Dictionary Order Topology on ##\mathbb{R}^2## Metrizable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bashyboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Topology
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on defining a metric on ##\mathbb{R}^2## that induces the dictionary order topology. The proposed metric is defined as $$d((x,y),(w,z)) = \begin{cases} \infty ,& x \neq w \\ |y-z| ,& x=w \\ \end{cases}$$. The author expresses concern about the validity of using ##\infty## in the metric definition. However, by restricting the radius of ##\epsilon##-balls to less than 1, the metric can be adjusted to ensure that the balls correspond to vertical strips, thus aligning with the basis elements of the dictionary order topology.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of metric spaces and their properties
  • Familiarity with the dictionary order topology
  • Knowledge of epsilon-delta definitions in topology
  • Basic concepts of basis elements in topological spaces
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of metric spaces and valid metric definitions
  • Study the dictionary order topology in depth
  • Explore the concept of basis elements in topology
  • Learn about epsilon-balls and their role in defining topological structures
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying topology, and anyone interested in the properties of metric spaces and order topologies.

Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5

Homework Statement


I am trying to show that there exists a metric on ##\mathbb{R}^2## that induces the dictionary order topology on the plane.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


If I recall correctly, vertical intervals in the plane form basis elements for the dictionary order topology. With this in mind, I am trying to define a metric such that the corresponding ##\epsilon##-balls are vertical strips. The only function that I could come up with is

$$d((x,y),(w,z)) = \begin{cases} \infty ,& x \neq w \\
|y-z| ,& x=w \\ \end{cases}
$$

Based on my work, it seems that this is a well-defined metric. However, somehow I feel that I am cheating by using ##\infty##. Is this in fact a valid metric?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Okay, I think I may have a way to "fix" this, though I would still be interested in knowing if the above defines a valid metric. When dealing with a metric induced topology whose basis elements are ##\epsilon##-balls, it suffices to look at those ##\epsilon##-balls with radius less than ##1##. Now, if we replace ##\infty## in the above function and confine ourselves to dealing with ##\epsilon##-balls of radius less than ##1## , then the metric will restrict the balls from containing points "off" the vertical line.

More precisely, if ##(a,b) \in B((x,y), \epsilon)## and ##a = x##, then ##d((x,y),(a,b)) = 1 > \epsilon##, a contradiction. So, if ##(a,b)## is a point in the ball, then necessarily ##a \neq x## and therefore ##d((x,y),(a,b)) = |y-a| < \epsilon## or ##a \in (y-\epsilon,y+\epsilon)##. This, of course, suggests that ##B((x,y),\epsilon) = \{x\} \times (y-\epsilon,y+\epsilon)##, which is a basis element of the dictionary order topology. In this case, ##1## effectively acts as ##\infty##.

As I mentioned above, I would still be interested in knowing whether the function in my first post defines a valid metric.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
4K