Exploring Metrics and Topologies: A Summary of their Relationship

  • Thread starter friend
  • Start date
In summary: D}##. And can you clarify what you mean by "signature"?In summary, topologies and metrics are both structures that can be put on sets to define a notion of "closeness". Every metric space is a topological space, but not every topological space can be a metric space. Urysohn's metrization theorem states that if a topology on a set is Hausdorff, regular, and second-countable, then there exists a unique metric that gives rise to that topology. This means that for a given topology, a corresponding metric can be constructed with certain properties. However
  • #1
friend
1,452
9
I could use some insight in the form of a summary.

Can the topology of a manifold determine the metric use on it? Or is the metric completely independent of topology and coordinates systems?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The concept of a coordinate system has no meaning for arbitrary metric spaces; that is something we work with on ##C^n## manifolds. Every metric space is a topological space; the metric naturally determines a topology on the space by generating one through the base of open balls of the metric. On the other hand, not every topological space is a metric space; this is where metrization theorems come in.
 
  • #3
WannabeNewton said:
Every metric space is a topological space; the metric naturally determines a topology on the space by generating one through the base of open balls of the metric.

It is also possible for different metrics to generate the same topology.
 
  • #4
Thank you. So I'm not sure, which came first a topology or the metric. It would seem to me that you cannot have a metric until you first have a set of points to form a distance function onto. But perhaps that doesn't require the points to be a topology.
 
  • #5
friend said:
Thank you. So I'm not sure, which came first a topology or the metric. It would seem to me that you cannot have a metric until you first have a set of points to form a distance function onto. But perhaps that doesn't require the points to be a topology.

Metrics and topologies are both structures which can be put on arbitrary non-empty sets in order to define a notion of "closeness". Having done that one can then define notions of convergence of sequences and continuity of functions.

There is a sense in which topological spaces are more general than metric spaces, in as much as every metric space is a topological space but not every topological space can be a metric space.
 
  • #6
Do the separation axioms on a topology imply a metric? If there is a continuous function from one point or set to another, doesn't that continuous function imply a measure between points, namely the continuous function has a different value for one point than for another, perhaps only for two point very close to each other?

And more generally, can you have a function on points without a metric between them. I mean, if there is a continuous function, then df/dx can be defined, and dx is a distance, right?
 
  • #7
friend said:
Do the separation axioms on a topology imply a metric? If there is a continuous function from one point or set to another, doesn't that continuous function imply a measure between points, namely the continuous function has a different value for one point than for another, perhaps only for two point very close to each other?

Urysohn's metrization theorem does exactly this. It says that if a topology on [itex]X[/itex] is Hausdorff (a separation condition), regular (a separation condition), and second-countable (a condition stating that the topology isn't too rich), then there exists a metric on on [itex]X[/itex] giving rise to said topology.
 
  • #8
economicsnerd said:
Urysohn's metrization theorem does exactly this. It says that if a topology on [itex]X[/itex] is Hausdorff (a separation condition), regular (a separation condition), and second-countable (a condition stating that the topology isn't too rich), then there exists a metric on on [itex]X[/itex] giving rise to said topology.

When you say, "giving rise to said topology", that seems confusing to me. Your first statements make it sound as though the topology already exists, with certain properties such as Hausdorff, etc. So would it be sufficient to say, ",then there exists a metric on X", without the rest of the sentence?
 
Last edited:
  • #9
friend said:
When you say, "giving rise to said topology", that seems confusing to me. Your first statements make it sound as though the topology already exists, with certain properties such as Hausdorff, etc. So would it be sufficient to say, ",then there exists a metric on X", without the rest of the sentence?

The phrase "giving rise to a topology" means there exists a metric, such that the topology induced by said metric, is equivalent to the original topology you started with.

So to be precise: you have a set ##T## with topology ##\mathcal{T}##. Now ##\mathcal{T}## is metrisable if and only if there exists metric ##d## (which induces a metric ##\mathcal{D}## via open balls) satisfying ##\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{D}##.
 
  • #10
friend said:
And more generally, can you have a function on points without a metric between them. I mean, if there is a continuous function, then df/dx can be defined, and dx is a distance, right?

A function is a purely set theoretic concept so no there is no need for a notion of distance whatsoever. Also, you need the notion of differentiability to define derivatives, continuity isn't enough. For continuity you just need a topology but for differentiability you need a ##C^n## differentiable structure (##n \geq 1##). Finally, ##dx## has absolutely no relation to distance.
 
  • #11
pwsnafu said:
The phrase "giving rise to a topology" means there exists a metric, such that the topology induced by said metric, is equivalent to the original topology you started with.

So to be precise: you have a set ##T## with topology ##\mathcal{T}##. Now ##\mathcal{T}## is metrisable if and only if there exists metric ##d## (which induces a metric ##\mathcal{D}## via open balls) satisfying ##\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{D}##.

"a metric", you say. Is there a way to discern what kind of metric it is for a given topology, or what signature the metric might have? Or does this theorem only state that a metric can be constructed. Or does this mean that you can construct a metric of your chosing?
 
  • #12
pwsnafu said:
So to be precise: you have a set ##T## with topology ##\mathcal{T}##. Now ##\mathcal{T}## is metrisable if and only if there exists metric ##d## (which induces a topology ##\mathcal{D}## via open balls) satisfying ##\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{D}##.

For no more cofusing arise :)
 

1. What is the importance of exploring metrics and topologies in science?

Exploring metrics and topologies is crucial in science as it allows us to understand the relationships and patterns between different variables and elements in a system. By studying metrics and topologies, scientists can identify key factors that influence a system and make predictions about its behavior.

2. How are metrics and topologies related?

Metrics and topologies are closely related in that they both involve the measurement and analysis of relationships between different components within a system. Metrics refer to the quantitative measures of these relationships, while topologies refer to the spatial or structural patterns that emerge from these relationships.

3. What are some common metrics used in scientific research?

Some common metrics used in scientific research include distance, density, frequency, and correlation. These metrics can be measured and analyzed in various ways, depending on the specific research question and type of data being collected.

4. What is the role of topology in understanding complex systems?

Topology plays a crucial role in understanding complex systems as it allows us to identify and visualize the underlying patterns and connections between different components in a system. By studying topology, scientists can gain a deeper understanding of how these components interact and influence one another.

5. How can exploring metrics and topologies contribute to solving real-world problems?

Exploring metrics and topologies can provide valuable insights into solving real-world problems by helping us identify key factors and relationships that contribute to the problem. By understanding these metrics and topologies, scientists can develop more effective strategies and solutions to address the issue at hand.

Similar threads

  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
8
Views
436
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top