New Reply

Is this a valid argument about box topology?

 
Share Thread Thread Tools
May2-12, 12:51 PM   #1
 

Is this a valid argument about box topology?


Given the following sequence in the product space R^ω, such that the coordinates of x_n are 1/n,

x1 = {1, 1, 1, ...}
x2 = {1/2, 1/2, 1/2, ...}
x3 = {1/3, 1/3, 1/3, ...}
...

the basis in the box topology can be written as ∏(-1/n, 1/n). However, as n becomes infinitely large, the basis converges to ∏(0, 0), which is a single set and not open. Therefore the sequence is not convergent in box topology.

Since there exists a basis that converges to ∏(x, x), for any element x of R^ω, a sequence in box topology does not converge to any element in R^ω.
 
PhysOrg.com
PhysOrg
mathematics news on PhysOrg.com

>> Mathematicians analyze social divisions using cell phone data
>> Can math models of gaming strategies be used to detect terrorism networks?
>> Mathematician proves there are infinitely many pairs of prime numbers less than 70 million units apart
May2-12, 04:20 PM   #2
 
Recognitions:
Science Advisor Science Advisor
Quote by Pippi View Post
However, as n becomes infinitely large, the basis converges to ∏(0, 0), which is a single set and not open. Therefore the sequence is not convergent in box topology.
To have a basis [itex] B [/itex] for [itex] R^\omega [/itex] don't you need to be able to represent any set in [itex] R^\omega [/itex] as a union of sets in [itex] B [/itex] , not merely the sets that are near {0,0,...}?

What kind of convergence are you talking about? Are you talking about a sequence of sets or a sequence of points? Under the usual definition of convergence, a sequence of points in a toplogical space that converges will converge to a point. There is no requirement that it converge to an open set.
 
May2-12, 05:44 PM   #3
 
I don't know the right terminology. x_n represents a point in R^ω that has infinite number of coordinates. I want to use the sequence that if each of the coordinate converges as n grows large, x_n converges to a point.

I want to show the difference between product topology and box topology using the sequence x_n = {1/n, 1/, 1/n, ..., 1/n, ... }. A textbook argument, if I read correctly, says that because 1/n eventually goes to 0, there is no open set in the box topology that contains (-δ, δ) in R, hence no function converges. Am I on the right track?
 
May2-12, 09:28 PM   #4
 
Recognitions:
Science Advisor Science Advisor

Is this a valid argument about box topology?


To get a clear answer, you're going to have state a clear question. You mention a sequence of points and then you talk about a function converging without explaining what function you mean.

If there is a textbook argument, then quote the argument. Quote it, don't just give a mangled summary. (Perhaps the discipline of copying it will make it clearer to you.)
 
May2-12, 09:50 PM   #5
 
Thanks but no thank you. You are not being helpful at all.
 
May2-12, 10:50 PM   #6
 
Blog Entries: 8
Recognitions:
Gold Membership Gold Member
Science Advisor Science Advisor
Retired Staff Staff Emeritus
Quote by Pippi View Post
Thanks but no thank you. You are not being helpful at all.
That is because your question is a bit weird. What does it mean for a basis to converge?? The only things which can converge in topology are sequences, nets and filters. Things like basises can't converge. Except if you're talking about a filter basis, but even then the OP makes little sense.
 
New Reply

Tags
box topology, converge, sequence, topology
Thread Tools


Similar Threads for: Is this a valid argument about box topology?
Thread Forum Replies
Sentential Logic: Is the argument valid? Calculus & Beyond Homework 4
Tell if this Argument is valid (Propositional Logic)? Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 1
Prove the argument form valid Calculus & Beyond Homework 4
valid argument ? Linear & Abstract Algebra 2
Valid Units of Measure for Trig Argument Introductory Physics Homework 5