Undergrad A non-empty intersection of closures of level sets implies discontinuity

  • Thread starter Thread starter pasmith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Uniqueness
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the conditions under which a function f: X to Y is discontinuous at points in the non-empty intersection of closures of level sets, specifically when distinct points c and c' in Y are involved. It is noted that the statement holds in locally Euclidean spaces, but questions arise regarding its validity in more general topological spaces. The conversation highlights that if X is discrete or Y is indiscrete, f remains continuous. A proposed method for demonstrating discontinuity involves constructing sequences converging to the same limit in X, leading to different limits in Y, which suggests the necessity of the Hausdorff condition for Y. The possibility of using the weaker preregularity condition is also raised, prompting further exploration of its implications in non-Hausdorff spaces.
pasmith
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
3,342
Reaction score
1,886
Let X and Y be topological spaces, and suppose f: X \to Y is such that there exist distinct points c and c&#039; of Y such that <br /> S = \overline{f^{-1}(\{c\})} \cap \overline{f^{-1}(\{c&#039;\})} \neq \varnothing. What conditions must be placed on X and Y so that it follows that f is discontinuous at each point of S? (Note that f^{-1}(\{c\}) \cap f^{-1}(\{c&#039;\}) is necessarily empty: a function cannot take more than one value at any point of its domain.)

The statement appears to hold if X and Y are (locally) Euclidean, as for example <br /> \mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R} : (x,y) \mapsto \begin{cases} \frac{x^2 - y^2}{x^2+ y^2} &amp; (x,y) \neq (0,0) \\ \mbox{(any real number)} &amp; (x,y) = (0,0) \end{cases} in the limit (x,y) \to (0,0) or <br /> [0, \infty) \to \mathbb{R} : x \mapsto \begin{cases} \sin (x^{-1}) &amp; x \neq 0 \\<br /> \mbox{(any real number)} &amp; x = 0 \end{cases} in the limit x \to 0, but does it hold between more general spaces?

We do have the following constraints:
  • If X is discrete, then f is necessarily continuous.
  • If Y is indiscrete, then f is necessarily continuous.

My idea is that for each x \in S we can construct two distinct sequences, x_n \in f^{-1}(\{c\}) and x_n&#039; \in f^{-1}(\{c&#039;\}) having x as their common limit, so that <br /> \lim_{n \to \infty} f(x_n) = c \neq c&#039; = \lim_{n \to \infty} f(x_n&#039;) and f is discontinuous at x. But this assumes that limits in X and Y are unique.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
pasmith said:
My idea is that for each x \in S we can construct two distinct sequences, x_n \in f^{-1}(\{c\}) and x_n&#039; \in f^{-1}(\{c&#039;\}) having x as their common limit, so that <br /> \lim_{n \to \infty} f(x_n) = c \neq c&#039; = \lim_{n \to \infty} f(x_n&#039;) and f is discontinuous at x. But this assumes that limits in X and Y are unique.
That works. It points us towards requiring the Hausdorff condition for space ##Y##, which is perhaps the most commonly required condition in topology - so likely what the examiner was aiming for.
I wonder whether the weaker condition of preregularity would suffice. To investigate that we'd need to consider what happens in a preregular, non-Hausdorff space where the above points ##c## and ##c'## are not topologically distinguishable.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K