arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2208.10096

Relative (functionally) Type I spaces and narrow subspaces

Abstract

An open chain cover $\{U_\alpha : \alpha\in\kappa\}$ ($\kappa$ a cardinal) of a space $X$ is a systematic cover if the closure of $U_\alpha$ is contained in $U_\beta$ when $\alpha<\beta$, and $X$ is Type I if $\kappa=\omega_1$ and the closure of each $U_\alpha$ is Lindel\"of. A closed subspace $D\subset X$ is narrow in $X$ if for each systematic cover $\{V_\alpha : \alpha\in\omega_1\}$ of $X$, either there is $\alpha$ such that $D$ is included in $V_\alpha$, or the closure of $V_\alpha$ intersected with $D$ is Lindel\"of for each $\alpha$. Taking systematic covers given by preimages by $s$ of $[0,\alpha)$ for a continuous $s: X\to \mathbb{L}_{\ge 0}$ (where $ \mathbb{L}_{\ge 0}$ is the longray) defines functionally Type I spaces and functionally narrow subspaces. For instance, $ \mathbb{L}_{\ge 0}$ and $\omega_1$ are narrow in themselves and any other space. We investigate these properties and relative versions, as well as their relationship, and show in particular the following. There are functionally Hausdorff Type I spaces which are not functionally Type I while regular Type I spaces are functionally Type I. We exhibit examples of spaces which are narrow in some but not in other spaces. There are subspaces of a Tychonoff space $Y$ that are functionally narrow but not narrow in $Y$, while both notions agree if $Y$ is normal. Under PFA and using classical results, any $\omega_1$-compact locally compact countably tight Type I space contains a non-Lindel\"of subspace narrow in it (a copy of $\omega_1$, actually), while a Suslin tree does not. There are spaces with subspaces narrow in them that are essentially discrete. Finally, we investigate natural partial orders on (functionally) narrow subspaces and when these orders are $\omega$- or $\omega_1$-closed.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Mathieu Baillif. 2022-08-22. Relative (functionally) Type I spaces and narrow subspaces. https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.10096

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Maximal Center of Distances of Finite Ultrametric Spaces and Perfect Binary Trees

We investigate the finite ultrametric spaces $(X,d)$ that have a given cardinality of the center of distances and a minimal cardinality of the set $X$. It is shown that such spaces are isometric if and only if their centers of distances are the same. The representing trees of these spaces are characterized up to isomorphism.

math.GN

A continuous $3$-distributive frame that is not $\omega$-distributive

We give a negative answer to the question, posed by Ern\'e, whether every $3$-distributive lattice is $\omega$-distributive. More precisely, we exhibit a continuous frame that is $\kappa$-distributive for every integer $\kappa\geq 2$, but is not a wide coframe. The frame is the open-set lattice of a compact, locally compact, countably based $T_0$ topological meet-semilattice, obtained from Lawson's construction in the logarithmic form described by Goubault-Larrecq. The failure of $\omega$-distributivity is witnessed by an explicit matrix with countably many nonempty finite rows: all row joins are the same nonzero element, whereas every choice of one entry from each row has meet zero. The same space answers negatively Ern\'e's accompanying question whether every $4$-web space is a wide web space. All properties of the construction needed for these conclusions are proved directly.

math.GN

An overlooked weakening of perfect normality: Perfect regularity in spaces and locales

We introduce the notion of perfect regularity as an appropriate weakening of perfect normality, both for spaces and locales. Various characterizations are given, using Dedekind-MacNeille completions, injective hulls, and sublocales. We place the new class of perfectly regular frames among various well-studied classes of frames. We also introduce the construction of perfect regularization of a completely regular frame, compare it to Isbell's well-known booleanization construction, and argue that it is at least as important as the latter.

math.GN