Continuity in Half Interval Topology for x^2 Function

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Slats18
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the continuity of the function f: R -> R, defined as x -> x^2, when the domain and codomain are equipped with the Half interval topology (or Lower Limit topology). Participants explore the implications of this topology on the function's continuity, particularly regarding the pre-images of certain sets.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the continuity of the function by noting that intervals in the negative part of the real line, such as [x^2, x^2 + r), may not have pre-images, suggesting a potential issue with continuity.
  • Another participant asserts that every set has a pre-image, challenging the initial concern about negative intervals.
  • A participant reflects on their assumption that negative intervals do not have pre-images, indicating that if this assumption is incorrect, it would weaken their argument against continuity.
  • There is a request for clarification on the pre-image of the interval [x, x + r), prompting further exploration of the function's behavior.
  • One participant proposes that the pre-image of [x, x + r) could be the union of intervals involving both positive and negative square roots, but acknowledges that this set is not open in the Half interval topology.
  • Another participant suggests that the mapping from R to R implies that certain pre-images may not be defined, using the example of the interval [-1, 0) to illustrate their point.
  • A later reply corrects the misunderstanding, stating that the pre-image of the mentioned interval is empty, thus reinforcing the idea that pre-images are always defined.
  • One participant admits to confusion between topology and complex analysis, indicating the complexity of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the continuity of the function under the Half interval topology, with some questioning the existence of pre-images for negative intervals while others assert that pre-images are always defined. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these points on the function's continuity.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the behavior of pre-images under the Half interval topology, particularly for negative intervals. The discussion also reflects a mix of concepts from topology and complex analysis, which may contribute to confusion among participants.

Slats18
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Is the function f: R -> R, x -> x^2 continuous when the domain and codomain are given the Half interval topology? (Or Lower Limit topology).

I'm not sure where to go with this. On inspection, I know that the intervals are open sets, so preservance of open sets in preimages are defined for x > 0. But what if there is a set [x^2,x^2+r) that is in the negative part of the real line, there is no pre-image for this set. Is there something I'm missing, or just not realizing (most likely the second one)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Slats18 said:
But what if there is a set [x^2,x^2+r) that is in the negative part of the real line, there is no pre-image for this set.
Every set has a pre-image.

Is there something I'm missing
You don't seem to have missed any elements of the pre-image...


preservance of open sets in preimages are defined for x > 0
Proof?
 
It was only by inspection, assuming that any sets in the negative real line for this particular function don't have pre-images in the real line. If that assumption is wrong, then I've got nothing to go on to prove it's not continuous, so it must be, but that's a very weak justification.
 
Hi Slats18 :smile:

Can you tell me what f^{-1}([x,x+r[) is?
 
Sorry for the really late reply, been busy with other topological concerns, namely product topologies haha.

I'm completely blanking on this at the moment, no matter how interesting topology is, it just doesn't stick. Would it be [sqrt(x),sqrt(x) + r) ?
 
Not exactly. You'll need to figure out what f-1(x) and f-1(x+r) are (there are multiple values). Then you need to figure out what happens to the points between x and x+r...
 
On further, concentrated inspection, given [x,x+r) the pre-image of this is
( -(sqrt(x+r)),-(sqrt(x)) ]U[ sqrt(x),sqrt(x+r) )
which isn't open as -sqrt(x) is an element of the pre-image, but there is no r > 0 such that [-sqrt(x),r) is an element of the pre-image as well.
 
Looks right to me!
 
Could it be also said, not neccessarily proven, that because the mapping is from R to R, the pre-image is not defined for certain R and hence, not continuous?
Ex: Take the interval [-1,0). The preimage of this is obviously in the complex plane, hence not in R.
 
  • #10
Slats18 said:
Could it be also said, not neccessarily proven, that because the mapping is from R to R, the pre-image is not defined for certain R and hence, not continuous?
Ex: Take the interval [-1,0). The preimage of this is obviously in the complex plane, hence not in R.

The pre-image is always defined. The pre-image of the set you mention is empty:

f^{-1}([-1,0[)=\emptyset
 
  • #11
Ohh, duh, of course haha. My mistake, I'm doing topology and complex analysis so sometimes the two subjects mix haha.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K