Fine Topology on [0,1]: Equivalence to Euclidean Topology?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the equivalence of the fine topology and the Euclidean topology on the interval [0,1]. Participants explore the implications of convex functions and their continuity in relation to these topologies.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that in R, the fine topology is equivalent to the Euclidean topology due to the continuity of convex functions.
  • Another participant questions the meaning of 'equivalent' topologies and suggests that if it refers to the same open sets, it would be tautological.
  • A different participant points out that convex functions on [0,1] are discontinuous at the boundaries, raising doubts about their ability to generate the same topology as continuous functions.
  • One participant seeks clarification on the definition of the fine topology, asking if it is the initial topology with respect to all convex functions from X to R.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about the relationship between convex functions and the fine topology on [0,1], noting that since convex functions are not continuous on this interval, they may not generate the same topology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between convex functions and the topologies in question, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in understanding the definitions and implications of the fine topology, particularly regarding the continuity of convex functions on the interval [0,1].

attardnat
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Can anyone please help me with this because I'm really getting confused. Thanks!

In R, we know that fine topology is equivalent to the Euclidean topology as convex functions are continuous.

Now if instead of R we consider a subset of it say [0,1], the fine topology induced on [0,1] would it be equivalent to the Euclidean topology induced on [0,1] ?

Thanks once again
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you mean by 'equivalent' topologies?

I am not familiar with the fine topology, but if by equivalent topologies you simply mean 'the same topology' (i.e. the same open set), then it is of course a tautology.
 
yes i mean the same topology.
Convex functions on [0,1] are discontinuous at the boundaries so I don't understand how they generate the same topology as continuous functions.
 
Ah, so by 'induced on [0,1]' you don't mean the subspace topology. Could you define the fine topology for me? Is it the initial topology on X w.r.t. all convex functions X->R?
 
I am not sure if i understood you well (as I'm not very much familiar with topology)

What I am trying to ask is the following: convex functions on R generate the fine topology and convex functions on R are the continuous functions so obviosly they generate the same topology. But since on [0,1], convex functions are not continuous, can they generate the same topology?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K