2

Given a collection of topological spaces $$ \mathfrak X:=\{X_\sigma:\sigma\in\Sigma\} $$ we let consider the natural inclusion $$ \iota_\sigma: X_\sigma\ni x_\sigma\longrightarrow(x_\sigma,\sigma)\in\coprod_{\sigma\in\Sigma}X_\sigma $$ Well I would like to understand if a function $f$ form $\coprod_{\sigma\in\Sigma}X_\sigma$ to a space $Y$ is continuous if and only if $f\circ\iota_\sigma$ is continuous.

So on this purpouse I first observed that the map $$ e_\sigma:X_\sigma\ni x_\sigma\longrightarrow(x_\sigma,\sigma)\in X_\sigma\times\{\sigma\} $$ is an embedding so that I observed that if $$ i_\sigma:X_\sigma\times\{\sigma\}\ni (x_\sigma,\sigma)\longrightarrow(x_\sigma,\sigma)\in\coprod_{\sigma\in\Sigma}X_\sigma $$ is the inclusion then the identity $$ \iota_\sigma=i_\sigma\circ e_\sigma $$ holds and thus I concluded that $\iota_\sigma$ is a continuous function. So if $f$ is continuous then clearly even $f\circ\iota_\sigma$ is continuous. Conversely if $f\circ \iota_\sigma$ is continuous then I observed that $$ f\circ i_\sigma=\big(f\circ (i_\sigma\circ e_\sigma)\big)\circ e^{-1}_\sigma=(f\circ\iota_\sigma)\circ e^{-1}_\sigma $$ for any $\sigma\in \Sigma$ so that by the universal continuous property of final topolgy I concluded that $f$ is continuous.

So I would like to know if my proof attempt is correct and then I would like to know if the coproduct topology is just the final topology induced by the collection $$ I:=\{\iota_\sigma:\sigma\in \Sigma\} $$ I point out that I think that the last statement is false because e.g. if $X_{\sigma_1}$ and $X_{\sigma_2}$ are not disjoint then $\iota^{-1}_{\sigma_2}[A_{\sigma_1}\times\{\sigma_1\}]$ cannot be open in $X_{\sigma_2}$ when it is open in $X_{\sigma_1}$: however I was not able to find an appropriate counterexample. So could someone help me, please?

1 Answers1

2

Yes, your proof is correct. It's good you have seperated the inclusions (and also haven't forgotten the $-\times\{\sigma\}$), but you don't need to when you are more stable.

The coproduct topology (or also called disjoint union topology) is indeed the final topology induced by all inclusions $\iota_\sigma$, which are then all continuous by definition. The forward direction is then simple, as all $f\circ\iota_\sigma$ are simply compositions of continuous maps. For the backwards direction, you could also go another way without using the universal property, but it is related of course. It would look something like this:

Lemma: For topological spaces $X$, $Y$ and $Z$ as well as maps $i\colon X\rightarrow Y$ and $f\colon Y\rightarrow Z$, we have: If $f\circ i$ is continuous and $i$ is open, then $f\vert_{i(X)}$ is continuous.

Let $U\subseteq Z$ be open, then $i^{-1}(f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U))=(f\vert_{i(X)}\circ i)^{-1}(U)\subseteq X$ is open since $f\circ i=f\vert_{i(X)}\circ i$ is continous, therefore $f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U)=f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U)\cap i(X)=i(i^{-1}(f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U))\subseteq Y$ is open since $i$ is open. Therefore $f\vert_{i(X)}$ is continuous. $\square$

Lemma: The inclusion $\iota_\sigma\colon X_\sigma\hookrightarrow\bigsqcup_{\sigma\in\Sigma}X_\sigma$ is open.

Proof: Let $U\subseteq X_\sigma$ be open, then $\iota_\sigma^{-1}(\iota_\sigma(U))=U$ since $\iota_\sigma$ is injective. Therefore we have that $\iota_\sigma(U)\subset\bigsqcup_{\sigma\in\Sigma}X_\sigma$ is open due to the definition of the coproduct topology as the finest (with the most open sets possible), so that all inclusions $\iota_\sigma$ are continuous. $\square$

Therefore, we can conclude that if all $f\circ\iota_\sigma$ are continuous, then all limitations $f\vert_{\iota_\sigma(X_\sigma)}$ are and therefore $f$ is due to the pasting lemma.

Samuel Adrian Antz
  • 2,134
  • 1
  • 5
  • 19
  • Sorry, but it seem to me that the identity $$i\Big[i^{-1}\big[f^{-1}[U]\big]\Big]=f^{-1}[U]$$ holds only if $i$ is surjective so that I do not copmletely understand the proof of the first lemma: so could you explain better, please? – Antonio Maria Di Mauro Jun 26 '22 at 15:57
  • Moreover I now saw I made a mistake in the question: indeed I wanted observe that if $X_{\sigma_1}$ and $X_{\sigma_2}$ are not disjoint then $\iota^{-1}{\sigma_2}[A{\sigma_1}\times{\sigma_1}]$ is not generally open in $X_{\sigma_2}$ where $A_{\sigma_1}$ is open in $X_{\sigma_1}$ so that it seem that the coproduct topology is not the final topology generated by the collection $I$ as defined in the question. So what can you say about? – Antonio Maria Di Mauro Jun 26 '22 at 15:57
  • I want mean $$i(i^{-1}(f^{-1}(U))=f^{-1}(U)$$ – Antonio Maria Di Mauro Jun 26 '22 at 16:01
  • The equation $i(i^{-1}(V))=V$ holds for any subset $V\subseteq Y$: \begin{equation} y\in i(i^{-1}(V)) \Leftrightarrow \exists x\in i^{-1}(V)\colon y=i(x) \Leftrightarrow y\in V. \end{equation} What is indeed true is that $i^{-1}(i(W))=W$ for a subset $W\subseteq X$ only holds if $i$ is injective, a case that I have also used. – Samuel Adrian Antz Jun 26 '22 at 16:03
  • It is indeed a problem, when the topological spaces are not disjoint. That is why you use the disjoint union to make them. The image of $\iota_{\sigma_2}$ will always be equipped with a $(-,\sigma_2)$ or $-\times{\sigma_2}$. Therefore $\iota_{\sigma_2}^{-1}(A_{\sigma_1}\times{\sigma_1})=\emptyset$ still holds. – Samuel Adrian Antz Jun 26 '22 at 16:06
  • Sorry but if $i$ is not surjective then only the inclusion $$i(i^{-1}(V))\subseteq V$$ holds surely because $V$ could be not contained into $i[X]$. You can see here that the equality holds for surjective functions but otherwise could be not true: e.g. if $f$ is the function $\sin x$ then $f[f^{-1}[\Bbb R^+]]$ is not $\Bbb R^+$. So what can you say about? – Antonio Maria Di Mauro Jun 26 '22 at 16:10
  • Okay, you're right. I missed that totally. The last $\Leftrightarrow$ above should be a $\Rightarrow$. Since $i$ is open, $i(X)\subseteq Y$ is open and $i(i^{-1}(f^{-1}(U)))=i(X)\cap f^{-1}(U)$. Therefore, we can only conclude surjectivity for $f\vert_{i(X)}$. As a result we still need all maps $f\circ\iota_\sigma$ to be continuous. I was already wondering about that. I will correct my answer. – Samuel Adrian Antz Jun 26 '22 at 16:27
  • So I think you wanted write $$i(i^{-1}(f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U))=f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U)\cap i(X)=f^{-1}[U]\cpa i[X]\subseteq Y$$ and not $$i(i^{-1}(f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U))=f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U)\cap i(X)=f\vert_{i(X)}\subseteq Y $$ right? Moreover do you use the pasting lemma to conclude that $f$ is continuous in your second lemma, right? – Antonio Maria Di Mauro Jun 26 '22 at 16:51
  • 1
    I wanted to write $f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U)$ instead of just $f\vert_{i(X)}$. Having $\subset i(X)$ there would not be a fitting replacement. Since I want to show, that $f\vert_{i(X)}$ is continuous, I need to have the expression $f\vert_{i(X)}^{-1}(U)$ appearing.

    Yes, that is the pasting lemma. I've now added both edits.

    – Samuel Adrian Antz Jun 26 '22 at 16:56
  • 1
    Okay, tanks for your assistance: answer upvoted and approved. See you soon. :-) – Antonio Maria Di Mauro Jun 26 '22 at 16:58
  • 1
    Thanks, also for the discussion. I can't believe I had the first lemma in mind in a totally wrong way all along. Well, now I know. See you soon! :-) – Samuel Adrian Antz Jun 26 '22 at 17:00