Topology

Uploaded Last edited

Notation and Conventions

  • A topological space is a pair (X,T)(X, \mathscr T), but henceforth we may omit mentioning T\mathscr T and simply say XX is a topological space. Of course, T\mathscr T, a topology on XX, is still there.
  • For a point p∈Xp \in X we say that UU is an open set around pp if p∈Up \in U. This is just to help write more intuitive sentences.
  • Saying AA is open is equivalent to saying A∈TA \in \mathscr T. So we might simply use open sets to refer to the (sub)sets in the topology T\mathscr T. It is important to note that the concept of “open sets” is therefore dependent on the choice of topology T\mathscr T on XX.

1 - Topological Spaces

Definition (Topological Space): A set XX and a collection of subsets of XX, (called open sets) T\mathscr T is a topological space if:

  • ∅,X∈T\emptyset, X \in \mathscr T
  • if Aα∈TA_\alpha \in \mathscr T is an arbitrary collection of open sets, for each α∈I\alpha \in I (where II is any index set), ⋃α∈IAα∈T\bigcup_{\alpha \in I} A_{\alpha} \in \mathscr T. That is, arbitrary union of open sets, is open.
  • Similarly, for a finite collection of open sets Ai∈TA_i \in \mathscr T, the intersection ⋂i=1nAi∈T\bigcap_{i=1}^n A_i \in \mathscr T. That is, finite intersection of open sets are open.

Definition (Neighborhood): Given a topological space (X,T)(X,\mathscr T), and a point p∈Xp \in X, then VV is a neighborhood around pp if there is an open set UU around pp that is contained in VV. More formally, VV is a neighborhood if p∈U⊂V⊂Xp \in U \subset V \subset X, where U∈TU \in \mathscr T. The set of all neighborhoods of pp is denoted as N(p)N(p).

Definition (Metric Space): A set XX with a distance function d:X×X→R+∪{0}d: X \times X \rightarrow \mathbb R^+ \cup \{0\} is a metric space if:

  • d(x,y)=0  ⟺  x=yd(x,y) = 0 \iff x = y (only identical points have zero distance).
  • d(x,y)=d(y,x)d(x,y) = d(y,x) (symmetry of distance).
  • d(x,z)+d(z,y)≥d(x,y)d(x,z) + d(z,y) \ge d(x,y) (triangle inequality).

2 - Limit Points, Closed Sets, and Closure

Definition (Limit Point): Let (X,T)(X, \mathscr T) be a topological space and S⊂XS \subset X. Then a point p∈Xp \in X is a limit point of SS if for all neighborhoods VV around pp, VV has a non empty intersection with SS, and contains points other than pp. That is, for all V∈N(p)V \in N(p), (V−{p})∩S≠∅(V - \{p\}) \cap S \neq \emptyset. The set of all limit points of SS is denoted as LP(S)LP(S).

Definition (Closed Set): Let (X,T)(X, \mathscr T) be a topological space and S⊂XS \subset X. Then SS is closed if it contains all its limit points. That is, LP(S)⊂SLP(S) \subset S.

Closed and Open are NOT Opposites

This is something important to keep in mind. If a set is not closed, that doesn’t mean its open. And if a set is not open, it doesn’t mean that it is closed. It’s a weird case of English names not playing well with their corresponding math definitions.

For example, if (X,T)(X, \mathscr T) is a topological space, then XX is open by definition (X∈TX \in \mathscr T), However, XX also contains all its limit points (XX contains all points!) Hence XX is also closed. It is both closed and open, or “clopen” (this is an actual term).

Define the standard topology on R\mathbb R where the open sets are unions of open intervals (a,b)(a,b). Consider the set S=(0,1]S =(0,1]. Clearly this set is not open, as no union of open intervals or finite intersection of open intervals can result in SS. However, it is also not closed, as 00 is a limit point of SS, but 0∉S0 \not \in S. So this is an example of a set that is neither closed nor open in the standard topology on R\mathbb R.

Definition (Closure of a Set): Let XX be a topological space and S⊂XS \subset X. Then the closure of SS written Sˉ\bar S is the union of SS with all the limit points of SS. That is, Sˉ=S∪LP(S)\bar S = S \cup LP(S).

Theorem: The closure of a set is closed. Let XX be a topological space, and S⊂XS \subset X. Then Sˉ=S∪LP(S)\bar S = S \cup LP(S) is closed.

Proof: Suppose S‾\overline{S} is not closed. Then there exists a point q∈LP(S‾)q \in LP(\overline S) with q∉S‾q \notin \overline S. In particular, q∉LP(S)q \notin LP(S), so there is an open set UU around qq such that (U−{q})∩S=∅(U-\{q\})\cap S=\emptyset. Since q∉Sq \notin S, this says U∩S=∅U\cap S=\emptyset.

Because qq is a limit point of S‾\overline S, there is some p∈(U−{q})∩S‾p\in (U-\{q\})\cap\overline S. As U∩S=∅U\cap S=\emptyset, we must have p∈LP(S)p\in LP(S). But UU is also an open set around pp, so it contains a point of SS other than pp, contradicting U∩S=∅U\cap S=\emptyset. Thus S‾\overline S is closed. □\square

Theorem: The closure is the smallest containing closed set. Let XX be a topological space and S⊂XS \subset X. Then if EE is a closed set such that S⊂ES \subset E, then Sˉ⊂E\bar S \subset E. That is, any closed set that contains SS must also contain its closure.

Proof: Since EE is closed, EE contains all its limit points. In particular, EE contains all the limit points of SS because EE contains SS. Therefore EE contains Sˉ\bar S. □\square

Alternate Definition for Closed Sets

Let XX be a topological space. Then E⊂XE \subset X is closed if and only if X−EX-E is open.

Proof: Well suppose EE is closed, then any limit point of EE is in EE. Therefore, no point p∈X−Ep \in X-E is a limit point of EE. Hence, for each p∈X−Ep \in X-E there exists a neighborhood VpV_p around pp such that Vp∩E=∅V_p \cap E = \emptyset. Equivalently, there exists an open set UpU_{p} around each pp such that Up∩E=∅U_p \cap E = \emptyset. Hence ⋃p∈X−EUp=X−E\bigcup_{p \in {X-E}}U_{p} = X-E. Hence X−EX-E is open (it is a union of open sets).

Now suppose X−EX-E is open, and (for the sake of contradiction) suppose q∗∈X−Eq^* \in X-E is a limit point of EE. Since X−EX-E itself is an open set around q∗q^*, it must contain a point e∈Ee\in E other than q∗q^*. But then e∈E∩(X−E)e\in E\cap(X-E), which is a contradiction. Hence no point outside EE is a limit point of EE, so EE contains all its limit points and is closed. □\square

Note: whenever we have a definition of something, A := B iff (“def 1”), and then we also have A := B iff (“some condition”) we can alternatively take that condition itself as a definition, and recover the older definition as a theorem instead. That is to say, if we define closed sets as ones that contain all their limit points, we can show the theorem: E is closed iff its complement in X is open. Dually, we can define E is closed iff its complement in X is open, and recover E is closed iff it contains all its limit points as a theorem.


3 - Denseness, Subspace Topology, Covers, and Compactness

Definition (Denseness): If XX is a topological space, then A⊂XA \subset X is dense if Aˉ=X\bar A = X. Denseness of AA is a nice property, because any point x∈Xx \in X is either in AA, or is a limit point of AA.

Definition (Subspace Topology): Let (X,T)(X,\mathscr T) be a topological space and Y⊂XY \subset X. Then inheriting the topology TY={U∩Y:U∈T}\mathscr T_Y = \{ U \cap Y: U \in \mathscr T \}, (basically taking the intersection of all open sets with YY) defines a topological space (Y,TY)(Y, \mathscr T_{Y}). (It is left to the reader to verify that (Y,TY)(Y, \mathscr T_{Y}) satisfies the axioms of topology.)

Definition (Covers and Subcovers): Let XX be a topological space, and S⊂XS \subset X, then an open cover of SS is a collection of open sets C={Uα:α∈I}C =\{U_{\alpha} : \alpha \in I\} such that S⊂⋃α∈IUαS \subset \bigcup_{\alpha \in I}U_{\alpha}. If C′⊂CC' \subset C is also a cover of SS, then C′C' is a subcover of SS. Note: subcover simply means picking some (maybe all) elements of the cover.

Definition (Compactness): Let XX be a topological space and S⊂XS \subset X. Then SS is compact if for every open cover C(S)C(S) there exists a subcover C′(S)⊂C(S)C'(S) \subset C(S) such that the cardinality of C′C' is finite.


4 - Bases, Sub-bases, and Generating Topologies

Definition (Basis for a Topology): Let (X,T)(X, \mathscr T) be a topological space. Then, a basis of this topology B⊂T\mathscr B \subset \mathscr T is such that for every point x∈Xx \in X and open set UU around xx, there exists a “basic open set” B∈BB \in \mathscr B such that x∈B⊂Ux \in B \subset U. Essentially, the basis is a subcollection of open sets, such that any open set is the union of some basis elements. The elements of the basis are called basic open sets.

  • (B1) Since XX is itself an open set, for every x∈Xx \in X, there exists a basic open set BB around xx.
  • (B2) For any two basic open sets B1,B2B_1, B_2 if x∈B1∩B2x \in B_1 \cap B_2 there exists B3⊂B1∩B2B_3 \subset B_{1} \cap B_{2} around xx. (this is because the (finite) intersections of open sets are open).

In fact, if there is no topology on XX, but we have a collection of subsets B\mathscr B for which (B1) and (B2) hold, then we can generate a topology from arbitrary unions of elements of B\mathscr B. By induction on (B2) the generated topology is stable under finite intersection, and by (B1) XX is part of the generated topology. And by the process of generation, the generated topology is also stable under arbitrary unions.

Finer and Coarser Topologies

Now, suppose T1\mathscr{T}_1 and T2\mathscr{T}_2 are both topologies on XX, such that T1⊆T2\mathscr{T}_1 \subseteq \mathscr{T}_2. Then we say that T2\mathscr{T}_2 is finer than T1\mathscr{T}_1 and that T1\mathscr{T}_1 is coarser than T2\mathscr{T}_2.

The intuition is to take two copies of XX, then grind it down, one finer than the other. Now, you identify clumps of both, to be the basis open sets. Indeed, I could make the coarser stone, with clumps of finer stones. So the arbitrary unions of coarser stones, can also be made by clumps of finer stone, however, having finer stone lets me make more intricate open sets, so naturally, the topology of the finer stone contains whatever the topology of the coarser stone, but not necessarily the other way around!

Proposition: If B1\mathscr{B}_1 is a basis for T1\mathscr{T}_1 and B2\mathscr{B}_2 is a basis for T2\mathscr{T}_2, such that T2\mathscr{T}_2 is finer than T1\mathscr{T}_1. Then, ∀x∈X\forall x \in X and each B1∈B1B_1 \in \mathscr{B}_1 containing xx, there is B2∈B2B_2 \in \mathscr{B}_2 such that x∈B2⊆B1x \in B_2 \subseteq B_1! (this is actually an iff).

Proof: Suppose T2\mathscr{T}_2 is finer than T1\mathscr{T}_1. Let B1B_1 be any basic open set in T1\mathscr{T}_1 and xx any point in B1B_1. Since T1⊆T2\mathscr{T}_1 \subseteq \mathscr{T}_2, B1B_1 is open in T2\mathscr{T}_2. Because B2\mathscr{B}_2 is a basis for T2\mathscr{T}_2, there is some B2∈B2B_2\in\mathscr B_2 such that x∈B2⊆B1x\in B_2\subseteq B_1.

Now, the other direction: let U∈T1U \in \mathscr{T}_1, then, by the basis property, U=⋃α∈ΛBα′U = \bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} B_\alpha' where Bα′∈B1B_\alpha' \in \mathscr{B}_1. Now for every xα∈Bα′x_\alpha \in B_\alpha', ∃B2xα∈B2\exists B_2^{x_\alpha} \in \mathscr{B}_2 such that xα∈B2xα⊆Bα′x_\alpha \in B_2^{x_\alpha} \subseteq B_\alpha'. Therefore, ⋃α∈Λ⋃xα∈Bα′B2xα=U∈T2\bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} \bigcup_{x_\alpha \in B_\alpha'} B_2^{x_\alpha} = U \in \mathscr{T}_2! i.e. T1⊆T2\mathscr{T}_1 \subseteq \mathscr{T}_2. □\square

Sub-basis

Let XX be a set such that ∀x∈X\forall x \in X, ∃S∈S\exists S \in \mathscr{S} for which x∈Sx \in S. Such a collection of subsets of XX, S\mathscr{S} is called the sub-basis for a topology.

Sub-basis ⟶all finite intersection\overset{\text{all finite intersection}}{\longrightarrow} basis ⟶all arbitrary union\overset{\text{all arbitrary union}}{\longrightarrow} Topology.

Lemma: Let Bi,i=1B_i, i = 1 to n∈Bn \in \mathscr{B} be any finite collection of basic open sets. Then, for every x∈⋂i=1nBix \in \bigcap_{i=1}^{n} B_i, ∃Bx∗∈B\exists B_x^* \in \mathscr{B}, x∈Bx∗⊆⋂i=1nBix \in B_x^* \subseteq \bigcap_{i=1}^{n} B_i.

Proof: Indeed, the base case for an inductive argument is in the definition of a basic open set itself. ∀B1,B2∈B\forall B_1, B_2 \in \mathscr{B}, ∀x∈B1∩B2\forall x \in B_1 \cap B_2, ∃B3\exists B_3 for which x∈B3⊆B1∩B2x \in B_3 \subseteq B_1 \cap B_2.

Now suppose the inductive hypothesis holds for some n≥2n \ge 2.

Now, let x∈⋂i=1n+1Bix \in \bigcap_{i=1}^{n+1} B_i. Indeed, x∈⋂i=1nBix \in \bigcap_{i=1}^{n} B_i, so ∃Bxn∈B\exists B_x^n \in \mathscr{B} such that x∈Bxn⊆⋂i=1nBix \in B_x^n \subseteq \bigcap_{i=1}^{n} B_i. But x∈Bn+1x \in B_{n+1} too, hence, x∈Bxn∩Bn+1⊆⋂i=1n+1Bix \in B_x^n \cap B_{n+1} \subseteq \bigcap_{i=1}^{n+1} B_i.

Again due to the definition of basis of topology, ∃Bxn+1⊆Bxn∩Bn+1\exists B_x^{n+1} \subseteq B_x^n \cap B_{n+1} such that x∈Bxn+1x \in B_x^{n+1}. Hence, x∈Bxn+1⊆⋂i=1n+1Bix \in B_x^{n+1} \subseteq \bigcap_{i=1}^{n+1} B_i. □\square

Theorem: Let XX be a set, and B={Bα:α∈I}\mathscr{B} = \{B_\alpha : \alpha \in I\} a collection of subsets of XX satisfying the “basis” properties. Define T={⋃α∈ΛBα:Λ⊆I}\mathscr{T} = \{\bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} B_\alpha : \Lambda \subseteq I\}, that is, T\mathscr{T} consists of unions over all subsets of the index set of B\mathscr{B}. Then T\mathscr{T} forms a topology on XX.

Proof:

Closed under finite intersection: Let Ui,i=1U_i, i = 1 to nn be a finite collection of elements of T\mathscr{T}, and hence each Ui=⋃αi∈ΛiBαiU_i = \bigcup_{\alpha_i \in \Lambda_i} B_{\alpha_i} for some Λi⊆I\Lambda_i \subseteq I.

⋂j=1nUj=⋂j=1n(⋃αj∈ΛjBαj)\bigcap_{j=1}^{n} U_j = \bigcap_{j=1}^{n} \left(\bigcup_{\alpha_j \in \Lambda_j} B_{\alpha_j}\right)

Repeatedly applying set theory laws (which afaik its okay on uncountable unions too, like I know you can’t give an induction argument but still)

⋂j=1nUj=⋃α1∈Λ1⋃α2∈Λ2⋯⋃αn∈Λn(Bα1∩Bα2⋯∩Bαn)\bigcap_{j=1}^{n} U_j = \bigcup_{\alpha_1 \in \Lambda_1} \bigcup_{\alpha_2 \in \Lambda_2} \cdots \bigcup_{\alpha_n \in \Lambda_n} \left(B_{\alpha_1} \cap B_{\alpha_2} \cdots \cap B_{\alpha_n}\right)

Indeed, from the previous lemma, ∀x∈Bα1∩Bα2⋯Bαn\forall x \in B_{\alpha_1} \cap B_{\alpha_2} \cdots B_{\alpha_n}, ∃B(α1,α2⋯αn)x∈B\exists B_{(\alpha_1, \alpha_2 \cdots \alpha_n)}^x \in \mathscr{B}, where x∈B(α1,α2⋯αn)x⊆(Bα1∩Bα2⋯Bαn)x \in B_{(\alpha_1, \alpha_2 \cdots \alpha_n)}^x \subseteq (B_{\alpha_1} \cap B_{\alpha_2} \cdots B_{\alpha_n}). Hence

⋃x∈⋂i=1nBαiB(α1,α2⋯αn)x=⋂j=1nBαj\bigcup_{x \in \bigcap_{i=1}^{n} B_{\alpha_i}} B_{(\alpha_1, \alpha_2 \cdots \alpha_n)}^x = \bigcap_{j=1}^{n} B_{\alpha_j}

If the above argument looks sus to you, just realize the fact that each B(α1,α2,…αn)xB^x_{(\alpha_{1},\alpha_{2},\dots \alpha_{n})} for a given xx in ⋂j=1nBαj\bigcap_{j=1}^{n} B_{\alpha_j}, contains xx, and also that each B(α1,α2,…αn)xB^x_{(\alpha_{1},\alpha_{2},\dots \alpha_{n})} is a subset of ⋂j=1nBαj\bigcap_{j=1}^{n} B_{\alpha_j}.

Hence, finally

⋂j=1nUj=⋃(α1,…,αn)∈Λ1×⋯×Λn(⋃x∈⋂j=1nBαjB(α1,α2⋯αn)x)\bigcap_{j=1}^{n} U_j = \bigcup_{(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_n)\in \Lambda_1\times\cdots\times\Lambda_n} \left(\bigcup_{x \in \bigcap_{j=1}^{n} B_{\alpha_j}} B_{(\alpha_1, \alpha_2 \cdots \alpha_n)}^x\right)

And since its all unions, ⋂j=1nUj∈T\bigcap_{j=1}^{n} U_j \in \mathscr{T}, so T\mathscr{T} is closed under finite intersection.

Closed under arbitrary union: Now, let Uβ,β∈ΔU_\beta, \beta \in \Delta be an arbitrary subcollection of T\mathscr{T}. Uβ=⋃αβ∈ΛβBαβU_\beta = \bigcup_{\alpha_\beta \in \Lambda_\beta} B_{\alpha_\beta}. Hence ⋃β∈ΔUβ=⋃β∈Δ⋃αβ∈ΛβBαβ∈T\bigcup_{\beta \in \Delta} U_\beta = \bigcup_{\beta \in \Delta} \bigcup_{\alpha_\beta \in \Lambda_\beta} B_{\alpha_\beta} \in \mathscr{T}. So T\mathscr{T} is closed under arbitrary union.

Contains XX and ∅\emptyset: Finally since ⋃B∈BB=X\bigcup_{B \in \mathscr{B}} B = X, X∈TX \in \mathscr{T} and similarly have ∅∈T\emptyset \in \mathscr{T}. □\square

Sub-basis Generates a Basis

Let S\mathscr{S} be a collection of subsets of XX that covers XX (sub-basis), then B={⋂j=1nSj:n∈N,Sj∈S}\mathscr{B} = \{\bigcap_{j=1}^{n} S_j : n \in \mathbb{N}, S_j \in \mathscr{S}\} the set of all finite subcollection intersections, forms a basis for a topology on XX.

Proof: ∀S∈S\forall S \in \mathscr{S}, S∈BS \in \mathscr{B}, hence, ∀x∈X\forall x \in X, ∃Sx∈B\exists S_x \in \mathscr{B} such that x∈Sxx \in S_x. Now, let B1,B2∈BB_1, B_2 \in \mathscr{B}. B1=⋂j=1mSj1B_1 = \bigcap_{j=1}^{m} S_j^1, B2=⋂j=1nSj2B_2 = \bigcap_{j=1}^{n} S_j^2. Let x∈B1∩B2x \in B_1 \cap B_2, ∃Sx∈S\exists S_x \in \mathscr{S} such that x∈Sxx \in S_x. Hence x∈Sx∩B1∩B2x \in S_x \cap B_1 \cap B_2 (this is a finite intersection of elements of S\mathscr{S}) hence indeed ∃Bx∗=Sx∩B1∩B2\exists B_x^* = S_x \cap B_1 \cap B_2 for which x∈Bx∗⊆B1∩B2x \in B_x^* \subseteq B_1 \cap B_2. □\square


5 - Continuous Maps

Definition (Continuous Maps on Topological Spaces): Let (X,ΘX)(X, \Theta_{X}) and (Y,ΘY)(Y, \Theta_{Y}) be topological spaces. A map f:X→Yf: X \to Y is a homomorphism (continuous) if for any open subset V∈ΘYV \in \Theta_{Y} of YY, the pre image of VV, f−1(V)f^{-1}(V) is open in XX, that is f−1(V)∈ΘXf^{-1}(V) \in \Theta_{X}. (Note that since ∅\emptyset is always open in any topology, there is no need for our map to be surjective, if VV is not hit by ff at all, then its pre-image is empty and so we are okay.)

If f:X→Yf : X \to Y is bijective, and both f,f−1f, f^{-1} are continuous, then ff is a topological isomorphism (called “Homeomorphism”).

  • Given three topological spaces X,Y,ZX, Y, Z, if f:X→Y, g:Y→Zf: X \to Y, \ g: Y \to Z are both continuous, then g∘f:X→Zg \circ f : X \to Z is continuous. For all VZ∈ΘZV_{Z} \in \Theta_{Z}, g−1(VZ)∈ΘYg^{-1}(V_Z) \in \Theta_{Y}. Hence f−1(g−1(ΘZ))∈ΘXf^{-1}(g^{-1}(\Theta_{Z})) \in \Theta_{X}.
  • If f:X→Yf : X \to Y is a continuous map, let S⊂XS \subset X. If we put the subspace topology (inheriting from ΘX\Theta_{X}) on SS, then the restriction f∣S:S→Yf|_{S}: S\to Y is continuous. Let VV be any open set of YY. f−1∣S(V)=f−1(V)∩Sf^{-1}|_{S}(V) = f^{-1}(V) \cap S. Since f−1(V)f^{-1}(V) is open in XX, by the definition of the subspace topology, f−1(V)∩Sf^{-1}(V)\cap S is open in SS.

Continuity via Basis

Proposition: Let f:X→Yf: X \to Y be a map between topological spaces X,YX, Y, with BX,BY\mathscr{B}_X, \mathscr{B}_Y as the respective bases. ff is continuous if and only if ∀bY∈BY\forall b_Y \in \mathscr{B}_Y, f−1(bY)f^{-1}(b_Y) is open in XX. (not necessarily basic open in XX).

Proof: The forward direction is trivial. If ff is continuous, bYb_Y is an open set and f−1(bY)f^{-1}(b_Y) must be open.

So now, suppose that ∀bY∈BY\forall b_Y \in \mathscr{B}_Y, f−1(bY)f^{-1}(b_Y) is open in XX. Let UU be any open set in YY. U=⋃α∈ΛbYαU = \bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} b_Y^\alpha, hence, f−1(U)=⋃α∈Λf−1(bYα)f^{-1}(U) = \bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} f^{-1}(b_Y^\alpha) which is a union of open sets in XX, and hence is open. □\square

Continuity via Sub-basis

Proposition: Let f:X→Yf: X \to Y be a map between topological spaces X,YX, Y. And let BY\mathscr{B}_Y be a basis for the topology on YY, and SY\mathscr{S}_Y a sub-basis that generates BY\mathscr{B}_Y. ff is continuous if and only if for each sY∈SYs_Y \in \mathscr{S}_Y, f−1(sY)f^{-1}(s_Y) is open in XX.

Proof: The forward direction is yet again trivial, each sY∈SYs_Y \in \mathscr{S}_Y is indeed an open set in YY, so if ff is continuous, f−1(sY)f^{-1}(s_Y) must be open in XX. Now, suppose that for every sY∈SYs_Y \in \mathscr{S}_Y, f−1(sY)f^{-1}(s_Y) is open in XX. Let bY∈BYb_Y \in \mathscr{B}_Y be any basic open set in YY. bY=⋂i=1nsYib_Y = \bigcap_{i=1}^{n} s_Y^i. Hence f−1(bY)=⋂i=1nf−1(sYi)f^{-1}(b_Y) = \bigcap_{i=1}^{n} f^{-1}(s_Y^i) which is a finite intersection of open sets in XX, and by the previous proposition, ff is continuous. □\square

Some Basic Ideas

f:X→Yf: X \to Y, if ff is continuous, and we put a coarser topology on YY, it will still be continuous. If ff is an open map defined: for all open sets UU in XX, f(U)f(U) is open in YY, if we put a coarser topology on XX, ff is still an open map.


6 - Disjoint Union and Quotient Topology

Disjoint Union

Let Λ\Lambda be an index set, and {Aα:α∈Λ}\{A_\alpha : \alpha \in \Lambda\} a collection of sets. The disjoint union is defined as

∐α∈ΛAα=⋃α∈ΛAα×{α}\coprod_{\alpha \in \Lambda} A_\alpha = \bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} A_\alpha \times \{\alpha\}

Indeed, if A=∐α∈ΛAα\mathbb{A} = \coprod_{\alpha \in \Lambda} A_\alpha, we can recover any Aα∗A_{\alpha^*} as the partition of A\mathbb{A} with part Aα∗={x:(x,α∗)∈A}A_{\alpha^*} = \{x : (x, \alpha^*) \in \mathbb{A}\}. Cool!

Indeed, the canonical injections ια:Aα→A\iota_\alpha: A_\alpha \to \mathbb{A}, x↦(x,α)x \mapsto (x, \alpha) are very helpful.

Quotient Topology

Let XX be a topological space and ∼\sim an equivalence relation on XX. Then there is a canonical topology (quotient), one where the map q:X→X/∼q: X \to X/\sim, the quotient projection map x↦[x]x \mapsto [x] is continuous. Indeed qq is surjective, and UU is open in X/∼X/\sim if and only if q−1(U)={x∈X:[x]∈U}q^{-1}(U) = \{x \in X : [x] \in U\} is open in XX.

For any set XX and any equivalence relation ∼\sim, and the quotient set X/∼X/\sim, we have a natural function, that sends each x∈Xx \in X to its equivalence class [x]∈X/∼[x] \in X/\sim.

In particular, for some index set Λ\Lambda, let Xα,α∈ΛX_\alpha, \alpha \in \Lambda denote the equivalence classes that partition XX under ∼\sim.

i.e. ⋃α∈ΛXα=X\bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} X_\alpha = X and Xα∩Xα′=∅X_\alpha \cap X_{\alpha'}=\emptyset whenever α≠α′\alpha \neq \alpha'. The quotient set is the set of the classes themselves, X/∼={Xα:α∈Λ}X/\sim=\{X_\alpha:\alpha\in\Lambda\}, and the natural projection sends xx to the unique class [x][x] containing it.

One may choose a representative xα∗∈Xαx_\alpha^*\in X_\alpha for each class, but the representatives are not the elements of the quotient; the equivalence classes are.

If XX is a topological space, what is the finest topology we can put on X/∼X/\sim for which qq is continuous? Okay, put some topology T\mathscr{T} on X/∼X/\sim such that qq is continuous. Then for any U∈TU \in \mathscr{T}, it is clear that q−1(U)q^{-1}(U) must be open in XX. This means that any such T\mathscr{T} is a subcollection of M={U⊂X/∼:q−1(U) is open in X}\mathscr{M} = \{ U \subset X/\sim : q^{-1}(U) \ \text{is open in }X\}. Now we only have to show that M\mathscr{M} is a topology on X/∼X/\sim. It is clear that ∅,X/∼ ∈M\emptyset, X/\sim \ \in \mathscr{M}. Now consider an arbitrary union of elements in M\mathscr{M}, V=⋃a∈AUaV = \bigcup_{a \in A}U_{a}. Then, q−1(V)=q−1(⋃a∈AUa)=⋃a∈Aq−1(Ua)q^{-1}(V) = q^{-1}(\bigcup_{a \in A}U_{a}) = \bigcup_{a \in A}q^{-1}(U_{a}). But each q−1(Ua)q^{-1}(U_{a}) is open in XX, so their union is also open in XX. Thus q−1(V)q^{-1}(V) is open in XX, and hence V∈MV \in \mathscr{M}; therefore M\mathscr{M} is closed under arbitrary unions. A very similar argument shows that M\mathscr{M} is closed under finite intersections. □\square


7 - Convergence and the Compact Convergence Topology

On Convergence

Consider a set EE as the domain of some set of functions, targeted towards a metric space (Y,d)(Y,d). The sequence of functions f1,f2,…f_1, f_2, \dots converges to ff pointwise, if for every ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 and x∈Ex \in E, there exists N(x,ϵ)∈NN(x,\epsilon) \in \mathbb N such that for n>N(x,ϵ)n > N(x,\epsilon), d(fn(x),f(x))<ϵd(f_n(x), f(x)) < \epsilon. The thing about pointwise convergence on EE is that, the tail of the sequence that is epsilon close to ff at an input xx depends not only on epsilon but xx as well.

On the other hand, f1,f2,…f_{1}, f_{2}, \dots uniformly converges to ff if for any ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, there exists N(ϵ)N(\epsilon) such that no matter what choice of x∈Ex \in E, whenever n>N(ϵ)n > N(\epsilon), d(fn(x),f(x))<ϵd(f_{n}(x), f(x)) < \epsilon.

Definition (Compact Convergence): Let (X,T)(X, \mathscr T) be a topological space, (Y,d)(Y, d) a metric space, and XY^XY the set of all functions from XX to YY. A sequence of functions f1,f2,…f_1, f_2, \dots in XY^XY converges compactly to ff in XY^XY if for every compact subset KK of XX, the restriction of each fnf_{n} to KK uniformly converges to the restriction of ff to KK. That is, for every compact K⊂XK\subset X and every ϵ>0\epsilon > 0, there is N(K,ϵ)∈NN(K,\epsilon) \in \mathbb N such that whenever n>N(K,ϵ)n > N(K,\epsilon), for all x∈Kx \in K, d(fn(x),f(x))<ϵd(f_n(x), f(x)) < \epsilon.

  • Since the inequality holds for all x∈Kx \in K, we can say that sup⁡x∈K d(fn(x),f(x))<ϵ\sup_{x \in K} \ d(f_{n}(x),f(x)) < \epsilon for all n>N(K,ϵ)n > N(K,\epsilon).
  • Stating the definition compactly (pun intended), for all compact K⊂XK \subset X, lim⁡n→∞sup⁡x∈Kd(fn(x),f(x))=0\lim_{ n \to \infty } \sup_{x \in K} d(f_{n}(x), f(x)) = 0.

In some sense, we want to put a topology on XY^X Y such that if fn⟶ff_n \longrightarrow f (that is the sequence fnf_n converges to ff, both in XY^XY as a topological space) if and only if fnf_n compactly converges to ff.

Take any compact set C⊂XC \subset X, any ϵ>0\epsilon > 0 and f∈XYf \in {^X}Y. Define the open ball / basis element given by:

BC(f,ϵ)={g∈XY:sup⁡x∈Cd(f(x),g(x))<ϵ}B_C(f, \epsilon) = \{ g \in {}^{X}Y : \sup_{x \in C} d(f(x),g(x)) < \epsilon \}

Then, using κX\kappa X to denote all nonempty compact subsets of XX,

B={BC(f,ϵ):C∈κX, ϵ>0, f∈XY}.\mathscr{B} = \{B_C(f,\epsilon): C \in \kappa X,\ \epsilon > 0,\ f \in {}^{X}Y\}.

We now have to verify that B\mathscr B is a basis, by (B1) and (B2). So (B1) basically states (in this context) that for each f∈XYf \in {}^XY there exists B∈BB \in \mathscr B such that f∈Bf \in B. Well, pick any compact CC and ϵ>0\epsilon > 0. Clearly BC(f,ϵ)∈BB_C(f ,\epsilon) \in \mathscr B, and f∈BC(f,ϵ)f \in B_C(f,\epsilon) as d(f(x),f(x))=0<ϵd(f(x), f(x)) = 0 < \epsilon.

Lemma: If g∈BC(f,ϵ)g \in B_C(f,\epsilon) and δc=ϵ−sup⁡x∈C d(f(x),g(x))\delta_{c} = \epsilon - \sup_{x \in C} \ d(f(x), g(x)) then BC(g,δc)⊂BC(f,ϵ)B_C(g, \delta_{c}) \subset B_{C}(f, \epsilon).

Proof: Let h∈BC(g,δc)h \in B_C(g,\delta_{c} ), then sup⁡x∈C d(h(x),g(x))<ϵ−sup⁡x∈C d(g(x),f(x))\sup_{x \in C} \ d(h(x), g(x)) < \epsilon - \sup_{x \in C} \ d(g(x), f(x)). Rearrange and use triangle inequality to get sup⁡x∈C d(h(x),f(x))<ϵ\sup_{x \in C} \ d (h(x), f(x)) < \epsilon. □\square

Let h∈BC(f,ϵ)∩BD(t,υ)h \in B_C(f, \epsilon) \cap B_{D}(t, \upsilon). As defined in the lemma, BC(h,δC)⊂BC(f,ϵ)B_C(h, \delta_{C}) \subset B_{C}(f, \epsilon) and BD(h,δD)⊂BD(t,υ)B_D(h, \delta_{D}) \subset B_{D}(t,\upsilon). It follows that BC∪D(h,min⁡(δC,δD))⊂BC(f,ϵ)∩BD(t,υ)B_{C \cup D}(h,\min(\delta_{C}, \delta_{D})) \subset B_C(f, \epsilon) \cap B_{D}(t, \upsilon) and contains hh. (C,DC,D are compact so C∪DC \cup D is compact). Finally showing (B2).

Definition (Convergence of Sequences in Topological Spaces): A sequence xnx_n converges to xx (written xn⟶xx_n \longrightarrow x) in a topological space XX if for every neighborhood VV around xx, there exists N(V)∈NN(V) \in \mathbb N such that for all n>N(V)n > N(V), xn∈Vx_n \in V.

Equivalently xn⟶xx_n \longrightarrow x if and only if for each basis element BB around xx there exists N(B)∈NN(B) \in \mathbb N such that for all n>N(B)n > N(B), xn∈Bx_n \in B.

Proof: If VV is a neighborhood of xx, then there is an open set UU where x∈U⊂Vx \in U \subset V. But UU is the union of some basis elements, one of them has to contain xx, call it B∗B^*. So it’s sufficient to show that there is a tail of the sequence contained in B∗B^*. But all basis elements BB around xx are themselves neighborhoods around xx. So it is necessary to show that there is a tail of the sequence contained in any such BB. □\square

Definition (Compact Convergence Topology): Let (X,T)(X, \mathscr T) be a topological space and (Y,d)(Y,d) be a metric space. The compact convergence topology on functions from XX to YY, XY^X Y is the one generated by the following basis:

B={BC(f,ϵ):C∈κX, ϵ>0, f∈XY}.\mathscr{B} = \{B_C(f,\epsilon): C \in \kappa X,\ \epsilon > 0,\ f \in {}^{X}Y\}.

Where

BC(f,ϵ)={g∈XY:sup⁡x∈Cd(f(x),g(x))<ϵ}B_C(f, \epsilon) = \{ g \in {}^{X}Y : \sup_{x \in C} d(f(x),g(x)) < \epsilon \}

In this topology on XY^XY, fn⟶ff_n \longrightarrow f if and only if fnf_n converges compactly to ff.

Indeed, if fn→ff_n\to f, then for every compact C⊂XC\subset X and every ϵ>0\epsilon>0, the basic neighborhood BC(f,ϵ)B_C(f,\epsilon) contains all sufficiently large fnf_n. Thus sup⁡x∈Cd(fn(x),f(x))<ϵ\sup_{x\in C}d(f_n(x),f(x))<\epsilon eventually.

Conversely, suppose fnf_n converges compactly to ff, and let BC(g,δ)B_C(g,\delta) be any basic neighborhood of ff. Set r=sup⁡x∈Cd(f(x),g(x))<δr=\sup_{x\in C}d(f(x),g(x))<\delta. Compact convergence gives NN such that, for n>Nn>N, sup⁡x∈Cd(fn(x),f(x))<δ−r\sup_{x\in C}d(f_n(x),f(x))<\delta-r. The triangle inequality then gives sup⁡x∈Cd(fn(x),g(x))<δ\sup_{x\in C}d(f_n(x),g(x))<\delta, so fn∈BC(g,δ)f_n\in B_C(g,\delta) eventually.


8 - Injectivity and Surjectivity

Two Views on Injectivity of Functions

1) Assuming AA is nonempty, f:A→Bf: A \to B is injective if and only if ∃g:B→A\exists g: B \to A such that g∘f=idAg \circ f = id_A (ff has a left inverse). (Without the nonempty assumption, the unique map ∅→B\emptyset\to B is injective, but it has no left inverse when BB is nonempty.)

Proof: Suppose gg is the left inverse of ff. Let a≠a′∈Aa \neq a' \in A. Then, g(f(a))≠g(f(a′))g(f(a)) \neq g(f(a')) (g(f(x))=x ∀x∈Ag(f(x)) = x \ \forall x \in A). This means that f(a)≠f(a′)f(a) \neq f(a'); if they were equal, say f(a)=f(a′)=tf(a) = f(a') = t, both g(f(a))g(f(a)) and g(f(a′))g(f(a')) would equal g(t)g(t), a contradiction.

Now suppose ff is injective, pick a particular a∗∈Aa^* \in A (any one will do). Construct g:B→Ag: B \to A, b↦f−1({b})b \mapsto f^{-1}(\{b\}) if b∈f(A)b \in f(A), a∗a^* if b∉f(A)b \notin f(A). gg is well defined as ff is injective so f−1({b})f^{-1}(\{b\}) is always a singleton. Indeed g∘f(a)=a ∀a∈Ag \circ f(a) = a \ \forall a \in A. □\square

2) f:A→Bf: A \to B is injective iff ∀\forall sets ZZ and all functions α,α′:Z⟶A\alpha, \alpha': Z \longrightarrow A, f∘α=f∘α′  ⟹  α=α′f \circ \alpha = f \circ \alpha' \implies \alpha = \alpha'.

Proof: Choose Z={p}Z = \{p\} (any singleton) and make da:{p}→A ∀a∈Ad_a: \{p\} \to A \ \forall a \in A, p↦ap \mapsto a. Suppose ∀a,a′∈A\forall a, a' \in A, f∘da=f∘da′  ⟹  da=da′f \circ d_a = f \circ d_{a'} \implies d_a = d_{a'}.   ⟹  f(da(p))=f(da′(p))  ⟹  da(p)=da′(p)\implies f(d_a(p)) = f(d_{a'}(p)) \implies d_a(p) = d_{a'}(p)   ⟹  f(a)=f(a′)  ⟹  a=a′\implies f(a) = f(a') \implies a = a'.

Now suppose ff is injective, and α,α′:Z→A\alpha, \alpha': Z \to A is any two functions on any set. And suppose f∘α=f∘α′f \circ \alpha = f \circ \alpha'. Since ff has a left inverse gg, (g∘f)∘α=(g∘f)∘α′(g \circ f) \circ \alpha = (g \circ f) \circ \alpha'. Hence, idA∘α=idA∘α′id_A \circ \alpha = id_A \circ \alpha' hence α=α′\alpha = \alpha'. □\square

Two Views on Surjectivity of Functions

3) Assuming the axiom of choice, f:A→Bf: A \to B is surjective iff ∃g:B→A\exists g: B \to A such that f∘g=idBf \circ g = id_B (ff has a right inverse).

Proof: Suppose ff has a right inverse gg. Let b∈Bb \in B be an element of BB. f∘g(b)=bf \circ g(b) = b. That is, ∃g(b)∈A\exists g(b) \in A : f(g(b))=bf(g(b)) = b. Hence ff is surjective.

Now suppose ff is surjective, then f(A)=Bf(A) = B. Hence ∀b∈B\forall b \in B, f−1({b})f^{-1}(\{b\}) is non empty. So we can choose an element g(b)∈f−1({b})g(b) \in f^{-1}(\{b\}) and construct gg. □\square

4) f:A→Bf: A \to B is surjective iff ∀\forall sets ZZ and all functions α,α′:B→Z\alpha, \alpha': B \to Z, α∘f=α′∘f  ⟹  α=α′\alpha \circ f = \alpha' \circ f \implies \alpha = \alpha'.

Proof: If ff is surjective, and α∘f=α′∘f\alpha \circ f = \alpha' \circ f, use the right inverse gg, so α∘(f∘g)=α′∘(f∘g)\alpha \circ (f \circ g) = \alpha' \circ (f \circ g)   ⟹  α=α′\implies \alpha = \alpha'. Now suppose whenever α∘f=α′∘f\alpha \circ f = \alpha' \circ f, α=α′\alpha = \alpha'. Choose Z={0,1}Z = \{0, 1\} and, α:b↦0 ∀b∈B\alpha: b \mapsto 0 \ \forall b \in B and α′(b)=0  ⟺  b∈f(A)\alpha'(b) = 0 \iff b \in f(A) else 11. Indeed ∀a∈A\forall a \in A, α(f(a))=α′(f(a))=0\alpha(f(a)) = \alpha'(f(a)) = 0. But this means that α=α′\alpha = \alpha'. i.e. ∀b∈B\forall b \in B, α(b)=0\alpha(b) = 0, α′(b)=0\alpha'(b) = 0. Therefore B=f(A)B = f(A). □\square


9 - Homotopy Theory

Let X,YX,Y be topological spaces, and f,g∈Mor(X,Y)f,g \in Mor(X,Y) (f,gf,g are continuous maps from XX to YY).

Then, ff is homotopic to gg, written f∼Hgf \sim_H g if:

There exists a continuous map H:X×[0,1]STD→YH: X \times [0,1]_{STD} \to Y such that H(x,0)=f(x)H(x,0) = f(x) and H(x,1)=g(x)H(x,1) = g(x) for every x∈Xx\in X.

If H:X×[0,1]⟶YH: X \times [0,1] \longrightarrow Y is a continuous map, where H(x,0)=f(x)H(x,0)=f(x) and H(x,1)=g(x)H(x,1)=g(x) then we call HH the (a) homotopy map between ff and gg.

Indeed, ∼H\sim_H is an equivalence relation on Mor(X,Y)Mor(X,Y).

Reflexivity

f∼Hff \sim_H f. Choose H:X×[0,1]→YH: X \times [0,1] \to Y as H(x,t)=f(x)H(x,t) = f(x). Now, let VYV_Y be open in YY, then, H−1(VY)=f−1(VY)×[0,1]H^{-1}(V_Y) = f^{-1}(V_Y) \times [0,1]. But ff is continuous. Hence f−1(VY)f^{-1}(V_Y) is open in XX, and [0,1][0,1] is trivially open in [0,1][0,1]. Therefore, by definition of product topology, f−1(VY)×[0,1]f^{-1}(V_Y) \times [0,1] is open in X×[0,1]X \times [0,1]. Indeed, H(x,0)=f(x)H(x,0) = f(x) and H(x,1)=f(x)H(x,1) = f(x) too.

We need some lemmas now:

Lemma 1 (Interval Change Map): For p<qp<q, define the interval change map C[p,q]:X×[p,q]⟶X×[0,1]C_{[p,q]}: X \times [p,q] \longrightarrow X \times [0,1] by C[p,q](x,t)=(x,t−pq−p)C_{[p,q]}(x,t) = (x, \frac{t-p}{q-p}). Then, C[p,q]C_{[p,q]} is a homeomorphism.

Proof:

Bijectivity: (x,t1−pq−p)=(x,t2−pq−p)  ⟹  x=x and t1=t2(x, \frac{t_1-p}{q-p}) = (x, \frac{t_2-p}{q-p}) \implies x=x \text{ and } t_1=t_2. For each (x,u)∈X×[0,1](x,u) \in X \times [0,1], C[p,q](x,(q−p)u+p)=(x,u)C_{[p,q]}(x, (q-p)u+p) = (x,u).

Continuity: It is enough to check a basic open rectangle γ=VX×U\gamma=V_X\times U, where VXV_X is open in XX and U=(⋃α∈Λ(aα,bα))∩[0,1]U=(\bigcup_{\alpha\in\Lambda}(a_\alpha,b_\alpha))\cap[0,1] is open in [0,1][0,1].

The properties of inverse images gives:

C[p,q]−1(γ)=VX×((⋃α∈Λ((q−p)aα+p,(q−p)bα+p))∩[p,q])C_{[p,q]}^{-1}(\gamma) = V_X \times \left(\left(\bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} ((q-p) a_\alpha+p, (q-p) b_\alpha+p)\right) \cap [p,q]\right)

which is indeed an open set in X×[p,q]X \times [p,q]!

Inverse Continuity: Similarly, it is enough to check a basic open rectangle γ=V×U\gamma=V\times U in X×[p,q]X\times[p,q]. Its image under C[p,q]C_{[p,q]} is a basic open rectangle in X×[0,1]X\times[0,1], since the affine map t↦(t−p)/(q−p)t\mapsto (t-p)/(q-p) is a homeomorphism. Hence C[p,q]−1C_{[p,q]}^{-1} is continuous. □\square


Lemma 2 (Cut-Paste): Let H,H∗:X×[0,1]⟶YH, H^*: X \times [0,1] \longrightarrow Y be continuous maps such that H(x,1)=H∗(x,0)∀x∈XH(x,1) = H^*(x,0) \forall x \in X. Then, the cut-paste function at pp, written H[0,p]×pH∗[p,1]H^{[0,p]} \times_{p} H^{*[p,1]} or simply H×pH∗H \times_p H^* is the function

H×pH∗(x,t)={H(C[0,p](x,t))t∈[0,p]H∗(C[p,1](x,t))t∈[p,1]H \times_p H^*(x,t) = \begin{cases} H(C_{[0,p]}(x,t)) & t \in [0,p] \\ H^*(C_{[p,1]}(x,t)) & t \in [p,1] \end{cases}

We claim that H×pH∗H \times_p H^* is a continuous map from X×[0,1]⟶YX \times [0,1] \longrightarrow Y. Firstly, the map H×pH∗H \times_p H^* is well defined, as H(C[0,p](x,p))=H∗(C[p,1](x,p))∀x∈XH(C_{[0,p]}(x,p)) = H^*(C_{[p,1]}(x,p)) \forall x \in X. Then, continuity follows by realizing that X×[0,p]X \times [0,p] and X×[p,1]X \times [p,1] are both closed in X×[0,1]X \times [0,1], (XX is clopen in XX, and [0,p][0,p] and [p,1][p,1] are both closed in [0,1][0,1], and product of closed sets are closed in the product topology). And then, we simply invoke the Gluing Lemma, which we will state and prove next. □\square


Gluing Lemma

Let P,QP, Q be topological spaces, and suppose A,B⊆PA, B\subseteq P are either both closed or both open, with A∪B=PA \cup B = P. Let f:A→Q,g:B→Qf: A \to Q, g: B \to Q be continuous maps such that whenever x∈A∩Bx \in A \cap B, f(x)=g(x)f(x) = g(x) (the maps agree). Then the glued map f∪g:P→Qf \cup g: P \to Q, defined by

f∪g(x)={f(x)x∈Ag(x)x∈Bf \cup g(x) = \begin{cases} f(x) & x \in A \\ g(x) & x \in B \end{cases}

is also continuous.

Proof: First suppose AA and BB are closed. Let VV be closed in QQ. Since the domain is P=A∪BP=A\cup B,

(f∪g)−1(V)=((f∪g)−1(V)∩A)∪((f∪g)−1(V)∩B)=f−1(V)∪g−1(V).(f\cup g)^{-1}(V)=((f\cup g)^{-1}(V)\cap A)\cup((f\cup g)^{-1}(V)\cap B)=f^{-1}(V)\cup g^{-1}(V).

Now f−1(V)f^{-1}(V) is closed in the subspace AA, so f−1(V)=F1∩Af^{-1}(V)=F_1\cap A for some closed F1⊆PF_1\subseteq P. Similarly, g−1(V)=F2∩Bg^{-1}(V)=F_2\cap B for some closed F2⊆PF_2\subseteq P. Because AA and BB are closed in PP, both preimages are closed in PP, and their finite union is closed. Hence f∪gf\cup g is continuous.

If AA and BB are open, use the same argument with an open set V⊆QV\subseteq Q: the two preimages are open in the open subspaces AA and BB, hence open in PP, and their union is open. □\square


Lemma 3 (Interval Reversal): Define γ:X×[p,q]→X×[p,q]\gamma: X \times [p, q] \to X \times [p, q] to be the interval reversal map γ(x,t)=(x,(p+q)−t)\gamma(x, t) = (x, (p+q)-t). Then γ\gamma is continuous and bijective (homeomorphism even).

Proof: Proof is very similar to Lemma 1. So we won’t do it here. □\square


Transitivity

Let f,g,h:X→Yf,g,h: X \to Y be continuous maps. f∼Hgf \sim_H g, g∼H2hg \sim_{H_2} h. Then, there exists a homotopy H∗H^* between ff and hh.

Indeed, H∗H^* can be chosen to be the cut paste map at 12\frac{1}{2}, H1×12H2H_1 \times_{\frac{1}{2}} H_2 from Lemma 2, which also shows continuity of this map.

Indeed H1×12H2(x,0)=f(x)H_1 \times_{\frac{1}{2}} H_2 (x,0) = f(x), H1×12H2(x,12)=g(x)H_1 \times_{\frac{1}{2}} H_2 (x,\frac{1}{2}) = g(x) and H1×12H2(x,1)=h(x)H_1 \times_{\frac{1}{2}} H_2 (x,1) = h(x), for every x∈Xx \in X.

Symmetry

Let f,g:X→Yf,g: X \to Y be continuous functions. Suppose f∼Hgf \sim_H g then, there exists a homotopy H′H' such that g∼H′fg \sim_{H'} f.

Indeed by Lemma 3, the interval reversal function γ[0,1]:X×[0,1]→X×[0,1]\gamma^{[0,1]}: X \times [0,1] \to X \times [0,1] given by γ(x,t)=(x,(1−t))\gamma(x,t) = (x, (1-t)) is continuous. Indeed H′=H∘γ[0,1]H' = H \circ \gamma^{[0,1]} is a continuous map X×[0,1]→YX \times [0,1] \to Y. H′(x,0)=H(x,1)=g(x)H'(x,0) = H(x,1) = g(x) and H′(x,1)=H(x,0)=f(x)H'(x,1) = H(x,0) = f(x).

Cool! So indeed the homotopy relation is an equivalence on Mor(X,Y)Mor(X,Y), so we have equivalence classes [f][f].


Composing Equivalence Classes of Maps under Homotopy

We need some more lemmas first.

Lemma 4: Let A,B,CA, B, C be topological spaces, g1:A→Bg_1: A \rightarrow B, g2:A→Cg_2: A \rightarrow C. Now construct g:A→B×Cg: A \rightarrow B \times C, g(a)=(g1(a),g2(a))g(a) = (g_1(a), g_2(a)). (There is a product topology on B×CB \times C). gg is continuous if and only if g1g_1 and g2g_2 are both continuous.

Proof: Let UB×UCU_B \times U_C be open in B×CB \times C, g−1(UB×UC)={a∈A:(g1(a),g2(a))∈UB×UC}g^{-1}(U_B \times U_C) = \{a \in A: (g_1(a), g_2(a)) \in U_B \times U_C \}. Indeed, g−1(UB×UC)={a∈A:g1(a)∈UB and g2(a)∈UC}g^{-1}(U_B \times U_C) = \{a \in A: g_1(a) \in U_B \text{ and } g_2(a) \in U_C \}. Therefore we get: g−1(UB×UC)=g1−1(UB)∩g2−1(UC)g^{-1}(U_B \times U_C) = g_1^{-1}(U_B) \cap g_2^{-1}(U_C). Indeed, the above equation holds for any UBU_B open in BB and any UCU_C open in CC.

Choose UB=BU_B = B. Then ∀\forall open sets UCU_C in CC, g−1(B×UC)=g1−1(B)∩g2−1(UC)g^{-1}(B \times U_C) = g_1^{-1}(B) \cap g_2^{-1}(U_C). i.e. g−1(B×UC)=A∩g2−1(UC)=g2−1(UC)g^{-1}(B \times U_C) = A \cap g_2^{-1}(U_C) = g_2^{-1}(U_C) (pause and justify). Therefore it is necessary that g2g_2 is continuous for gg to be continuous.

Now choose UC=CU_C = C then ∀\forall open UBU_B in BB, g−1(UB×C)=g1−1(UB)∩g2−1(C)=g1−1(UB)∩A=g1−1(UB)g^{-1}(U_B \times C) = g_1^{-1}(U_B) \cap g_2^{-1}(C) = g_1^{-1}(U_B) \cap A = g_1^{-1}(U_B). Therefore it is also necessary that g1g_1 is continuous for gg to be continuous.

If g1g_1 and g2g_2 are both continuous, then the preimage of every basic open rectangle is open: g−1(UB×UC)=g1−1(UB)∩g2−1(UC)g^{-1}(U_B \times U_C) = g_1^{-1}(U_B) \cap g_2^{-1}(U_C). Since such rectangles form a basis for the product topology, gg is continuous. □\square

Lemma 5 (Id Projection Extension): Let f:A×B→Cf: A \times B \to C be a continuous map. The projection map ΠB:A×B→B\Pi_B: A \times B \to B, ΠB(a,b)=b\Pi_B(a,b) = b is also continuous. The map f×ΠB:A×B→C×Bf \times \Pi_B: A \times B \to C \times B, (a,b)↦(f(a,b),ΠB(a,b))(a,b) \mapsto (f(a,b), \Pi_B(a,b)) is continuous. (When A,B,CA, B, C are topological spaces, and product topology on A×BA \times B and C×BC \times B.)

Proof: Follows trivially from Lemma 4. □\square

Theorem (Composing Equivalence Classes of Maps under Homotopy): Let X,Y,ZX, Y, Z be topological spaces, put the quotient of homotopy relation on continuous maps between XX and YY, and YY and ZZ. Now let [f]∈Mor(X,Y)/∼H[f] \in Mor(X,Y)/\sim_H and [g]∈Mor(Y,Z)/∼H[g] \in Mor(Y,Z)/\sim_H. Then for any f′∈[f]∼Hf' \in [f]_{\sim_H} and g′∈[g]∼Hg' \in [g]_{\sim_H}, g′∘f′∈[g∘f]∼Hg' \circ f' \in [g \circ f]_{\sim_H}.

Proof: Let H1:X×[0,1]→YH_1: X \times [0,1] \to Y be a homotopy from ff to f′f'. i.e. H1H_1 is continuous, H1(x,0)=f(x)H_1(x,0) = f(x) and H1(x,1)=f′(x) ∀x∈XH_1(x,1) = f'(x) \ \forall x \in X. Similarly let H2:Y×[0,1]→ZH_2: Y \times [0,1] \to Z be a homotopy from gg to g′g'. H2H_2 is continuous, H2(y,0)=g(y)H_2(y,0) = g(y), H2(y,1)=g′(y) ∀y∈YH_2(y,1) = g'(y) \ \forall y \in Y. Now consider the map H2∘(H1×Π[0,1]):X×[0,1]→ZH_2 \circ (H_1 \times \Pi_{[0,1]}): X \times [0,1] \to Z. This map is continuous, (H1×Π[0,1]H_1 \times \Pi_{[0,1]} is continuous by Lemma 5).

Now, H2∘(H1×Π[0,1])(x,0)=H2(H1(x,0),0)=H2(f(x),0)=g(f(x))H_2 \circ (H_1 \times \Pi_{[0,1]})(x,0) = H_{2}(H_{1}(x,0),0) = H_{2}(f(x),0) = g(f(x)), and similarly, H2∘(H1×Π[0,1])(x,1)=g′(f′(x))H_2 \circ (H_1 \times \Pi_{[0,1]})(x,1) = g'(f'(x)). □\square


10 - Homotopy Equivalence of Topological Spaces

Definition: Let X,YX,Y be topological spaces, then XX is homotopy equivalent to YY, written X≃HYX \simeq_H Y, if ∃\exists continuous maps f:X→Yf: X \to Y and g:Y→Xg: Y \to X such that g∘f∼HidXg \circ f \sim_H id_X, f∘g∼HidYf \circ g \sim_H id_Y.

Homotopy Equivalence is an Equivalence Relation

Recall that two topological spaces X,YX, Y are homotopy equivalent if ∃f:X→Y\exists f: X \to Y and g:Y→Xg: Y \to X (both continuous) such that g∘f∼HidXg \circ f \sim_H id_X, f∘g∼HidYf \circ g \sim_H id_Y. In such cases, we write X≃HYX \simeq_H Y. We claim that this relation on topological spaces is indeed an equivalence.

  1. Reflexive: X≃HXX \simeq_H X. Indeed, idX:X→Xid_X: X \to X is a continuous map, not only homotopic but literally equal to idXid_X.

  2. Symmetry: X≃HY  ⟺  Y≃HXX \simeq_H Y \iff Y \simeq_H X (obvious from the definition itself).

  3. Transitivity: Suppose X≃HYX \simeq_H Y and Y≃HZY \simeq_H Z. We will repeatedly use the theorem on composition of homotopy equivalence classes on maps, which states that if g,fg, f are continuous maps that are composable, and g∈[g]∼Hg \in [g]_{\sim_H}, and f∈[f]∼Hf \in [f]_{\sim_H}, then g∘f∈[g∘f]∼Hg \circ f \in [g \circ f]_{\sim_H}.

(diagram: X⟶fY⟶gZX \overset{f}{\longrightarrow} Y \overset{g}{\longrightarrow} Z and Z⟶hY⟶kXZ \overset{h}{\longrightarrow} Y \overset{k}{\longrightarrow} X)

h∘g∈[idY]∼Hh \circ g \in [id_Y]_{\sim_H}, hence (h∘g)∘f∈[idY∘f]∼H=[f]∼H(h \circ g) \circ f \in [id_Y \circ f]_{\sim_H} = [f]_{\sim_H}. Therefore, k∘(h∘g)∘f∈[k∘f]∼Hk \circ (h \circ g) \circ f \in [k \circ f]_{\sim_H}. But k∘f∈[idX]∼Hk \circ f \in [id_X]_{\sim_H}, and by properties of equivalence classes, [k∘f]∼H=[idX]∼H[k \circ f]_{\sim_H} = [id_X]_{\sim_H}. Finally, k∘h∘g∘f∈[idX]∼Hk \circ h \circ g \circ f \in [id_X]_{\sim_H}.

Similarly, f∘k∈[idY]∼Hf \circ k \in [id_Y]_{\sim_H}, hence (f∘k)∘h∈[idY∘h]∼H=[h]∼H(f \circ k) \circ h \in [id_Y \circ h]_{\sim_H} = [h]_{\sim_H}. Therefore, g∘(f∘k)∘h∈[g∘h]∼Hg \circ (f \circ k) \circ h \in [g \circ h]_{\sim_H}. But g∘h∈[idZ]∼Hg \circ h \in [id_Z]_{\sim_H}. Hence, [g∘h]∼H=[idZ]∼H[g \circ h]_{\sim_H} = [id_Z]_{\sim_H}. Therefore, g∘f∘k∘h∈[idZ]∼Hg \circ f \circ k \circ h \in [id_Z]_{\sim_H}. □\square