17
  1. The smallest possible cardinality of a base is called the weight of the topological space. I was wondering if all minimal bases have the same cardinality, and if every base contains a subset whose cardinality is the weight of the topological space?
  2. What aspects are common between a (smallest) base of a topology and a base of a vector space, besides the following similarity (open subset <-> vector, union <-> linear combination):

    • every open subset is the union of some members in the base;

    • every vector is the linear combination of some members in the base.

    Note that a base in a vector space is also a base in the linear matroid. Not sure if we can have some nice structure like matroid for a topological space to understand its (smallest) bases.

Thanks and regards!

Tim
  • 49,162
  • 5
    Don't let the word "basis" confuse you. Much like "normal distribution" and "normal function" (in set theory) have nothing to do with one another, the word "basis" is just a common word, like "normal" or "regular". – Asaf Karagila Dec 31 '12 at 23:52

1 Answers1

17

Let $\langle X,\tau\rangle$ be a topological space. While there are exceptions, in general there is no such thing as a minimal base for $\tau$: if $\mathscr{B}$ is a base for $\tau$, in general some proper subset of $\mathscr{B}$ is also a base for $\tau$.1 However, among bases for $\tau$ there are bases of minimal cardinality, and that minimal cardinality of a base for $\tau$ is $w(X)$, the weight of $X$.2

Yes, it is true that every base for $\tau$ has a subset of cardinality $w(X)$ that is also a base for $X$. Here’s a proof.

Let $\mathscr{B}$ be a base for $\tau$, and let $\mathscr{W}$ be a base for $\tau$ such that $|\mathscr{W}|=w(X)$. For each $W\in\mathscr{W}$ let $\mathscr{B}(W)=\{B\in\mathscr{B}:B\subseteq W\}$; clearly $\bigcup\mathscr{B}(W)=W$. Let $$\mathscr{W}_W=\{V\in\mathscr{W}:V\subseteq B\text{ for some }B\in\mathscr{B}(W)\}\;;$$ clearly $\bigcup\mathscr{W}_W=\bigcup\mathscr{B}(W)=W$, and $|\mathscr{W}_W|\le|\mathscr{W}|=w(X)$. For each $V\in\mathscr{W}_W$ let $B(V)\in\mathscr{B}(W)$ be such that $V\subseteq B(V)$, and let $$\mathscr{B}_0(W)=\{B(V):V\in\mathscr{W}_W\}\;;$$ $|\mathscr{B}_0(W)|\le|\mathscr{W}_W|\le w(X)$, and $$\bigcup\mathscr{W}_W\subseteq\bigcup\mathscr{B}_0(W)\subseteq\bigcup\mathscr{B}(W)=\bigcup\mathscr{W}_W\;,$$ so $\bigcup\mathscr{B}_0(W)=W$.

Now let $$\mathscr{B}_0=\bigcup_{W\in\mathscr{W}}\mathscr{B}_0(W)\subseteq\mathscr{B}\;.$$

$\mathscr{B}_0$ is the union of $w(X)$ subsets of $\mathscr{B}$, each of which has cardinality at most $w(X)$, so $|\mathscr{B}_0|\le w(X)$. Moreover, each $W\in\mathscr{W}$ is the union of members of $\mathscr{B}_0$, and $\mathscr{W}$ is a base for $\tau$, so $\mathscr{B}_0$ is also a base for $\tau$. Since $w(X)$ is the minimum cardinality of a base for $\tau$, it follows that $|\mathscr{B}_0|=w(X)$.

As Asaf already pointed out in the comments, there is little connection between this notion of base and the notion of basis in vector spaces. What connection there is does not go beyond the fact that both are in some sense small families (of open sets and vectors, respectively) from which the entire topology or vector space can be generated in some natural way.

1 Specifically, if $\mathscr{B}$ is a partition of $X$, then $\mathscr{B}$ is the unique minimal base for the topology $\tau$ on $X$ generated by $\mathscr{B}$. If $\langle X,\tau\rangle$ is $T_1$, this means that $\tau$ is the discrete topology, and $\mathscr{B}=\big\{\{x\}:x\in X\big\}$. Added 25 July 2023: Here is another exceptional case. Suppose that $\tau$ is a finite topology on $X$. For each $x\in X$ let $B(x)=\bigcap\{U\in\tau:x\in U\}$; clearly the sets $B(x)$ are open, and $B(x)$ is the smallest open set containing $x$; it’s not hard to check that $\mathscr{B}=\{B(x):x\in X\}$ is a minimal base for $\tau$.

2 The weight of $X$ is actually defined to be $\omega+\min\{|\mathscr{B}|:\mathscr{B}\text{ is a base for }X\}$, so the weight of any finite topology is $\omega$.

Brian M. Scott
  • 631,399
  • +1 Thanks, @Brain! First let me wish you a happy new year! You have shown that every base admits a subset which is a smallest base. A question would be: for every two bases with different cardinalities, will it be possible to move an open subset away from the bigger base (with the aid of the smaller base), so that it remains a base but only smaller? The motivation of the question is that I suspect the collection of all bases of a topology has some nice structure, which is just opposite to a matroid. – Tim Jan 01 '13 at 00:36
  • @Tim: Let $\mathscr{B}$ be any base for $X$; I showed that there is a base $\mathscr{B}_0\subseteq\mathscr{B}$ of cardinality $w(X)$, so if $|mathscr{B}|>w(X)$, you can remove all of $\mathscr{B}\setminus\mathscr{B}_0$ and still have a base. (Happy New Year!) – Brian M. Scott Jan 01 '13 at 00:47
  • Not every base has a proper subset as a base for finite topologies because then the nullset would be a base for all finite topologies. – Jacob Wakem Nov 02 '16 at 21:27
  • "if ℬ is a base for , in general some proper subset of ℬ is also a base for " -- what about the basis $\mathscr B = { { x } : x \in X }$ for the discrete topology on $X$? If you remove any basis element, the generated topology fails to cover $X$. – Quelklef Sep 10 '21 at 19:56
  • 1
    @Quelklef: I was using the weaker sense of in general: I meant simply that in the typical case some proper subset is still a base. The unique minimal base of a discrete space is of course an exception. Let me see if I can revise it slightly to avoid that potential ambiguity. – Brian M. Scott Sep 10 '21 at 22:50
  • More generally, any Alexandrov topology has a unique minimal base (that includes the mentioned cases of partition topology and finite topology). Is the converse true, i.e., is a topology with a unique minimal base (or just minimal base) Alexandrov? – PatrickR Aug 05 '23 at 21:33
  • @PatrickR: I’ll have to think about that. I can definitel show that a space with a minimal base has a dense Alexandrov-discrete subspace. – Brian M. Scott Aug 06 '23 at 07:16
  • @PatrickR: And I now have a counterexample. Let $Y={s\subseteq\omega:0<|s|<\omega}$ and $X=Y\cup{\omega}$. For $y\in Y$ let $B_y={x\in X:y\subseteq x}$; $\mathscr{B}={B_y:y\in Y}$ is a base for a topology on $X$, and $B_y$ is the minimal open nbhd of $y$ for any $y\in Y$, so $\mathscr{B}$ is a minimal base. But $\omega$ has no minimal open nbhd, so $X$ is not Alexandrov-discrete. – Brian M. Scott Aug 06 '23 at 17:58
  • 1
    @PatrickR: That was unnecessarily complicated. Let $X=\omega+1$, for $n\in\omega$ let $B_n={x\in X:x\ge n}$, and let $\mathscr{B}={B_n:n\in\omega}$; then $\mathscr{B}$ is a minimal base for a topology on $X$, since $B_n$ is the minimal open nbhd of $n$ for each $n\in\omega$, and the point $\omega$ has no minimal nbhd. – Brian M. Scott Aug 07 '23 at 04:35
  • 1
    @BrianM.Scott Very nice "almost Alexandrov" example! – PatrickR Aug 07 '23 at 05:03