Continuous bijection equivalent to homeomorphism under suitable hypotheses
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
My question is pretty simple to state, although I did not find any satisfying answer on the internet or books. I assume that the answer has to be well-known, but I can not figure any proof or counterexample.
Suppose that $B subset mathbb{R}^n$ is a connected topological space (with the relative topology) and we have a map $f:B to mathbb{R}$ which is assumed to be a continuous bijection. The question is if under these simple hypotheses it is enough to conclude that $f$ an homeomorphism.
Some remarks:
1) I am already aware about the invariance of domain theorem, that would give a YES answer for the case $B=mathbb{R}$.
2) I know that the statement would be false if $mathbb{R}$ was in the domain and $B$ in the codomain (classical counterexample where $B=mathbb{S}^1$).
My intuitive guess is that it is true.
One idea is to induce an order in $B$ from the order in $mathbb{R}$. Therefore, if there is some result that ensures me that $B$ is homeomorphic to a subset of $mathbb{R}$ it is everything done, because connectedness forces this homeomorphic set to $B$ to be an interval and it is immediate to conclude that has to be an open one (and from there is obvious). Any ideas?
general-topology continuity
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
My question is pretty simple to state, although I did not find any satisfying answer on the internet or books. I assume that the answer has to be well-known, but I can not figure any proof or counterexample.
Suppose that $B subset mathbb{R}^n$ is a connected topological space (with the relative topology) and we have a map $f:B to mathbb{R}$ which is assumed to be a continuous bijection. The question is if under these simple hypotheses it is enough to conclude that $f$ an homeomorphism.
Some remarks:
1) I am already aware about the invariance of domain theorem, that would give a YES answer for the case $B=mathbb{R}$.
2) I know that the statement would be false if $mathbb{R}$ was in the domain and $B$ in the codomain (classical counterexample where $B=mathbb{S}^1$).
My intuitive guess is that it is true.
One idea is to induce an order in $B$ from the order in $mathbb{R}$. Therefore, if there is some result that ensures me that $B$ is homeomorphic to a subset of $mathbb{R}$ it is everything done, because connectedness forces this homeomorphic set to $B$ to be an interval and it is immediate to conclude that has to be an open one (and from there is obvious). Any ideas?
general-topology continuity
1
What happens for instance if we take $B=mathbb{R}$ endowed with the discrete topology, and $f$ the identity map ?
– user120527
Nov 22 at 10:59
It is OK for the general case, but not enough if we assume B to be connected.
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:01
I have just seen this. I am not quite familiar with the order topology, but it seems that it would be enough to show that the order induced in $B$ induces an order topology equivalent to the one that $B$ already has? But maybe I suspect it is no simplification at all. at.yorku.ca/cgi-bin/…
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:03
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
My question is pretty simple to state, although I did not find any satisfying answer on the internet or books. I assume that the answer has to be well-known, but I can not figure any proof or counterexample.
Suppose that $B subset mathbb{R}^n$ is a connected topological space (with the relative topology) and we have a map $f:B to mathbb{R}$ which is assumed to be a continuous bijection. The question is if under these simple hypotheses it is enough to conclude that $f$ an homeomorphism.
Some remarks:
1) I am already aware about the invariance of domain theorem, that would give a YES answer for the case $B=mathbb{R}$.
2) I know that the statement would be false if $mathbb{R}$ was in the domain and $B$ in the codomain (classical counterexample where $B=mathbb{S}^1$).
My intuitive guess is that it is true.
One idea is to induce an order in $B$ from the order in $mathbb{R}$. Therefore, if there is some result that ensures me that $B$ is homeomorphic to a subset of $mathbb{R}$ it is everything done, because connectedness forces this homeomorphic set to $B$ to be an interval and it is immediate to conclude that has to be an open one (and from there is obvious). Any ideas?
general-topology continuity
My question is pretty simple to state, although I did not find any satisfying answer on the internet or books. I assume that the answer has to be well-known, but I can not figure any proof or counterexample.
Suppose that $B subset mathbb{R}^n$ is a connected topological space (with the relative topology) and we have a map $f:B to mathbb{R}$ which is assumed to be a continuous bijection. The question is if under these simple hypotheses it is enough to conclude that $f$ an homeomorphism.
Some remarks:
1) I am already aware about the invariance of domain theorem, that would give a YES answer for the case $B=mathbb{R}$.
2) I know that the statement would be false if $mathbb{R}$ was in the domain and $B$ in the codomain (classical counterexample where $B=mathbb{S}^1$).
My intuitive guess is that it is true.
One idea is to induce an order in $B$ from the order in $mathbb{R}$. Therefore, if there is some result that ensures me that $B$ is homeomorphic to a subset of $mathbb{R}$ it is everything done, because connectedness forces this homeomorphic set to $B$ to be an interval and it is immediate to conclude that has to be an open one (and from there is obvious). Any ideas?
general-topology continuity
general-topology continuity
edited Nov 22 at 13:51
asked Nov 22 at 10:53
DCao
251110
251110
1
What happens for instance if we take $B=mathbb{R}$ endowed with the discrete topology, and $f$ the identity map ?
– user120527
Nov 22 at 10:59
It is OK for the general case, but not enough if we assume B to be connected.
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:01
I have just seen this. I am not quite familiar with the order topology, but it seems that it would be enough to show that the order induced in $B$ induces an order topology equivalent to the one that $B$ already has? But maybe I suspect it is no simplification at all. at.yorku.ca/cgi-bin/…
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:03
add a comment |
1
What happens for instance if we take $B=mathbb{R}$ endowed with the discrete topology, and $f$ the identity map ?
– user120527
Nov 22 at 10:59
It is OK for the general case, but not enough if we assume B to be connected.
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:01
I have just seen this. I am not quite familiar with the order topology, but it seems that it would be enough to show that the order induced in $B$ induces an order topology equivalent to the one that $B$ already has? But maybe I suspect it is no simplification at all. at.yorku.ca/cgi-bin/…
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:03
1
1
What happens for instance if we take $B=mathbb{R}$ endowed with the discrete topology, and $f$ the identity map ?
– user120527
Nov 22 at 10:59
What happens for instance if we take $B=mathbb{R}$ endowed with the discrete topology, and $f$ the identity map ?
– user120527
Nov 22 at 10:59
It is OK for the general case, but not enough if we assume B to be connected.
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:01
It is OK for the general case, but not enough if we assume B to be connected.
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:01
I have just seen this. I am not quite familiar with the order topology, but it seems that it would be enough to show that the order induced in $B$ induces an order topology equivalent to the one that $B$ already has? But maybe I suspect it is no simplification at all. at.yorku.ca/cgi-bin/…
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:03
I have just seen this. I am not quite familiar with the order topology, but it seems that it would be enough to show that the order induced in $B$ induces an order topology equivalent to the one that $B$ already has? But maybe I suspect it is no simplification at all. at.yorku.ca/cgi-bin/…
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:03
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
You have the function $f:B to mathbb{R}$ that it is known to be biyective and continuous. Furthermore, we assume that $B$ is Hausdorff and path-connected. We want to see that $f^{-1}$ is continuous. I separate my answer in claims.
1) It is possible to induce a total order in $B$. Given $x,y in B$ just define $x>y$ iff $f(x)>f(y)$.
2) The preimage of $[f(x),f(y)]$ is the interval $[x,y] subset B$, meaning all the elements in $B$ that lie between $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ (trivial). Moreover, $[x,y] subset B$ is closed since it is the continuous preimage of a closed set.
3) Since $B$ is path-connected there is a continuous map $h: [0,1] to B$, with $f(0)=x$ and $f(1)=y$. We have that $f circ h:[0,1] to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous path from $f(x)$ to $f(y)$ and, by Bolzano, it contains $[f(x),f(y)]$. Therefore, since $f$ is bijective, $[x,y] subset h[0,1]$. Since $h[0,1]$ is compact, $[x,y]$ is closed and $B$ is Hausdorff, we have that $[x,y]$ is compact.
4) Therefore, the restriction of $f$ to the compact $[x,y]$ is an homeomorphism between $[x,y]$ and $[f(x),f(y)]$. In particular, the same happens for $(x,y)$ with image $(f(x),f(y))$. Changing $x$ for a sequence $x_n$ that goes to $-infty$ and $y$ for a sequence $y_n$ that goes to $+infty$ gives the result from a well-known lemma of prolongation of functions that have open domains and coincide in the intersection.
Remark: Point $4)$ holds for $mathbb{R}$ and not for $mathbb{S}^1$ (because you can not put $mathbb{S}^1$ as an increasing union of open sets homeomorphic to segments).
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3008998%2fcontinuous-bijection-equivalent-to-homeomorphism-under-suitable-hypotheses%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
You have the function $f:B to mathbb{R}$ that it is known to be biyective and continuous. Furthermore, we assume that $B$ is Hausdorff and path-connected. We want to see that $f^{-1}$ is continuous. I separate my answer in claims.
1) It is possible to induce a total order in $B$. Given $x,y in B$ just define $x>y$ iff $f(x)>f(y)$.
2) The preimage of $[f(x),f(y)]$ is the interval $[x,y] subset B$, meaning all the elements in $B$ that lie between $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ (trivial). Moreover, $[x,y] subset B$ is closed since it is the continuous preimage of a closed set.
3) Since $B$ is path-connected there is a continuous map $h: [0,1] to B$, with $f(0)=x$ and $f(1)=y$. We have that $f circ h:[0,1] to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous path from $f(x)$ to $f(y)$ and, by Bolzano, it contains $[f(x),f(y)]$. Therefore, since $f$ is bijective, $[x,y] subset h[0,1]$. Since $h[0,1]$ is compact, $[x,y]$ is closed and $B$ is Hausdorff, we have that $[x,y]$ is compact.
4) Therefore, the restriction of $f$ to the compact $[x,y]$ is an homeomorphism between $[x,y]$ and $[f(x),f(y)]$. In particular, the same happens for $(x,y)$ with image $(f(x),f(y))$. Changing $x$ for a sequence $x_n$ that goes to $-infty$ and $y$ for a sequence $y_n$ that goes to $+infty$ gives the result from a well-known lemma of prolongation of functions that have open domains and coincide in the intersection.
Remark: Point $4)$ holds for $mathbb{R}$ and not for $mathbb{S}^1$ (because you can not put $mathbb{S}^1$ as an increasing union of open sets homeomorphic to segments).
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
You have the function $f:B to mathbb{R}$ that it is known to be biyective and continuous. Furthermore, we assume that $B$ is Hausdorff and path-connected. We want to see that $f^{-1}$ is continuous. I separate my answer in claims.
1) It is possible to induce a total order in $B$. Given $x,y in B$ just define $x>y$ iff $f(x)>f(y)$.
2) The preimage of $[f(x),f(y)]$ is the interval $[x,y] subset B$, meaning all the elements in $B$ that lie between $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ (trivial). Moreover, $[x,y] subset B$ is closed since it is the continuous preimage of a closed set.
3) Since $B$ is path-connected there is a continuous map $h: [0,1] to B$, with $f(0)=x$ and $f(1)=y$. We have that $f circ h:[0,1] to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous path from $f(x)$ to $f(y)$ and, by Bolzano, it contains $[f(x),f(y)]$. Therefore, since $f$ is bijective, $[x,y] subset h[0,1]$. Since $h[0,1]$ is compact, $[x,y]$ is closed and $B$ is Hausdorff, we have that $[x,y]$ is compact.
4) Therefore, the restriction of $f$ to the compact $[x,y]$ is an homeomorphism between $[x,y]$ and $[f(x),f(y)]$. In particular, the same happens for $(x,y)$ with image $(f(x),f(y))$. Changing $x$ for a sequence $x_n$ that goes to $-infty$ and $y$ for a sequence $y_n$ that goes to $+infty$ gives the result from a well-known lemma of prolongation of functions that have open domains and coincide in the intersection.
Remark: Point $4)$ holds for $mathbb{R}$ and not for $mathbb{S}^1$ (because you can not put $mathbb{S}^1$ as an increasing union of open sets homeomorphic to segments).
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
You have the function $f:B to mathbb{R}$ that it is known to be biyective and continuous. Furthermore, we assume that $B$ is Hausdorff and path-connected. We want to see that $f^{-1}$ is continuous. I separate my answer in claims.
1) It is possible to induce a total order in $B$. Given $x,y in B$ just define $x>y$ iff $f(x)>f(y)$.
2) The preimage of $[f(x),f(y)]$ is the interval $[x,y] subset B$, meaning all the elements in $B$ that lie between $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ (trivial). Moreover, $[x,y] subset B$ is closed since it is the continuous preimage of a closed set.
3) Since $B$ is path-connected there is a continuous map $h: [0,1] to B$, with $f(0)=x$ and $f(1)=y$. We have that $f circ h:[0,1] to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous path from $f(x)$ to $f(y)$ and, by Bolzano, it contains $[f(x),f(y)]$. Therefore, since $f$ is bijective, $[x,y] subset h[0,1]$. Since $h[0,1]$ is compact, $[x,y]$ is closed and $B$ is Hausdorff, we have that $[x,y]$ is compact.
4) Therefore, the restriction of $f$ to the compact $[x,y]$ is an homeomorphism between $[x,y]$ and $[f(x),f(y)]$. In particular, the same happens for $(x,y)$ with image $(f(x),f(y))$. Changing $x$ for a sequence $x_n$ that goes to $-infty$ and $y$ for a sequence $y_n$ that goes to $+infty$ gives the result from a well-known lemma of prolongation of functions that have open domains and coincide in the intersection.
Remark: Point $4)$ holds for $mathbb{R}$ and not for $mathbb{S}^1$ (because you can not put $mathbb{S}^1$ as an increasing union of open sets homeomorphic to segments).
You have the function $f:B to mathbb{R}$ that it is known to be biyective and continuous. Furthermore, we assume that $B$ is Hausdorff and path-connected. We want to see that $f^{-1}$ is continuous. I separate my answer in claims.
1) It is possible to induce a total order in $B$. Given $x,y in B$ just define $x>y$ iff $f(x)>f(y)$.
2) The preimage of $[f(x),f(y)]$ is the interval $[x,y] subset B$, meaning all the elements in $B$ that lie between $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ (trivial). Moreover, $[x,y] subset B$ is closed since it is the continuous preimage of a closed set.
3) Since $B$ is path-connected there is a continuous map $h: [0,1] to B$, with $f(0)=x$ and $f(1)=y$. We have that $f circ h:[0,1] to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous path from $f(x)$ to $f(y)$ and, by Bolzano, it contains $[f(x),f(y)]$. Therefore, since $f$ is bijective, $[x,y] subset h[0,1]$. Since $h[0,1]$ is compact, $[x,y]$ is closed and $B$ is Hausdorff, we have that $[x,y]$ is compact.
4) Therefore, the restriction of $f$ to the compact $[x,y]$ is an homeomorphism between $[x,y]$ and $[f(x),f(y)]$. In particular, the same happens for $(x,y)$ with image $(f(x),f(y))$. Changing $x$ for a sequence $x_n$ that goes to $-infty$ and $y$ for a sequence $y_n$ that goes to $+infty$ gives the result from a well-known lemma of prolongation of functions that have open domains and coincide in the intersection.
Remark: Point $4)$ holds for $mathbb{R}$ and not for $mathbb{S}^1$ (because you can not put $mathbb{S}^1$ as an increasing union of open sets homeomorphic to segments).
answered Nov 22 at 20:56
DCao
251110
251110
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3008998%2fcontinuous-bijection-equivalent-to-homeomorphism-under-suitable-hypotheses%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
What happens for instance if we take $B=mathbb{R}$ endowed with the discrete topology, and $f$ the identity map ?
– user120527
Nov 22 at 10:59
It is OK for the general case, but not enough if we assume B to be connected.
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:01
I have just seen this. I am not quite familiar with the order topology, but it seems that it would be enough to show that the order induced in $B$ induces an order topology equivalent to the one that $B$ already has? But maybe I suspect it is no simplification at all. at.yorku.ca/cgi-bin/…
– DCao
Nov 22 at 11:03