Paracompact subspaces in the box product topology

Supercompact minus compact is super

d-20 - H-Closed Spaces

On the existence of continuous (approximate) roots of algebraic equations

A categorical characterization of a subcategory S of TOP (or 7J) is one which enables the identification of S in TOP (or 7^) without requiring the reconstruction of the topological structure of its objects.In this paper we so characterize various familiar subcategories of TOP (Hausdorff spaces, normal spaces, compact Hausdorff spaces, paracompact Hausdorff spaces, metrizable spaces, first countable spaces) in terms of the global behavior of the (objects and) morphisms of the subcategory. Introduction. A categorical characterization of a subcategory S of TOP (or of T2) is one which enables the identification of S in TOP (or T2) without requiring the reconstruction of the topological structure of its objects.The proof of the triviality of the automorphism class group of TOP [Fe, p. 32] assures us of the existence of such characterizations.As will be shown in §1, this proof establishes that all the topological structure of an object of TOP can be recovered from the behavior of the arrows with that object as source and/ or target.In §2 we establish a number of lemmas (mostly known), and we use these lemmas in §3 to characterize many important subcategories of TOP and/ or T2, such as the metrizable spaces, the paracompact Hausdorff spaces, the normal spaces, etc.We can distinguish at least three classes of "categorical" characterizations of subcategories of TOP, which are listed below: Class 3. Straightforward translations of the familiar definitions.These can always be obtained because of the results in §1.Example: Characterize the concepts "open", "cover", "refinement", "locally finite" categorically and then the standard definition of paracompact spaces is categorical.Class 2. Characterizations using standard categorical constructions (product, coproduct, epimorphic images, etc.) but in terms of individual objects, and/or constants outside the subcategory.Example: The category of paracompact Hausdorff spaces contains precisely those Hausdorff spaces X such that

Let X, Y be compact Hausdorff spaces and B£(X), B*(Y)f 0 < a, |3 < 12 (the first uncountable ordinal), the associated Banach spaces of bounded real-valued Baire functions of classes a and 0. If B*(X) =£ B*AX) (which is the case if a =£ 0 and X is not dispersed), then B*(X) is neither linearly isometric to BQ(Y) nor equivalent to B^(Y) in several other ways. B^(X) is linearly isometric to B%(Y) if and only if X is Baire isomorphic to Y. For 1 < a < ft the maximal ideal space of B£(X) for a nondispersed compact space X As not an F-space. 1. Let I bea compact (more generally, completely regular) Hausdorff space and C(X) the space of continuous real-valued functions on X. Let B0(X) = C(X)9 and inductively define Ba(X) for each ordinal a < Q, (Q denotes the first uncountable ordinal) to be the space of pointwise limits of sequences of functions in U | < a B^(X). Let B*(X) be the space of bounded functions contained in Ba(X). With the pointwise operations Ba(X) and B*(X) are lattice-ordered algebras. With the supremum norm B*(X) is a Banach algebra (see [4, §41]). The Baire sets of X of multiplicative class a, denoted by Za(X)9 are defined to be the zero sets of functions in B*(X). Those of additive class a, denoted by CZa(X), are defined as the complements of sets in Za(X). Finally, those of ambiguous class a, denoted by Aa(X), are the sets which are simultaneously in Za(X) and CZa(X). With the set-theoretic operations of union and intersection, Aa(X) is a Boolean algebra for each a < 12. The sets of exactly ambiguous class a, denoted by EAa(X are those in ^ a ( Z ) U ^ < a Ac(X). The sets of exactly additive and exactly multiplicative class a are defined analogously. The class of all Baire subsets of X is AMS (MOS) subject classifications (1970). Primary 06A65, 26A21, 28A05, 46E1S, 46E30, 46J10, 54C50, 54H05; Secondary 04A15.

Function-space compactifications of function spaces

1. Introduction. In this paper, we describe methods of imbedding a Hausdorff space X in a compact space X so that each function in a given family of continuous functions on X has a continuous extension to X and the family of extensions separates the points of X -X. In particular, if X is completely regular but not locally compact, then we shall exhibit a non-Hausdorff compactification which contains X as an open subset and is bigger than the Stone-tech compactification of X. (Of course, every compactification of X is nonHausdorff if X is not completely regular.) We shall also show that the completion of a metric space M may be obtained as a subset of a compactification of M by a rather simple construction. By a compactification of a Hausdorff space X, we mean a compact space X which contains, as a dense subset, the image of X under a fixed homeomorphism f. We usually do not distinguish between X and f(X), and we say that X contains X as a dense subset. In what follows, X is always a noncompact Hausdorff space, AX denotes the closure of X-X in X, and a mapping is always a continuous function. If X is Hausdorff ,we say that X is a Hausdorff compactification of X. If X is not Hausdorff, however, we still assume that it satisfies

b-7 - Cleavable (Splittable) Spaces

Comparing Cartesian closed categories of (core) compactly generated spaces

The uniform box product problem is a weakening of the well-known box product problem, which asks whether box products of certain compact spaces are normal or even paracompact. Using uniformities, a new topology on products is defined between the box and Tychonov topologies. This new product, called the uniform box product, is an extension of the sup metric to powers of compact spaces. We investigate a certain non-metrizable compact space whose uniform box product, in ZFC, is normal, countably paracompact, and collectionwise Hausdorff.

Given two topologies J1, J2 on a set X, J1 is said to be coarser than J2, written J1 ≦ J2, if every set open under J1 is open under J2. A minimal Hausdorff space is then one for which there is no coarser Hausdorff topology etc. Vaidyanathaswamy [4] showed that every compact Hausdorff space is both maximal compact and minimal Hausdorff. This raised the question of whether there exist minimal Hausdorff non-compact spaces and/or maximal compact non-Hausdorff spaces. These questions were in fact answered in the affirmative by Ramanathan [2], Balachandran [1], and Hing Tong [3]. Their examples were, however, all on countable sets, and the topology constructed to answer one question bore no relation to the topology answering the second. In particular, the minimal Hausdorff non-compact topologies were not finer than any maximal compact topology.

By the Riesz Representation Theorem for locally compact Hausdorff spaces, for every positive linear functional I on K(X) there is a measure @m such that I(f)=@!fd@m, where K(X) is the set of continuous real functions with compact support on the locally compact Hausdorff space X. In this article we prove a uniformly computable version of this theorem for computably locally compact computable Hausdorff spaces X. We introduce a representation of the positive linear functionals I on K(X) and a representation of the Borel measures on X and prove that for every such functional I a measure @m can be computed and vice versa such that I(f)=@!fd@m.

Let G be a locally compact second countable Hausdorff space with a positive regular Borel measure λ, where λ is invariant under a continuous injective mapping φ : G → G. We characterize the disjoint hypercyclicity of finite weighted translations generated by φ acting on the weighted space Lp (G, ω) (1 ≤ p &lt; ∞).

On classes of compactifications which are always singular

Suppose that K = {K0, K1} is a partition of some finite combinatorial power [S]r of a set S. Let X(K) be the compact subspace of the Tychonoff cube [0, 1]S consisting of those functions ƒ whose supports Sƒ = {ƒ &gt; 0} are 0-homogeneous i.e., [Sƒ]r ⊆ K0. It can be said that almost every example of a space witnessing the distinction between various chain conditions is a variation of X(K) (see [2]). This comes from the fact that the subject is closely related to the subject of Partition Calculus. (See [11] for an explanation of this point.) To have examples which are even more topologically interesting one usually tries to make them small, i.e., as closely related to the unit interval as possible. The operation X(K) has a considerable drawback in that respect. For example, if we want X(K) to be ccc this becomes equivalent to the fact that the poset of all finite 0-homogeneous sets is ccc which amounts to the fact that K1 must be very small. Hence K0 is big in the sense that there exist large 0-homogeneous sets. This usually results in X(K) having large size and having points of large character. One attempt to solve this problem was given by van Douwen in [5] by going to the subspace Xm(K) of X(K) consisting of those ƒ for which Sƒ are maximal 0-homogeneous subsets of S. Unfortunately, while Xm(K) usually does have small character it is almost never compact. This might have been the reason for his question ([2], p. 207) whether the Continuum Hypothesis implies that the class of all first countable compacta distinguishes the standard chain conditions that lie between ‘ccc’ and ‘separable’. In this paper we solve this problem completely. Moreover, we shall not go beyond the usual axioms of set theory in constructing the examples. The sequence of examples will start with a compact space of small character whose chain condition is not productive and it will end with a compact space of size c and small character which is ccc in a strong sense but which fails to have calibre θ for some regular uncountable cardinal θ, i.e., it fails to have the property of Shanin. Note that one cannot go further and show that, for example, compact spaces of small character distinguish between ‘the property of Shanin’ and ‘separable’. This follows from an old result of Efimov [3] that, under CH, first-countable spaces of calibre ℵ1 are separable. The combinatorics behind our examples have been developed in a series of papers that deal with the subject of forcing axioms in general and Martin's axiom in particular ([10, 11, 12, 13, 14]). Martin's axiom was originally invented in connection with the Souslin Problem, i.e., to show that certain compact ccc spaces must be separable (see [8]). A result of the aforementioned study of MA showed that this axiom is nothing more than the statement that all compact ccc spaces of π-weight &lt; c must be separable (see [12]). An analysis of the fact that MA implies SH, due to Hajnal and Juhasz[6] (see also [4], §43 for a definite result in that direction due to Shapirovskii), revealed that MA implies that every compact ccc space X with the property χ(X)+ &lt; c must be separable. This result explains why the compact ccc non-separable spaces X that we construct in this paper have the property that χ(x, X) &lt; c for all x m X rather than the stronger property χ(X) &lt; c or even χ(X) = ℵ0. Note that our examples show, answering a question from [6], that the Hajnal–Juhasz result is sharp in the sense that the assumption χ(X)+ &lt; c cannot be weakened to χ(X) &lt; c. The first example to show this was constructed by Bell [1] using a consequence of MA rather than just ZFC for its construction. Another feature of our examples is that they all are remainders of certain compactifications of the integers. This is of independent interest in certain constructions of weak P-points in compact F-spaces. An explanation of this can be found in [1] and [9] where the first examples of ccc non-separable remainders were constructed and used.