Machine-translated by Google. Questions are authored in English.
Top

Discussion

Consider \(([0,1], T_{1})\), where \(T_{1}\) is the subspace topology induced by the Euclidean topology on \(\mathbb{R}\), and let \(T_{2}\) be any topology on [0, 1]. Consider the following statements:

P : If \(T_{1}\) is a proper subset of \(T_{2}\), then \(([0,1], T_{2})\) is not compact.
Q : If \(T_{2}\) is a proper subset of \(T_{1}\), then \(([0,1], T_{2})\) is not Hausdorff.

Then

  • A.P is TRUE and Q is FALSE
  • B.Both P and Q are TRUE
  • C.Both P and Q are FALSE
  • D.P is FALSE and Q is TRUE

Answer: B

The answer is Both P and Q are TRUE.

Both follow from one fact: a continuous bijection from a compact space onto a Hausdorff space is a homeomorphism. \(([0,1], T_{1})\) is compact and Hausdorff.

P: if \(T_{2}\) strictly contains \(T_{1}\) and \(([0,1], T_{2})\) were compact, the identity from \(T_{2}\) to \(T_{1}\) would be a continuous bijection from a compact space to a Hausdorff one, hence a homeomorphism, forcing \(T_{2} = T_{1}\). So \(T_{2}\) is not compact.

Q: if \(T_{2}\) is strictly contained in \(T_{1}\) and were Hausdorff, the identity from \(T_{1}\) to \(T_{2}\) would be a homeomorphism for the same reason, forcing equality. So \(T_{2}\) is not Hausdorff.

A compact Hausdorff topology is both maximal compact and minimal Hausdorff, so every option calling P or Q false is wrong.

No comment is present. Be the first to comment.
Loading…

Post your comment

Please log in or register to post a comment.