0 like 0 dislike
The question is about the proof that \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R} ^{ \omega }\) is not metrizable in the box Topology. The test is using a series method to show this. For the record: Let X be a Topological space. Let \(\displaystyle A \subset X\). If there is a sequence of points of A converging to x then \(\displaystyle x \in \bar{A}\). The converse holds if X is metrizable. Click to expand... The proof that \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R} ^{ \omega }\) is not metrizable in the box Topology is as follows: We shall show that the sequence lemma (above) does not hold for \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R} ^{ \omega }\). Let A be the subset of \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R} ^{ \omega }\) consisting of those points all of whose coordinates are positive. \(\displaystyle A = \{ (x_1, ~ x_2, ~ \text{...}) | x_i > 0 ~ \forall ~ i \in Z_+ \}\) Let \(\displaystyle \textbf{0}\) be the origin in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R} ^{ \omega }\), that is, the point (0, 0, ...) each of whose coordinates is zero. In the box Topology, \(\displaystyle \textbf{0}\) belongs to \(\displaystyle \bar{A}\); for if \(\displaystyle B = (a_1, ~ b_1) \times (a_2, ~b_2) \times \text{ ...}\) is any basis element containing \(\displaystyle \mathbb{0}\) then B intersects A. For instance, the point \(\displaystyle \left ( \dfrac{1}{2} b_1 , ~ \dfrac{1}{2} b_2, \text{ ...} \right )\) belongs to \(\displaystyle B \cap A\). But we assert that there is no sequence of points of A converging to \(\displaystyle \mathbf{0}\). For let \(\displaystyle ( \textbf{a}_n )\) be a sequence of points of A, where \(\displaystyle \textbf{a}_n = (x_{1n}, ~ x_{2n}, \text{ ...} )\). Every coordinate \(\displaystyle x_{in}\) is positive, so we can construct a basis element B' for the box Topology on \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R} ^{ \omega }\) by setting \(\displaystyle B' = ( - x_{11}, x_{11} ) \times ( -x_{22}, x_{22} ) \times \text{...}\) Then B' contains the origin \(\displaystyle \mathbf{0}\), but it contains no member of the sequence \(\displaystyle ( \textbf{a}_n )\); the point \(\displaystyle \textbf{a}_n\) cannot belong to B' because its nth coordinate \(\displaystyle x_{nn}\) does not belong to the interval \(\displaystyle ( - x_{nn}, x_{nn} )\). Hence the sequence \(\displaystyle ( \textbf{a}_n )\) cannot converge to \(\displaystyle \textbf{0}\) in the box Topology and thus \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R} ^{ \omega }\) cannot be metrized in the box Topology. Click to expand... I can understand this proof. But, if no member of the sequence \(\displaystyle ( \textbf{a}_n )\) is in B' then why not just choose another basis element? Let \(\displaystyle x_{in} = 1/n\) and B'' = (-1, 1) x (-1, 1) x ... I don't see why we can't just choose a basis element that will work. Clearly I'm missing something fundamental. Thanks! -Dan
by

Please log in or register to answer this question.

0 like 0 dislike
MacstersUndead said: B'' bounds \(\displaystyle (a_n)\) and is a neighborhood of 0, but we need to show that "every neighbourhood of 0 contains all but finitely many points of the sequence." (Henno Brandsma from the link above) Click to expand... Ahhhh! "every". That's the word I was missing! Thanks! -Dan
by
0 like 0 dislike
Going to give helping a college try. I didn't take differential geometry. I think using that \(\displaystyle x_n = 1/n\) converging to 0 is throwing us off, but I'll use it to work with an example. If you let \(\displaystyle x_{in} = 1/n\) then you have points such as \(\displaystyle a_1 = (x_{11}, x_{21}, ...) = (1, 1, 1, ...)\). B' = (-1, 1) x (-1/2, 1/2) x ... B'' = (-1, 1) x (-1, 1) x ... From here, $\Bbb R^{\omega}$ in the box topology is not metrizable , my initial reaction that it parallels Cantor's famous Diagonalization Proof was justified. B' is a construction to show that \(\displaystyle (a_n)\) cannot converge to 0 in the box topology. B'' bounds \(\displaystyle (a_n)\) and is a neighborhood of 0, but we need to show that "every neighbourhood of 0 contains all but finitely many points of the sequence." (Henno Brandsma from the link above) I think that's the key here. We only need to construct the counterexample B' to show there is at least one neighborhood that contains no point of the sequence \(\displaystyle (a_n)\)
by
Welcome to AskTheTask.com, where understudies, educators and math devotees can ask and respond to any number related inquiry. Find support and replies to any numerical statement including variable based math, geometry, calculation, analytics, geometry, divisions, settling articulation, improving on articulations from there, the sky is the limit. Find solutions to numerical problems. Help is consistently 100 percent free!

Questions

No related questions found