Glueing together normal topological spaces at a closed subset

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the construction of a new topological space by "glueing together" two normal topological spaces at a closed subset, specifically exploring the properties of this new space, particularly its normality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the construction of a topological space from two normal spaces X and Y using a continuous map from a closed subset A of X to Y, defining an equivalence relation for the glueing process.
  • Another participant identifies the resulting space as an adjunction space, noting that it forms a pushout in the category of topological spaces and suggests that the normality of X and Y aids in separating closed sets in the new space.
  • A different participant expresses a desire to understand the proof of normality without relying on abstract concepts, proposing to examine closed sets in the disjoint union of X and Y and construct open sets in X and Y that contain these closed sets.
  • One participant advises against separating closed sets using open sets and instead suggests using continuous functions, indicating that this approach is more aligned with the abstract framework of quotient topology.
  • A later reply expresses gratitude, indicating a moment of clarity regarding the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing preferences for approaches to proving the normality of the constructed space, with some favoring a more concrete method while others advocate for a more abstract perspective. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the preferred method of proof.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to the quotient topology and the properties of adjunction spaces, but does not resolve the specific mathematical steps required to prove the normality of the constructed space.

conquest
Messages
132
Reaction score
4
Hi all!

My question is the following. Suppose we have two normal topological spaces X and Y and we have a continuous map from a closed subset A of X to Y. Then we can construct another topological space by "glueing together" X and Y at A and f(A). By taking the quotient space of the disjoint union of X and Y by the equivalence relation that

x is equivalent to y if:

1) x=y
2) x,y are elements of A and f(x)=f(y)
or
3) x is an element of A and y is an element of Y and f(x)=y
or x is an element of Y and y is an element of A and x=f(y).

My question is how can you prove that this constructed space is again normal?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The space obtained from this construction is called an adjunction space and is typically denoted by ##X \cup_f Y##. It forms a pushout in the category of topological spaces. With this and the normality of X and Y in mind, it's not too difficult to show that you can separate closed sets in ##X \cup_f Y## by a continuous function.
 
Okay I believe this, but I would rather find a way to prove it without using any abstract non-sense so that I have an idea of where it is coming from.

So basically the question is if I have non-intersecting closed sets in this adjunction I look at the pre-image in the disjoint union of X and Y (where they are again closed and non-intersecting). Since I know X and Y are normal I can construct open sets now in both X and Y that don't intersect and contain the earlier closed sets (i.e. definition of normal).
but how then do I make sure that when I project them onto the adjunction they are again open and non-intersecting?
 
The abstract nonsense here is just a reformulation of what it means to give a space the quotient topology, so it's really not so abstract.

It's probably best not to try to separate by open sets, but to separate with continuous functions, like I mentioned in my post. This is where the abstract nonsense (which again is not so abstract) will be helpful.
 
aaah thank you!

Suddenly it all makes sense thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K