Identity map between metric spaces continuous or not. [closed]












0












$begingroup$


How to counter this problem? Is it enough to show pre image of unit ball in some metric is open under another to show the continuity? I am not at all getting the path to proceed. And how to contradict when it's not continuous?



enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$



closed as off-topic by user21820, Adrian Keister, max_zorn, YiFan, Eevee Trainer Mar 29 at 2:15


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 provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – user21820, Adrian Keister, max_zorn, YiFan, Eevee Trainer

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
















  • $begingroup$
    You can use epsilon-delta methods to prove continuity. Proceed as you would with the standard metric but substitute the appropriate metric to make arguments like $d_2(f,g)ltepsilon$.
    $endgroup$
    – John Douma
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:03






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Tip: Questions are not well-received on here whenever the question asker doesn't mention any attempted efforts towards a solution. So always try to mention any attempted work even if it seems embarrassingly incorrect, otherwise other users are less motivated to help.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:29


















0












$begingroup$


How to counter this problem? Is it enough to show pre image of unit ball in some metric is open under another to show the continuity? I am not at all getting the path to proceed. And how to contradict when it's not continuous?



enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$



closed as off-topic by user21820, Adrian Keister, max_zorn, YiFan, Eevee Trainer Mar 29 at 2:15


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 provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – user21820, Adrian Keister, max_zorn, YiFan, Eevee Trainer

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
















  • $begingroup$
    You can use epsilon-delta methods to prove continuity. Proceed as you would with the standard metric but substitute the appropriate metric to make arguments like $d_2(f,g)ltepsilon$.
    $endgroup$
    – John Douma
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:03






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Tip: Questions are not well-received on here whenever the question asker doesn't mention any attempted efforts towards a solution. So always try to mention any attempted work even if it seems embarrassingly incorrect, otherwise other users are less motivated to help.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:29
















0












0








0





$begingroup$


How to counter this problem? Is it enough to show pre image of unit ball in some metric is open under another to show the continuity? I am not at all getting the path to proceed. And how to contradict when it's not continuous?



enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




How to counter this problem? Is it enough to show pre image of unit ball in some metric is open under another to show the continuity? I am not at all getting the path to proceed. And how to contradict when it's not continuous?



enter image description here







real-analysis functional-analysis continuity metric-spaces






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Dec 21 '18 at 3:45









ChakSayantanChakSayantan

492511




492511




closed as off-topic by user21820, Adrian Keister, max_zorn, YiFan, Eevee Trainer Mar 29 at 2:15


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 provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – user21820, Adrian Keister, max_zorn, YiFan, Eevee Trainer

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







closed as off-topic by user21820, Adrian Keister, max_zorn, YiFan, Eevee Trainer Mar 29 at 2:15


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 provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – user21820, Adrian Keister, max_zorn, YiFan, Eevee Trainer

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












  • $begingroup$
    You can use epsilon-delta methods to prove continuity. Proceed as you would with the standard metric but substitute the appropriate metric to make arguments like $d_2(f,g)ltepsilon$.
    $endgroup$
    – John Douma
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:03






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Tip: Questions are not well-received on here whenever the question asker doesn't mention any attempted efforts towards a solution. So always try to mention any attempted work even if it seems embarrassingly incorrect, otherwise other users are less motivated to help.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:29




















  • $begingroup$
    You can use epsilon-delta methods to prove continuity. Proceed as you would with the standard metric but substitute the appropriate metric to make arguments like $d_2(f,g)ltepsilon$.
    $endgroup$
    – John Douma
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:03






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Tip: Questions are not well-received on here whenever the question asker doesn't mention any attempted efforts towards a solution. So always try to mention any attempted work even if it seems embarrassingly incorrect, otherwise other users are less motivated to help.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:29


















$begingroup$
You can use epsilon-delta methods to prove continuity. Proceed as you would with the standard metric but substitute the appropriate metric to make arguments like $d_2(f,g)ltepsilon$.
$endgroup$
– John Douma
Dec 21 '18 at 4:03




$begingroup$
You can use epsilon-delta methods to prove continuity. Proceed as you would with the standard metric but substitute the appropriate metric to make arguments like $d_2(f,g)ltepsilon$.
$endgroup$
– John Douma
Dec 21 '18 at 4:03




2




2




$begingroup$
Tip: Questions are not well-received on here whenever the question asker doesn't mention any attempted efforts towards a solution. So always try to mention any attempted work even if it seems embarrassingly incorrect, otherwise other users are less motivated to help.
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 21 '18 at 4:29






$begingroup$
Tip: Questions are not well-received on here whenever the question asker doesn't mention any attempted efforts towards a solution. So always try to mention any attempted work even if it seems embarrassingly incorrect, otherwise other users are less motivated to help.
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 21 '18 at 4:29












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

a. Let $varepsilon>0$ be given. Since $sup_{xin [0,1]} | , f(x)-g(x)| geq int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx$, we may choose $delta=varepsilon$ so that $int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx<varepsilon$ whenever $sup_{xin [0,1]} |, f(x)-g(x)|<delta$. Therefore $id:X_1 longrightarrow X_2$ is continuous.



b. Notice $int_0^1 |x^n|dx to 0$ as $n to infty$ BUT $sup_{xin [0,1]} |x^n|=1$ for every $n in mathbb N$. Therefore $id:X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is NOT continuous at the constant function $g equiv 0$ because it is not sequentially continuous there. There are other counterexamples but this is the preferred (by at least 2 people in this thread).



c. I leave to you. The notion of sequential continuity seems good for demonstrating a counterexample to such statements, while the standard notion of continuity seems good for proving such statements true which is not exactly strict advice.





Technically for b. I used the fact that the functions $f_n(x):=x^n$ from the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converge to the constant function $g equiv 0$ in $(X_2, d_2)$ but the same is not true in $(X_1, d_1)$. And so $id: X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is not sequentially continuous at $g$ as opposed to identifying the pointwise limit $f(x):=lim_{nto infty} f_n(x)$ which is not in the set $mathcal C[0,1]$ as $f$ is not continuous at $x=1$.



If this seems like an issue, then showing that the chosen sequence of functions is not uniformly Cauchy on $[0,1]$ (Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$) avoids this. For this argument we make the following two observations, $|x^n-x^m|=|x^n||1-x^{m-n}|$ and the function $F(x):=left(1-frac1xright)^x$ is nondecreasing on $[1, infty)$ with $lim_{x to infty} F(x)=frac1e$. So with $varepsilon=frac1{4}(1-e^{-1})$ and for any $ngeq 2$, we may select $m=2n$ and have
$$sup_{xin[0,1]} |x^n-x^m| geq left(1-frac1nright)^nleft(1-left(1-frac1nright)^nright)geq varepsilon$$
which shows that the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ is not Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$ by definition.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For the part c, Cauchy Schwartz says, integral 0 to 1 of h < (int 0 to 1 of h²)^1/2. Hence like part a, choosing delta same as given epsilon we get d3 < delta implies d2< epsilon. Therefore id: X3 to X2 is continuous.
    $endgroup$
    – ChakSayantan
    Dec 21 '18 at 6:09










  • $begingroup$
    You got it, btw I didn't downvote your question. Someone else did and so I shared my tip. My upvote was preemptive but I would say you proved worthy. Most people seem eager to rush towards negative judgement these days (not to say some don't deserve it...rhymes with rump).
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 9:43










  • $begingroup$
    Oh but learn to write in latex too. Tip: right click>"show math as" AND for symbols there are pdf documents littering the web with thorough latex code catalogs.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 10:15






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding $a.$ If $d_1,d_2$ are metrics on a set $X$ and if there exists $K>0$ such that $d_2(f,g)leq Kcdot d_1(f,g)$ for all $f,gin X$ then the topology generated by $d_2$ is a subset of the topology generated by $d_1,$ so $ id_X:(X,d_1)to (X,d_2)$ is continuous because the inverse of a $d_2$-open set, which is itself, is also $d_1$-open.... In $a.$ we have $K=1.$
    $endgroup$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:06












  • $begingroup$
    Comparing topologies on the same set certainly can come in handy sometimes: imgur.com/cfOxqfs (an old assignment I did that plays off the same notion). I guess considering a and b together, we might say that an open bijection is not always continuous -_-
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:24



















2












$begingroup$

We know that a continuous map between metric spaces is one which preserves limits: $f$ is continuous if and only if $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f(x_n)=f(limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n)$ for each convergent sequence $x_n$. To prove that a map is not continuous, we can try to find a sequence that is convergent in one metric but not the other.



For example, I don't think that b) is true. Consider the sequence
$$f_n(x)=x^n.$$



Then $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f_n=0$ in the metric $d_2$, but not in $d_1$: it even fails to be Cauchy in $d_1$.



Of course, in general it is fine to show that the preimage of any open ball is open. There is some general theory that tells you that if the identity map is bounded - that is, if for every $xin X_i$, $d_j(x,0)le Mcdot d_i(x,0)$ -- then the identity map from $X_i$ to $X_j$ is continuous. This uses the fact that all these metrics come from norms, though, and takes some work to establish.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    nice counterexample
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:25


















2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









0












$begingroup$

a. Let $varepsilon>0$ be given. Since $sup_{xin [0,1]} | , f(x)-g(x)| geq int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx$, we may choose $delta=varepsilon$ so that $int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx<varepsilon$ whenever $sup_{xin [0,1]} |, f(x)-g(x)|<delta$. Therefore $id:X_1 longrightarrow X_2$ is continuous.



b. Notice $int_0^1 |x^n|dx to 0$ as $n to infty$ BUT $sup_{xin [0,1]} |x^n|=1$ for every $n in mathbb N$. Therefore $id:X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is NOT continuous at the constant function $g equiv 0$ because it is not sequentially continuous there. There are other counterexamples but this is the preferred (by at least 2 people in this thread).



c. I leave to you. The notion of sequential continuity seems good for demonstrating a counterexample to such statements, while the standard notion of continuity seems good for proving such statements true which is not exactly strict advice.





Technically for b. I used the fact that the functions $f_n(x):=x^n$ from the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converge to the constant function $g equiv 0$ in $(X_2, d_2)$ but the same is not true in $(X_1, d_1)$. And so $id: X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is not sequentially continuous at $g$ as opposed to identifying the pointwise limit $f(x):=lim_{nto infty} f_n(x)$ which is not in the set $mathcal C[0,1]$ as $f$ is not continuous at $x=1$.



If this seems like an issue, then showing that the chosen sequence of functions is not uniformly Cauchy on $[0,1]$ (Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$) avoids this. For this argument we make the following two observations, $|x^n-x^m|=|x^n||1-x^{m-n}|$ and the function $F(x):=left(1-frac1xright)^x$ is nondecreasing on $[1, infty)$ with $lim_{x to infty} F(x)=frac1e$. So with $varepsilon=frac1{4}(1-e^{-1})$ and for any $ngeq 2$, we may select $m=2n$ and have
$$sup_{xin[0,1]} |x^n-x^m| geq left(1-frac1nright)^nleft(1-left(1-frac1nright)^nright)geq varepsilon$$
which shows that the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ is not Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$ by definition.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For the part c, Cauchy Schwartz says, integral 0 to 1 of h < (int 0 to 1 of h²)^1/2. Hence like part a, choosing delta same as given epsilon we get d3 < delta implies d2< epsilon. Therefore id: X3 to X2 is continuous.
    $endgroup$
    – ChakSayantan
    Dec 21 '18 at 6:09










  • $begingroup$
    You got it, btw I didn't downvote your question. Someone else did and so I shared my tip. My upvote was preemptive but I would say you proved worthy. Most people seem eager to rush towards negative judgement these days (not to say some don't deserve it...rhymes with rump).
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 9:43










  • $begingroup$
    Oh but learn to write in latex too. Tip: right click>"show math as" AND for symbols there are pdf documents littering the web with thorough latex code catalogs.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 10:15






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding $a.$ If $d_1,d_2$ are metrics on a set $X$ and if there exists $K>0$ such that $d_2(f,g)leq Kcdot d_1(f,g)$ for all $f,gin X$ then the topology generated by $d_2$ is a subset of the topology generated by $d_1,$ so $ id_X:(X,d_1)to (X,d_2)$ is continuous because the inverse of a $d_2$-open set, which is itself, is also $d_1$-open.... In $a.$ we have $K=1.$
    $endgroup$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:06












  • $begingroup$
    Comparing topologies on the same set certainly can come in handy sometimes: imgur.com/cfOxqfs (an old assignment I did that plays off the same notion). I guess considering a and b together, we might say that an open bijection is not always continuous -_-
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:24
















0












$begingroup$

a. Let $varepsilon>0$ be given. Since $sup_{xin [0,1]} | , f(x)-g(x)| geq int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx$, we may choose $delta=varepsilon$ so that $int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx<varepsilon$ whenever $sup_{xin [0,1]} |, f(x)-g(x)|<delta$. Therefore $id:X_1 longrightarrow X_2$ is continuous.



b. Notice $int_0^1 |x^n|dx to 0$ as $n to infty$ BUT $sup_{xin [0,1]} |x^n|=1$ for every $n in mathbb N$. Therefore $id:X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is NOT continuous at the constant function $g equiv 0$ because it is not sequentially continuous there. There are other counterexamples but this is the preferred (by at least 2 people in this thread).



c. I leave to you. The notion of sequential continuity seems good for demonstrating a counterexample to such statements, while the standard notion of continuity seems good for proving such statements true which is not exactly strict advice.





Technically for b. I used the fact that the functions $f_n(x):=x^n$ from the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converge to the constant function $g equiv 0$ in $(X_2, d_2)$ but the same is not true in $(X_1, d_1)$. And so $id: X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is not sequentially continuous at $g$ as opposed to identifying the pointwise limit $f(x):=lim_{nto infty} f_n(x)$ which is not in the set $mathcal C[0,1]$ as $f$ is not continuous at $x=1$.



If this seems like an issue, then showing that the chosen sequence of functions is not uniformly Cauchy on $[0,1]$ (Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$) avoids this. For this argument we make the following two observations, $|x^n-x^m|=|x^n||1-x^{m-n}|$ and the function $F(x):=left(1-frac1xright)^x$ is nondecreasing on $[1, infty)$ with $lim_{x to infty} F(x)=frac1e$. So with $varepsilon=frac1{4}(1-e^{-1})$ and for any $ngeq 2$, we may select $m=2n$ and have
$$sup_{xin[0,1]} |x^n-x^m| geq left(1-frac1nright)^nleft(1-left(1-frac1nright)^nright)geq varepsilon$$
which shows that the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ is not Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$ by definition.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For the part c, Cauchy Schwartz says, integral 0 to 1 of h < (int 0 to 1 of h²)^1/2. Hence like part a, choosing delta same as given epsilon we get d3 < delta implies d2< epsilon. Therefore id: X3 to X2 is continuous.
    $endgroup$
    – ChakSayantan
    Dec 21 '18 at 6:09










  • $begingroup$
    You got it, btw I didn't downvote your question. Someone else did and so I shared my tip. My upvote was preemptive but I would say you proved worthy. Most people seem eager to rush towards negative judgement these days (not to say some don't deserve it...rhymes with rump).
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 9:43










  • $begingroup$
    Oh but learn to write in latex too. Tip: right click>"show math as" AND for symbols there are pdf documents littering the web with thorough latex code catalogs.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 10:15






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding $a.$ If $d_1,d_2$ are metrics on a set $X$ and if there exists $K>0$ such that $d_2(f,g)leq Kcdot d_1(f,g)$ for all $f,gin X$ then the topology generated by $d_2$ is a subset of the topology generated by $d_1,$ so $ id_X:(X,d_1)to (X,d_2)$ is continuous because the inverse of a $d_2$-open set, which is itself, is also $d_1$-open.... In $a.$ we have $K=1.$
    $endgroup$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:06












  • $begingroup$
    Comparing topologies on the same set certainly can come in handy sometimes: imgur.com/cfOxqfs (an old assignment I did that plays off the same notion). I guess considering a and b together, we might say that an open bijection is not always continuous -_-
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:24














0












0








0





$begingroup$

a. Let $varepsilon>0$ be given. Since $sup_{xin [0,1]} | , f(x)-g(x)| geq int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx$, we may choose $delta=varepsilon$ so that $int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx<varepsilon$ whenever $sup_{xin [0,1]} |, f(x)-g(x)|<delta$. Therefore $id:X_1 longrightarrow X_2$ is continuous.



b. Notice $int_0^1 |x^n|dx to 0$ as $n to infty$ BUT $sup_{xin [0,1]} |x^n|=1$ for every $n in mathbb N$. Therefore $id:X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is NOT continuous at the constant function $g equiv 0$ because it is not sequentially continuous there. There are other counterexamples but this is the preferred (by at least 2 people in this thread).



c. I leave to you. The notion of sequential continuity seems good for demonstrating a counterexample to such statements, while the standard notion of continuity seems good for proving such statements true which is not exactly strict advice.





Technically for b. I used the fact that the functions $f_n(x):=x^n$ from the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converge to the constant function $g equiv 0$ in $(X_2, d_2)$ but the same is not true in $(X_1, d_1)$. And so $id: X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is not sequentially continuous at $g$ as opposed to identifying the pointwise limit $f(x):=lim_{nto infty} f_n(x)$ which is not in the set $mathcal C[0,1]$ as $f$ is not continuous at $x=1$.



If this seems like an issue, then showing that the chosen sequence of functions is not uniformly Cauchy on $[0,1]$ (Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$) avoids this. For this argument we make the following two observations, $|x^n-x^m|=|x^n||1-x^{m-n}|$ and the function $F(x):=left(1-frac1xright)^x$ is nondecreasing on $[1, infty)$ with $lim_{x to infty} F(x)=frac1e$. So with $varepsilon=frac1{4}(1-e^{-1})$ and for any $ngeq 2$, we may select $m=2n$ and have
$$sup_{xin[0,1]} |x^n-x^m| geq left(1-frac1nright)^nleft(1-left(1-frac1nright)^nright)geq varepsilon$$
which shows that the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ is not Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$ by definition.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



a. Let $varepsilon>0$ be given. Since $sup_{xin [0,1]} | , f(x)-g(x)| geq int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx$, we may choose $delta=varepsilon$ so that $int_0^1 |, f(x)-g(x)|dx<varepsilon$ whenever $sup_{xin [0,1]} |, f(x)-g(x)|<delta$. Therefore $id:X_1 longrightarrow X_2$ is continuous.



b. Notice $int_0^1 |x^n|dx to 0$ as $n to infty$ BUT $sup_{xin [0,1]} |x^n|=1$ for every $n in mathbb N$. Therefore $id:X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is NOT continuous at the constant function $g equiv 0$ because it is not sequentially continuous there. There are other counterexamples but this is the preferred (by at least 2 people in this thread).



c. I leave to you. The notion of sequential continuity seems good for demonstrating a counterexample to such statements, while the standard notion of continuity seems good for proving such statements true which is not exactly strict advice.





Technically for b. I used the fact that the functions $f_n(x):=x^n$ from the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ converge to the constant function $g equiv 0$ in $(X_2, d_2)$ but the same is not true in $(X_1, d_1)$. And so $id: X_2 longrightarrow X_1$ is not sequentially continuous at $g$ as opposed to identifying the pointwise limit $f(x):=lim_{nto infty} f_n(x)$ which is not in the set $mathcal C[0,1]$ as $f$ is not continuous at $x=1$.



If this seems like an issue, then showing that the chosen sequence of functions is not uniformly Cauchy on $[0,1]$ (Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$) avoids this. For this argument we make the following two observations, $|x^n-x^m|=|x^n||1-x^{m-n}|$ and the function $F(x):=left(1-frac1xright)^x$ is nondecreasing on $[1, infty)$ with $lim_{x to infty} F(x)=frac1e$. So with $varepsilon=frac1{4}(1-e^{-1})$ and for any $ngeq 2$, we may select $m=2n$ and have
$$sup_{xin[0,1]} |x^n-x^m| geq left(1-frac1nright)^nleft(1-left(1-frac1nright)^nright)geq varepsilon$$
which shows that the sequence of functions ${f_n}_{n=1}^infty$ is not Cauchy in $(X_1, d_1)$ by definition.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Dec 23 '18 at 20:10

























answered Dec 21 '18 at 4:23









Matt A PeltoMatt A Pelto

2,677621




2,677621








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For the part c, Cauchy Schwartz says, integral 0 to 1 of h < (int 0 to 1 of h²)^1/2. Hence like part a, choosing delta same as given epsilon we get d3 < delta implies d2< epsilon. Therefore id: X3 to X2 is continuous.
    $endgroup$
    – ChakSayantan
    Dec 21 '18 at 6:09










  • $begingroup$
    You got it, btw I didn't downvote your question. Someone else did and so I shared my tip. My upvote was preemptive but I would say you proved worthy. Most people seem eager to rush towards negative judgement these days (not to say some don't deserve it...rhymes with rump).
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 9:43










  • $begingroup$
    Oh but learn to write in latex too. Tip: right click>"show math as" AND for symbols there are pdf documents littering the web with thorough latex code catalogs.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 10:15






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding $a.$ If $d_1,d_2$ are metrics on a set $X$ and if there exists $K>0$ such that $d_2(f,g)leq Kcdot d_1(f,g)$ for all $f,gin X$ then the topology generated by $d_2$ is a subset of the topology generated by $d_1,$ so $ id_X:(X,d_1)to (X,d_2)$ is continuous because the inverse of a $d_2$-open set, which is itself, is also $d_1$-open.... In $a.$ we have $K=1.$
    $endgroup$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:06












  • $begingroup$
    Comparing topologies on the same set certainly can come in handy sometimes: imgur.com/cfOxqfs (an old assignment I did that plays off the same notion). I guess considering a and b together, we might say that an open bijection is not always continuous -_-
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:24














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    For the part c, Cauchy Schwartz says, integral 0 to 1 of h < (int 0 to 1 of h²)^1/2. Hence like part a, choosing delta same as given epsilon we get d3 < delta implies d2< epsilon. Therefore id: X3 to X2 is continuous.
    $endgroup$
    – ChakSayantan
    Dec 21 '18 at 6:09










  • $begingroup$
    You got it, btw I didn't downvote your question. Someone else did and so I shared my tip. My upvote was preemptive but I would say you proved worthy. Most people seem eager to rush towards negative judgement these days (not to say some don't deserve it...rhymes with rump).
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 9:43










  • $begingroup$
    Oh but learn to write in latex too. Tip: right click>"show math as" AND for symbols there are pdf documents littering the web with thorough latex code catalogs.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 10:15






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Regarding $a.$ If $d_1,d_2$ are metrics on a set $X$ and if there exists $K>0$ such that $d_2(f,g)leq Kcdot d_1(f,g)$ for all $f,gin X$ then the topology generated by $d_2$ is a subset of the topology generated by $d_1,$ so $ id_X:(X,d_1)to (X,d_2)$ is continuous because the inverse of a $d_2$-open set, which is itself, is also $d_1$-open.... In $a.$ we have $K=1.$
    $endgroup$
    – DanielWainfleet
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:06












  • $begingroup$
    Comparing topologies on the same set certainly can come in handy sometimes: imgur.com/cfOxqfs (an old assignment I did that plays off the same notion). I guess considering a and b together, we might say that an open bijection is not always continuous -_-
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 22 '18 at 3:24








1




1




$begingroup$
For the part c, Cauchy Schwartz says, integral 0 to 1 of h < (int 0 to 1 of h²)^1/2. Hence like part a, choosing delta same as given epsilon we get d3 < delta implies d2< epsilon. Therefore id: X3 to X2 is continuous.
$endgroup$
– ChakSayantan
Dec 21 '18 at 6:09




$begingroup$
For the part c, Cauchy Schwartz says, integral 0 to 1 of h < (int 0 to 1 of h²)^1/2. Hence like part a, choosing delta same as given epsilon we get d3 < delta implies d2< epsilon. Therefore id: X3 to X2 is continuous.
$endgroup$
– ChakSayantan
Dec 21 '18 at 6:09












$begingroup$
You got it, btw I didn't downvote your question. Someone else did and so I shared my tip. My upvote was preemptive but I would say you proved worthy. Most people seem eager to rush towards negative judgement these days (not to say some don't deserve it...rhymes with rump).
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 21 '18 at 9:43




$begingroup$
You got it, btw I didn't downvote your question. Someone else did and so I shared my tip. My upvote was preemptive but I would say you proved worthy. Most people seem eager to rush towards negative judgement these days (not to say some don't deserve it...rhymes with rump).
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 21 '18 at 9:43












$begingroup$
Oh but learn to write in latex too. Tip: right click>"show math as" AND for symbols there are pdf documents littering the web with thorough latex code catalogs.
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 21 '18 at 10:15




$begingroup$
Oh but learn to write in latex too. Tip: right click>"show math as" AND for symbols there are pdf documents littering the web with thorough latex code catalogs.
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 21 '18 at 10:15




1




1




$begingroup$
Regarding $a.$ If $d_1,d_2$ are metrics on a set $X$ and if there exists $K>0$ such that $d_2(f,g)leq Kcdot d_1(f,g)$ for all $f,gin X$ then the topology generated by $d_2$ is a subset of the topology generated by $d_1,$ so $ id_X:(X,d_1)to (X,d_2)$ is continuous because the inverse of a $d_2$-open set, which is itself, is also $d_1$-open.... In $a.$ we have $K=1.$
$endgroup$
– DanielWainfleet
Dec 22 '18 at 3:06






$begingroup$
Regarding $a.$ If $d_1,d_2$ are metrics on a set $X$ and if there exists $K>0$ such that $d_2(f,g)leq Kcdot d_1(f,g)$ for all $f,gin X$ then the topology generated by $d_2$ is a subset of the topology generated by $d_1,$ so $ id_X:(X,d_1)to (X,d_2)$ is continuous because the inverse of a $d_2$-open set, which is itself, is also $d_1$-open.... In $a.$ we have $K=1.$
$endgroup$
– DanielWainfleet
Dec 22 '18 at 3:06














$begingroup$
Comparing topologies on the same set certainly can come in handy sometimes: imgur.com/cfOxqfs (an old assignment I did that plays off the same notion). I guess considering a and b together, we might say that an open bijection is not always continuous -_-
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 22 '18 at 3:24




$begingroup$
Comparing topologies on the same set certainly can come in handy sometimes: imgur.com/cfOxqfs (an old assignment I did that plays off the same notion). I guess considering a and b together, we might say that an open bijection is not always continuous -_-
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 22 '18 at 3:24











2












$begingroup$

We know that a continuous map between metric spaces is one which preserves limits: $f$ is continuous if and only if $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f(x_n)=f(limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n)$ for each convergent sequence $x_n$. To prove that a map is not continuous, we can try to find a sequence that is convergent in one metric but not the other.



For example, I don't think that b) is true. Consider the sequence
$$f_n(x)=x^n.$$



Then $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f_n=0$ in the metric $d_2$, but not in $d_1$: it even fails to be Cauchy in $d_1$.



Of course, in general it is fine to show that the preimage of any open ball is open. There is some general theory that tells you that if the identity map is bounded - that is, if for every $xin X_i$, $d_j(x,0)le Mcdot d_i(x,0)$ -- then the identity map from $X_i$ to $X_j$ is continuous. This uses the fact that all these metrics come from norms, though, and takes some work to establish.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    nice counterexample
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:25
















2












$begingroup$

We know that a continuous map between metric spaces is one which preserves limits: $f$ is continuous if and only if $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f(x_n)=f(limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n)$ for each convergent sequence $x_n$. To prove that a map is not continuous, we can try to find a sequence that is convergent in one metric but not the other.



For example, I don't think that b) is true. Consider the sequence
$$f_n(x)=x^n.$$



Then $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f_n=0$ in the metric $d_2$, but not in $d_1$: it even fails to be Cauchy in $d_1$.



Of course, in general it is fine to show that the preimage of any open ball is open. There is some general theory that tells you that if the identity map is bounded - that is, if for every $xin X_i$, $d_j(x,0)le Mcdot d_i(x,0)$ -- then the identity map from $X_i$ to $X_j$ is continuous. This uses the fact that all these metrics come from norms, though, and takes some work to establish.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    nice counterexample
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:25














2












2








2





$begingroup$

We know that a continuous map between metric spaces is one which preserves limits: $f$ is continuous if and only if $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f(x_n)=f(limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n)$ for each convergent sequence $x_n$. To prove that a map is not continuous, we can try to find a sequence that is convergent in one metric but not the other.



For example, I don't think that b) is true. Consider the sequence
$$f_n(x)=x^n.$$



Then $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f_n=0$ in the metric $d_2$, but not in $d_1$: it even fails to be Cauchy in $d_1$.



Of course, in general it is fine to show that the preimage of any open ball is open. There is some general theory that tells you that if the identity map is bounded - that is, if for every $xin X_i$, $d_j(x,0)le Mcdot d_i(x,0)$ -- then the identity map from $X_i$ to $X_j$ is continuous. This uses the fact that all these metrics come from norms, though, and takes some work to establish.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



We know that a continuous map between metric spaces is one which preserves limits: $f$ is continuous if and only if $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f(x_n)=f(limlimits_{ntoinfty} x_n)$ for each convergent sequence $x_n$. To prove that a map is not continuous, we can try to find a sequence that is convergent in one metric but not the other.



For example, I don't think that b) is true. Consider the sequence
$$f_n(x)=x^n.$$



Then $limlimits_{ntoinfty} f_n=0$ in the metric $d_2$, but not in $d_1$: it even fails to be Cauchy in $d_1$.



Of course, in general it is fine to show that the preimage of any open ball is open. There is some general theory that tells you that if the identity map is bounded - that is, if for every $xin X_i$, $d_j(x,0)le Mcdot d_i(x,0)$ -- then the identity map from $X_i$ to $X_j$ is continuous. This uses the fact that all these metrics come from norms, though, and takes some work to establish.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Dec 21 '18 at 3:53









Ashwin TrisalAshwin Trisal

1,2891516




1,2891516












  • $begingroup$
    nice counterexample
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:25


















  • $begingroup$
    nice counterexample
    $endgroup$
    – Matt A Pelto
    Dec 21 '18 at 4:25
















$begingroup$
nice counterexample
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 21 '18 at 4:25




$begingroup$
nice counterexample
$endgroup$
– Matt A Pelto
Dec 21 '18 at 4:25



Popular posts from this blog

Plaza Victoria

Puebla de Zaragoza

Musa