DOCSLIB.ORG

Topology: 2020, SEU Yi Li

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Topology: 2020, SEU Yi Li Topology: 2020, SEU Yi Li SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICS AND SHING-TUNG YAU CENTER,SOUTHEAST UNIVERSITY,NANJING,CHINA 210096 E-mail address: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Contents Chapter 1. Basic topology 1 1.1. Metric spaces 1 1.2. Topological spaces 11 1.3. Constructions 37 1.4. Topological groups and matrix Lie groups 50 1.5. Connectedness and compactness 67 Chapter 2. Analysis on topological groups 81 2.1. Haar measures 81 2.2. Iwasawa’s decomposition 87 2.3. Harish, Mellin and spherical transforms 92 Chapter 3. Fundamental groups 109 v CHAPTER 1 Basic topology Main references: • Kelley, John L. General topology, Reprint of the 1955 edition [Van Nostrand, Toronto, Ont.], Graduate Texts in Mathe- matics, No. 27, Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1975. xiv+298 pp. MR0370454 (51# 6681) • Bredon, Glen E. Topology and geometry, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, No. 139, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993. xiv+557 pp. MR1224675 (94d: 55001) • Lee, John M. Introduction to topological manifolds, Second edi- tion, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, No. 202, Springer, New York, 2011. xviii+433 pp. ISBN: 978-1-4419-7939-1 MR2766102 (2011i: 57001) • Munkres, James R. Topology: a first course, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1975. xvi+413 pp. MR0464128 (57 # 4063) • Burago, Dmitri; Burago, Yuri; Ivanov, Sergei. A course in metric geometry, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 33, Amer- ican Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001. xiv+415 pp. ISBN: 0-8218-2129-6 MR1835418 (2002e: 53053) 1.1. Metric spaces 1.1.1. Metric spaces. A metric on a set X is a map d : X × X ! R := R [ f¥g satisfying, for any x, y, z 2 X, (a) (positiveness) d(x, y) ≥ 0 and d(x, y) = 0 if and only if x = y; (b) (symmetry) d(x, y) = d(y, x); (c) (triangle inequality) d(x, z) ≤ d(x, y) + d(y, z). A metric space is a pair (X, d) where d is a metric on X. Given a metric space (X, d) we define a relation ∼ on X by x ∼ y () d(x, y) < ¥. Then ∼ is an equivalence relation on X, and the equivalence class [x] of x can be endowed with a natural metric (still denoted by d). EXERCISE 1.1.1. For any x 2 X, show that ([x], d) is a finite metric space. ! A map f : (X, dX) (Y, dY) between metric spaces is called distance-preserving if dY( f (x1), f (x2)) = dX(x1, x2) 1 2 1. BASIC TOPOLOGY 2 for all x1, x2 X. A distance-preserving bijection is called an isometry. A semi-metric on a set X is a map d : X × X ! R := R [ f¥g satisfying, for any x, y, z 2 X, (a) (nonnegativity) d(x, y) ≥ 0; (b) (symmetry) d(x, y) = d(y, x); (c) (triangle inequality) d(x, z) ≤ d(x, y) + d(y, z). A semi-metric space is a pair (X, d) where d is a semi-metric on X. Given a semi-metric space (X, d) we define a relation ∼ on X by x ∼ y () d(x, y) = 0. Then ∼ is an equivalence relation on X. Define Xˆ := X/ ∼= f[x] : x 2 Xg, dˆ([x], [y]) := d(x, y). Then (X/d, d) := (Xˆ , dˆ) is a metric space. EXERCISE 1.1.2. Show that dˆ is well-defined and (X/d, d) is a metric space. EXERCISE 1.1.3. Let X = R2 and define 0 0 0 0 d((x, y), (x , y )) := j(x − x ) + (y − y )j. Show that d is a semi-metric on X. Define f : R2/d ! R by f ([(x, y)]) := x + y. Show that f is an isometry. EXERCISE 1.1.4. Consider the set X of all continuous real-valued functions on [0, 1]. Show that Z 1 d( f , g) := j f (x) − g(x)jdx 0 defines a metric on X. Is this still the case if continuity is weakened to integrabil- ity? EXERCISE 1.1.5. Let (X, dX) and (Y, dY) be two metric spaces. We define q dX×Y((x1, y1), (x2, y2)) := dX(x1, x2) + dY(y1, y2). × Show that (X Y, dX×Y) is a metric space. EXERCISE 1.1.6. As a subspace of R2, the unit circle S1 carries the restricted 2 Euclidean metric from R . We can define another (intrinsic) metric dint by dint(x, y) := the length of the shorter arc between them. 2 p 2 1 Note that dint(x, y) [0, ] for any points x, y S . (a) Show that any circle arc of length less than or equal to p, equipped with the intrinsic metric, is isometric to a straight line segment. (b) The whole circle with the intrinsic metric is not isometric to any subset of R2. 1.1. METRIC SPACES 3 Let (X, d) be a metric space. Set B(x, r) := fy 2 X : d(x, y) < rg, B(x, r) := fy 2 X : d(x, y) ≤ rg. We define the metric topology on X by saying that U ⊂ X is open if and only for any x 2 U there exists e > 0 such that B(x, e) ⊂ U. Let (1.1.1.1) T := fall open subsets in Xg [ fÆ, Xg. The set T satisfies the following (1) U \ V 2 T for any U, V 2 T ; [ 2 T f g ⊂ T (2) i2IUi for any collection Ui i2I ; (3) Æ, X 2 T . In general, we can introduce a topology on any set X.A topology on X is a subset T of 2X satisfying (1) U \ V 2 T for any U, V 2 T ; [ 2 T f g ⊂ T (2) i2IUi for any collection Ui i2I ; (3) Æ, X 2 T . The pair (X, T ) is called the topological space, and any element in T is said to be open; a closed set is a subset of X whose complement in X is open. In particular, we see that any metric space must be a topological space. Given a metric space (X, d). • (X, d) is complete if any Cauchy sequence1 in X has a limit in X. • A diameter of S ⊂ X is defined by (1.1.1.2) diam(S) := sup d(x, y). x,y2S • (X, d) is compact if any sequence in X has a converging subsequence. • ⊂ e f 2 ≤ eg S X is an -net if Se := x X : d(x, S) = infy2X d(x, y) = X. • X is totally bounded if for any e > 0 there exists a finite e-net in X. The following theorem is a basic result. THEOREM 1.1.7. Let (X, d) is a metric space. Then X is compact if and only if X is complete and totally bounded. 1.1.2. Length spaces. Let (X, T ) be a topological space. We say X is Haus- dorff if for any different points x, y 2 X, there exist open sets Ux, Uy ⊂ X such that x 2 Ux, y 2 Uy, and Ux \ Uy = Æ. Clearly that any metric space must be Hausdorff. A path g in X is a continuous2 map g : I ! X. where I ⊂ R is an interval (i.e., connected subset) of R. A length structure on X is a pair (A , L), where A is a collection of paths (called admissible paths) and L : A ! R+ is a map on A (called the length of paths), satisfying 1 f g e 2 A sequence xn n2N in X is said to be Cauchy if for any > 0 there exists an integer n0 N e ≥ such that d(xn, xm) < whenever n, m n0. − 2That is, g 1(U) is open in I for any open set U in X. 4 1. BASIC TOPOLOGY A g ! A gj 2 A (a) ( is closed under restrictions) If : [a, b] X in , then [c,d] for any subinterval [c, d] ⊂ [a, b]; A g ! g (b) ( is closed under concatenations of paths) If 1 : [a, c] X and 2 : ! g g [c, d] X are admissible with 1(c) = 2(c), then the obvious product g g · g ! := 1 2 : [a, d] X is also admissible; (c) (A is closed under reparameterizations) If g : [a, b] ! X is admissible and j : [c, d] ! [a, b] is a homeomorphism, then g ◦ j : [c, d] ! x is also admissible; gj gj gj (d) (Length of paths is additive) L( [a,b]) = L( [a,c]) + L( [c,b]) for any c 2 [a, b] and g : [a, b] ! X in A ; (e) (The length of a piece of a path continuously depends on the piece) If g : [a, b] ! X is a admissible path with L(g) < +¥, then L(g, a, t) := g L( [a,t]) is continuous in t; (f) (L(·) is invariant under reparametrizations) L(g ◦ j) = L(g) for any ad- missible path g and any homeomorphism j as in (c); (g) (Length structures agree with the topology of X) For any x 2 X and open set Ux 3 x, one has inf fL(g) : g(a) = x, g(b) 2 X n U g > 0. g2A x Let (X, T ) is a Hausdorff space with a length structure (A , L). Define (1.1.2.1) d (x, y) := inf fL(g)jg : [a, b] ! X, g(a) = x, g(b) = yg . L g2A ¥ If there is no path between x and y, we set dL(x, y) = + . We say a length struc- A 2 ¥ ture ( , L) is complete if for any x, y X with dL(x, y) < + , there exists a path g 2 A g joining x and y such that dL(x, y) = L( ).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bitopological Duality for Distributive Lattices and Heyting Algebras
    BITOPOLOGICAL DUALITY FOR DISTRIBUTIVE LATTICES AND HEYTING ALGEBRAS GURAM BEZHANISHVILI, NICK BEZHANISHVILI, DAVID GABELAIA, ALEXANDER KURZ Abstract. We introduce pairwise Stone spaces as a natural bitopological generalization of Stone spaces—the duals of Boolean algebras—and show that they are exactly the bitopolog- ical duals of bounded distributive lattices. The category PStone of pairwise Stone spaces is isomorphic to the category Spec of spectral spaces and to the category Pries of Priestley spaces. In fact, the isomorphism of Spec and Pries is most naturally seen through PStone by first establishing that Pries is isomorphic to PStone, and then showing that PStone is isomorphic to Spec. We provide the bitopological and spectral descriptions of many algebraic concepts important for the study of distributive lattices. We also give new bitopo- logical and spectral dualities for Heyting algebras, thus providing two new alternatives to Esakia’s duality. 1. Introduction It is widely considered that the beginning of duality theory was Stone’s groundbreaking work in the mid 30s on the dual equivalence of the category Bool of Boolean algebras and Boolean algebra homomorphism and the category Stone of compact Hausdorff zero- dimensional spaces, which became known as Stone spaces, and continuous functions. In 1937 Stone [33] extended this to the dual equivalence of the category DLat of bounded distributive lattices and bounded lattice homomorphisms and the category Spec of what later became known as spectral spaces and spectral maps. Spectral spaces provide a generalization of Stone 1 spaces. Unlike Stone spaces, spectral spaces are not Hausdorff (not even T1) , and as a result, are more difficult to work with.
    [Show full text]
  • Counterexamples in Topology
    Counterexamples in Topology Lynn Arthur Steen Professor of Mathematics, Saint Olaf College and J. Arthur Seebach, Jr. Professor of Mathematics, Saint Olaf College DOVER PUBLICATIONS, INC. New York Contents Part I BASIC DEFINITIONS 1. General Introduction 3 Limit Points 5 Closures and Interiors 6 Countability Properties 7 Functions 7 Filters 9 2. Separation Axioms 11 Regular and Normal Spaces 12 Completely Hausdorff Spaces 13 Completely Regular Spaces 13 Functions, Products, and Subspaces 14 Additional Separation Properties 16 3. Compactness 18 Global Compactness Properties 18 Localized Compactness Properties 20 Countability Axioms and Separability 21 Paracompactness 22 Compactness Properties and Ts Axioms 24 Invariance Properties 26 4. Connectedness 28 Functions and Products 31 Disconnectedness 31 Biconnectedness and Continua 33 VII viii Contents 5. Metric Spaces 34 Complete Metric Spaces 36 Metrizability 37 Uniformities 37 Metric Uniformities 38 Part II COUNTEREXAMPLES 1. Finite Discrete Topology 41 2. Countable Discrete Topology 41 3. Uncountable Discrete Topology 41 4. Indiscrete Topology 42 5. Partition Topology 43 6. Odd-Even Topology 43 7. Deleted Integer Topology 43 8. Finite Particular Point Topology 44 9. Countable Particular Point Topology 44 10. Uncountable Particular Point Topology 44 11. Sierpinski Space 44 12. Closed Extension Topology 44 13. Finite Excluded Point Topology 47 14. Countable Excluded Point Topology 47 15. Uncountable Excluded Point Topology 47 16. Open Extension Topology 47 17. Either-Or Topology 48 18. Finite Complement Topology on a Countable Space 49 19. Finite Complement Topology on an Uncountable Space 49 20. Countable Complement Topology 50 21. Double Pointed Countable Complement Topology 50 22. Compact Complement Topology 51 23.
    [Show full text]
  • MAT 3500/4500 SUGGESTED SOLUTION Problem 1 Let Y Be a Topological Space. Let X Be a Non-Empty Set and Let F
    MAT 3500/4500 SUGGESTED SOLUTION Problem 1 Let Y be a topological space. Let X be a non-empty set and let f : X ! Y be a surjective map. a) Consider the collection τ of all subsets U of X such that U = f −1(V ) where V is open in Y . Show that τ is a topology on X. Also show that a subset A ⊂ X is connected in this topology if and only if f(A) is a connected subset of Y . Solution: We have X = f −1(Y ) and ? = f −1(?) so X and ? are in τ. Consider S −1 −1 S fVi j i 2 Ig with each Vi open in Y . Then f (Vi) = f ( (Vi), and since i2I i2I S Vi is open in Y , τ is closed under arbitrary unions. Let Vj; j = 1; : : : n, be open i2I n n n T −1 −1 T T sets in Y . Then f (Vj) = f ( Vj), and since Vj is open in Y , τ is closed j=1 j=1 j=1 under finite intersections. Together this shows that τ is a topology on X. It is clear from the definition of τ that f becomes continuous when X is given the topology τ. So if A is connected in τ, f(A) becomes connected in Y . −1 −1 Now let U1 = f (V1) and U2 = f (V2) be sets in τ with V1 and V2 open sets in Y . Let A ⊂ X with A \U1 \U2 = ?, A ⊂ U1 [U2. Then we must have f(A)\V1 \V2 = −1 −1 −1 ?.
    [Show full text]
  • On Induced Map F# in Fuzzy Set Theory and Its Applications to Fuzzy Continuity
    Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) On induced map f # in fuzzy set theory and its applications to fuzzy continuity Sandeep Kaur · Nitakshi Goyal Received: date / Accepted: date Abstract In this paper, we introduce # image of a fuzzy set which gives an induced map f # corresponding to any function f : X ! Y , where X and Y are crisp sets. With this, we present a new vision of studying fuzzy continuous mappings in fuzzy topological spaces where fuzzy continuity explains the term of closeness in the mathematical models. We also define the concept of fuzzy saturated sets which helps us to prove some new characterizations of fuzzy continuous mappings in terms of interior operator rather than closure operator. Keywords fuzzy set · fuzzy topology · fuzzy saturated · fuzzy continuous · interior · closure Mathematics Subject Classification (2010) 54A40 · 54C05 · 94D05 · 03E72 1 Introduction The theory of fuzzy sets, which proposes to deal with uncertainity, vagueness and unclear boundaries was first introduced by L.A. Zadeh in [7]. The basic idea of a fuzzy set concerns the flexibility over the concept of belongingness. Since its advent, research in soft set theory and its applications in several di- rections has been growing exponentially resulting in the great success from the theoretical and technological point of view. Therefore, fuzzification of various classical concepts related to topology has been done by various authors in [1], [6], [4] etc. Chang introduced the concept of fuzzy topological spaces in [3] S. Kaur Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Central University of Punjab, Bathinda-151001, Punjab, India. e-mail: [email protected] N.
    [Show full text]
  • INAUGURAL DISSERTATION Zur Erlangung Der Doktorwürde Der
    INAUGURAL DISSERTATION zur Erlangung der Doktorwurde¨ der Naturwissenschaftlich-Mathematischen Gesamtfakultat¨ der Ruprecht-Karls-Universitat¨ Heidelberg vorgelegt von Diplom-Mathematiker Edgar Busse ( geb. Damir Serikovich Muldagaliev ) aus Almaty Tag der mundlichen¨ Prufung:¨ 27. April 2006 Thema Finite-State Genericity On the Diagonalization Strength of Finite Automata Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Klaus Ambos-Spies Prof. Dr. Frank Stephan Zusammenfassung Algorithmische Generizitatskonzepte¨ spielen eine wichtige Rolle in der Berechenbarkeits- und Komplexitatstheorie.¨ Diese Begriffe stehen in engem Zusammenhang mit grundle- genden Diagonalisierungstechniken, und sie wurden zur Erzielung starker Trennungen von Komplexitatsklassen¨ verwendet. Da fur¨ jedes Generizitatskonzept¨ die zugehorigen¨ gener- ischen Mengen eine co-magere Klasse bilden, ist die Analyse generischer Mengen ein wichtiges Hifsmittel fur¨ eine quantitative Analyse struktureller Phanomene.¨ Typischer- weise werden Generizitatskonzepte¨ mit Hilfe von Erweiterungsfunktionen definiert, wobei die Starke¨ eines Konzepts von der Komplexitat¨ der zugelassenen Erwiterungsfunktionen abhangt.¨ Hierbei erweisen sich die sog. schwachen Generizitatskonzepte,¨ bei denen nur totale Erweiterungsfunktionen berucksichtigt¨ werden, meist als wesentlich schwacher¨ als die vergleichbaren allgemeinen Konzepte, bei denen auch partielle Funktionen zugelassen sind. Weiter sind die sog. beschrankten¨ Generizitatskonzepte¨ – basierend auf Erweiterun- gen konstanter Lange¨ – besonders interessant, da hier
    [Show full text]
  • Finite Topological Spaces with Maple
    University of Benghazi Faculty of Science Department of Mathematics Finite Topological Spaces with Maple A dissertation Submitted to the Department of Mathematics in Partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mathematics By Taha Guma el turki Supervisor Prof. Kahtan H.Alzubaidy Benghazi –Libya 2013/2014 Dedication For the sake of science and progress in my country new Libya . Taha ii Acknowledgements I don’t find words articulate enough to express my gratitude for the help and grace that Allah almighty has bestowed upon me. I would like to express my greatest thanks and full gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Kahtan H. Al zubaidy for his invaluable assistance patient guidance and constant encouragement during the preparation of the thesis. Also, I would like to thank the department of Mathematics for all their efforts advice and every piece of knowledge they offered me to achieve the accomplishment of writing this thesis. Finally , I express my appreciation and thanks to my family for the constant support. iii Contents Abstract ……………………………………………………….…1 Introduction ……………………………..……………………….2 Chapter Zero: Preliminaries Partially Ordered Sets …………………………………………….4 Topological Spaces ………………………………………………11 Sets in Spaces …………………………………………………... 15 Separation Axioms …...…………………………………………..18 Continuous Functions and Homeomorphisms .….......………………..22 Compactness …………………………………………………….24 Connectivity and Path Connectivity …..……………………………25 Quotient Spaces ……………………..…………………………...29 Chapter One: Finite Topological Spaces
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Set Theory
    Appendix A: Review of Set Theory In this book, as in most modern mathematics, mathematical statements are couched in the language of set theory. We give here a brief descriptive summary of the parts of set theory that we use, in the form that is commonly called “naive set theory.” The word naive should be understood in the same sense in which it is used by Paul Halmos in his classic text Naive Set Theory [Hal74]: the assumptions of set theory are to be viewed much as Euclid viewed his geometric axioms, as intuitively clear statements of fact from which reliable conclusions can be drawn. Our description of set theory is based on the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory together with the axiom of choice (commonly known as ZFC), augmented with a notion of classes (aggregations that are too large to be considered sets in ZFC), primarily for use in category theory. We do not give a formal axiomatic treat- ment of the theory; instead, we simply give the definitions and list the basic types of sets whose existence is guaranteed by the axioms. For more details on the subject, consult any good book on set theory, such as [Dev93,Hal74,Mon69,Sup72,Sto79]. We leave it to the set theorists to explore the deep consequences of the axioms and the relationships among different axiom systems. Basic Concepts A set is just a collection of objects, considered as a whole. The objects that make up the set are called its elements or its members. For our purposes, the elements of sets are always “mathematical objects”: integers, real numbers, complex numbers, and objects built up from them such as ordered pairs, ordered n-tuples, functions, sequences, other sets, and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1108.0714V3 [Math.GT] 14 Mar 2016 Oohrtu Oitos Npriua,Orrslsapyt Apply Example, Results for Our Sets
    OPEN SATURATED SETS WITHOUT HOLONOMY JOHN CANTWELL AND LAWRENCE CONLON Abstract. Open, connected, saturated sets W without holonomy in codimension one foliations F play key roles as fundamental building blocks. A great deal is understood about the structure of F|W , but the possibilities have not been quantified. Here, for the case of foli- ated 3-manifolds, we produce a finite system of closed, convex, non- overlapping polyhedral cones in H1(W ) (real coefficients) such that the isotopy classes of possible foliations F|W without holonomy correspond one-to-one to the rays in the interiors of these cones. This generalizes our classification of depth one foliations to foliations of finite depth and more general foliations. 1. Introduction W.Thurston shows that fibrations π : M → S1, where M is a compact 3- manifold, are in one-one corresponance, up to isotopy, with rays through the nontrivial lattice points in the open cones over certain top dimensional faces of the unit ball of the Thurston norm in H1(M; R). In [6], we produced closed polyhedral cones in H1(M; R), where (M, γ) is a taut sutured 3- manifold, such that the depth-one foliations of M having the components of R(γ) as sole compact leaves are in one-one corresponance, up to isotopy, with rays through the nontrivial lattice points (called rational rays) in the interiors of these cones. The cones have disjoint interiors which are open, convex, polyhedral cones. In [3], we correct some errors in [6] and further show that the dense leaved foliations having the components of R(γ) as sole compact leaves and sole leaves with holonomy are in one-one corresponance, arXiv:1108.0714v3 [math.GT] 14 Mar 2016 up to isotopy, with the irrationsl rays in these open cones.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Duality of Compact Vs. Open
    On the Duality of Compact vs. Open Achim Jung Philipp S¨underhauf∗ University of Birmingham University of Southern Maine [email protected] [email protected] November 2, 1995 Abstract It is a pleasant fact that Stone-duality may be described very smoothly when restricted to the category of compact spectral spaces: The Stone- duals of these spaces, arithmetic algebraic lattices, may be replaced by their sublattices of compact elements thus discarding infinitary operations. We present a similar approach to describe the Stone-duals of coherent spaces, thus dropping the requirement of having a base of compact-opens (or, alternatively, replacing algebraicity of the lattices by continuity). The construction via strong proximity lattices is resembling the classical case, just replacing the order by an order of approximation. Our development enlightens the fact that “open” and “compact” are dual concepts which merely happen to coincide in the classical case. Introduction Pointless topology relies on the duality between the category of sober spaces with continuous functions and the category of spatial frames with frame-homomor- phisms. The origin of this subject, however, dates back to the classical Represen- tation Theorem by Marshall Stone [Sto36], which establishes a duality between compact zero-dimensional Hausdorff spaces and Boolean algebras. So the origi- nal theory deals just with finitary operations on the algebraic side, whereas one has to pay a price for the broader generality of frames: infinitary operations are involved. The key property of Stone spaces which makes it possible to restrict to fini- tary operations is the fact that their lattices of open sets are algebraic.
    [Show full text]
  • Counterexamples in Topology
    Lynn Arthur Steen J. Arthur Seebach, Jr. Counterexamples in Topology Second Edition Springer-Verlag New York Heidelberg Berlin Lynn Arthur Steen J. Arthur Seebach, Jr. Saint Olaf College Saint Olaf College Northfield, Minn. 55057 Northfield, Minn. 55057 USA USA AMS Subject Classification: 54·01 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Steen, Lynn A 1941· Counterexamples in topology. Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Topological spaces. I. Seebach, J. Arthur, joint author. II. Title QA611.3.S74 1978 514'.3 78·1623 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form without written permission from Springer.Verlag Copyright © 1970, 1978 by Springer·Verlag New York Inc. The first edition was published in 1970 by Holt, Rinehart, and Winston Inc. 9 8 7 6 5 4 321 ISBN-13: 978-0-387-90312-5 e-ISBN-13:978-1-4612-6290-9 DOl: 1007/978-1-4612-6290-9 Preface The creative process of mathematics, both historically and individually, may be described as a counterpoint between theorems and examples. Al­ though it would be hazardous to claim that the creation of significant examples is less demanding than the development of theory, we have dis­ covered that focusing on examples is a particularly expeditious means of involving undergraduate mathematics students in actual research. Not only are examples more concrete than theorems-and thus more accessible-but they cut across individual theories and make it both appropriate and neces­ sary for the student to explore the entire literature in journals as well as texts. Indeed, much of the content of this book was first outlined by under­ graduate research teams working with the authors at Saint Olaf College during the summers of 1967 and 1968.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Topological Entropy of Saturated Sets
    Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. (0), 0, 1–29 Printed in the United Kingdom c 0 Cambridge University Press On the Topological Entropy of Saturated Sets C.-E. Pfister† and W.G. Sullivan‡ † EPF-L, Institut d’analyse et calcul scientifique CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland (e-mail: charles.pfister@epfl.ch) ‡ School of Mathematical Sciences, UCD Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland (e-mail: [email protected]) (Received 18 November 2005 ) Abstract.Let(X, d, T) be a dynamical system, where (X, d)isacompactmetric space and T : X → X a continuous map. We introduce two conditions for the set of orbits, called respectively g-almost product property and uniform separation property.Theg-almost product property holds for dynamical systems with the specification property, but also for many others. For example all β-shifts have the g-almost product property. The uniform separation property is true for expansive and more generally asymptotically h-expansive maps. Under these two conditions we compute the topological entropy of saturated sets. If the uniform separation condition does not hold, then we can compute the topological entropy of the set of generic points, and show that for any invariant probability measure µ, the (metric) entropy of µ is equal to the topological entropy of generic points of µ.Wegivean application of these results to multi-fractal analysis and compare our results with those of Takens and Verbitskiy (Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 23 (2003)). 1. Introduction In this paper a dynamical system (X, d, T) means always that (X, d)isacompact metric space and T : X → X is a continuous map.
    [Show full text]
  • SOBRIETY VIA Θ-OPEN SETS 1. Introduction. in 1943, Fomin
    ANALELE S¸TIINT¸IFICE ALE UNIVERSITAT¸II˘ \AL.I. CUZA" DIN IAS¸I (S.N.) MATEMATICA,˘ Tomul LVI, 2010, f.1 DOI: 10.2478/v10157-010-0011-y SOBRIETY VIA θ-OPEN SETS BY M. CALDAS, S. JAFARI and R.M LATIF Abstract. Sunderhauf¨ studied the important notion of sobriety in terms of nets. In this paper, by the same token, we present and study the notion of θ-sobriety by utilizing the notion of θ-open sets. Mathematics Subject Classification 2000: 54B05, 54C08, 54D05. Key words: θ-open, θ-closed, θ-compact space, θ-sobriety. 1. Introduction. In 1943, Fomin [4] (see, also [5]) introduced the notion of θ-continuity. The notions of θ-open subsets, θ-closed subsets and θ-closure were introduced by Velickoˇ [11] for the purpose of studying the important class of H-closed spaces in terms of arbitrary filterbases. Dick- man and Porter [2], [3], Joseph [7] continued the work of Veliˇcko. Re- cently Noiri and Jafari [9] have also obtained several new and interesting results related to these sets. In what follows (X; τ) and (Y; σ) (or X and Y ) denote topological spaces. Let A be a subset of X. We denote the interior and the closure of a set A by Int(A) and Cl(A), respectively. A point x 2 X is called a θ-cluster point of A if A\Cl(U) =6 ; for every open set U of X containing x. The set of all θ-cluster points of A is called the θ-closure of A. A subset A is called θ-closed if A and its θ-closure coincide.
    [Show full text]