Non-Hausdorff Space Example: Learn Here

  • Thread starter Oxymoron
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Space
In summary: For a really trivial example, take X = {a, b, c}. Then {φ, {a}, {b}, {c}, {a, b}, {a, c}, {b, c}, {a, b, c}} is a topology for X. So is {φ, X}. So is {{a}, {b, c}}. So is {{a, b}, {b, c}}. So is {{a, b, c}}. So is {φ, X, {a}, {a, b, c}}. So is {φ, X, {a}, {
  • #1
Oxymoron
870
0
Can someone provide me with an example of a non-Hausdorff space. I can't seem to conjure one up :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The "indiscrete" space should work: Let X be any set, the topology consist only of the empty set and X itself. I'll leave it to you to show that that is a valid topology and that it is not Hausdorf.
 
  • #3
The real line with the 'half-infinite' topology is not Hausdorff. This is the topology with the sets {[a,->) | a is real}.
 
  • #4
The reason why I wanted an example of a non-Hausdorff space is one of convergence.

If I have sequence in a Hausdorff space, then the limit of this sequence is unique (ie. if it converges to A and B in a Hausdorff space then A = B).

But is the limit unique in a non-Hausdorff space? That is, in a non-Hausdorff space can a sequence have two, non-identical limits?
 
  • #5
limits in any non-hausdordff spave are not necessarily unique (though they may be).

It is important to remember waht it means for a seqquence to converge to something in an arbitrary topological space: x_n tends to x if for all open U with x in U then for all n sufficiently large x_n is in U.

Thus in the indsicrete topology every sequence tends to every point since there is only one open set (apart from the empty set).

Other non-hausdorff spaces include the zariski topology on R (or C or any field). A set is closed iff it is the set of zeroes of a polynomial. Thus the closed sets are precisely finite sets of points We can generalize to R^n (or C^n etc) with a bit of care. This is probably the most "naturally occurring" non-hausdorff space since it is the topology on the algebriac versions of Differential Manifolds (Algebraic varieties).

If a space is Hausdroff and x_n were to tend to x and y with x=/=y in its topology then there are disjoint open sets about x and y U and V say, and we know that all x_n for n sufficiently large are in U and V, but they are disjoint, contradiction, so there cannot be two distinct limits.

this is the second time today I've written that arguemtn out, though the first time was for ordinary metric spaces, well, R with the metric topology.
 
  • #6
Thanks for replying Matt.

Thus in the indsicrete topology every sequence tends to every point since there is only one open set (apart from the empty set).

Im sorry but I am struggling to understand this. :cry:
 
  • #7
If we consider the indiscrete topological space [itex](X,\tau)[/itex] where

[tex]\tau = \{\oslash, X\}[/tex]

is the topology on [itex]X[/itex]. Then for any sequence [itex]x_n[/itex], every point [itex]x[/itex] in the sequence is in [itex]X[/itex] (obviously), so [itex]x \in X[/itex]. Then [itex]x_n \rightarrow x[/itex], ie the sequence converges to every point in [itex]X[/itex]. So if [itex]a,b \, \in X[/itex] and [itex]a \neq b[/itex] then regardless, [itex]x_n \rightarrow a[/itex] and [itex]x_n \rightarrow b[/itex].

And this is because the only open set containing [itex]a,b[/itex] is [itex]X[/itex] (well it certainly isn't [itex]\oslash[/itex]). But [itex]X[/itex] also contains every point in [itex]x_n[/itex]. Therefore, in the indiscrete topological space, every sequence has every point of [itex]X[/itex] as a limit.

How does this sound?
 
  • #8
I just want to ask. Because we have defined the topology to be indiscrete, that means that the only open sets are the empty set and itself right? So open sets in X are determined by the topology on X? And a sequence [itex]x_n[/itex] converges to a point [itex]x[/itex] if each open neighbourhood of [itex]x[/itex] contains [itex]x_n [/itex] for [itex]n[/itex] sufficiently large. So does that mean if a sequence exists in the indiscrete topological space, then the elements of the sequence must reside in an open set containing [itex]x_n[/itex]. And the only open set containing any points is [itex]X[/itex] because, from the topology, every other set is not open, or empty.
 
  • #9
Oxymoron said:
So open sets in X are determined by the topology on X?

I need to sit down... A topology on set X is exactly a collection of open sets satisfying certain conditions (equivalently closed sets satisfying dual conditions).

And a sequence [itex]x_n[/itex] converges to a point [itex]x[/itex] if each open neighbourhood of [itex]x[/itex] contains [itex]x_n [/itex] for [itex]n[/itex] sufficiently large.

Again, that is the definition, yes.

So does that mean if a sequence exists in the indiscrete topological space, then the elements of the sequence must reside in an open set containing [itex]x_n[/itex].


Erm, since if (X,T) is any topological space (X the underlying set and T its topology) X is an element of T, then this statement is trivially true for all topological spaces.


And the only open set containing any points is [itex]X[/itex] because, from the topology, every other set is not open, or empty.


I don't understand what you're getting at. Please, for peace of mind, would you mind telling me what you think a topological space is?
 
  • #10
Oxymoron said:
I just want to ask. Because we have defined the topology to be indiscrete, that means that the only open sets are the empty set and itself right? So open sets in X are determined by the topology on X?
Fortunately, I'm already sitting down! If X is any set, the definition of "topology on X" is a collection of subsets of X such that:
(1) The empty set is in the collection.
(2) The set X itself is in the collection.
(3) The union of any subcollection of sets in the collection is also in the collection.
(4) The intersection of any finite subcollection of sets in the collection is also in the collection.
Yes, the definition of "open set" is "member of the topology" for X.
The "indiscrete" topology for any given set is just {φ, X} which you can easily see satisfies the 4 conditions above. In the indiscrete topology the only open sets are φ and X itself.
(For any set X, the collection of all subsets of X is also a topology for X, called the "discrete" topology. ALL subsets of X are open (and so also closed) in the discrete topology.)

And a sequence [itex]x_n[/itex] converges to a point [itex]x[/itex] if each open neighbourhood of [itex]x[/itex] contains [itex]x_n [/itex] for [itex]n[/itex] sufficiently large. So does that mean if a sequence exists in the indiscrete topological space, then the elements of the sequence must reside in an open set containing [itex]x_n[/itex].
? In any topology a point of a sequence is in some open set! It does happen that, in the discrete topology, the only open set is X itself so the entire sequence is in that set!

And the only open set containing any points is [itex]X[/itex] because, from the topology, every other set is not open, or empty.

Let {xn} be any sequence in X. Let x be any point of X. To show that {xn} converges to x, we need only observe that the only open set containing x (X itself) also contains every member of {xn}. With the indiscreet topology, every sequence converges to every member of X!

Exercise for the student: Reverse yourself and show that in the discreet topology, the only convergent sequences are the constant sequences!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

1. What is a non-Hausdorff space?

A non-Hausdorff space is a type of topological space in which there exist points that cannot be separated by disjoint open sets. This means that there are points in the space that cannot be isolated from each other by open sets, unlike in a Hausdorff space where all points can be separated by open sets.

2. Why is it important to understand non-Hausdorff spaces?

Non-Hausdorff spaces have many applications in mathematics and other fields, such as physics and computer science. They can be used to model more complex and non-intuitive spaces, and can also be used to study and understand the behavior of systems that exhibit non-Hausdorff properties.

3. Can you give an example of a non-Hausdorff space?

One example of a non-Hausdorff space is the Zariski topology on an algebraic variety. In this topology, the closed sets are defined as the zero sets of collections of polynomials. This space is non-Hausdorff because there exist points that cannot be separated by disjoint open sets.

4. How does a non-Hausdorff space differ from a Hausdorff space?

In a non-Hausdorff space, there exist points that cannot be separated by disjoint open sets, while in a Hausdorff space, all points can be separated in this way. Additionally, non-Hausdorff spaces do not satisfy the T2 separation axiom, which states that any two distinct points in a space can be separated by open sets. Hausdorff spaces, on the other hand, do satisfy this axiom.

5. Are there any real-world examples of non-Hausdorff spaces?

Yes, there are many real-world examples of non-Hausdorff spaces. Some examples include the spaces of continuous functions with the compact-open topology, the space of all measurable functions with the L1 topology, and the space of all compact subsets of a topological space with the Hausdorff metric. These spaces have applications in fields such as functional analysis and topology.

Similar threads

  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
820
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Back
Top