From: "Brian M. Scott"
Subject: Re: Definition of a discontinuous function
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 00:38:56 -0400
Newsgroups: alt.algebra.help,sci.math
Keywords: topologies on power set (Vietoris topology, Pixley-Roy topology)
Ronald Bruck wrote:
> In article <37626260.B6B5B5F3@hut.fi>, Pertti Lounesto
> wrote:
> :"Brian M. Scott" wrote:
> :> Pertti Lounesto wrote:
> :> > And what if you define f: R -> R U P(R), by
> :> >
> :> > sin(1/x) for x not= 0
> :> > f(x) =
> :> > [-1,1] for x = 0?
> :> You will be obliged first to define a topology on
> :> R U P(R) if you wish to talk about continuity of f.
> :That is right. If we simplify things, and consider only
> :mappings f:R->P(R), what interesting topologies could
> :we use on P(R)?
> Ah, missed seeing this before I replied to the earlier post.
> On P(R) itself, I dunno of a useful one.
If X is a topological space, let A(X) be the collection
of non-empty subsets of X topologized as follows. For
each n in N and each (n+1)-tuple of
open sets in X, define <> = {A in A(X):
A is a subset of V(0) U ... U V(n) and A meets each V(i)
in a non-empty set}. The sets <> form
a base for the Vietoris topology on A(X).
Another topology on A(X) is the Pixley-Roy topology; its
base is the collection of sets [A,V], for A in A(X) and
V open in X, where [A,V] = {S : A is a subset of S and S
is a subset of V}. This is finer than the Vietoris
topology and is most interesting when X is metrizable.
In each case it's often more interesting to look at a
subspace, e.g., the finite, compact, or closed non-empty
subsets of X instead of all of them. For Pertti's
example we could use the compact sets, but it's not
continuous wrt either topology: for each n [-1,1] has a
Vietoris nbhd in which every point is a set of cardinality
at least n.
Brian M. Scott