Difference between revisions of "Exercises:Mond - Topology - 1/Question 9"
(Finishing proof) |
m (Changes to picture caption) |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
* We denote by {{M|\pi:\mathbb{S}^2\rightarrow\frac{\mathbb{S}^2}{\sim} }} the [[canonical projection of the equivalence relation]], {{M|\sim}}. Note that this is a {{link|quotient map|topology}} when we consider {{M|\frac{\mathbb{S}^2}{\sim} }} with the [[quotient topology]]. | * We denote by {{M|\pi:\mathbb{S}^2\rightarrow\frac{\mathbb{S}^2}{\sim} }} the [[canonical projection of the equivalence relation]], {{M|\sim}}. Note that this is a {{link|quotient map|topology}} when we consider {{M|\frac{\mathbb{S}^2}{\sim} }} with the [[quotient topology]]. | ||
====Solution outline==== | ====Solution outline==== | ||
− | [[File:RP2isHausdorff.JPG|thumb| | + | [[File:RP2isHausdorff.JPG|thumb|Suppose we take the points {{M|\alpha}} and {{M|\beta}} on the sphere. We could have [[open ball|balls]] (in {{M|\mathbb{R}^3}}) that are centred at {{M|\alpha}} and {{M|\beta}} and they'd get quite large before touching (we want them to be disjoint!) However we must consider 4 open balls, one at each point {{M|\alpha}}, {{M|\beta}}, {{M|\gamma}} and {{M|\delta}}, we see here even though {{M|\alpha}} and {{M|\beta}} are far apart that {{M|\beta}} and {{M|\gamma}} (which is [[antipodal]] to {{M|\alpha}}) are actually rather close! |
+ | <br/><br/> | ||
+ | So rather than {{M|\epsilon\le\frac{1}{2}d(\alpha,\beta)}} (for {{M|d}} being the [[Euclidean metric]] of {{M|\mathbb{R}^3}}) we must make sure that the ball at the antipodal point doesn't touch any others too! | ||
+ | <br/><br/> | ||
+ | It is clear that if {{M|1=\epsilon\le\frac{1}{2} d(\alpha,\gamma)=1 }} that the balls centred at {{M|\alpha}} and {{M|\gamma}} (or {{M|\beta}} and {{M|\delta}}) wont touch, we must make sure that {{M|\alpha}} and {{M|\beta}} don't touch, so use {{M|\epsilon\le d(\alpha,\beta)}}. | ||
+ | <br/><br/> | ||
+ | But as the diagram shows, {{M|\alpha}} and {{M|\delta}} could be rather close! (or equivalently, {{M|\gamma}} and {{M|\beta}}), so we need {{M|\epsilon<\frac{1}{2} d(\alpha,\delta)}} too! | ||
+ | <br/><br/> | ||
+ | We can boil all these down into {{M|\epsilon\le\frac{1}{2}\text{min}(\{d(\alpha,\beta),d(\alpha,\delta)\})}} ]]<!-- | ||
+ | |||
+ | START OF PARAGRAPH AND END OF IMAGE HERE | ||
+ | |||
+ | -->We will deal with the [[open sets]], {{M|U}}, in terms of {{M|\pi^{-1}(U)}} (as by definition, {{M|U\in\mathcal{P}(\frac{\mathbb{S}^2}{\sim})}} is open in {{M|1=\frac{\mathbb{S}^2}{\sim} }} {{iff}} {{M|\pi^{-1}(U)}} is open in {{M|\mathbb{S}^2}}, which we consider with the [[subspace topology]] inherited from {{M|\mathbb{R}^3}} as usual) then we just have to find small enough open balls! | ||
With this in mind, let {{M|a,b\in\mathbb{RP}^2}} be given. We need to find two [[open sets]] (well... [[neighbourhoods]] will do... but open sets are neighbourhoods!), let's say {{M|U_a}} and {{M|U_b}} such that: | With this in mind, let {{M|a,b\in\mathbb{RP}^2}} be given. We need to find two [[open sets]] (well... [[neighbourhoods]] will do... but open sets are neighbourhoods!), let's say {{M|U_a}} and {{M|U_b}} such that: |
Revision as of 17:51, 11 October 2016
Contents
[hide]Section B
Question 9
The real projective plane, RP2 is defined as the quotient of the sphere, S2, by the equivalence relation that defines (for x∈S2⊂R3) x∼−x, that is it identifies antipodal points.
Show that RP2 is Hausdorff
Definitions
- We denote by π:S2→S2∼ the canonical projection of the equivalence relation, ∼. Note that this is a quotient map when we consider S2∼ with the quotient topology.
Solution outline
So rather than ϵ≤12d(α,β) (for d being the Euclidean metric of R3) we must make sure that the ball at the antipodal point doesn't touch any others too!
It is clear that if ϵ≤12d(α,γ)=1 that the balls centred at α and γ (or β and δ) wont touch, we must make sure that α and β don't touch, so use ϵ≤d(α,β).
But as the diagram shows, α and δ could be rather close! (or equivalently, γ and β), so we need ϵ<12d(α,δ) too!
We can boil all these down into ϵ≤12min({d(α,β),d(α,δ)})
With this in mind, let a,b∈RP2 be given. We need to find two open sets (well... neighbourhoods will do... but open sets are neighbourhoods!), let's say Ua and Ub such that:
- a∈Ua, b∈Ub and Ua∩Ub=∅
Well:
- Ua is open in RP2
- π−1(Ua) is open in S2
- there exists an open set, Va in R3 such that Va∩S2=π−1(Ua)
Of course, the open balls of R3 are a basis, so we can think of Va as a union of open balls, or possibly just an open ball (as basis sets themselves are open, and also as an open ball can be expressed as a union of open balls).
This changes the question into, in terms of a and b, what size balls can we consider in R3 such that they're disjoint. There's a caveat here. This is what is shown in the diagram.
If a and b are "far apart" on RP2, it is entirely possible (in the pre-image under π) that the antipodal point of one is near the other!
So we must be careful to make sure our balls do not overlap at all!
Consider now {x,−x}=π−1(a) and {y,−y}=π−1(b):
We notice also there is extra "structure" on R3, namely that it is a normed space, (R3,∥⋅∥), and we consider the metric induced by the norm as the metric, d, for a metric space, (R3,d), then we see:
- d(x,y)=d(y,x) (by the symmetric property of a metric) and
- d(−x,y)=∥−x−y∥=∥(−1)x+y∥=∥x+y∥=d(x,−y)
- We don't need to consider d(x,−x) and d(y,−y), also d(x,x)=d(y,y)=0 is not very helpful
So take:
- ϵ≤12min({d(x,y),d(x,−y)}) (Note: Smaller would work too, eg 14 rather than 12 - I hope I don't need to prove 12 is sufficient?)
- This should explain why d(x,−x) and d(y,−y) are of no use!
Then just place one of these open balls of radius ϵ at each of the 4 points. Job done!
Solution
We wish to show that RP2 is Hausdorff.
- Let a,b∈RP2 be given such that a≠b, then
- there exist x,y∈S2 such that π−1(a)={x,−x} and π−1(b)={y,−y}
- Let ϵ:=12min({d(x,y),d(x,−y)}) Note that d(x,−y)=d(−x,y) - see above in the outline section
- Let Va:=Bϵ(x)∪Bϵ(−x)⊂R3 and Vb:=Bϵ(y)∪Bϵ(−y)⊂R3. These are open (in R3) as open balls are open sets, and the union of open sets is open.
- Now define Ua:=Va∩S2 and Ub:=Vb∩S2, these are open in S2 (considered with the subspace topology it inherits from R3 - as mentioned in the outline)
- Recall U∈P(RP2) is open if and only if π−1(U) is open in S2
- Thus:
- π(Ua) is open if and only if π−1(π(Ua)) is open in S2 and
- π(Ub) is open if and only if π−1(π(Ub)) is open in S2
- It should be clear that π−1(π(Ua))=Ua and π−1(π(Ub))=Ub (by their very construction)
- Thus:
- π(Ua) is open if and only if π−1(π(Ua))=Ua is open in S2 and
- π(Ub) is open if and only if π−1(π(Ub))=Ub is open in S2
- As both right-hand-sides are true, we see π(Ua) and π(Ub) are both open in RP2
- We must now show Ua and Ub are disjoint.
- Suppose there exists a p∈π(Ua)∩π(Ub) (that is that they're not disjoint and x is in both of them), then:
- clearly ∃q∈π−1(π(Ua))∩π−1(π(Ub)) such that π(q)=p[Note 1]
- However π−1(π(Ua))∩π−1(π(Ub))=Ua∩Ub and Ua∩Ub=∅ (by construction), so there does not exist such a q!
- If there is nothing in the pre-image of π(Ua)∩π(Ub) that maps to p then we cannot have p∈π(Ua)∩π(Ub) - a contradiction
- clearly ∃q∈π−1(π(Ua))∩π−1(π(Ub)) such that π(q)=p[Note 1]
- So there does not exist such a p, which means π(Ua)∩π(Ub)=∅, they're disjoint.
- Suppose there exists a p∈π(Ua)∩π(Ub) (that is that they're not disjoint and x is in both of them), then:
- Now define Ua:=Va∩S2 and Ub:=Vb∩S2, these are open in S2 (considered with the subspace topology it inherits from R3 - as mentioned in the outline)
- Let Va:=Bϵ(x)∪Bϵ(−x)⊂R3 and Vb:=Bϵ(y)∪Bϵ(−y)⊂R3. These are open (in R3) as open balls are open sets, and the union of open sets is open.
- Let ϵ:=12min({d(x,y),d(x,−y)}) Note that d(x,−y)=d(−x,y) - see above in the outline section
- there exist x,y∈S2 such that π−1(a)={x,−x} and π−1(b)={y,−y}
This completes the proof.
Notes
- Jump up ↑ Note that by Properties of the pre-image of a map that π−1(π(Ua)∩π(Ub))=π−1(π(Ua))∩π−1(π(Ub))
References