
Such a basis element is guaranteed to exist, since the topology on X
is generated by the
basis of which
(B
b
) is an element of. This choice, then, satises the relation x B
b
B
U
for any B
U
containing some x.
Because these two relations hold, the bases generate equivalent topologies.
Now, to prove Theorem 19.2s results for the product topology, one can realize that all
the sets in these two bases are also elements of the basis for the box topology, and so the
construction proceeds in the exact same way. If one is not so clever, one can write out some
extraneous proof as such:
Let us use the notation of the previous argument and show that the relation x B
U
B
b
holds for any B
b
containing some x. As stated, the argument above holds for nitely many
(B
b
) = X
, which sug-
gests that a suitable choice for
(B
U
) is X
(B
U
) = X
. Conse-
quently a choice for
(B
b
) is any basis element in X
that contains x.
2. (Theorem 19.3) It should be clear that the box topology on just
diers at most
from the subspace topology it inherits from
has to be open for all U T. However, each U can be written as the union of products
of open sets in each . This implies that the subspace topology inherited from
has
that ( J)(
(U) A
is open in A
. A
are equivalent in the box topology. Because the box topology is ner
than the product, the theorem also holds for the product topology.
1
3.(Theorem 19.4) Let X
J
X
(x
1
)! =
(x
2
) for at least one J. Let choose on of these
particular for which they dier, and denote it as i. Now,
i
(x
1
) and
i
(x
2
) are distinct
points in X
i
, which is by hypothesis Hausdor. This means there are disjoint neighborhoods
of each point. Now, basis elements in the product space, which are indeed open sets in the
product space, have the form
J
U
J<i
X
D
1
J>i
X
where
D
1
is the disjoint neighborhood of
i
(x
1
) that exists by hypothesis. Similarly, i choose as a
neighborhood of x
2
J<i
X
D
2
J>i
X
where D
2
is the neighborhood of
i
(x
2
)
that is disjoint to
i
(x
1
). These two neighborhoods are disjoint, and have been constructed
for arbitrary distinct points x
1
and x
2
. This proves that the box topological product space is
Hausdor if the coordinate spaces are Hausdor. The result holds in the product topology
because it is coarser than the box topology.
5. (Theorem 19.6) (metaproof) In example two, Munkres gives an example of a function
for which each coordinate-function is continuous, but the function itself is not. This means
that coordinate-function continuity does not imply function continuity in the box topology.
By the language of problem ve, this implies that the other implication, namely that func-
tion continuity implies coordinate-function continuity, must hold in the box topology.
6.(Coordinate convergence is logically equivalent to point convergence) First, I choose to
answer the question in the box topology rst. Let us consider R
. Let
n
R
(
n
) = 1/n
for all Z
+
. Clearly each coordinate of this series converges to 0. However, note that
iZ
+
U
i
, U
i
= (
i
,
i
) is a neighborhood of the 0 vector that the coordinates would imply
n
converges to. If it were that
n
did converge to this point, then we would have some n
such that
1
n
(
i
,
i
)i, however, as i approaches innity, the set is 0, and there is no n
such that
1
n
{0}.
Let us consider the product topology on
J
X
J
B
such
that B
(
n
)
J
B
) = B
. Now, all
n
after some arbitrary N, by hypothesis, lay in this basis element (it is a neighborhood about
the supposed convergence point
end
). This implies that ( J)(n > N)(
(
n
) B
).
2
Each (
(
n
) is a series of points in the topology X
(that
is, by U), a dierent choice of U could generate any and all B
(
n
) B
). Open sets in X
J
X
,n
converge to at least some
,end
. We desire to show that
,end
=
end
is a conver-
gence point of
,n
=
n
. Equivalently, we wish to construct some N for an arbitrary
open set U about
end
in the product space such that for all (n > N)
n
U. Any U can
be expressed as the union of basis elements of the form
J
U
where U
dier from X
! = X
. However, these U
,end
. This coordinate series, by denition has some N