Difference between revisions of "Notes:Quotient topology"
m (substitution didn't work as expected.) |
m |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
|} | |} | ||
</div>This is very similar to [[quotient (function)|the quotient of a function]].<br/> | </div>This is very similar to [[quotient (function)|the quotient of a function]].<br/> | ||
− | * Let X and Z be [[topological space|topological spaces]], | + | * Let X and Z be [[topological space|topological space|topological spaces]], |
* let {{M|q:X\rightarrow Y}} be a quotient map, | * let {{M|q:X\rightarrow Y}} be a quotient map, | ||
* let {{M|f:X\rightarrow Z}} be ''any'' continuous mapping such that {{M|1=q(x)=q(y)\implies f(x)=f(y)}} | * let {{M|f:X\rightarrow Z}} be ''any'' continuous mapping such that {{M|1=q(x)=q(y)\implies f(x)=f(y)}} | ||
Then | Then | ||
* There exists a unique continuous map, {{M|\bar{f}:Y\rightarrow Z}} such that {{M|1=f=\bar{f}\circ q}} | * There exists a unique continuous map, {{M|\bar{f}:Y\rightarrow Z}} such that {{M|1=f=\bar{f}\circ q}} | ||
+ | |||
==Munkres== | ==Munkres== | ||
+ | '''Munkres starts with a quotient map''' | ||
+ | * Let {{M|(X,\mathcal{J})}} and {{M|(Y,\mathcal{K})}} be [[topological space|topological spaces]] and | ||
+ | * let {{M|q:X\rightarrow Y}} be a [[surjective]] map | ||
+ | We say {{M|q}} is a ''quotient map'' provided: | ||
+ | * {{M|\forall U\in\mathcal{P}(Y)[U\in\mathcal{K}\iff p^{-1}(U)\in\mathcal{J}]}} | ||
+ | He goes on to say: | ||
+ | # This condition is "stronger than continuity" (of {{M|q}} presumably) probably because if we gave {{M|Y}} the [[indiscrete topology]] it'd be continuous. | ||
+ | # He defines this in several ways, one of which is "saturation" of maps. Yeah this is just the [[equivalence relation]] version hiding (CHECK THIS THOUGH) | ||
+ | ===Quotient topology=== | ||
+ | If {{M|(X,\mathcal{J})}} is a [[topological space]] and {{M|A}} a [[set]] and if {{M|p:X\rightarrow A}} is a ''[[surjective]]'' [[map]] then: | ||
+ | * There is exactly on topology, {{M|\mathcal{K} }} on {{M|A}} relative to which {{M|p}} is a ''quotient map'' (as defined above) | ||
+ | That topology is the ''quotient topology'' induced by {{M|p}} | ||
+ | ===Quotient space=== | ||
+ | Let {{M|(X,\mathcal{J})}} be a [[topological space]] and let {{M|X^*}} be a [[partition]] of {{M|X}} into disjoint subsets whose union is {{M|X}} (that is the definition of a [[partition]]). | ||
+ | Let {{M|p:X\rightarrow X^*}} be the surjective map that carries each point of {{M|X}} to the element of {{M|X^*}} containing that point, then: | ||
+ | * The ''quotient topology'' induced by {{M|p}} on {{M|X^*}} is called the ''quotient space'' of {{M|X}} |
Revision as of 21:35, 21 April 2016
Note to readers: the page quotient topology as it stands right now (Alec (talk) 17:07, 21 April 2016 (UTC)) is an embarrassment to me. However before I can clean it up I must unify it. I've been using it for almost 2 years now though I promise! Gosh this is embarrassing.
Contents
[hide]According to John M. Lee
Let ∼ denote an equivalence relation, let (X,J) be a topological space. We get a map, π:X→X∼ that takes π:x→[x]
- The quotient topology on X∼ is the finest such that π is continuous
Let K denote a topology on X∼, then we may define K as:
- K:={U∈P(X∼) | π−1(U)∈J}, that is:
- U∈P(X∼) is open if π−1(U) is open in X - we get "only if" by going the other way. I must make a page about how definitions are "iff"s
Note: more than one book is very clear on "U∈P(X∼) is open in X∼ if and only if π−1(U)∈J, not sure why they stress it so.
Quotient map
A map between two topological spaces (X,J) and (Y,K) is a quotient map if:
- It is surjective
- The topology on Y (K) is the quotient topology that'd be induced on Y by the map q
Lee actually defines the quotient topology using maps first, then constructs the equiv relation version, but we can can define an equivalence relation as follows:
- x∼y⟺q(x)=q(y) and that's where this comes from
Passing to the quotient
Passing to the quotient |
---|
- Let X and Z be topological space|topological spaces,
- let q:X→Y be a quotient map,
- let f:X→Z be any continuous mapping such that q(x)=q(y)⟹f(x)=f(y)
Then
- There exists a unique continuous map, ˉf:Y→Z such that f=ˉf∘q
Munkres
Munkres starts with a quotient map
- Let (X,J) and (Y,K) be topological spaces and
- let q:X→Y be a surjective map
We say q is a quotient map provided:
- ∀U∈P(Y)[U∈K⟺p−1(U)∈J]
He goes on to say:
- This condition is "stronger than continuity" (of q presumably) probably because if we gave Y the indiscrete topology it'd be continuous.
- He defines this in several ways, one of which is "saturation" of maps. Yeah this is just the equivalence relation version hiding (CHECK THIS THOUGH)
Quotient topology
If (X,J) is a topological space and A a set and if p:X→A is a surjective map then:
- There is exactly on topology, K on A relative to which p is a quotient map (as defined above)
That topology is the quotient topology induced by p
Quotient space
Let (X,J) be a topological space and let X∗ be a partition of X into disjoint subsets whose union is X (that is the definition of a partition). Let p:X→X∗ be the surjective map that carries each point of X to the element of X∗ containing that point, then:
- The quotient topology induced by p on X∗ is called the quotient space of X