Are all countable metric spaces discrete? [on hold]











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Is there a countable metric space that isn't a discrete metric space?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as off-topic by user21820, Rushabh Mehta, José Carlos Santos, Holo, Brahadeesh 20 hours ago


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user21820, Rushabh Mehta, José Carlos Santos, Holo, Brahadeesh

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.













  • This is probably obvious to you but not to all, but countable means countably infinite rather than finite.
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Is there a countable metric space that isn't a discrete metric space?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as off-topic by user21820, Rushabh Mehta, José Carlos Santos, Holo, Brahadeesh 20 hours ago


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user21820, Rushabh Mehta, José Carlos Santos, Holo, Brahadeesh

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.













  • This is probably obvious to you but not to all, but countable means countably infinite rather than finite.
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday













up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











Is there a countable metric space that isn't a discrete metric space?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











Is there a countable metric space that isn't a discrete metric space?







general-topology metric-spaces






share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question






New contributor




George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked yesterday









George

181




181




New contributor




George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






George is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




put on hold as off-topic by user21820, Rushabh Mehta, José Carlos Santos, Holo, Brahadeesh 20 hours ago


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user21820, Rushabh Mehta, José Carlos Santos, Holo, Brahadeesh

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.




put on hold as off-topic by user21820, Rushabh Mehta, José Carlos Santos, Holo, Brahadeesh 20 hours ago


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user21820, Rushabh Mehta, José Carlos Santos, Holo, Brahadeesh

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.












  • This is probably obvious to you but not to all, but countable means countably infinite rather than finite.
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday


















  • This is probably obvious to you but not to all, but countable means countably infinite rather than finite.
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday
















This is probably obvious to you but not to all, but countable means countably infinite rather than finite.
– Robert Frost
yesterday




This is probably obvious to you but not to all, but countable means countably infinite rather than finite.
– Robert Frost
yesterday










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
7
down vote













The set of rational numbers $mathbb{Q}$ with the usual metric is a countable, metric space (which is also perfect, i.e. it doesn't have any isolated points). Being perfect can be viewed as being 'very far' from discrete.





Bonus: Consider the reals with their natural metric $(mathbb R; d)$. Let $g$ be $mathrm{Coll}(omega, mathbb R)$-generic over $V$. In the generic extension $V[g]$ we have that $mathbb{R}$ is countable but (by an easy absoluteness argument) $(mathbb{R}, d)$ remains a (non-complete but perfect) metric space in this larger universe.



(This can also be achieved by taking a countable, transitivized Skolem hull $M$ of $V_{omega_1}$ and considering $(mathbb R;d)^M$ -- $M$'s version of the reals and their metric. The advantage of the latter construction is that it takes place purely in $mathrm{ZF}$, without stepping out of the set theoretical universe.)






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Hang on, $Bbb R$ is countable? I'd love to know more about that. Is every element of $Bbb R$ expressible in a countable set like that statement sounds?
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday






  • 1




    @RobertFrost: It's not that $mathbb{R}$ is countable, but rather that the $mathbb{R}$ in one set-theoretic universe might be found to be countable (i.e. in bijection with the natural numbers) in a larger set-theoretic universe which happens to have more natural numbers than the first. The real numbers in the larger universe are of course not countable, by its own standards.
    – Kundor
    yesterday






  • 1




    Ok thanks @Kundor . I'm going to file that under "one day I might understand that".
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday










  • @Kundor : Yep, because the larger universe has more naturals in it, it can have enough of them to count all the reals in the first universe, right?
    – The_Sympathizer
    23 hours ago








  • 1




    @RobertFrost No to both questions.
    – Stefan Mesken
    10 hours ago


















up vote
4
down vote













Just for fun I put the formula "metrizable + ~discrete + countable" into https://topology.jdabbs.com/



and found some fun examples of nondiscrete countable metric spaces.



The first example I hadn't heard of before was the "Countable Fort Space" which is defined in the following way:



Let $X$ be a countable set and $pin X$. Define $Usubseteq X$ to be open provided that $Xsetminus U$ is finite or $pnotin U$.



Likewise there is the evenly spaced integer topology.



Let $X=mathbb{Z}$ equipped with the topology generated by all sets of the form



$$a+kmathbb{Z}={a+knmid ninmathbb{Z}}text{ for all }a,kinmathbb{Z}$$



There are others of course, but those were some fun ones that haven't been mentioned in this post yet.






share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 1




    countable Fort space is just homeomorphic to ${frac{1}{n}: n ge 1} cup {0}$ as a subspace of the reals. (It's only added because we also have uncountable Fort space, which is the one-point compactification of a discrete space, like the sequence). The countable version is metrisable, so is mentioned separately.
    – Henno Brandsma
    yesterday










  • So it is, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
    – Robert Thingum
    yesterday






  • 1




    The evenly spaces integer topology is just $mathbb{Q}$ topologically, as is any countable metric space without isolated points.
    – Henno Brandsma
    yesterday


















up vote
3
down vote













For a metric space to be discrete we need to have every singleton to be open.



Consider the metric space of $Q$, the rational numbers with the standard metric.



$Q$ is countable but singletons are not open because in every neighborhood of a singleton there are points other the singleton itself so no open interval in included in the singleton.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • It's a bit confusing that OP asked opposing questions in the title and the body of his post... I'll edit my answer to make it more apparent that the "yes" refers to the body of the question.
    – Stefan Mesken
    yesterday




















up vote
3
down vote













If $X$ is a metric space and $x in X$, then the following statements are equivalent:




  • The metric-induced topology on $X$ is not the discrete topology, with ${ x }$ being non-open in $X$.


  • $x$ is an accumulation point in $X$.


  • There exists a sequence $x_1, x_2, x_3, dots in X setminus { x } $ such that $x_n to x$.



So probably the "sparsest" way to construct a countable metric space $X$ whose metric-induced topology is not the discrete topology is to choose a convergent sequence $x_n$ in $mathbb R$, with limit $x := lim_{n to infty } x_n$ such that the $x_n neq x$ for all $n$, and define $$X = { x_n : n in mathbb N } cup { x }.$$
For example, $X = { frac 1 n : n in mathbb N } cup { 0 }$ works.



Of course, $X = mathbb Q$ works too, as Stefan explained, as witnessed by the fact that it contains the sequence $x_n = frac 1 n$ and its limit $0$.






share|cite|improve this answer






























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    7
    down vote













    The set of rational numbers $mathbb{Q}$ with the usual metric is a countable, metric space (which is also perfect, i.e. it doesn't have any isolated points). Being perfect can be viewed as being 'very far' from discrete.





    Bonus: Consider the reals with their natural metric $(mathbb R; d)$. Let $g$ be $mathrm{Coll}(omega, mathbb R)$-generic over $V$. In the generic extension $V[g]$ we have that $mathbb{R}$ is countable but (by an easy absoluteness argument) $(mathbb{R}, d)$ remains a (non-complete but perfect) metric space in this larger universe.



    (This can also be achieved by taking a countable, transitivized Skolem hull $M$ of $V_{omega_1}$ and considering $(mathbb R;d)^M$ -- $M$'s version of the reals and their metric. The advantage of the latter construction is that it takes place purely in $mathrm{ZF}$, without stepping out of the set theoretical universe.)






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • Hang on, $Bbb R$ is countable? I'd love to know more about that. Is every element of $Bbb R$ expressible in a countable set like that statement sounds?
      – Robert Frost
      yesterday






    • 1




      @RobertFrost: It's not that $mathbb{R}$ is countable, but rather that the $mathbb{R}$ in one set-theoretic universe might be found to be countable (i.e. in bijection with the natural numbers) in a larger set-theoretic universe which happens to have more natural numbers than the first. The real numbers in the larger universe are of course not countable, by its own standards.
      – Kundor
      yesterday






    • 1




      Ok thanks @Kundor . I'm going to file that under "one day I might understand that".
      – Robert Frost
      yesterday










    • @Kundor : Yep, because the larger universe has more naturals in it, it can have enough of them to count all the reals in the first universe, right?
      – The_Sympathizer
      23 hours ago








    • 1




      @RobertFrost No to both questions.
      – Stefan Mesken
      10 hours ago















    up vote
    7
    down vote













    The set of rational numbers $mathbb{Q}$ with the usual metric is a countable, metric space (which is also perfect, i.e. it doesn't have any isolated points). Being perfect can be viewed as being 'very far' from discrete.





    Bonus: Consider the reals with their natural metric $(mathbb R; d)$. Let $g$ be $mathrm{Coll}(omega, mathbb R)$-generic over $V$. In the generic extension $V[g]$ we have that $mathbb{R}$ is countable but (by an easy absoluteness argument) $(mathbb{R}, d)$ remains a (non-complete but perfect) metric space in this larger universe.



    (This can also be achieved by taking a countable, transitivized Skolem hull $M$ of $V_{omega_1}$ and considering $(mathbb R;d)^M$ -- $M$'s version of the reals and their metric. The advantage of the latter construction is that it takes place purely in $mathrm{ZF}$, without stepping out of the set theoretical universe.)






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • Hang on, $Bbb R$ is countable? I'd love to know more about that. Is every element of $Bbb R$ expressible in a countable set like that statement sounds?
      – Robert Frost
      yesterday






    • 1




      @RobertFrost: It's not that $mathbb{R}$ is countable, but rather that the $mathbb{R}$ in one set-theoretic universe might be found to be countable (i.e. in bijection with the natural numbers) in a larger set-theoretic universe which happens to have more natural numbers than the first. The real numbers in the larger universe are of course not countable, by its own standards.
      – Kundor
      yesterday






    • 1




      Ok thanks @Kundor . I'm going to file that under "one day I might understand that".
      – Robert Frost
      yesterday










    • @Kundor : Yep, because the larger universe has more naturals in it, it can have enough of them to count all the reals in the first universe, right?
      – The_Sympathizer
      23 hours ago








    • 1




      @RobertFrost No to both questions.
      – Stefan Mesken
      10 hours ago













    up vote
    7
    down vote










    up vote
    7
    down vote









    The set of rational numbers $mathbb{Q}$ with the usual metric is a countable, metric space (which is also perfect, i.e. it doesn't have any isolated points). Being perfect can be viewed as being 'very far' from discrete.





    Bonus: Consider the reals with their natural metric $(mathbb R; d)$. Let $g$ be $mathrm{Coll}(omega, mathbb R)$-generic over $V$. In the generic extension $V[g]$ we have that $mathbb{R}$ is countable but (by an easy absoluteness argument) $(mathbb{R}, d)$ remains a (non-complete but perfect) metric space in this larger universe.



    (This can also be achieved by taking a countable, transitivized Skolem hull $M$ of $V_{omega_1}$ and considering $(mathbb R;d)^M$ -- $M$'s version of the reals and their metric. The advantage of the latter construction is that it takes place purely in $mathrm{ZF}$, without stepping out of the set theoretical universe.)






    share|cite|improve this answer














    The set of rational numbers $mathbb{Q}$ with the usual metric is a countable, metric space (which is also perfect, i.e. it doesn't have any isolated points). Being perfect can be viewed as being 'very far' from discrete.





    Bonus: Consider the reals with their natural metric $(mathbb R; d)$. Let $g$ be $mathrm{Coll}(omega, mathbb R)$-generic over $V$. In the generic extension $V[g]$ we have that $mathbb{R}$ is countable but (by an easy absoluteness argument) $(mathbb{R}, d)$ remains a (non-complete but perfect) metric space in this larger universe.



    (This can also be achieved by taking a countable, transitivized Skolem hull $M$ of $V_{omega_1}$ and considering $(mathbb R;d)^M$ -- $M$'s version of the reals and their metric. The advantage of the latter construction is that it takes place purely in $mathrm{ZF}$, without stepping out of the set theoretical universe.)







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited yesterday

























    answered yesterday









    Stefan Mesken

    14.2k32045




    14.2k32045












    • Hang on, $Bbb R$ is countable? I'd love to know more about that. Is every element of $Bbb R$ expressible in a countable set like that statement sounds?
      – Robert Frost
      yesterday






    • 1




      @RobertFrost: It's not that $mathbb{R}$ is countable, but rather that the $mathbb{R}$ in one set-theoretic universe might be found to be countable (i.e. in bijection with the natural numbers) in a larger set-theoretic universe which happens to have more natural numbers than the first. The real numbers in the larger universe are of course not countable, by its own standards.
      – Kundor
      yesterday






    • 1




      Ok thanks @Kundor . I'm going to file that under "one day I might understand that".
      – Robert Frost
      yesterday










    • @Kundor : Yep, because the larger universe has more naturals in it, it can have enough of them to count all the reals in the first universe, right?
      – The_Sympathizer
      23 hours ago








    • 1




      @RobertFrost No to both questions.
      – Stefan Mesken
      10 hours ago


















    • Hang on, $Bbb R$ is countable? I'd love to know more about that. Is every element of $Bbb R$ expressible in a countable set like that statement sounds?
      – Robert Frost
      yesterday






    • 1




      @RobertFrost: It's not that $mathbb{R}$ is countable, but rather that the $mathbb{R}$ in one set-theoretic universe might be found to be countable (i.e. in bijection with the natural numbers) in a larger set-theoretic universe which happens to have more natural numbers than the first. The real numbers in the larger universe are of course not countable, by its own standards.
      – Kundor
      yesterday






    • 1




      Ok thanks @Kundor . I'm going to file that under "one day I might understand that".
      – Robert Frost
      yesterday










    • @Kundor : Yep, because the larger universe has more naturals in it, it can have enough of them to count all the reals in the first universe, right?
      – The_Sympathizer
      23 hours ago








    • 1




      @RobertFrost No to both questions.
      – Stefan Mesken
      10 hours ago
















    Hang on, $Bbb R$ is countable? I'd love to know more about that. Is every element of $Bbb R$ expressible in a countable set like that statement sounds?
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday




    Hang on, $Bbb R$ is countable? I'd love to know more about that. Is every element of $Bbb R$ expressible in a countable set like that statement sounds?
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday




    1




    1




    @RobertFrost: It's not that $mathbb{R}$ is countable, but rather that the $mathbb{R}$ in one set-theoretic universe might be found to be countable (i.e. in bijection with the natural numbers) in a larger set-theoretic universe which happens to have more natural numbers than the first. The real numbers in the larger universe are of course not countable, by its own standards.
    – Kundor
    yesterday




    @RobertFrost: It's not that $mathbb{R}$ is countable, but rather that the $mathbb{R}$ in one set-theoretic universe might be found to be countable (i.e. in bijection with the natural numbers) in a larger set-theoretic universe which happens to have more natural numbers than the first. The real numbers in the larger universe are of course not countable, by its own standards.
    – Kundor
    yesterday




    1




    1




    Ok thanks @Kundor . I'm going to file that under "one day I might understand that".
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday




    Ok thanks @Kundor . I'm going to file that under "one day I might understand that".
    – Robert Frost
    yesterday












    @Kundor : Yep, because the larger universe has more naturals in it, it can have enough of them to count all the reals in the first universe, right?
    – The_Sympathizer
    23 hours ago






    @Kundor : Yep, because the larger universe has more naturals in it, it can have enough of them to count all the reals in the first universe, right?
    – The_Sympathizer
    23 hours ago






    1




    1




    @RobertFrost No to both questions.
    – Stefan Mesken
    10 hours ago




    @RobertFrost No to both questions.
    – Stefan Mesken
    10 hours ago










    up vote
    4
    down vote













    Just for fun I put the formula "metrizable + ~discrete + countable" into https://topology.jdabbs.com/



    and found some fun examples of nondiscrete countable metric spaces.



    The first example I hadn't heard of before was the "Countable Fort Space" which is defined in the following way:



    Let $X$ be a countable set and $pin X$. Define $Usubseteq X$ to be open provided that $Xsetminus U$ is finite or $pnotin U$.



    Likewise there is the evenly spaced integer topology.



    Let $X=mathbb{Z}$ equipped with the topology generated by all sets of the form



    $$a+kmathbb{Z}={a+knmid ninmathbb{Z}}text{ for all }a,kinmathbb{Z}$$



    There are others of course, but those were some fun ones that haven't been mentioned in this post yet.






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 1




      countable Fort space is just homeomorphic to ${frac{1}{n}: n ge 1} cup {0}$ as a subspace of the reals. (It's only added because we also have uncountable Fort space, which is the one-point compactification of a discrete space, like the sequence). The countable version is metrisable, so is mentioned separately.
      – Henno Brandsma
      yesterday










    • So it is, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
      – Robert Thingum
      yesterday






    • 1




      The evenly spaces integer topology is just $mathbb{Q}$ topologically, as is any countable metric space without isolated points.
      – Henno Brandsma
      yesterday















    up vote
    4
    down vote













    Just for fun I put the formula "metrizable + ~discrete + countable" into https://topology.jdabbs.com/



    and found some fun examples of nondiscrete countable metric spaces.



    The first example I hadn't heard of before was the "Countable Fort Space" which is defined in the following way:



    Let $X$ be a countable set and $pin X$. Define $Usubseteq X$ to be open provided that $Xsetminus U$ is finite or $pnotin U$.



    Likewise there is the evenly spaced integer topology.



    Let $X=mathbb{Z}$ equipped with the topology generated by all sets of the form



    $$a+kmathbb{Z}={a+knmid ninmathbb{Z}}text{ for all }a,kinmathbb{Z}$$



    There are others of course, but those were some fun ones that haven't been mentioned in this post yet.






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 1




      countable Fort space is just homeomorphic to ${frac{1}{n}: n ge 1} cup {0}$ as a subspace of the reals. (It's only added because we also have uncountable Fort space, which is the one-point compactification of a discrete space, like the sequence). The countable version is metrisable, so is mentioned separately.
      – Henno Brandsma
      yesterday










    • So it is, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
      – Robert Thingum
      yesterday






    • 1




      The evenly spaces integer topology is just $mathbb{Q}$ topologically, as is any countable metric space without isolated points.
      – Henno Brandsma
      yesterday













    up vote
    4
    down vote










    up vote
    4
    down vote









    Just for fun I put the formula "metrizable + ~discrete + countable" into https://topology.jdabbs.com/



    and found some fun examples of nondiscrete countable metric spaces.



    The first example I hadn't heard of before was the "Countable Fort Space" which is defined in the following way:



    Let $X$ be a countable set and $pin X$. Define $Usubseteq X$ to be open provided that $Xsetminus U$ is finite or $pnotin U$.



    Likewise there is the evenly spaced integer topology.



    Let $X=mathbb{Z}$ equipped with the topology generated by all sets of the form



    $$a+kmathbb{Z}={a+knmid ninmathbb{Z}}text{ for all }a,kinmathbb{Z}$$



    There are others of course, but those were some fun ones that haven't been mentioned in this post yet.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    Just for fun I put the formula "metrizable + ~discrete + countable" into https://topology.jdabbs.com/



    and found some fun examples of nondiscrete countable metric spaces.



    The first example I hadn't heard of before was the "Countable Fort Space" which is defined in the following way:



    Let $X$ be a countable set and $pin X$. Define $Usubseteq X$ to be open provided that $Xsetminus U$ is finite or $pnotin U$.



    Likewise there is the evenly spaced integer topology.



    Let $X=mathbb{Z}$ equipped with the topology generated by all sets of the form



    $$a+kmathbb{Z}={a+knmid ninmathbb{Z}}text{ for all }a,kinmathbb{Z}$$



    There are others of course, but those were some fun ones that haven't been mentioned in this post yet.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered yesterday









    Robert Thingum

    7541316




    7541316








    • 1




      countable Fort space is just homeomorphic to ${frac{1}{n}: n ge 1} cup {0}$ as a subspace of the reals. (It's only added because we also have uncountable Fort space, which is the one-point compactification of a discrete space, like the sequence). The countable version is metrisable, so is mentioned separately.
      – Henno Brandsma
      yesterday










    • So it is, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
      – Robert Thingum
      yesterday






    • 1




      The evenly spaces integer topology is just $mathbb{Q}$ topologically, as is any countable metric space without isolated points.
      – Henno Brandsma
      yesterday














    • 1




      countable Fort space is just homeomorphic to ${frac{1}{n}: n ge 1} cup {0}$ as a subspace of the reals. (It's only added because we also have uncountable Fort space, which is the one-point compactification of a discrete space, like the sequence). The countable version is metrisable, so is mentioned separately.
      – Henno Brandsma
      yesterday










    • So it is, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
      – Robert Thingum
      yesterday






    • 1




      The evenly spaces integer topology is just $mathbb{Q}$ topologically, as is any countable metric space without isolated points.
      – Henno Brandsma
      yesterday








    1




    1




    countable Fort space is just homeomorphic to ${frac{1}{n}: n ge 1} cup {0}$ as a subspace of the reals. (It's only added because we also have uncountable Fort space, which is the one-point compactification of a discrete space, like the sequence). The countable version is metrisable, so is mentioned separately.
    – Henno Brandsma
    yesterday




    countable Fort space is just homeomorphic to ${frac{1}{n}: n ge 1} cup {0}$ as a subspace of the reals. (It's only added because we also have uncountable Fort space, which is the one-point compactification of a discrete space, like the sequence). The countable version is metrisable, so is mentioned separately.
    – Henno Brandsma
    yesterday












    So it is, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
    – Robert Thingum
    yesterday




    So it is, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
    – Robert Thingum
    yesterday




    1




    1




    The evenly spaces integer topology is just $mathbb{Q}$ topologically, as is any countable metric space without isolated points.
    – Henno Brandsma
    yesterday




    The evenly spaces integer topology is just $mathbb{Q}$ topologically, as is any countable metric space without isolated points.
    – Henno Brandsma
    yesterday










    up vote
    3
    down vote













    For a metric space to be discrete we need to have every singleton to be open.



    Consider the metric space of $Q$, the rational numbers with the standard metric.



    $Q$ is countable but singletons are not open because in every neighborhood of a singleton there are points other the singleton itself so no open interval in included in the singleton.






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • It's a bit confusing that OP asked opposing questions in the title and the body of his post... I'll edit my answer to make it more apparent that the "yes" refers to the body of the question.
      – Stefan Mesken
      yesterday

















    up vote
    3
    down vote













    For a metric space to be discrete we need to have every singleton to be open.



    Consider the metric space of $Q$, the rational numbers with the standard metric.



    $Q$ is countable but singletons are not open because in every neighborhood of a singleton there are points other the singleton itself so no open interval in included in the singleton.






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • It's a bit confusing that OP asked opposing questions in the title and the body of his post... I'll edit my answer to make it more apparent that the "yes" refers to the body of the question.
      – Stefan Mesken
      yesterday















    up vote
    3
    down vote










    up vote
    3
    down vote









    For a metric space to be discrete we need to have every singleton to be open.



    Consider the metric space of $Q$, the rational numbers with the standard metric.



    $Q$ is countable but singletons are not open because in every neighborhood of a singleton there are points other the singleton itself so no open interval in included in the singleton.






    share|cite|improve this answer














    For a metric space to be discrete we need to have every singleton to be open.



    Consider the metric space of $Q$, the rational numbers with the standard metric.



    $Q$ is countable but singletons are not open because in every neighborhood of a singleton there are points other the singleton itself so no open interval in included in the singleton.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited yesterday

























    answered yesterday









    Mohammad Riazi-Kermani

    39.6k41957




    39.6k41957












    • It's a bit confusing that OP asked opposing questions in the title and the body of his post... I'll edit my answer to make it more apparent that the "yes" refers to the body of the question.
      – Stefan Mesken
      yesterday




















    • It's a bit confusing that OP asked opposing questions in the title and the body of his post... I'll edit my answer to make it more apparent that the "yes" refers to the body of the question.
      – Stefan Mesken
      yesterday


















    It's a bit confusing that OP asked opposing questions in the title and the body of his post... I'll edit my answer to make it more apparent that the "yes" refers to the body of the question.
    – Stefan Mesken
    yesterday






    It's a bit confusing that OP asked opposing questions in the title and the body of his post... I'll edit my answer to make it more apparent that the "yes" refers to the body of the question.
    – Stefan Mesken
    yesterday












    up vote
    3
    down vote













    If $X$ is a metric space and $x in X$, then the following statements are equivalent:




    • The metric-induced topology on $X$ is not the discrete topology, with ${ x }$ being non-open in $X$.


    • $x$ is an accumulation point in $X$.


    • There exists a sequence $x_1, x_2, x_3, dots in X setminus { x } $ such that $x_n to x$.



    So probably the "sparsest" way to construct a countable metric space $X$ whose metric-induced topology is not the discrete topology is to choose a convergent sequence $x_n$ in $mathbb R$, with limit $x := lim_{n to infty } x_n$ such that the $x_n neq x$ for all $n$, and define $$X = { x_n : n in mathbb N } cup { x }.$$
    For example, $X = { frac 1 n : n in mathbb N } cup { 0 }$ works.



    Of course, $X = mathbb Q$ works too, as Stefan explained, as witnessed by the fact that it contains the sequence $x_n = frac 1 n$ and its limit $0$.






    share|cite|improve this answer



























      up vote
      3
      down vote













      If $X$ is a metric space and $x in X$, then the following statements are equivalent:




      • The metric-induced topology on $X$ is not the discrete topology, with ${ x }$ being non-open in $X$.


      • $x$ is an accumulation point in $X$.


      • There exists a sequence $x_1, x_2, x_3, dots in X setminus { x } $ such that $x_n to x$.



      So probably the "sparsest" way to construct a countable metric space $X$ whose metric-induced topology is not the discrete topology is to choose a convergent sequence $x_n$ in $mathbb R$, with limit $x := lim_{n to infty } x_n$ such that the $x_n neq x$ for all $n$, and define $$X = { x_n : n in mathbb N } cup { x }.$$
      For example, $X = { frac 1 n : n in mathbb N } cup { 0 }$ works.



      Of course, $X = mathbb Q$ works too, as Stefan explained, as witnessed by the fact that it contains the sequence $x_n = frac 1 n$ and its limit $0$.






      share|cite|improve this answer

























        up vote
        3
        down vote










        up vote
        3
        down vote









        If $X$ is a metric space and $x in X$, then the following statements are equivalent:




        • The metric-induced topology on $X$ is not the discrete topology, with ${ x }$ being non-open in $X$.


        • $x$ is an accumulation point in $X$.


        • There exists a sequence $x_1, x_2, x_3, dots in X setminus { x } $ such that $x_n to x$.



        So probably the "sparsest" way to construct a countable metric space $X$ whose metric-induced topology is not the discrete topology is to choose a convergent sequence $x_n$ in $mathbb R$, with limit $x := lim_{n to infty } x_n$ such that the $x_n neq x$ for all $n$, and define $$X = { x_n : n in mathbb N } cup { x }.$$
        For example, $X = { frac 1 n : n in mathbb N } cup { 0 }$ works.



        Of course, $X = mathbb Q$ works too, as Stefan explained, as witnessed by the fact that it contains the sequence $x_n = frac 1 n$ and its limit $0$.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        If $X$ is a metric space and $x in X$, then the following statements are equivalent:




        • The metric-induced topology on $X$ is not the discrete topology, with ${ x }$ being non-open in $X$.


        • $x$ is an accumulation point in $X$.


        • There exists a sequence $x_1, x_2, x_3, dots in X setminus { x } $ such that $x_n to x$.



        So probably the "sparsest" way to construct a countable metric space $X$ whose metric-induced topology is not the discrete topology is to choose a convergent sequence $x_n$ in $mathbb R$, with limit $x := lim_{n to infty } x_n$ such that the $x_n neq x$ for all $n$, and define $$X = { x_n : n in mathbb N } cup { x }.$$
        For example, $X = { frac 1 n : n in mathbb N } cup { 0 }$ works.



        Of course, $X = mathbb Q$ works too, as Stefan explained, as witnessed by the fact that it contains the sequence $x_n = frac 1 n$ and its limit $0$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited yesterday

























        answered yesterday









        Kenny Wong

        16.6k21135




        16.6k21135















            Popular posts from this blog

            Plaza Victoria

            In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

            How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...