2

Self studying topology from Kahn, an exercise asks to find a metric space that fails the second axiom of countability. I can't find the name of the metric space that I thought of online, and when I search the quoted phrase it comes up with papers much more advanced than what I am trying to figure out. I'd like to self-evaluate. This is my solution. Any critique is welcomed.

Let $F$ be the set of all bounded functions from $[0,1]$ into $\Bbb R$ under the metric

$$D(f_1, f_2) = \max\{|f_1(x) – f_2(x)|: x \in [0,1]\}\;.$$

Consider a countable subset of the basis $\{B_\epsilon(f) \mid f \in F, \epsilon\in\Bbb R\}$. For each $k \in\Bbb N$ we have an open set $U_k$ of the form $B_\epsilon(f)$. For each $\alpha\in [0,1]$ let $U_k^\alpha$ denote the interval $(f(α) – \epsilon, f(α) + \epsilon)$.

I wish to show that there is a function $f \in F$ which is not contained by any $U_k$, and thus no countable basis can exist.

Define $g:[0,1]\to\Bbb R$ as

$$g(x)=\begin{cases} 1+\sup U_k^x,&\text{if }x=\frac1k\text{ for some }k\in\Bbb N\\ 0,&\text{otherwise}\;. \end{cases}$$

Thus $g$ is not contained in any $U_k$ since it is outside of the epsilon radius for at least one $\alpha$ in each $U_k$.

Therefore there is no countable basis for this metric space.

Again please critique and suggest better notation for clarity. Posting from my phone and cannot access the latex tips.

Brian M. Scott
  • 631,399
Opal E
  • 391
  • Not a critique, but the first thing I thought of was the family ${ \chi_{{x}}:x \in [0,1]}.$ Note that $D(\chi_{{x}},\chi_{{y}})=1$ for $x\ne y.$ – zhw. Nov 12 '16 at 18:15
  • Fair enough; I like looking for more challenging examples for my own understanding. Still seeking feedback... – Opal E Nov 12 '16 at 19:29
  • My example is your example. I just found a different way of showing $F$ not second countable. – zhw. Nov 12 '16 at 19:36
  • Ah-- missed that, I don't think that is a family of functions I'm familiar with. Can you clarify? – Opal E Nov 12 '16 at 20:36
  • $\chi_{{x}}$ is the function that equals $1$ at $x$ and is $0$ elsewhere – zhw. Nov 12 '16 at 21:21

1 Answers1

1

It would be better to name the function and $\epsilon$ used to define each $U_k$: for each $k\in\Bbb Z^+$ there are $f_k\in F$ and $\epsilon_k>0$ such that $U_k=B_{\epsilon_k}(f_k)$. Then you can define $g$ by

$$g(x)=\begin{cases} 1+f_k(x)+\epsilon_k,&\text{if }x=\frac1k\text{ for some }k\in\Bbb Z^+\\ 0,&\text{otherwise} \end{cases}$$

and don’t even need to define the intervals $U_\epsilon^x$. In fact you don’t even need the $1$:

$$g(x)=\begin{cases} f_k(x)+\epsilon_k,&\text{if }x=\frac1k\text{ for some }k\in\Bbb Z^+\\ 0,&\text{otherwise} \end{cases}$$

works just as well, since

$$D(g,f_k)\ge\left|f_k\left(\frac1k\right)-f_k\left(\frac1k\right)\right|=\epsilon_k$$

for each $k\in\Bbb Z^+$.

Your argument requires one non-trivial fact that you’ve not mentioned: it depends on the fact that if $\mathscr{B}$ is a base for a second countable space, then there is a countable $\mathscr{B}_0\subseteq\mathscr{B}$ that is countable. That is, if a space is second countable, then every base for the space contains a countable base for it. This is the countable case of a more general theorem that I stated and proved in this answer.

Brian M. Scott
  • 631,399
  • Thanks for the feedback on notation! You're right, I failed to mention that fact -- I recall proving it for myself a few weeks ago at least to the point where I was convinced, but shamefully neglected it here. – Opal E Nov 13 '16 at 05:13
  • @Opal: You’re welcome! – Brian M. Scott Nov 13 '16 at 05:22