For help, A simple question about topology

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Xian'an Jin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Topology
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of continuous bijections in the context of topology, specifically whether a continuous 1-1 and onto mapping from Euclidean 3-space to itself qualifies as a homeomorphism. Participants explore the implications of continuity and bijectiveness in relation to the continuity of inverses.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that a continuous 1-1 and onto mapping is a homeomorphism, while others clarify that a homeomorphism requires the continuity of the inverse as well.
  • It is noted that a continuous bijection from R to R is generally proven to be a homeomorphism, but this may not extend to R^3 without additional conditions.
  • One participant mentions a theorem suggesting that if a continuous bijection from R^n to R^n has first-order partial derivatives and a nonzero Jacobian, then its inverse is continuous.
  • Another participant discusses the necessity of proving that a map is proper in the context of R^2, indicating that the situation may be more complex than in R.
  • There is a discussion about the Jordan curve theorem and its application to proving the continuity of inverses in mappings from R^2 to R^2.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the applicability of certain theorems to R^3 and suggests looking up the generalized Jordan curve theorem.
  • Another participant mentions that a continuous bijection with a compact domain and a Hausdorff range is a homeomorphism, but points out that R^3 is not compact.
  • There is a request for clarification on the definition of a Jordan curve and its properties in relation to continuous mappings.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions under which a continuous bijection is a homeomorphism, particularly in relation to the continuity of the inverse. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the topic.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of continuity and compactness, as well as the unresolved nature of theorems applicable to higher dimensions like R^3.

Xian'an Jin
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Is a continuous 1-1 and onto mapping from the Euclidean 3-space to itself a homeomorphism? i.e. Is its inverse also continous?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Xian'an Jin said:
Is a continuous 1-1 and onto mapping from the Euclidean 3-space to itself a homeomorphism? i.e. Is its inverse also continous?

Yes, a function is bijective if it is a continuous 1-1 and onto mapping. If a function is bijective it's easy to show it has an inverse. A homeomorphism is basically a bijection between topological spaces. Since euclidean space is a topological space, it is a homeomorphism.
 
what said:
Yes, a function is bijective if it is a continuous 1-1 and onto mapping. If a function is bijective it's easy to show it has an inverse. A homeomorphism is basically a bijection between topological spaces. Since euclidean space is a topological space, it is a homeomorphism.
A function is bijective if it's 1-1 and onto. That's all - it has nothing to do with continuity. A homeomorphism is a continuous bijection whose inverse is continuous as well. A continuous bijection between topological spaces may as well have an inverse that isn't continuous.

In calculus it's usually proved that a continuous bijection f:R->R is a homeomorphism. I don't think this generalizes to R^3 though. IIRC, there's a theorem that says if f:R^n->R^n is a continuous bijection that has first-order partials and nonzero jacobian, then its inverse is continuous.
 
Last edited:
morphism said:
A function is bijective if it's 1-1 and onto. That's all - it has nothing to do with continuity. A homeomorphism is a continuous bijection whose inverse is continuous as well. A continuous bijection between topological spaces may as well have an inverse that isn't continuous.

Yes, that's it. My error is due to looking at the question and retyping some of it too quickly, sorry.
 
In general a continuous bijection with a compact domain will have a continuous inverse.
 
morphism said:
In calculus it's usually proved that a continuous bijection f:R->R is a homeomorphism.

What theorem is this? I don't recall it from calculus.
 
DeadWolfe said:
What theorem is this? I don't recall it from calculus.
It usually comes before the inverse function theorem. It's probably stated as: a function that is continuous and 1-1 on an interval has a continuous inverse.
 
for continuous bijective maps from R to R it is easy, since they are monotone.

for R^2 it isn't coming to me immediately yet. i think you have to prove the map is proper somehow, if it is.
 
ok. let p map to q (R^2-->R^2). want to show f^(-1) continuous at q.

take a disc centered at p, and by jordan curve theorem, the circular boundary maps to a closed loop that has q in its interior.

thus the image of the compact disc around p is a compact "disc" around q, with q in the interior.

then the continuous inverse of the restriction of the map to the compact disc, is also continuous as a map on all of R^2.

so yes.

whew! what about R^3? I guess th same is true, i.e. the image of a ball around p should map to a ball around q, and use the same argument.

so this seems to use the jordan theorem to argue that the image of a sphere separates R^3 into an inside and an outside. (provided the map was defined and bijective on all of R^3.)

i hope this is true. look up the generalized jordan curve theorem. [yep, hatcher, p.169.]

so this question is simple but difficult.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Sorry, delete it. Thanks
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Crosson said:
In general a continuous bijection with a compact domain will have a continuous inverse.

I know it, a contiunous bijection with a compact domain and a Hausdorff range is a homeomorphism. Unfortunately, here R^3 is not compact.
 
  • #12
In calculus it's usually proved that a continuous bijection f:R->R is a homeomorphism. [/QUOTE]

I think it can be proved by the following steps:
step 1: show that f is monotone
setp 2: a monotone continuous function has continouse inverse.

Is the sketch of proof right? and can you provide a detailed proof of this proposition.
 
  • #13
What is a Jordan curve

mathwonk said:
ok.
take a disc centered at p, and by jordan curve theorem, the circular boundary maps to a closed loop that has q in its interior.

Let C be the circle x^2+y^2=1 in R^2, f is continuous bijection from R^2 to R^2, is f(C) a Jordan curve? and what is a Jordan curve? what is its definition?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
7K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K