Generalized cell structures
Abstract.
Cell structures were introduced by W. Debski and E. Tymchatyn as a way to study some classes of topological spaces and their continuous functions by means of discrete approximations. In this work we weaken the notion of cell structure and prove that the resulting class of topological space admitting such a generalized cell structure includes non-regular spaces.
Introduction
Cell structures may be thought of as devices to represent some topological spaces by means of discrete approximations, more precisely, to describe a space as homeomorphic to a perfect image of an inverse limit of graphs. They were introduced in [1] for complete metric spaces and extended in [2] to topologically complete spaces. The initial step in identifying a cell structure consists in considering an inverse sequence of graphs, each of which have attached a reflexive and symmetric relation. The vertices of each graph are the elements of a set and the edges are described by reflexive and symmetric subsets of , or equivalently, the set of edges of is an entourage of the diagonal of . Such an inverse sequence is said to be a cell structure when it admits a couple of properties: one that allows the induced natural relation on its inverse limit to be an equivalence relation (where two threads in the inverse limit are declared to be related if every pair of their corresponding components are related), and a second property that allows the quotient of the inverse limit by its natural relation to be a perfect mapping. This resulting quotient space is the said to admit, up to homeomorphism, a cell structure.
In this paper we explore the natural question on the class of topological space obtained by admitting a weaker version of a cell structures, which we will call generalized cell structures, or g-cell structure for short. We are able to show that there are topological spaces admitting such a g-cell structure but not a cell structure. Furthermore, an explicit example of a nonregular space admitting a g-cell structure will be provided.
Representing the structure of spaces as approximations of simpler more understandable structures, such as graphs, is a fruitful idea used not only in topology [5], but in a variety of other areas such as spin networks [6], operator algebras [3], networks [7], among others.
We divide this work in two sections. In Section 1 we introduce the notion of generalized cell structure and prove the basic results needed in the rest of the paper. The main results are given in Section 2.
The authors gratefully acknowledge that this paper have benefited from stimulating conversations with Carlos Islas and Juan Manuel Burgos. The first author received support for this work from CONACyT scholarship Num. 926215.
1. Preliminaries
In this section we give the definition of spaces admitting a g-cell structure together with some preliminary results which will be useful in the next section. For any set , we will denote the diagonal of as . When no confusion arises, we will write rather than . The set of natural numbers is as usual .
Definition 1.1.
We say that an order pair is a cellular graph if is a nonempty topological space and is a reflexive and symmetric relation on . The vertices of the graph, the elements of , will also be known as cells of the graph, while the elements of are the edges of the graph.
Definition 1.2.
If is a cellular graph and is a cell, we define the neighborhood of to be the set
Therefore, the set is the set of vertices of that are adjacent to in . More generally, for we denote
Following the terminology of [4, Section 8.1, pg. 426], given a cellular graph , since the relation is reflexive, then the diagonal of is a subset of . On the other hand, since is symmetric it follows that is equal to its own inverse relation , where . Conversely, given a entourage of the diagonal of , that is to say, a relation on which contains and satisfies , it follows that is a reflexive and symmetric relation. Thus, we may characterize a cellular graph as a pair where is a nonempty topological space and is an entourage of the diagonal. Finally, the composition of of the relation with itself is defined as . In other words a pair of cells belongs to if there exits a path of length 2 in the cellular graph joining them. Notice that is still a reflexive and symmetric relation of . Furthermore, it is always true that and the opposite inclusion follows if and only if is transitive.
Definition 1.3.
Suppose that is a sequence of cellular graphs and let be a family of continuous functions, called bonding maps, such that
-
•
is the identity on ,
-
•
for and
-
•
the bonding maps send edges to edges, that is, whenever .
We will then say that is an inverse sequence of cellular graphs.
The inverse limit of an inverse sequence of cellular graphs will be denoted by or . It is a nonempty subspace of with the product topology. Elements in are called threads and the mappings denote the restriction of the standard projection maps . In other words,
The topology in is actually characterized by a basis, as the following result shows. It is actually a special case of [4, Propositon 2.5.5]. We include a proof for completeness.
Proposition 1.4.
Let be the inverse limit of an inverse sequence of cellular graphs . Then the collection of the sets of the form
defines a basis for the the topology of .
Proof.
Let and let be an open set such that . By definition of the subspace topology, there exists an open set such that . Thus there exists an open set in the base of satisfying . Let . Since the bounding maps are continuous, for every , is an open set in . Hence, is also an open set and . Let be an open set in the base of such that . Now, since , we get that . ∎
Definition 1.5.
Let be an inverse sequence of cellular graphs and let be its inverse limit. We define the natural relation on by
In turns out that the inverse limits of an inverse sequence of cellular graphs is actually a cellular graph with the natural relation on given in Definition 1.5, as established in the following proposition.
Proposition 1.6.
If is the inverse limit of an inverse sequence of cellular graphs then it is a cellular graph with respect its natural relation given in Definition 1.5.
Proof.
Let be an inverse sequence of cellular graphs and let be its inverse limit. By definition, is a topological space. We only need to check that is reflexive and symmetric. This follows immediately since each is reflexive and symmetric. ∎
We are now ready to define a generalized cell structure. It consists of just one condition which is a necessary condition implied by the first original condition for cell structures originally defined in [1]. It enables the natural relation induced on the inverse limit of an inverse sequence of cellular graphs to be transitive and therefore an equivalent relation.
Definition 1.7.
We say that an inverse sequence of cellular graphs is a generalized cell structure, or a g-cell structure for short, if its natural relation given in Definition 1.5 is an equivalence relation.
Proposition 1.8.
Let be an inverse sequence of cellular graphs and let be its inverse limit. Each of the following statement implies the next.
-
(1)
For each , the relation is an equivalence relation on .
-
(2)
For each thread and for each there exists such that .
-
(3)
The inverse sequence is a g-cell structure.
Proof.
To prove (1) implies (2), let and let . Take . Since is transitive, by hypothesis, then . Since is the identity, this proves that holds.
Now, we prove (2) implies (3). By Proposition 1.6, the natural relation is reflexive and symmetric. To check that it is a g-cell structure, the transitivity of the natural relation is the only property missing. The proof follows from the same argument given in the proof of [1, Lemma 3.1], which we repeat here for completeness sake. Suppose that and let . Then there is such that . Since then . Therefore , that is, . Thus , as wanted. ∎
Condition (2) in previous Proposition 1.8 may be interpreted as follows: For each and each , there exits such that collapses any path of length two beginning at the vertex and through three different vertices to an edge beginning at .
Given an inverse sequence of cellular graphs, to prove that it is a g-cell structure will usually be verified by checking condition (2) in Proposition 1.8.
Notice that Definition 1.7 allows the spaces to be not necessary discrete. It would be trivial to propose a g-cell structure of any topological space by considering the inverse sequence , and the bonding maps are all the identity maps. Therefore, to avoid such trivialities, it becomes important to require either that every has the discrete topology or that not all are equal to . The role of the bonding maps, evidently, becomes predominant, as the following examples show.
Example 1.9.
For each , consider with the standard topology and define
while the bonding maps are given by
Then is a g-cell structure while none of the ’s is a discrete spaces.
Observe that Example 1.9 also exhibits that the converse of the implication in Proposition 1.8 is false. The following example will show how a modification on the bonding maps may produce the loss of the cell structure on a sequence of cellular graphs.
Example 1.10.
Consider the cellular graphs given in Example 1.9. Now redefine all the bonding maps as the identity maps. Then the resulting inverse sequence is no longer a cell structure. Indeed, the constant sequences , and belong to . Furthermore, and . However, . Thus is not an equivalence relation.
Definition 1.11.
Let be a g-cell structure. Let and let be the induced relation on as given in Definition 1.5. We denote the quotient space as
We will say that a topological space admits a g-cell structure if there exists a g-cell structure such that is homeomorphic to .
In Example 1.9 one may show that is homeomorphic to with the usual topology and that is the only nontrivial relation in . Thus is homeomorphic to . This gives a g-cell structure for alternative to cell structure obtained in [1].
When every is an equivalence relation, one might think that the inverse limit of is equal to . This is not true, as the following example shows.
Example 1.12.
Consider the discrete spaces together with . Define now the bonding maps to be the inclusion maps. Then is empty, while the inverse limit of is the one point space.
The above Example 1.12 may be slightly modified by taking , and all bonding maps to be the identity. Then again is different from the inverse limit of the one-point space .
Proposition 1.13.
Let be a g-cell structure. The quotient map is closed if and only if for every and every open neighbourhood of there exists in the base of such that and .
Proof.
Let and let be an open subset in such that . Define
If is a closed map, by [4, Proposition 2.4.9], the set is an open set and since , by Proposition 1.4, there exists in the base of such that . By definition of , for each , . Thus, . For the converse, if then, by hypothesis, there exists a basis element such that and . Let then and thus . Consequently and so is an open set. By [4, Proposition 2.4.9], is a closed map. ∎
In Propositon 1.13, if has the discrete topology for all , we obtained a condition similar to [1, Proposition 3.8] for cell structures as the following result shows.
Corollary 1.14.
Let be a g-cell structure where every has the discrete topology. If for every and every open neighbourhood of there exists such that then the collection
is a basis of open sets for the topology of .
Proof.
Let and let be an open set containing . Since is an open set in , then by Proposition 1.4, for each there exists such that . Let , then is an open set such that . By Proposition 1.13, is a closed set and thus is an open set. On the other hand we have . This mean that and so . Thus . Finally, since , then , so that . Now, since and then . We conclude that . ∎
Lemma 1.15.
Let be a g-cell structure where each satisfies that for each and for each open set containing , there exists an open set such that and . Let and let . Then is an open set in and .
Proof.
We will show that the condition in is independent of the representative of the class. Let such that and satisfying for all . Let such that . Since , there exists an open set such that and . Hence, since , then . By the definition of g-cell structure, there exits such that and suppose that there exists such that . Then , which implies . This is a contradiction on the choosing of . Thus, for all , , this mean that satisfies the condition in .
Now, we will prove that is an open set. Let , then and there exists such that for all . Since , then there exists an open set such that and . Then . We will show that . Let , then . Suppose that there exists such that . Then . Hence, . This is a contradiction because . Consequently, for all . Then which implies that . Hence, is an open set, so that is an open set in . ∎
2. Results
In this section we present the main results of this work. Since we do not require that for each thread and each there is such that is finite (a condition that implies that the quotient map to be a perfect map), we begin by giving alternative condition on the g-cell structure which implies to be Hausdorff or normal.
Theorem 2.1.
Let be a g-cell structure where each is a Hausdorff space and satisfies that for each and for each open set containing , there exists an open set such that and . Then the quotient space is a Hausdorff space.
Proof.
Let , in such that and . Then and thus there exists such that . Since that is a Hausdorff space there exists disjoint open sets and such that and . Define the following sets:
By the Lemma 1.15, and are open sets in containing and , respectively. We will show that and are disjoint sets. Suppose that there exists such that , then there exists and in such that satisfies the condition in and satisfies the condition in . Since , then . But, then and so . Hence, for some . This is a contradiction because and are in the same equivalence class. ∎
Corollary 2.2.
If is a g-cell structure where each is a discrete space then is a Hausdorff space.
Proof.
Since is a discrete space, then it is a Hausdorff space. Also, if and is an open set containing , then is an open set containing and . By the Theorem 2.1, is a Hausdorff space. ∎
Theorem 2.3.
Let be a space admitting a g-cell structure. Then is normal provided its g-cell structure satisfies the following properties: (i) Every is a metric space. (ii) For every and for every open neighborhood of there exists in the base of such that and .
Proof.
Theorem 2.4.
Let be a sequence of topological spaces each admitting a cellular structure and without isolated points. Then the wedge sum does not admit a cell structure but does admit a g-cell structure.
Proof.
For each , let us denote the distinguished base point in and let the quotient map which identifies all the points into a single point . Since each is a metrizable space (in fact completely metrizable by [1, Theorem 3.6]), let be a metric in , for each . Suppose that there exists a countable neighborhood base of the point . Since is an open set in , then is an open set in . Also, is a non-degenerate set because and is a topological space without isolated points. Then there exists . Put and denote the open ball with center and radius . By definition of the mapping we have , then by definition of quotient topology, we have that is an open set in which contains . We claim that does not contain any of the elements of the base . Indeed, if , then . Hence, , a contradiction. Thus, does no admit a countable neighborhood base. Then is not a first countable space. We conclude that is not a metrizable space. Thus X does not admit a cell structure by [1, Theorem 3.6].
For each , let be a cell structure for built as in [1, Theorem 4.3]. The cell structure determines a inverse limit which will be denoted by and will denote the space determined by the cell structure. The projection map restricted to will be denoted by . The quotient map of onto will be denoted by while will denote the homeomorphism of onto .
For each , fix . Furthermore, since is a cell structure for , we may choose inductively the least natural number such , where . We define the following sets:
-
•
-
•
-
•
For each , we will consider on the relation . Notice that each is a reflexive relation, because contains to the diagonal of . Also, is a symmetric relation, since and are symmetric. Thus, for each , is a cellular graph. We define, for each , the bonding maps as follow: let be the identity on and defined by
We will prove that whenever .
-
•
If , then for some . Since is a composition of bonding maps, we get that . Therefore, .
-
•
If , there exist such that and . Thus, there is such that and . This implies that and , therefore . Also, since , we have . In the same way, we get that . Hence, we conclude that .
Therefore is a inverse sequence of cellular graphs and we will denote its inverse limit. Now to show that the condition of g-cell structure is satisfied, let and let . Then, for some , , where we set, for each , . Notice that , because the set is cofinal in . Then, there is which corresponds to . For , let such that . We will show that . Let . Notice that .
-
•
If , then there exists such that and . Since , then and necessarily . Thus . This implies that . Therefore . We get that .
-
•
If , since is transitive, we have and so we obtain the result.
-
•
If , there exists such that and . Since , then . Hence . On the other hand, we have that and for some . Since , then and . Now, for some and therefore . This mean that and by the hypothesis, . We obtain . Also, . Then . We conclude that . Since , we get that .
-
•
If , there exists such that and . Since , there exists such that . Hence . In the other hands, we have that and . Since , then and . Thus where . Hence, . This implies that and by the hypothesis, we get that . Notice that . Also, we have . Therefore . We conclude that . Since , we get that .
We now define the following sets:
and
Notice that since is the induced relation on by the reflexive and symmetric relation on , for each , we have that is an equivalence relation. So we will consider the quotient space (which is in fact homeomorphic to ) and we will introduce and equivalence relation on as follows:
We will prove that the definition of does not depend on the class representative. It will suffice to show that given such that for each we have for some , implies that for each we also have for some . For this purpose, fix an arbitrary . Since , there exists such that . Then and . Also, by assumption, there exists such that and . Thus and this implies that . Hence, and so, . We get that , as wanted. Thus is well defined. Notice that is an equivalence relation. Consider the funtion defined as . We will show tha is well defined.
Let . If , then . If , then and thus . It follows that the diagram in Figure 1 commutes. Hence is continuous. We now show that is injective. Let , then , since otherwise and so , a contradiction. But also since otherwise implies by definition that , a contradiction. We conclude that and thus is injective. It is clear that is surjective and its inverse is also continuous by an analogous argument using a commutative diagram. Thus is a homeomorphism
∎
In fact the space in Theorem 2.4 is a normal space. In the next result we prove that more is true: there is a non-regular space admitting a g-cell structure.
First, we build the g-cell structure which will determine a non-regular space.
Definition 2.5.
Consider the following sets with the discrete topology.
where and let . In general, for each let , with and
Now, for each ,
is the identity function on and is defined as
First we will prove the following lemma.
Lemma 2.6.
The sequence given in Definition 2.5 is an inverse sequence of cellular graphs. Furthermore, given such that for some , then there exists such that , for some .
Proof.
By definition, is a reflexive and symmetric relation for each . Also, by definition of the bonding functions, we get that satisfies the first two conditions of inverse system. We will show that the third condition is satistied. Let such that .
-
•
If and with , then and . Hence, .
-
•
If and , then and . Therefore, .
-
•
If we can suppose that and . If , then and . Thus, . Now, if , we get that and . Hence, . By last, if , then and . Therefore .
-
•
Suppose that . If for some , then and . So, we get that . Now, if with , then and . Since that , we conclude that .
Consequently, we get that is an inverse system of cellular graphs. Let , notice that , then we can take and and we get that . Now, we suppose that . Then we can factorize as for some and . By definition of the function we get that . Now, we consider the preimage of under the function . We have two cases again. If , we get that . Hence, we can take and . This implies that . If , then . In general, if is not in some , then . Taking , we have . Since , we get that . Now, we can take and and we get that . Consequently, for each such that with , there exists such that , for some . ∎
We will also need the following.
Lemma 2.7.
The sequence given in Definition 2.5 is a g-cell structure.
Proof.
By Lemma 2.6, the system given in Definition 2.5 is an inverse system. It remains to prove that the condition for a g-cell structure is satisfied. Let and . If or with , then and . Now, if , with , we get that and . If for some , then and . Hence, if , then . Finally, if such that for some . Then, by the Lemma 2.6, there exists such that for some . Therefore, we have that . We conclude that for each and , there exists such that . Consequently, is a g-cell structure. ∎
We are now ready to prove our last result.
Theorem 2.8.
There are spaces admitting a g-cell structure which are not regular.
Proof.
Consider the inverse sequence of cell graphs given in Definition 2.5. By Lemma 2.7 it is a g-cell structure. Let , and . We will show that is a closed set in and it does not contain . Let for some . By definition of the relation , the element is related with if and only if . Hence, this implies that . Since was chosen arbitrarily, is not related with some element of . Therefore, .
Let . We shall show that . Notice that if , then and thus . It result that and this implies that . Therefore, . Now, we will show that there exists such that for every , . Suppose that for every there exists such that . In particular for , there exists such that . Since that and for there exists such that , then . Applying induction, we suppose that for some . Since and for there exists such that , we get that . Then for every . Hence, which is a contradiction. So, there exists such that for each , .
We shall show that is an open set and . Let , then . Now, if , then because . Suppose that , then or with and . First we will consider the case which satisfies for some . By the Lemma 2.6, there exists such that for some and . Therefore, by definition of , for every . Then for each this implies that . Hence, . Now, we will consider such that for some and . Then for every . Similarly to the first case, we get that . We conclude that is an open set such that . Consequently is open this implies that is open in . Therefore, is closed in .
To show that is not regular, we will prove that there are not disjoint open sets and in such that and . Let , open sets in such that and . Then and are open sets in which satisfy and . Also, . Since and is open, there exists a basic open such that . This implies that and thus . By definition of , we have that . Consider the thread . Then and thus, . Since is open, for there exists a basic open such that . If , then this implies that . Hence, and . Without losing generality, we suppose that . Remember that , then . Applying the row 7 of the bonding function , we get that . Now, we consider the thread
Then and thus, . Define the thread as
By definition of with , we have that . Then and therefore . Since , we get that and applying the row 6 of the bonding function , it result that . If , by row 9 of the function , we have that . In other case (), applying the row 8 of the function , . Considering now the function , we have two cases again. If , then and in the case , . Since , there exists such that . If we continue with this process until , we will get that . Therefore . Consequently, and thus . So, we get that . This mean that there exists such that y . Hence, and this implies that . Therefore, if and are open sets in such that and , then . We conclude that is not regular. ∎
Evidently, there is a net version of Definition 1.7, as was observed in [2] for cell structures. Using this generalized definition one may check that uniform spaces have a nontrivial g-cell structure where and for all . It would be interesting to determine what is the class of topological spaces admitting a g-cell structure.
References
- [1] W. Debski and E.D. Tymchantyn. Cell structures and completely metrizable spaces and their mappings. Colloq. Math, 147:181–194, 2017.
- [2] W. Debski and E.D. Tymchantyn. Cell structures and topologically complete spaces. Topol. Appl., 239:293–307, 2018.
- [3] G. Elliott. On the Classification of Inductive Limits of Sequences of Semisimple Finite-Dimensional Algebras. J. Algebra, 38:29–44, 1976.
- [4] R. Engelking. General Topology. Sigma Series in Pure Mathematics, 1989.
- [5] S. Lefschetz. On compact spaces. Ann. Math., 32:521–538, 1931.
- [6] C. Nash. Topology and physics—a historical essay. In I.M. James, editor, History of Topology, chapter 12, pages 359–415. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1999.
- [7] M. Newman. Networks. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018.