Convergence of a Sequence in a Finer Topology

Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5

Homework Statement


Clearly if a sequence of points ##\{x_n\}## in some space ##X## with some topology, then the sequence will also converge when ##X## is endowed with any coarser topology. I suspect this doesn't hold for endowment of ##X## with a finer topology, since a finer topology amounts to more open sets, decreasing the likelihood of convergence. However, I would like to build a counterexample to settle this matter.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



First, I am having a embarrassing confusion with quantifiers. The definition of convergence I am working is the following: ##x_n## converges to ##x## if and only if for every open neighborhood ##U## of ##x##, there exists ##N \in \mathbb{N}## such that ##x_n \in U## for all ##n \ge N##. Which of the two is the proper negation:

(1) ##x_n## does not converge to ##x## iff there exists an open neighborhood ##U## of ##x## such that ##x_n \notin U## for some ##n \ge N##

(2) ##x_n## does not converge to ##x## iff there exists an open neighborhood ##U## of ##x## such that ##x_n \notin U## for every ##n \ge N##

Once this is settled, my goal is to show that the sequence ##\frac{1}{n}## does not converge to ##0## in the lower limit topology (note, I don't actually know if this is the case; but I conjectured it on the basis that it is the simplest example).

EDIT: Perhaps this is easier. Just consider the indiscrete topology on ##\mathbb{R}##. Then every number in ##\mathbb{R}## is a limit of ##\frac{1}{n}##, but the sequence ##\frac{1}{n}## in the standard topology only has ##0## as its limit.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bashyboy said:
(1) ##x_n## does not converge to ##x## iff there exists an open neighborhood ##U## of ##x## such that ##x_n \notin U## for some ##n \ge N##

(2) ##x_n## does not converge to ##x## iff there exists an open neighborhood ##U## of ##x## such that ##x_n \notin U## for every ##n \ge N##
Neither of these are right.
xn does not converge to x iff there exists an open set U containing x such that for every N>0, there exists n>N with xn not in U.
EDIT: Perhaps this is easier. Just consider the indiscrete topology on ##\mathbb{R}##. Then every number in ##\mathbb{R}## is a limit of ##\frac{1}{n}##, but the sequence ##\frac{1}{n}## in the standard topology only has ##0## as its limit.
This is a good example to work with (sort of trivial, but that is ok for an example). Find a sequence that doesn't converge in the standard topology and show that it converges in the indiscrete topology.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top