Locally compact hausdorff space homeomorphism












0












$begingroup$


Suppose that $X, Y$ are locally compact Hausdorff space. A bijective $f:Xto Y$ is also a homeomorphism?



Let $X^+=Xcup {infty_x}$ and $Y^+=Ycup{infty_y}$. By one point compactification, $X^+$ and $Y^+$ are compact.
Define function $f^*:X^+to Y^+$ such that $f^*|_X=f$ and $f^*(infty_x)=f^*(infty_y)$.



Then, $f^*:X^+to Y^+$ is well defined. Since $f$ is bijective function, $f^*$ is bijective function.



For open subset $U$ not containing $infty_y$ in $Y^+$, obviously $f^{-1}(U)$ is open in Y. Then, $f^{-1}(U)$ is open in $Y^+$.
For open subset $U$ containing $infty_y$ in $Y^+$, $f^{-1}(Y^+setminus U)$ is closed in X, because $Y^+ setminus U$ is closed and $f$ is continuous.



$f^*$ is homeomorphic if $f^*$ is continuous.



How can I show that $f^*$ is continuous and $X$ and $Y$ are homeomorphic?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You are wrong that $f^*$ is continuous. For example if $X=[0,1)$ and $Y=[0,1]$ then $X^+=[0,1]$ and $Y^+=[0,1]cup{infty}$. Such $f^*$ cannot be continuous because $X^*$ is connected while $Y^*$ is not. The particular mistake is that you claim that $f^{-1}(Y^+backslash U)$ is closed. It is closed in $X$ but not necessarily in $X^+$. The same is for $f^{-1}(U)$. It is closed in $X$, not necessarily in $X^+$.
    $endgroup$
    – freakish
    Dec 13 '18 at 16:15


















0












$begingroup$


Suppose that $X, Y$ are locally compact Hausdorff space. A bijective $f:Xto Y$ is also a homeomorphism?



Let $X^+=Xcup {infty_x}$ and $Y^+=Ycup{infty_y}$. By one point compactification, $X^+$ and $Y^+$ are compact.
Define function $f^*:X^+to Y^+$ such that $f^*|_X=f$ and $f^*(infty_x)=f^*(infty_y)$.



Then, $f^*:X^+to Y^+$ is well defined. Since $f$ is bijective function, $f^*$ is bijective function.



For open subset $U$ not containing $infty_y$ in $Y^+$, obviously $f^{-1}(U)$ is open in Y. Then, $f^{-1}(U)$ is open in $Y^+$.
For open subset $U$ containing $infty_y$ in $Y^+$, $f^{-1}(Y^+setminus U)$ is closed in X, because $Y^+ setminus U$ is closed and $f$ is continuous.



$f^*$ is homeomorphic if $f^*$ is continuous.



How can I show that $f^*$ is continuous and $X$ and $Y$ are homeomorphic?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You are wrong that $f^*$ is continuous. For example if $X=[0,1)$ and $Y=[0,1]$ then $X^+=[0,1]$ and $Y^+=[0,1]cup{infty}$. Such $f^*$ cannot be continuous because $X^*$ is connected while $Y^*$ is not. The particular mistake is that you claim that $f^{-1}(Y^+backslash U)$ is closed. It is closed in $X$ but not necessarily in $X^+$. The same is for $f^{-1}(U)$. It is closed in $X$, not necessarily in $X^+$.
    $endgroup$
    – freakish
    Dec 13 '18 at 16:15
















0












0








0





$begingroup$


Suppose that $X, Y$ are locally compact Hausdorff space. A bijective $f:Xto Y$ is also a homeomorphism?



Let $X^+=Xcup {infty_x}$ and $Y^+=Ycup{infty_y}$. By one point compactification, $X^+$ and $Y^+$ are compact.
Define function $f^*:X^+to Y^+$ such that $f^*|_X=f$ and $f^*(infty_x)=f^*(infty_y)$.



Then, $f^*:X^+to Y^+$ is well defined. Since $f$ is bijective function, $f^*$ is bijective function.



For open subset $U$ not containing $infty_y$ in $Y^+$, obviously $f^{-1}(U)$ is open in Y. Then, $f^{-1}(U)$ is open in $Y^+$.
For open subset $U$ containing $infty_y$ in $Y^+$, $f^{-1}(Y^+setminus U)$ is closed in X, because $Y^+ setminus U$ is closed and $f$ is continuous.



$f^*$ is homeomorphic if $f^*$ is continuous.



How can I show that $f^*$ is continuous and $X$ and $Y$ are homeomorphic?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Suppose that $X, Y$ are locally compact Hausdorff space. A bijective $f:Xto Y$ is also a homeomorphism?



Let $X^+=Xcup {infty_x}$ and $Y^+=Ycup{infty_y}$. By one point compactification, $X^+$ and $Y^+$ are compact.
Define function $f^*:X^+to Y^+$ such that $f^*|_X=f$ and $f^*(infty_x)=f^*(infty_y)$.



Then, $f^*:X^+to Y^+$ is well defined. Since $f$ is bijective function, $f^*$ is bijective function.



For open subset $U$ not containing $infty_y$ in $Y^+$, obviously $f^{-1}(U)$ is open in Y. Then, $f^{-1}(U)$ is open in $Y^+$.
For open subset $U$ containing $infty_y$ in $Y^+$, $f^{-1}(Y^+setminus U)$ is closed in X, because $Y^+ setminus U$ is closed and $f$ is continuous.



$f^*$ is homeomorphic if $f^*$ is continuous.



How can I show that $f^*$ is continuous and $X$ and $Y$ are homeomorphic?







general-topology






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 13 '18 at 16:09







dlfjsemf

















asked Dec 13 '18 at 11:01









dlfjsemfdlfjsemf

968




968












  • $begingroup$
    You are wrong that $f^*$ is continuous. For example if $X=[0,1)$ and $Y=[0,1]$ then $X^+=[0,1]$ and $Y^+=[0,1]cup{infty}$. Such $f^*$ cannot be continuous because $X^*$ is connected while $Y^*$ is not. The particular mistake is that you claim that $f^{-1}(Y^+backslash U)$ is closed. It is closed in $X$ but not necessarily in $X^+$. The same is for $f^{-1}(U)$. It is closed in $X$, not necessarily in $X^+$.
    $endgroup$
    – freakish
    Dec 13 '18 at 16:15




















  • $begingroup$
    You are wrong that $f^*$ is continuous. For example if $X=[0,1)$ and $Y=[0,1]$ then $X^+=[0,1]$ and $Y^+=[0,1]cup{infty}$. Such $f^*$ cannot be continuous because $X^*$ is connected while $Y^*$ is not. The particular mistake is that you claim that $f^{-1}(Y^+backslash U)$ is closed. It is closed in $X$ but not necessarily in $X^+$. The same is for $f^{-1}(U)$. It is closed in $X$, not necessarily in $X^+$.
    $endgroup$
    – freakish
    Dec 13 '18 at 16:15


















$begingroup$
You are wrong that $f^*$ is continuous. For example if $X=[0,1)$ and $Y=[0,1]$ then $X^+=[0,1]$ and $Y^+=[0,1]cup{infty}$. Such $f^*$ cannot be continuous because $X^*$ is connected while $Y^*$ is not. The particular mistake is that you claim that $f^{-1}(Y^+backslash U)$ is closed. It is closed in $X$ but not necessarily in $X^+$. The same is for $f^{-1}(U)$. It is closed in $X$, not necessarily in $X^+$.
$endgroup$
– freakish
Dec 13 '18 at 16:15






$begingroup$
You are wrong that $f^*$ is continuous. For example if $X=[0,1)$ and $Y=[0,1]$ then $X^+=[0,1]$ and $Y^+=[0,1]cup{infty}$. Such $f^*$ cannot be continuous because $X^*$ is connected while $Y^*$ is not. The particular mistake is that you claim that $f^{-1}(Y^+backslash U)$ is closed. It is closed in $X$ but not necessarily in $X^+$. The same is for $f^{-1}(U)$. It is closed in $X$, not necessarily in $X^+$.
$endgroup$
– freakish
Dec 13 '18 at 16:15












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

It is not true. Let $X = [0,2pi), Y = S^1$. Then $f : X to Y, f(t) = e^{it}$, is a continuous bijection, but not a homeomorphism.



You may suspect that the reason for this phenomenon is that $Y$ is compact and $X$ is not compact. But you can easily modify the above example to $X' = (-1,1), Y' = S^1 cup [1,2) times { 0 }$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













    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',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3037870%2flocally-compact-hausdorff-space-homeomorphism%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









    0












    $begingroup$

    It is not true. Let $X = [0,2pi), Y = S^1$. Then $f : X to Y, f(t) = e^{it}$, is a continuous bijection, but not a homeomorphism.



    You may suspect that the reason for this phenomenon is that $Y$ is compact and $X$ is not compact. But you can easily modify the above example to $X' = (-1,1), Y' = S^1 cup [1,2) times { 0 }$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      It is not true. Let $X = [0,2pi), Y = S^1$. Then $f : X to Y, f(t) = e^{it}$, is a continuous bijection, but not a homeomorphism.



      You may suspect that the reason for this phenomenon is that $Y$ is compact and $X$ is not compact. But you can easily modify the above example to $X' = (-1,1), Y' = S^1 cup [1,2) times { 0 }$.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        It is not true. Let $X = [0,2pi), Y = S^1$. Then $f : X to Y, f(t) = e^{it}$, is a continuous bijection, but not a homeomorphism.



        You may suspect that the reason for this phenomenon is that $Y$ is compact and $X$ is not compact. But you can easily modify the above example to $X' = (-1,1), Y' = S^1 cup [1,2) times { 0 }$.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        It is not true. Let $X = [0,2pi), Y = S^1$. Then $f : X to Y, f(t) = e^{it}$, is a continuous bijection, but not a homeomorphism.



        You may suspect that the reason for this phenomenon is that $Y$ is compact and $X$ is not compact. But you can easily modify the above example to $X' = (-1,1), Y' = S^1 cup [1,2) times { 0 }$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Dec 13 '18 at 12:11

























        answered Dec 13 '18 at 11:19









        Paul FrostPaul Frost

        11.3k3934




        11.3k3934






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3037870%2flocally-compact-hausdorff-space-homeomorphism%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            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...