SOLUTIONS TO EXERCISES

Here are solutions to some of the problems in Munkres. There may be other, and
perhaps better, ones. They are sometimes more detailed than absolutely necessary,
but not excessively so.
Problem 13.1. For each x A, choose an open set U
x
with x U
x
A. Then
A =

xA
U
x
, which is open because it is a union of open sets.
Problem 13.3. We have XX = , which is countable, so X T
c
, and X = X,
so T
c
. Next suppose that U

T
c
for in some index set J. If all U

are
empty, so is their union, so

J
U

T
c
. Otherwise, there is some J such that
X U

is countable. Since X

J
U

X U

, X

J
U

is countable,
and again

J
U

T
c
. Finally, suppose U, V T
c
. If either of U and V is
empty, so is U V . Otherwise, X U and X V are countable, and hence so is
X (U V ) = (X U) (X V ), and U V T
c
. This completes the proof that
T
c
is a topology.
The collection T

is not a topology, in general. For example, take X = R. Then

(, 0) and (0, ) are in T

, but (, 0) (0, ) = R0 is not. (In fact, T

is a topology i X is nite, in which case it is the indiscrete topology, but a single

example is all thats needed.)
Problem 13.8. (a) Certainly B is a collection of open sets in the standard topology.
Suppose that U is open in the standard topology and x U. By denition of the
standard topology, there are real numbers a < b with x (a, b) U. Since a < x,
there is a rational number q with a < q < x. (This is a standard fact about the
real numbers, known as the density of the rationals; for completeness, I give a proof
below.) Similarly, there is a rational number r with x < r < b. Then (q, r) B
and x (q, r) U, and the result follows from Lemma 13.2.
(b) For any x R, there exist rational numbers a and b with a x < b (for
instance, a = x| and b = x| + 1), so that x [a, b) C. Also, the intersection of
any two elements of C is either empty or an element of C, and so C is a basis for
some topology T on R. Let x be an irrational number. The interval [x, x + 1) is
open in the lower limit topology; we show that it does not belong to T. Supppose,
on the contrary, that it does. Since x [x, x + 1), there exists an element [a, b) (a
and b rational) of C with x [a, b) [x, x +1). Now x [a, b) implies a x, while
[a, b) [x, x + 1) implies x a, so x = a, a contradiction.
Density of the rationals. Let a and b be real numbers with a < b. Since 0 < b a,
there is a positive integer n with
1
n
< b a. Let m be the smallest integer such
that
m
n
> a. Then
m1
n
a, so
m
n
a +
1
n
< a + (b a) = b. Thus the rational
number
m
n
satises a <
m
n
< b.
While were at it, lets prove that between any two reals there is an irrational.
Density of the irrationals. Let a and b be real numbers with a < b. By what was
just proved, there is a rational number q with a

2 < q < b

2. Now x = q+

2
is irrational, and a < x < b.
1
Problem 16.1. Let T
X
and T
Y
be the topologies that A inherits as a subspace of
X and Y , respectively. Suppose rst that W T
X
. Then there is an open set U
of X with W = U A. Set V = U Y . Then V is open in Y and W = V A, so
A T
Y
. Suppose conversely that W T
Y
. Then there is a set V open in Y with
W = V A. Since V is open in Y , there is an open set U of X with V = U Y .
Then W = U A, so W T
X
.
Problem 16.9. Let T
1
be the dictionary order topology on RR, and T
2
the product
topology on R
d
R. As pointed out on page 85 of Munkres, the sets (a b, a d)
for b < d form a basis for T
1
. (This is because any set (a b, c d) with a < c
is the union of all the sets (a b, a y) for y > b, (x y
1
, x y
2
) for a < x < c
and y
1
< y
2
, and (c y, c d) for y < d.) Now the singleton sets a form a basis
for R
d
(Example 3 on page 79), and the sets (b, d) for b < d form a basis for R by
denition of the usual topology on R, so the sets a (b, d) for b < d form a basis
for T
2
by Theorem 15.1. But (a b, a d) = a (b, d), so the same collection of
sets is a basis for both T
1
and T
2
, so these topologies are equal.
I observed in class (after correcting myself) that the dictionary order topology
is strictly ner than the usual topology on R
2
, but it is easier to see this using the
basis of rectangles (a, b) (c, d) (a < b and c < d) for the usual topology, rather
than the circle basis. We have (a, b) (c, d) =

x(a,b)
x (c, d), which is open
in T
1
. On the other hand, a (b, d) is not open in the usual topology, because it
is non-empty and contains no rectangle.
For the problem on the handout for the second assignment, see Theorem N16.1
in the supplementary notes.
Problem 17.21. We shall write A

for X A.
(a) First we show that if U is open then U

= U

. Since U is open and

U U

, U U

and hence U

. Conversely, U

and U

is
closed, so U

.
Now let A
1
be any subset of X, and dene A
2n
= A

2n1
and A
2n+1
= A

2n
for
n Z
+
. Also let B
1
= A

1
, and similarly dene B
2n
= B

2n1
and B
2n+1
= B

2n
for
n Z
+
. Clearly any set obtained from A
1
by repeated closure and complementation
is either A
n
or B
n
for some n Z
+
. Now A
3
is open, since it is the complement of
A
2
= A

1
, so A

3
= A

3
. But A

3
= A
4
and A

3
= A

4
= A

4
= A
8
. Hence
A
8
= A
4
, and so A
n+4
= A
n
for n 4. Similarly B
n+4
= B
n
for n 4, and so
every set obtainable from A
1
is one of the fourteen sets A
1
, . . . , A
7
, B
1
, . . . B
7
.
(b) Let us rst try simply to nd A
1
so that A
1
, . . . , A
7
are distinct. We have
A
3
open, as observed above, and A
7
= A

3
= A

3
, so we need an open set that
is dierent from the interior of its closure. A simple example of such a set is an
open interval or ray with a point removed; we shall work with rays since they have
the convenient property that the complement of a ray is a ray. If A
3
is obtained by
removing a point from an open ray with endpoint a, then A
4
, . . . , A
7
are the four
rays with endpoint a. (For instance, if A
3
= (0, ) 1 then A
4
= [0, ), A
5
=
(, 0), A
6
= (, 0], and A
7
= (0, ).) Now A
2
, being the complement of A
3
,
will be a closed ray with endpoint a together with an isolated point ((, 0] 1
in the example), and if A
1
is any non-closed set with closure of this form then
A
1
, . . . , A
7
will be distinct.
Next we try to get B
1
, . . . , B
7
also distinct. If A
1
is a ray (either open or closed)
with a point removed, together with an isolated point, then B
1
has the same form,
2
and each of A
1
and B
1
is a non-closed set whose closure is a closed ray together with
an isolated point. Here A
1
, . . . , A
7
are distinct, as are B
1
, . . . , B
7
. Unfortunately,
A
4
, . . . , A
7
are the same four rays as B
4
, . . . , B
7
(in a dierent order). Here is a
specic example.
A
1
=

(, 0) 1

1 B
1
= 1

[0, ) 1

A
2
= (, 0] 1 B
2
= 1 [0, )
A
3
= (0, ) 1 B
3
= (, 0) 1
A
4
= [0, ) B
4
= (, 0]
A
5
= (, 0) B
5
= (0, )
A
6
= (, 0] B
6
= [0, )
A
7
= (0, ) B
7
= (, 0)
The trick here is to use that fact that there is a dense set whose complement is also
dense (for instance, the rationals) to get the endpoints of the rays in A
2
and B
2
to
be dierent. This leads to the following example achieving the maximum of 14.
A
1
=

(, 1) 2

[1, 1] Q

2
B
1
= 2

[1, 1] Q

(1, ) 2

A
2
= (, 1] 2 B
2
= 2 [1, )
A
3
= (1, ) 2 B
3
= (, 1) 2
A
4
= [1, ) B
4
= (, 1]
A
5
= (, 1) B
5
= (1, )
A
6
= (, 1] B
6
= [1, )
A
7
= (1, ) B
7
= (, 1)
Problem 17.6. (a) Since B

B, we have A

B. Since

B is closed, and

A is the
smallest closed set containing A,

A

B.
(b) Since AB

A

B and

A

B is closed, A B

A

B. Conversely, since
A A B,

A A B by part (a). Similarly,

B A B, so

A

B A B.
(c) For each ,

A

by part (a), so

. For the counterexam-

ple, any collection (necessarily innite) of closed sets whose union is not closed will
do. For a specic example, let X = R and A
q
= q for q Q. Then

qQ

A
q
= Q,
while

qQ
A
q
=

Q = R.
Problem 17.9. First suppose (x, y) AB. If U is any neighborhood of x, U Y
is a neighborhood of (x, y), so (U Y ) (A B) = (U A) B is non-empty.
Hence U A = , so x

A. Similarly, y

B, so (x, y)

A

B.
Conversely, suppose (x, y)

A

B. Any neigborhood of (x, y) contains one of
the form U V , and it suces to show that U V meets A B. Since x

A, U
meets A, and similarly V meets B. Hence (U V ) (AB) = (U A) (V B)
is non-empty.
Problem 17.13. Note that if A and B are subsets of X, AB is empty i AB
is empty. Suppose rst that X is Hausdor. We show that if (x, y) / , then (x, y)
is not a limit point of . For x = y, so there are disjoint open sets U x and
V y. Now U V is a neighborhood of (x, y) disjoint from .
3
Now suppose is closed, and let x = y X. Then (x, y) is not in , so it is not
a limit point of , and hence there is a neighbourhood of (x, y) of the form U V
disjoint from . Now U and V are disjoint neighborhoods of x and y.
Problem 18.6. Dene f by
f(x) =

0 if x Q;
x if x / Q.
Recall that f is continuous at x if, for every neighborhood V of f(x), there is a
neighborhood U of x with f(U) V . If V is a neighborhood of f(0) = 0, then
f(V ) V , so f is continuous at 0. If x is irrational, then V = R 0 is a
neighborhood of f(x) = x, but any neighborhood of x contains a rational y and
f(y) = 0 / V , so f is not continuous at x. Finally, if x is rational and non-zero
then V = ([x[, [x[) is a neighborhood of f(x) = 0, but any neighborhood of x
contains an irrational y with [y[ > [x[ and f(y) = y / V , so f is not continuous at
x. Thus f is continuous precisely at 0.
Problem 18.7(a). The condition on f means that, for all a R and > 0, there
exists > 0 such that a x < a + implies [f(x) f(a)[ < . Let V be open in
R and a f
1
(V ). There exists > 0 such that (f(a) , f(a) +) V . Let be
as above. Then [a, a +) is a neighborhood of a in R

and [a, a +) f
1
(V ). It
follows that f
1
(V ) is open in R

, and hence f : R

R is continuous.
Problem 18.8. (a) Let A = x [ f(x) g(x), and suppose a / A, so that f(a) >
g(a). If there is some y
0
Y with f(a) > y
0
> g(a), let V
1
= (y
0
, ) and
V
2
= (, y
0
); if not, let V
1
= (g(a), ) and V
2
= (, f(a)). In either case, V
1
and V
2
are neighborhoods of f(a) and g(a), respectively, and if y
1
V
1
and y
2
V
2
then y
1
> y
2
. Then U = f
1
(V
1
) g
1
(V
2
) is a neighborhood of a, and if x U
then f(x) > g(x), so U is disjoint from A. Hence A is closed.
(b) Let A be as in (a), and B = x [ g(x) f(x). Then X is the union of the
closed sets A and B. Since h[A = f[A and h[B = g[B are both continuous, h is
continuous by the pasting lemma.
Problem 19.7. In the box topology, R

is closed (so it is equal to its closure).

Suppose x = (x
n
) / R

. Set
U
n
=

R if x
n
= 0;
R 0 if x
n
= 0.
Then U =

n=1
U
n
is a box neighborhood of x, and if y U then y
n
= 0 whenever
x
n
= 0, so y / R

.
In the product topology, the closure of R

is R

. Let x R

. Any neighborhood
of x contains one of the form U =

n=1
U
n
, where there is some N with U
n
= R
for n N. Set
y
n
=

x
n
if n < N;
0 if n N.
Then y = (y
n
) U R

.
Problem 20.2. By problem 16.9 (assignment 2), the dictionary order topology is
the same as the product topology R
d
R, where R
d
denotes R with the discrete
4
topology. Since R
d
and R are both metrizable, so is R
d
R. A specic metric
giving the dictionary order topology is
d
o
(x, y) = d
o
(x
1
x
2
, y
1
y
2
) =

[x
2
y
2
[ if x
1
= y
1
;
max1, [x
2
y
2
[ if x
1
= y
1
.
Let us verify the triangle inequality. For x, y, z R
2
, we have
[x
2
z
2
[ [x
2
y
2
[ +[y
2
z
2
[ d
o
(x, y) +d
o
(y, z).
If x
1
= z
1
, [x
2
z
2
[ = d
o
(x, z), and we are done. Otherwise, y
1
is dierent
from at least one of x
1
and z
1
, so d
o
(x, y) + d
o
(y, z) 1, and hence d
o
(x, z)
d
o
(x, y) +d
o
(y, z), as required.
For 1, B
do
(x, ) = x
1
(x
2
, x
2
+), so d
o
induces the right topology.
Problem 20.3. (a) Let (x
1
, x
2
) X X, and let V be any neighborhood of s =
d(x
1
, x
2
). There exists > 0 such that [s t[ < implies t V . Let U be
the neighborhood B(x
1
,

2
) B(x
2
,

2
) of (x
1
, x
2
) in X X. For (y
1
, y
2
) U, set
t = d(y
1
, y
2
). Then
s = d(x
1
, x
2
) d(x
1
, y
1
) +d(y
1
, y
2
) +d(y
2
, x
2
) < t +
and
t = d(y
1
, y
2
) d(y
1
, x
1
) +d(x
1
, x
2
) +d(x
2
, y
2
) < s +.
Hence [s t[ < , so t V . That is, d(U) V , and it follows that d is continuous.
(b). Let U be open in X and x U. Take > 0 so that B
d
(x, ) U. Since
d(x, x) = 0, d
1
(, ) is a neighborhood of (x, x) in X

. Hence there are

neigborhoods V
1
and V
2
of x in X

with d(V
1
V
2
) (, ). For any y V
2
,
(x, y) V
1
V
2
, so d(x, y) < . Thus V
2
B
d
(x, ) and it follows that U is open in
X

, as required.
Problem 21.4. In R

, a countable base of neighborhoods of x is

[x, x + 1/n) [ n Z
+
.
In I
2
o
, consider rst x y with 0 < y < 1. A countable base of neighborhoods at
xy consists of the intervals (xc, xd) with c and d rational, 0 c < y < d 1.
Next consider x0 with 0 < x. Here a countable base of neighborhoods consists of
the intervals (a1, xd) with a and d rational, 0 a < x, 0 < d 1. A countable
base of neighborhoods at 0 0 consists of [0 0, 0 d) with d rational, 0 < d 1.
The remaining cases are similar.
Problem 21.8. Let > 0. Take M Z
+
such that d(f
n
(y), f(y)) < /2 for n M
and all y X. Since f is continuous (Theorem 21.6), there is a neighborhood U of
x such that d(f(y), f(x)) < /2 for y U. Since x
n
x, there exists N M such
that x
n
U for n N. Now, for n N,
d(f
n
(x
n
), f(x)) d(f
n
(x
n
), f(x
n
)) +d(f(x
n
), f(x)) < /2 +/2 = .
Hence f
n
(x
n
) f(x).
Problem 22.2. (a) Clearly p is surjective. (For y Y , y = p(f(y)).) Suppose
V Y and U = p
1
(V ) is open in X. Then f
1
(U) is open in Y . But f
1
(U) =
f
1
(p
1
(V )) = (p f)
1
(V ) = id
1
Y
(V ) = V . Hence p is a quotient map.
5
(b) The inclusion j : A X is continuous and r j is the identity of A. (The
equality r j = id
A
is equivalent to the condition that r(a) = a for all a A.) The
result follows from part (a).
Problem 22.3. Clearly q is continuous and surjective. Let B = R 0 A. The
restriction of q to B is a homeomorphism. Suppose V R and U = q
1
(V ) is open
in A. Then U B is open in B, so q(U B) is open in R. But q(U B) = V , so q
is a quotient map.
The set U = x y A [ y > 0 is open in A, but q(U) = [0, ) is not open in
R. Also F = x y A [ xy = 1 is closed in A, but q(F) = (0, ) is not closed
in R. Hence q is neither open nor closed.
Problem 22.4(a). Dene g : R
2
R by g(x y) = x + y
2
. Then g is a continuous
surjection, and x
0
y
0
x
1
y
1
i g(x
0
y
0
) = g(x
1
y
1
). By Corollary 22.3, g
induces a continuous bijection f : X

R. Also dene h: R R
2
by h(x) = x0.
If p: R
2
X

is the quotient map, then f

1
= ph, which is continuous. Therefore
X

is homeomorphic to R.
Note: problems 22.3 and 22.4 can both be done by using problem 22.2(a).
Problem 22.6. Note that if U is open in R, then U K is open in R
K
. (For U is a
union of open intervals, U =

J
(a

, b

), and U K =

(a

, b

) K

.) In
particular, R K is open in R
K
, so K is closed in R
K
.
(a) Recall that a quotient space is T
1
i the elements of the partition are closed
sets. Here the elements of the partition are the singletons x for x / K, which are
closed in R and therefore in R
K
, and K itself, which is closed in R
K
. Hence Y is
T
1
.
Now p(0) and p(K) are distinct points of Y . Let V
1
and V
2
be neighborhoods
of p(0) and p(K), respectively. Then U
1
= p
1
(V
1
) and U
2
= p
1
(V
2
) are open
sets in R
K
containing 0 and K, respectively. There exist a < 0 < b such that
(a, b) K U
1
. Take n Z
+
such that
1
n
< b. Then
1
n
U
2
, so there exist
c <
1
n
< d with (c, d) U
2
. (Every basic neighborhood of a point of K is an
interval.) We may assume that
1
n+1
c. Then (c,
1
n
) U
1
U
2
, so V
1
V
2
is
non-empty. Hence Y is not Hausdor.
(b) By problem 17.13, a space X is Hausdor i the diagonal is connected in
X X. Let
1
be the diagonal in R
2
, which is closed in the usual topology, and
hence in R
K
R
K
. Note that since K is closed in R
K
, KK is closed in R
K
R
K
.
The diagonal
2
in Y Y is not closed by part (a), but (pp)
1
(
2
) =
1
KK,
which is closed, so p p is not a quotient map.
Problem 23.2. Let B
n
=

n
i=1
A
i
. We prove by induction on n that B
n
is connected,
the case of B
1
= A
1
being trivial. Suppose B
n
is connected. Then B
n+1
=
B
n
A
n+1
and B
n
A
n+1
A
n
A
n+1
= , so B
n+1
is connected by Theorem
23.3.
Now

A
n
=

B
n
and

B
n
= A
1
A
1
A
2
= , so

A
n
is connected by the
same theorem.
Problem 23.8. Let be the uniform metric on R

, let A R

be the set of bounded

sequences, and B the set of unbounded sequences. For any x R

, B

(x, 1) is
contained in A if x A, and is contained in B if x B. Hence A, B is a
separation of R

in the uniform topology, which is therefore not connected.

6
Problem 24.8. (a) Yes. Let X

J
be a family of path-connected spaces, and
x = (x

) and y = (y

) points of X =

. For each J, let f

: [0, 1] X

be
a path from x

to y

, and dene f : I X by f(s) = (f

(s)). Then f is continuous

because each

f = f

is, and is a path from x to y in X.

(b) No. If S R
2
is as in Example 7 on p. 156, S is path connected, but the
topologists sine curve

S is not.
Problem 24.11. Neither holds. In R, [0, 1] is connected but its boundary 0, 1
is not. In R
2
, the union of two closed (Euclidean) discs of radius 1 with centers
(1, 0) is connected, but its interior is the union of the two open discs, which is
not connected. To disprove the converse, consider the disconnected set Q in R. Its
interior is empty, and its boundary is R, both of which are connected. (If youd
prefer an example with non-empty interior, take Q (, 0).)
Problem 25.10. (a) The reexive and symmetric properties are obvious. Suppose
x y and y z, and let A, B be a separation of X with x A. Then x y
implies y A, and now y z implies z A. Hence x z.
(b) Let C be a component. For any separation A, B, either C A or C B,
so x y for all x, y C. That is, C is contained in a single quasicomponent.
Suppose X is locally connected. For x X let C be the component and Q the
quasicomponent containing x. We already know that C Q. By Theorem 25.4, C
is open, as is XC (being the union of the other components of X), so C, XC
is a separation of X. For y Q, x C and x y imply y C, so Q C.
(c) Suppose x
1
y
1
and x
2
y
2
are in A with x
1
< x
2
. There exists some
x / K with x
1
< x < x
2
. Then A (, x) R and A (x, ) R form a
separation of A showing that x
1
y
1
x
2
y
2
. Hence each quasicomponent (and
therefore each component) of A is contained in
1
n
[0, 1] for some n Z
+
, or in
0 0, 0 1. Since
1
n
[0, 1] is connected (indeed path connected), it is both a
component and a quasicomponent of A. Since 0 0, 0 1 is disconnected, the
remaining components of A are the singletons 0 0 and 0 1. Suppose that
U, V is a separation of A with 0 0 U and 0 1 V . There is some n Z
+
with
1
n
0 U and
1
n
1 V . But now the connected set
1
n
[0, 1] meets both U
and V , a contradiction. Hence the remaining quasicomponent of A is 00, 01.
The set B 0 1 is path connected, and hence connected. Hence B =
B 0 1 is connected, and is therefore its own unique component and quasi-
component.
Let C
1
= K[0, 1], C
2
= K[1, 0], C
3
= [0, 1] K and C
4
= [1, 0] K.
Let m = n Z
+
, and suppose that U, V is a separation of C with
1
m
0 U
and
1
n
0 V . There is some k Z
+
with
1
m

1
k
U and
1
n

1
k
V . But now
the connected subset [0, 1]
1
k
of C meets both U and V , a contradiction. Hence
1
m
0
1
n
0, and it follows that C
1
is contained in a single quasicomponent of
C. Similarly, each of C
2
, C
3
and C
4
is contained in a quasicomponent. Suppose
U, V is a separation with C
1
U. Then

C
1
U. But

C
1
contains points of C
4
,
and it follows that C
1
and C
4
belong to the same quasicomponent, and then similar
arguments show that C is its own unique quasicomponent. This implies that there
is no separation of C, so C is also its own unique component.
Problem 26.1. (a) If X is compact under T

, then it is compact under T, since every

cover of X by sets of T is a cover by sets of T

, and so has a nite subcover. The

7
converse does not hold: if T is the indiscrete topology, X is compact under T, while
if T

is the discrete topology, X is not compact under T

if X is innite.
(b) Suppose that the topologies are comparable; without loss of generality, T

T. Then the identity map id: (X, T

) (X, T) is a continuous bijection from a

compact space to a Hausdor space, so it is a homeomorphism by Theorem 26.6.
This shows that T

= T.
Problem 26.7. Let A be a closed subset of X Y and B =
1
(A). We show that
X B is open. Let x X B. Then x Y is disjoint from A, so it is contained
in the open set X Y A. By the tube lemma, there is a neighborhood U of x
such that U Y X Y A. Now U X B, and we are done.
Problem 26.8. Suppose rst that f is continuous. Since G
f
is the inverse image
under the map f id
Y
: XY Y Y of the diagonal, and the diagonal is closed
in Y Y since Y is Hausdor, G
f
is closed.
Now suppose that G
f
is closed. The hint involves the unnecessary taking of
complements, so Ill ignore it. For B Y and x X,
x f
1
(B) x f(x) G
f
X B x
1
(G
f
X B).
That is, f
1
(B) =
1
(G
f
X B). If now B is closed in Y , then G
f
X B
is closed in X Y , so f
1
(B) is closed in X by the previous problem. Hence f is
continuous.
Problem 27.1. Let A be a non-empty subset of X that is bounded above, and
suppose that A does not have a least upper bound. Let B be the set of upper bounds
for A. Then B =

bB
(b, ), so B is open. Also X B =

aA
(, a). Now
pick a
0
A and b
0
B; we have a
0
< b
0
. The collection (, a) [ a A B
is a cover of [a
0
, b
0
] by sets open in X. Hence there exist a
1
, . . . , a
n
A such
that [a
0
, b
0
] B

n
i=1
(, a
i
). Let a be the maximum of a
0
, a
1
, . . . , a
n
. Then
a [a
0
, b
0
] but a / B

n
i=1
(, a
i
), a contradiction.
Problem 27.4. Let (X, d) be a connected metric space and x
0
= x
1
X. Let r =
d(x
0
, x
1
) > 0. Dene f : X R by f(x) = d(x
0
, x). Then f is continuous, f(x
0
) =
0 and f(x
1
) = r, so by the Intermediate Value Theorem, the image of f contains
the interval [0, r] and is therefore uncountable. Hence X is uncountable.
Problem 28.1. Let be the uniform metric on R

, and let A R

be the set
consisting of all sequences of 0s and 1s. Suppose rst that x A. For any y A
dierent from x, (x, y) = 1, so B

(x, 1) A = x and x is not a limit point of A.
If x / A, pick m Z
+
such that x
m
= 0 and x
m
= 1. Let be the minimum of
[x
m
[ and [1 x
m
[. Then B

(x, ) is disjoint from A, so again x is not a limit point
of A.
Problem 29.3. The answer to the rst part is no. Let X be the rationals with
the discrete topology, Y the rationals with the usual topology, and f the identity.
Certainly f is a continuous surjection. For x X, x is both a neighborhood of x
and a compact set, so X is locally compact. I said you could assume without proof
that Q is not locally compact, but Ill give a proof for completeness. If Q is locally
compact at 0, then since Q is Hausdor there exist a < 0 < b such that the closure
of (a, b) Q relative to Q is compact. But the relative closure is [a, b] Q, which is
not closed in R and therefore not compact.
8
If f is continuous and open then f(X) is locally compact. Suppose y = f(x)
f(X). There is a neigborhood U of x and a compact set C X with U C. Now
f(U) is open in f(X), f(U) f(C), and f(C) is compact by Theorem 26.5.
Problem 30.2. Let J be the set of all pairs (m, n) of positive integers such that
there is some C C with B
m
C B
n
, and for (m, n) J pick C
m,n
C with
B
m
C
m,n
B
n
. Then C
m,n
[ (m, n) J is a countable subcollection of C; we
must show that it is a basis. Let x X and let U be any neighborhood of x. Since
B = B
n
is a basis, there is some n with x B
n
U. Since C is a basis, there
is some C C with x C B
n
. Finally, since B is a basis, there is some m with
x B
m
C. Then (m, n) J, and x B
m
C
m,n
B
n
U.
Problem 30.5(a). Let d be a metric for the space X, and let D be a countable dense
subset of X. Then B
d
(x, 1/n) [ x D, n Z
+
is a countable collextion of open
subsets of X; we show that it is a basis. Let x X and let U be a neigborhood
of x. There is some n Z
+
such that B
d
(x, 2/n) U. Since D is dense, there is
some y D with d(x, y) < 1/n. Now x B
d
(y, 1/n) B
d
(x, 2/n) U, and we
are done.
Problem 30.16. (a) We show that R
J
is separable, where J = (0, 1]. Elements
of R
J
will be written as functions f : J R. Dene :

nZ+
Q
n
R
J
by
(q
1
q
n
)(s) = q
ns
. (Thus (q
1
q
n
) is a rational-valued step function.)
We show that the countable set Im is dense. It is enough to show that any non-
empty basis element U =

sJ
U
s
meets Im. Here U
s1
, . . . , U
s
k
are non-empty
open subsets of R for some s
1
, . . . , s
k
J, and U
s
= R for s / s
1
, . . . , s
k
. Take
n so large that ns
i
| = ns
j
| for i = j. For 1 m n, there is at most one i,
1 i k, with ns
i
| = m. If there is such an i, let q
m
be a rational number in
U
si
, and if not set q
m
= 0. Then (q
1
q
n
) U.
(b) Let D be a dense subset of R
J
. Dene : J P(D) by () =
1

((0, ))
D. If = J,
1

((0, ))
1

((, 0)) is a non-empty open set, so it meets

D. Any point of
1

((0, ))
1

((, 0)) D is in () (), so is injective

and hence D is uncountable.
Problem 33.4. If f exists, then A = f
1
(0) is closed. For n Z
+
, set U
n
=
f
1
([0,
1
n
)), an open set. Then

n=1
U
n
= A, so A is a G

. Suppose then that A

is a closed G

. We show rst that A =

n=1
U
n
where U
n
is open and

U
n+1
U
n
.
Let A =

n=1
V
n
, V
n
open, and set U
1
= V
1
. Suppose that open sets U
1
, . . . , U
n
have been constructed with

U
i+1
U
i
for 1 i < n and A U
n
V
n
. Since
U
n
V
n+1
is an open set containing A, there is an open U
n+1
containing A with

U
n+1
U
n
V
n+1
. Inductively, we construct U
n
for all n Z
+
with the desired
properties.
Let U
0
= X, and consider the closed sets B
n
=

U
n1
U
n
for n > 0 and
C
n
=

U
n
U
n
for n 0. We have B
n
B
n+1
= C
n
, B
n
B
m
= for m > n + 1,
and

n=1
B
n
= XA. Since C
n1
and C
n
are disjoint closed subsets of the normal
space B
n
, there is a continuous function f
n
: B
n
[
1
n+1
,
1
n
] such that f
n
(x) =
1
n
for x C
n1
and f
n
(x) =
1
n+1
for x C
n
. For x B
n
B
n+1
, f
n
(x) = f
n+1
(x),
so there is a well-dened function f

: X A (0, 1] with f

[ B
n
= f
n
. To see
that f

is continuous, we can either observe that B

n
is locally nite (see problem
18.9), or use the following cheap trick. By the pasting lemma, f

is continuous
9
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k)
connected
path connected
locally connected
locally path connected
compact
limit point compact
locally compact T
2

Hausdor
regular
completely regular
normal ?
rst-countable
second-countable
Lindelof
separable
locally metrizable
metrizable
Table 1. Answers to Problem 4S.1
on B
n
B
n+1
=

U
n1
U
n+1
, and therefore on the open set U
n1


U
n+1
. But
X A =

n=1
U
n1


U
n+1
.
Now extend f

to f : X [0, 1] by setting f(x) = 0 for x A. Since the

restriction of f to the open set X A is continuous, f is continuous at each point
of X A. Also f is continuous at each point of A since f(U
n
) [0,
1
n
).
Problem 33.5. It follows from the previous problem that if such an f exists A and B
are closed G

sets, and obviously they are disjoint. Suppose then that A and B are
closed, disjoint G

sets. By the previous problem there are continuous functions f

1
,
f
2
: X [0, 1] such that f
1
(x) = 0 i x A and f
2
(x) = 1 i x B. By Urysohns
Lemma, there is a continuous g : X [0, 1] with g(x) = 0 if x A and g(x) = 1 if
x B. Set
f(x) =

min
1
2
, maxf
1
(x), g(x) if g(x)
1
2
;
max
1
2
, minf
2
(x), g(x) if g(x)
1
2
.
You can check that f is well-dened (hence continuous), and has the desired prop-
erties.
Problem 33.9. In the uniform topology, R
J
is normal, so there is a continuous
function f : R
J
[0, 1] that vanishes outside B(0, 1) and has f(0) = 1. Now give
R
J
the box topology. Since this is ner than the usual topology, f is still continuous,
and it vanishes outside (1, 1)
J
. Let U be a neighborhood of a point a, and take a
box neighborhood

(a

, a

) contained in U. The function h: R

J
R
J
dened by h(x) = ((x

)/

) is easily seen to be a homeomorphism, and the

continuous function g = f h vanishes outside U and has g(a) = 1.
Problems from the supplementary exercises to Chapter 4 will be numbered as
4S.x.
10
Problem 4S.1. The answers are summarised in Table 1. We have the following
implications:
path connected connected
locally path connected locally connected
compact limit point compact, locally compact and Lindelof
compact and Hausdor normal
regular and Lindelof normal
normal completely regular regular Hausdor
second-countable rst-countable, Lindelof and separable
metrizable locally metrizable and normal
Lindelof and metrizable second countable
separable and metrizable second countable
locally metrizable rst countable
In the table, and both mean that the space has the property, but indicates
that this follows from other entries in the same column by the above implications.
Similarly, and both mean the space does not have the property, with indi-
cating that this follows from other entries. We shall make use of the following easy
facts.
(1) If X is a linearly ordered set in which every non-greatest element has an
immediate successor, then X is totally disconnected in the order topology.
In particular, this is true of a well-ordered set.
(2) A totally disconnected space with at least two points is disconnected.
(3) A totally disconnected space is locally connected i it is discrete.
(4) If X Y has any of the properties except limit point compactness, so do
X and Y .
Below we justify the 90 and entries.
(a) S

There is a non-least element of S

with no immediate predecessor, so this

space is neither connected nor locally connected by (1) (3) above. That it
is limit point compact but not compact is shown in Example 2 of '28. For
any S

, [
0
, ] (where
0
is the least element) is a neighborhood of
, and is compact. Hence S

is locally compact. It is normal by Theorem

32.4. It is not Lindelof because the open cover [
0
, ) [ S

has no
countable subcover. If A S

is countable, then A has an upper bound

and

A [
0
, ] = S

, so S

is not separable. It is locally metrizable

because each has the neighborhood [
0
, ] which is regular and second-
countable (because it has only countably many intervals), and therefore
metrizable by Theorem 34.1. Finally, as observed in Example 3 of '28, S

is not metrizable because it is limit point compact but not compact.

(b)

S

This space is neither connected nor locally connected by (1) (3) above. It
is compact by Theorem 27.1, and Hausdor because every order topology is
Hausdor. It is not rst countable because it does not satisfy the sequence
lemma:

S

, but any sequence in S

has an upper bound in S

, and
therefore does not converge to . If A is any countable subset of

S

then
11
A S

has an upper bound S

. Hence

A [
0
, ] =

S

, so

S

is not separable.
(c) S

This space is not normal by Example 2 of '32. All other negative results
follow from (4) above and the rst two columns of the table. To show that
it is limit point compact, it is enough to show that any countably innite
subset A has a limit point. Now
1
(A) is countable, so it has an upper
bound S

. Now A is contained in the compact space [

0
, ]

S

, and
so has a limit point. Any point has a neighborhood of the form [
0
, ]

,
so S

is locally compact. Finally, S

is completely regular because

it is a product of completely regular spaces.
(d) The ordered square I
2
o
Example 6 of '24 shows that this space is connected but not path connected.
It has a basis consisting of intervals, which are connected since I
2
o
is a linear
continuum. We show that the path components of I
2
o
are the sets x I,
x I; since these are not open sets, I
2
o
is not locally path connected. Each
such set is homeomorphic to I, so it is path connected. Suppose f is a path
from x
1
y
1
to x
2
y
2
with x
1
< x
2
. By the Intermediate Value Theorem
24.3, the image of f contains (x
1
, x
2
) I. For x
1
< x < x
2
, the nonempty
open subset f
1
(x (0, 1)) of I contains a rational number q
x
, and we get
an injection x q
x
of (x
1
, x
2
) into Q, which is absurd.
This space is compact by Theorem 27.1, and Hausdor because every
order topology is Hausdor. That it is rst countable is Problem 21.4. If
D is any dense subset of I
2
o
, D meets x (0, 1) for any x I, so
1
maps
D onto I. Therefore I
2
o
is not seperable. Finally, any neighborhood of
0 1 contains some set [a, b] I, which is homeomorphic to I
2
o
, and hence
Lindelof but not second countable, and therefore not metrizable. Thus I
2
o
is not locally metrizable.
(e) R

This space is totally disconnected; for x < y the separation

(, y), [y, )
shows that x and y are in dierent components. Hence R

is neither con-
nected nor locally connected by (2) and (3). The subset Z has no limit
point, so R

is not limit point compact. Being Hausdor, if it is locally

compact, there is some > 0 such that [0, ) = [0, ) is compact. But
[0, ) [ 0 < < ) is an open cover of [0, ) with no nite subcover. By Ex-
ample 2 of '31, R

is normal, and by Example 3 of '30 it is rst countable,

Lindelof and separable, but not second countable. Any non-empty open
subset of R

contains an interval (a, b), which in the subspace topology is

homeomorphic to R

. Since (a, b) is separable but not second countable, it

is not metrizable, and so R

is not locally metrizable.

(f) R
2

This space is not normal by Example 3 of '31, and it is not limit point
compact because Z
2
has no limit point. Since R

is neither connected,
locally connected, locally compact nor locally metrizable, the same is true
of R
2

; since R

is completely regular, rst countable and separable, so is

R
2

.
12
(g) R

in the product topology

This space is path connected and locally path connected since it is a product
of path connected and locally path connected spaces. No set containing a
neighborhood of the origin is limit point compact, since it contains an
innite set 0 0 Z 0 0 with no limit point. This
implies that R

is neither limit point compact nor locally compact. It is

second countable by Theorem 30.2, and metrizable by Theorem 20.5.
(h) R

in the uniform topology

This space is not connected by Problem 23.8. For any x R

and > 0, we
show that B

(x, ) is path connected, so this space is locally path connected.
For any y B

(x, ), let d = (x, y) < and dene f : I R

by f(t) =
(f
n
(t)) = ((1 t)x
n
+ty
n
). For s, t I we have [f
n
(s) f
n
(t)[ d[s t[,
and hence (f(s), f(t)) d[s t[. Therefore f is continuous, and taking
t = 0 shows that f maps into B

(x, ); it is a path from x to y, so the proof
is complete.
For any r with 0 < r
1
2
, let A
r
be the set of all a = (a
n
) R

with a
n
= r for all n. For a = b A
r
, (a, b) = 2r. Suppose that x
is a limit point of A
r
. Take a A
r
with (x, a) < r and a = x. Then
B

(x, r) A
r
= a, and B

(x, (x, a)) A
r
= , a contradiction. It follows
that this space is neither limit point compact nor locally compact. If D is
any dense set, for each a A
1/2
choose f(a) D B

(a, 1/2). Then f is
an injection from A
1/2
to D, so R

is not separable. It is metrizable by

denition of the uniform topology.
(i) R

in the box topology

This space is not connected by Example 6 of '23; recall from this example
that A, B is a separation, where A is the set of bounded sequences and
B is the set of unbounded sequences. For any a R

with a
n
= 0 for all
n, the function h
a
: R

given by h
a
(x) = (a
n
x
n
) is easily seen to
be a homeomorphism. Any neighborhood U of 0 contains a point x with
x
n
= 0 for all n. Let a
n
= x
n
/n. The homeomorphism h
a
takes 0 to 0 and
the sequence (n) to x, so 0 and x lie on opposite sides of the separation
h
a
(A), h
a
(B), and this space is not locally connected.
Let D = 0, 1 and consider the set D

of all sequences of 0s and 1s.

For any x R

, there is a neighborhood U
n
of x
n
with U
n
D x
n
for
each n. Now U =

U
n
is a box neighborhood of x with U D

x.
Thus D

has no limit points, and this space is not limit point compact.
For any neighborhood U of 0, take a U with a
n
= 0 for all n. The
homeomorphism h
a
takes D

into U, so this space is not locally compact.

It is completely regular by Exercise 33.9; it is unknown whether it is normal:
see Exercise 32.5. It is not rst countable by Example 1 of '21, and it is
neither Lindelof nor separable because the coarser uniform topology has
neither of these properties.
(j) R
I
in the product topology, where I = [0, 1]
This space is path connected and locally path connected since it is a product
of path connected and locally path connected spaces. No set containing a
neighborhood of the origin is limit point compact, since it contains an
innite set

sI
A
s
, where some A
s0
is Z and A
s
= 0 for s = s
0
, with no
limit point. This implies that R
I
is neither limit point compact nor locally
13
compact. It is completely regular because it is a product of completely
regular spaces, and not normal by Example 1 of '32 (see the supplementary
notes). It is not rst countable by Example 2 of '21, and is separable by
Exercise 30.16.
(k) R
K
The open set (0, ) inherits its usual topology, in which it is connected, so
(0, ) = [0, ) is connected. The open set R K also inherits its usual
topology, which has a number of consequences. One component of R K
is (, 0], which is not open in R
K
, so R
K
is not locally connected, but
as the union of the connected subsets (, 0] and [0, ) it is connected.
As the union of the open metrizable subsets (0, ) and RK, it is locally
metrizable.
Since the identity, considered as a map from R
K
to R, is continuous, any
connected subspace of R
K
is connected in the usual topology, and hence
convex. Suppose, for a contradiction, that f : I R
K
is a path with
f(0) 0 and f(1) > 0. If f(s) < 0, there is some t > s with f(t) = 0,
since f([s, 1]) is connected. Since f
1
((, 0]) is closed, it has a greatest
element s
0
< 1, and f((s
0
, 1]) (0, ). Since R K is a neighborhood of
0, there is some s > s
0
with f([s
0
, s]) RK. But f([s
0
, s]) is connected,
so [0, f(s)] f([s
0
, s]), a contradiction. Hence R
K
is not path connected.
That R
K
is Hausdor but not regular is Example 1 of '31. No subset of
K has a limit point in R
K
, so no set containing innitely many points of
K (in particular R
K
) is limit point compact. If R
K
were locally compact,
then since it is Hausdor there would be a neighborhood U of 0 with

U
compact. But

U contains innitely many points of K, a contradiction.
Finally R
K
is second countable since it has a basis consisting of all sets
(a, b) and (a, b) K with a and b rational.
The answers to Problems 4S.24S.6 are summarized in Table 2. The column
headings 4A, 4C and 4O refer to arbitrary, closed and open subspaces in Problem
4S.4, respectively, and 5A, 5C and 5F to arbitrary, countable and nite products
in Problem 4S.5. In the columns for Problems 4S.2 and 4S.3, the use of and
indicates implications within the column as before; in the columns for Problems 4S.4
and 4S.5, it indicates the trivial implications between the parts of each problem.
There are 83 entries in need of justication.
Problem 4S.2. The one is obvious, and from Problem 4S.1, R

in the uniform
topology gives all entries except for local connectedness. The space K = 0

1
n
[ n Z
+
R is metrizable but not locally connected.
Problem 4S.3. The entries are obvious, and from Problem 4S.1,

S

gives all
entries.
Problem 4S.4. The space R is path-connected and locally path-connected, while its
closed subspace K is neither connected nor locally connected, and its open subspace
R0 is not connected. This gives the negative entries in the rst 4 rows. That an
open subset of a locally (path) connected space is locally (path) connected follows
trivially from the denitions.
The space [0, 1] is compact (hence limit-point compact), but its open subspace
(0, 1) is not limit-point compact (hence not compact), and the subspace Q of the
14
2 3 4A 4C 4O 5A 5C 5F 6
connected
path connected
locally connected
locally path connected
compact
limit point compact
locally compact T
2

Hausdor
regular
completely regular
normal
rst-countable
second-countable
Lindelof
separable
locally metrizable
metrizable
Table 2. Answers to Problems 4S.24S.6
locally compact Hausdor space R is not locally compact (see the answer to Problem
29.3). That a closed subset of a compact space is compact is Theorem 26.2, and
that a closed or open subset of a locally compact Hausdor space is locally compact
is Corollary 29.3. It is easy to see that a closed subset A of a limit point compact
space X is limit point compact: if B is an innite subset of A and x is a limit point
of B in X, then x A and hence is a limit point of B in A.
That a subspace of a Hausdor, regular or completely regular space is of the
same kind is Theorem 31.2 or 33.2, and that a closed subspace of a normal space
is normal is easy. Examples 1 and 2 of '32 both give non-normal open subsets of
normal spaces.
That a subspace of a rst or second countable space is of the same kind is
Theorem 30.2, and is easy to see that a closed subspace of a Lindelof space is
Lindelof, and that an open subspace of a separable space is seperable. Example
5 of '30 gives an open subspace of a Lindelof space that is not Lindelof. The
Sorgenfrey plane R
2

is separable, but the closed subspace x (x) [ x R is

uncountable and discrete, so it is not separable.
Finally, it is easy to see that a subspace of a metrizable space is metrizable (this
is Problem 21.1), and it follows that a subspace of a locally metrizable space is
locally metrizable.
Problem 4S.5. That a product of connected spaces is connected is Problem 23.10,
and the corresponding result for path connected spaces is Problem 24.8(a). That a
nite product of locally (path) connected spaces is locally (path) connected follows,
since in the nite case any product of open sets is open. Let X be a space that
is locally connected but not connected, and let J be an innite set. If U is any
non-empty open subset of X
J
then U contains

where U

= X for all but

15
nitely many . For any with U

= X, the projection

maps U onto X, so U
is not connected. The same argument works for local path-connectedness.
That a product of compact spaces is compact is Tychonos Theorem. In Exer-
cise 28.3, Munkres refers you to Example 112 of Steen and Seebach for a product
of two limit point compact spaces that is not limit point compact, and I can do no
better. (The example starts from the Stone-

Cech compactication of the integers,

and it gets worse from there.) That a nite product of locally compact spaces is
compact follows from (the nite case of) Tychono because in the nite case any
product of open sets is open. Let X be a space that is locally compact Hausdor
but not compact, and let J be an innite set. If U is any non-empty open subset
of X
J
then U contains

where U

= X for all but nitely many . For any

with U

= X, the projection

maps

U onto X, so

U is not compact.
That a product of Hausdor, regular or completely regular spaces is of the same
kind is Theorem 31.2 or 33.2, while Example 2 of '32 gives a product of two normal
spaces that is not normal. A countable product of rst or second countable spaces
is of the same kind by Theorem 30.2, while R is second countable but R
I
is not
rst countable (problem 4S.1(j)). A product of two Lindelof spaces need not be
Lindelof by Example 4 of '30. That a product of separable spaces indexed by I
(and hence any countable product) is seperable is an easy adaptation of the solution
to Problem 30.16(a), while part (b) of that problem shows that this is not the case
for arbitrary products. That a countable product of metrizable spaces is metrizable
was proved in Theorem N20.1 in the notes, and it follows that a nite product of
locally metrizable spaces is locally metrizable by an argument seen twice already.
An uncountable product of metrizable spaces need not be metrizable by Example 2
of '21. Let X be a space that is locally metrizable but not metrizable (for instance,
S

or R
K
by problem 4S.1), and let J be an innite set. Any non-empty open
subset of X
J
contains a subspace homeomorphic to X, so U is not metrizable.
Problem 4S.6. That connectedness, path connectedness and compactness are pre-
served by continuous maps is Theorem 23.5, Problem 24.8(a) and Theorem 26.5,
and the proof for the Lindelof property is virtually the same as for compactness.
That the continuous image of a separable space is separable follows from the rela-
tion f(

A) f(A) for continuous f. Most of the negative entries can be seen by
the following cheap trick. Suppose some property is posessed by all discrete spaces,
and that X is a space not posessing it. If Y is the set X with the discrete topology,
the identity considered as a map Y X shows that the property is not preseved
by continuous maps. Any discrete space is trivially locally connected, locally path
connected and locally compact. It is also metrizable, and hence locally metrizable,
rst countable, normal, completely regular, regular and Hausdor. The same trick
will work for second countability provided we can nd a countable space X that is
not second countable. The following is Example 26 of Steen and Seebach, who call
it Arens-Fort space. As a set, X = Z
2
. The open sets are of two kinds.
(1) Any set not containing 0 0.
(2) A set which, for all but nitely many integers m, contains all but nitely
many points of the column m Z.
This is easily seen to be a topology, and clearly 00 is in the closure of X00.
We show that no sequence (x
n
) in X 0 0 converges to 0 0, so X is not
even rst countable. If there are nitely many columns containing all the x
n
, then
16
Xx
n
[ n Z
+
is a neighborhood of 00 showing that (x
n
) does not converge to
0 0. Otherwise, we can take a subsequence (x
n
k
) such that each column contains
at most one term, and then Xx
n
k
[ k Z
+
is a neighborhood of 0 0 showing
that (x
n
k
), and hence (x
n
), does not converge to 0 0.
Finally, it is observed in Example 1 of '28 that X = Z
+
Y is limit point
compact, where Y is an indiscrete two-point space, and projection on the rst
factor is a continuous map onto the non-compact space Z
+
. (It is easy to see that
countable compactness is preserved by continuous maps, so X has to be non-T
1
here.)
17