Talk:Metrizable space

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Revision as of 04:12, 6 February 2024 by imported>Cewbot (Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{Maths rating}}. Remove 1 deprecated parameter: field.)
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Latest comment: 8 April 2020 by Tea2min in topic "Semi-metrizable" not defined
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:WikiProject banner shell

Manifolds

Not actually relevant to the page, but does anyone know if there is are similar theorems about when a topological space is homeomorphic to a manifold?

Submetrizablity

I am pretty sure that that the space is submetrizable means that it contains a metrizable subspace or the space is homeomorphic to such a space, but I couldn't find (by means of quick google search) a reference to back this. Does anyone confirm this? Without defining Submetrizablity we can't go deep into the metrizable problems in my opinion. -- Taku 03:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

A space is called submetrizable if it has a weaker metrizable topology. The Sorgenfrey line is an example: the usual topology on R is a weaker and metrizable topology.Hennobrandsma 14:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Separation Axioms

Most texts, Dugundji being an example, consider normality to be a stronger separation axiom than regularity, not weaker. But then this is normality as T4, and regularity as T3. Without some clarification in this article, it isn't clear what Urysohn actually said. Further, this article needs style editing--or is it just me who thinks articles on general topology should avoid sounding flippant? 198.54.202.102 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 15:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Tychonoff's vs. Urysohn version

Under Tychonoff's assumptions X is in fact normal: second-countable implies Lindelöf, and Lindelöf + regular implies normal (this is Tychonoff's lemma). Tychonoff's contribution (his Lemma) was therefore more general than to just extend Urysohn's Metrization Theorem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.32.45.74 (talk) 20:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Definition

Hi guys, I'm a bit unclear on what the τ in the tuple (X,τ) is; can anyone shed some light on this? Do we approach this bracketed form similar to tuples in measure theory? thanks. 174.3.155.181 (talk) 20:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Assuming you are referring to the lead: τ refers to the topology on the space X under consideration. I hope this helps clarify. Definitely add in clarification to the text if you think this is unclear. Zfeinst (talk) 22:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

"Semi-metrizable" not defined

Semi-metrizable/Semi-metrisable/Semimetrizeable redirect to Metrizable space (they used to redirect to Metrization theorem before that page was moved to Metrizable space), but semi-metrizability is not defined at the target page, and apparently never was, at least I didn't find it in the article history. Can someone please add the definition? Thanks! – Tea2min (talk) 11:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Reply