Open set (equivalent definitions?)

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter center o bass
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definitions Set
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definitions of open sets in the context of topology, specifically examining whether two definitions are equivalent: one based on the existence of open disks and the other based on unions of open disks. The scope includes theoretical aspects of topology and potential implications for different types of topological spaces.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents two definitions of open sets and questions their equivalence, particularly in relation to whether the space ##X## needs to be Hausdorff.
  • Another participant provides a link to a proof that may support the equivalence of the definitions.
  • A different participant asserts that the definitions are equivalent if the topological space is metrizable and notes that every metric space satisfies the Hausdorff axiom.
  • Another participant expands the discussion by describing the general properties of open subsets in a topological space, introducing the concept of a basis for open sets.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions under which the definitions of open sets are equivalent, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved regarding the necessity of the Hausdorff condition or metrizability.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the topological space ##X##, particularly concerning its properties like being Hausdorff or metrizable, which are not fully explored in the discussion.

center o bass
Messages
545
Reaction score
2
I've seen open sets ##S## of a bigger set ##X## being defined as

1) for every ##x\in S## one can find an open disk ##D(x,\epsilon)## centered at ##x## of radius ##\epsilon## such that ##D## is entirely contained in ##S##. Where

$$D(x,\epsilon)= \left\{y \in X: d(x,y) < \epsilon\right\}$$
and ##d## is a metric.

2) An open set is a set that can be written as a union of open disks.

Are these two definitions equivalent in general? Or does it require ##X## to be Hausdorff. If they are in general equivalent, can you outline a proof?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I found a proof here:
http://people.hofstra.edu/stefan_waner/diff_geom/openballs.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The two definitions are equivalent if the topological space in question is metrizable.

I recommend proving for yourself that every metric space satisfies the Hausdorff axiom.
 
More generally, the open subsets of a topological space ##X ## are , or can be, any collection of subsets of ## X## that are closed under unions and closed under finite intersection, and the collection includes the whole space ## X## and the empty set. You then have a sub -collection of the collection of open sets that is called a basis, so that for every element ##x ## is an open set ## U## , there is a basis element ##B## with ## x ## contained in ## B ##, and ## B \subset U ##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K