Difference between revisions of "Notes:Basis for a topology/Attempt 2"

From Maths
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "==Overview== Last time I tried to merge the definitions, which got very confusing! This time I shall treat them as separate things and go from there. ==Definitions== Here we w...")
 
m (Saving work)
Line 20: Line 20:
 
If we have a '''TBasis''' for a topological space then we may talk about its open sets differently:
 
If we have a '''TBasis''' for a topological space then we may talk about its open sets differently:
 
* {{M|1=\forall U\in\mathcal{P}(X)\big[U\in\mathcal{J}\iff\big(\forall p\in U\exists B\in\mathcal{B}[p\in B\wedge B\subseteq U]\big)\big]}}
 
* {{M|1=\forall U\in\mathcal{P}(X)\big[U\in\mathcal{J}\iff\big(\forall p\in U\exists B\in\mathcal{B}[p\in B\wedge B\subseteq U]\big)\big]}}
 +
==Facts==
 +
# {{M|\mathcal{B} }} is a '''GBasis''' of {{M|X}} inducing {{M|(X,\mathcal{J}')}} {{M|\implies}} {{M|\mathcal{B} }} is a '''TBasis''' for the {{M|(X,\mathcal{J}')}}
 +
# {{Top.|X|J}} is a [[topological space]] with a '''TBasis''' {{M|\mathcal{B} }} {{M|\implies}} {{M|\mathcal{B} }} is a '''GBasis''' and it generates {{Top.|X|J}}
 +
==Proof of facts==
 +
# {{M|\mathcal{B} }} is a '''GBasis''' of {{M|X}} inducing {{M|(X,\mathcal{J}')}} {{M|\implies}} {{M|\mathcal{B} }} is a '''TBasis''' for the {{M|(X,\mathcal{J}')}}
 +
#* Let {{M|\mathcal{B} }} be a '''GBasis''', suppose it generates the [[topological space]] {{M|(X,\mathcal{J}')}}, we will show it's also a '''TBasis''' of {{M|(X,\mathcal{J}')}}
 +
#*# {{M|\forall B\in\mathcal{B}[B\in\mathcal{J}']}} must be shown
 +
#*#* Let {{M|B\in\mathcal{B} }} be given.
 +
#*#** Recall {{M|U\in\mathcal{J}'\iff\forall x\in U\exists B'\in\mathcal{B}[x\in B'\wedge B'\subseteq U]}}
 +
#*#** Let {{M|x\in B}} be given.
 +
#*#*** Choose {{M|1=B':=B}}
 +
#*#**** {{M|x\in B'}} by definition, as {{M|1=x\in B'=B}} and
 +
#*#**** we have {{M|B\subseteq B}}, by the [[implies-subset relation]], {{iff}} {{M|\forall p\in B[p\in B]}} which is trivial.
 +
#*#** Thus {{M|B\in\mathcal{J}'}}
 +
#*#* Since {{M|B\in\mathcal{B} }} was arbitrary we have shown {{M|\forall B\in\mathcal{B}[B\in\mathcal{J}']}}
 +
#*# {{M|1=\forall U\in\mathcal{J}'\exists\{B_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in I}[\bigcup_{\alpha\in I}B_\alpha=U]}} must be shown
 +
#*#* Let {{M|U\in\mathcal{J}'}} be given.
 +
#*#** Then, as {{M|\mathcal{B} }} is a '''GBasis''', by definition of the open sets generated: {{M|\forall x\in X\exists B\in\mathcal{B}[x\in B\wedge B\subseteq U]}}
 +
#*#** Let {{M|p\in U}} be given
 +
#*#*** Define {{M|1=B_p}} to be the {{M|B}} that exists such that {{M|p\in B_p}} and {{M|B_p\subseteq U}}
 +
#*#** We now have an .... thing, like a sequence but arbitrary, {{M|(B_p)_{p\in U} }} or {{M|\{B_p\}_{p\in U} }} - I need to come down on a notation for this - such that:
 +
#*#*** {{M|\forall B_p\in(B_p)_{p\in U}[p\in B_p\wedge B_p\subseteq U]}}
 +
#*#** We must now show {{M|1=\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p=U}}, we can do this by showing {{M|\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p\subseteq U}} and {{M|\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p\supseteq U}}
 +
#*#**# {{M|\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p\subseteq U}}
 +
#*#**#* Using the [[union of subsets is a subset of the union]] we see:
 +
#*#**#** {{M|\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p\subseteq U]}}
 +
#*#**# {{M|U\subseteq\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p}}
 +
#*#**#* Using the [[implies-subset relation]] we see: {{M|U\subseteq\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p\iff\forall x\in U[x\in\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p]}}, we will show the RHS instead.
 +
#*#**#** Let {{M|x\in U}} be given
 +
#*#**#*** Recall, by definition of [[union]], {{M|x\in\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p\iff\exists q\in U[x\in B_q]}}
 +
#*#**#**** Choose {{M|1=q:=x}} then we have {{M|x\in B_x}} (as {{M|p\in B_p}} is one of the defining conditions of choosing each {{M|B_p}}!)
 +
#*#**#* Thus {{M|U\subseteq\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p}}
 +
#*#** We have shown {{M|1=\bigcup_{p\in U}B_p=U}}
 +
#*#* Since {{M|U\in\mathcal{J}'}} was arbitrary we have shown this for all {{M|U\in\mathcal{J}'}}
 +
#*# We have now shown {{M|\mathcal{B} }} is a '''TBasis''' but not of what topology! {{Warning|Not finished!}}
 +
#* This completes the proof.
 
==Notes==
 
==Notes==
 
<references group="Note"/>
 
<references group="Note"/>

Revision as of 09:19, 8 August 2016

Overview

Last time I tried to merge the definitions, which got very confusing! This time I shall treat them as separate things and go from there.

Definitions

Here we will use GBasis for a generated topology (by a basis) and TBasis for a basis of an existing topology.

GBasis

Let X be a set and BP(X) be a collection of subsets of X. Then we say:

  • B is a GBasis if it satisfies the following 2 conditions:
    1. xXBB[xB] - every element of X is contained in some GBasis set.
    2. B1,B2Bx B1B2B3B[B1B2(xB3B1B2)][Note 1][Note 2]

Then B induces a topology on X.

Let JInduced denote this topology, then:

  • UP(X)[UJInduced(pUBB[pBBU])]

TBasis

Suppose (X,J) is a topological space and BP(X) is some collection of subsets of X. We say:

  • B is a TBasis if it satisfies both of the following:
    1. BB[BJ] - all the basis elements are themselves open.
    2. UJ{Bα}αI[αIBα=U]

If we have a TBasis for a topological space then we may talk about its open sets differently:

  • UP(X)[UJ(pUBB[pBBU])]

Facts

  1. B is a GBasis of X inducing (X,J) B is a TBasis for the (X,J)
  2. (X,J) is a topological space with a TBasis B B is a GBasis and it generates (X,J)

Proof of facts

  1. B is a GBasis of X inducing (X,J) B is a TBasis for the (X,J)
    • Let B be a GBasis, suppose it generates the topological space (X,J), we will show it's also a TBasis of (X,J)
      1. BB[BJ] must be shown
        • Let BB be given.
          • Recall UJxUBB[xBBU]
          • Let xB be given.
            • Choose B:=B
              • xB by definition, as xB=B and
              • we have BB, by the implies-subset relation, if and only if pB[pB] which is trivial.
          • Thus BJ
        • Since BB was arbitrary we have shown BB[BJ]
      2. UJ{Bα}αI[αIBα=U] must be shown
        • Let UJ be given.
          • Then, as B is a GBasis, by definition of the open sets generated: xXBB[xBBU]
          • Let pU be given
            • Define Bp to be the B that exists such that pBp and BpU
          • We now have an .... thing, like a sequence but arbitrary, (Bp)pU or {Bp}pU - I need to come down on a notation for this - such that:
            • Bp(Bp)pU[pBpBpU]
          • We must now show pUBp=U, we can do this by showing pUBpU and pUBpU
            1. pUBpU
            2. UpUBp
              • Using the implies-subset relation we see: UpUBpxU[xpUBp], we will show the RHS instead.
                • Let xU be given
                  • Recall, by definition of union, xpUBpqU[xBq]
                    • Choose q:=x then we have xBx (as pBp is one of the defining conditions of choosing each Bp!)
              • Thus UpUBp
          • We have shown pUBp=U
        • Since UJ was arbitrary we have shown this for all UJ
      3. We have now shown B is a TBasis but not of what topology! Warning:Not finished!
    • This completes the proof.

Notes

  1. Jump up Note that xB3B1B2 is short for:
    • xB3B3B1B2
  2. Jump up Note that if B1B2 is empty (they do not intersect) then the logical implication is true regardless of the RHS of the } sign, so we do not care if we have xB3B3B1B2! Pick any xX and aany B3B!