A map is continuous if and only if for every set, the image of closure is contained in the closure of image











up vote
46
down vote

favorite
32












As a part of self study, I am trying to prove the following statement:



Suppose $X$ and $Y$ are topological spaces and $f: X rightarrow Y$ is a map. Then $f$ is continuous if and only if $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)}$, where $overline{A}$ denotes the closure of an arbitrary set $A$.



Assuming $f$ is continuous, the result is almost immediate. Perhaps I am missing something obvious, but I have not been able to make progress on the other direction. Could anyone give me a hint which might illuminate the problem for me?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • I am not able to come up with any example of a continuous function s.t. $f(overline{A}) subsetneq overline{f(A)}$. Can anyone give such an examples?
    – MUH
    Mar 11 at 11:03








  • 2




    Assuming $f$ is continuous, how exactly is the result "immediate"?
    – Al Jebr
    May 19 at 18:56















up vote
46
down vote

favorite
32












As a part of self study, I am trying to prove the following statement:



Suppose $X$ and $Y$ are topological spaces and $f: X rightarrow Y$ is a map. Then $f$ is continuous if and only if $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)}$, where $overline{A}$ denotes the closure of an arbitrary set $A$.



Assuming $f$ is continuous, the result is almost immediate. Perhaps I am missing something obvious, but I have not been able to make progress on the other direction. Could anyone give me a hint which might illuminate the problem for me?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • I am not able to come up with any example of a continuous function s.t. $f(overline{A}) subsetneq overline{f(A)}$. Can anyone give such an examples?
    – MUH
    Mar 11 at 11:03








  • 2




    Assuming $f$ is continuous, how exactly is the result "immediate"?
    – Al Jebr
    May 19 at 18:56













up vote
46
down vote

favorite
32









up vote
46
down vote

favorite
32






32





As a part of self study, I am trying to prove the following statement:



Suppose $X$ and $Y$ are topological spaces and $f: X rightarrow Y$ is a map. Then $f$ is continuous if and only if $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)}$, where $overline{A}$ denotes the closure of an arbitrary set $A$.



Assuming $f$ is continuous, the result is almost immediate. Perhaps I am missing something obvious, but I have not been able to make progress on the other direction. Could anyone give me a hint which might illuminate the problem for me?










share|cite|improve this question















As a part of self study, I am trying to prove the following statement:



Suppose $X$ and $Y$ are topological spaces and $f: X rightarrow Y$ is a map. Then $f$ is continuous if and only if $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)}$, where $overline{A}$ denotes the closure of an arbitrary set $A$.



Assuming $f$ is continuous, the result is almost immediate. Perhaps I am missing something obvious, but I have not been able to make progress on the other direction. Could anyone give me a hint which might illuminate the problem for me?







general-topology continuity






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 18 '15 at 15:37







user147263

















asked Feb 28 '12 at 16:18









Holdsworth88

4,98732759




4,98732759












  • I am not able to come up with any example of a continuous function s.t. $f(overline{A}) subsetneq overline{f(A)}$. Can anyone give such an examples?
    – MUH
    Mar 11 at 11:03








  • 2




    Assuming $f$ is continuous, how exactly is the result "immediate"?
    – Al Jebr
    May 19 at 18:56


















  • I am not able to come up with any example of a continuous function s.t. $f(overline{A}) subsetneq overline{f(A)}$. Can anyone give such an examples?
    – MUH
    Mar 11 at 11:03








  • 2




    Assuming $f$ is continuous, how exactly is the result "immediate"?
    – Al Jebr
    May 19 at 18:56
















I am not able to come up with any example of a continuous function s.t. $f(overline{A}) subsetneq overline{f(A)}$. Can anyone give such an examples?
– MUH
Mar 11 at 11:03






I am not able to come up with any example of a continuous function s.t. $f(overline{A}) subsetneq overline{f(A)}$. Can anyone give such an examples?
– MUH
Mar 11 at 11:03






2




2




Assuming $f$ is continuous, how exactly is the result "immediate"?
– Al Jebr
May 19 at 18:56




Assuming $f$ is continuous, how exactly is the result "immediate"?
– Al Jebr
May 19 at 18:56










7 Answers
7






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
48
down vote



accepted










Because the property is stated in terms of closures, it's I think slightly easier to use the inverse image of closed is closed equivalence of continuity instead:



If $C$ is closed in $Y$, we need to show that $D = f^{-1}[C]$ is closed in $X$.



Now using our closure property for $D$: $$f[overline{D}] subseteq overline{f[D]} = overline{f[f^{-1}[C]]} subseteq overline{C} = C,$$ as $C$ is closed.



This means that $overline{D} subseteq f^{-1}[C] = D$, making $D$ closed, as required.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • I agree, no need to mess with complements.
    – wildildildlife
    Feb 28 '12 at 22:06










  • $C$ should be closed in $Y$, not $X$.
    – Holdsworth88
    Feb 29 '12 at 10:16










  • There's a misleading in the argumentation:<br> What you're showing is that in fact the preimage of closed sets is closed for continuous functions. That is a simple consequence as: $f^{-1}(C)=f^{-1}(C)^{c c}=f^{-1}(C^c)^c text{closed}$. However, the assertion is much more subtle!<br> Moreover there's a missing step in your derivation, which is precisely the desired assertion: $f(overline{D})subseteq overline{f(D)}text{???}$
    – C-Star-Puppy
    Jan 22 '14 at 16:57








  • 1




    @Freeze_S, it seems to me that you have misread the question. The OP was looking for the direction that Henno has proved here.
    – Carsten S
    Jan 22 '14 at 18:09










  • why the result is imeadiat if $f$ is continuous?
    – Guerlando OCs
    May 9 '16 at 0:18


















up vote
17
down vote













If $f$ is continuous, then $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)})$ is open; since $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)}) = X -f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, then $f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$ is closed; since $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}overline{f(A)}$, we conclude that $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, and therefore $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq fleft(f^{-1}left(overline{f(A)}right)right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. This proves one direction. (Since you said you already had this, I posted the full argument).



Conversely, assume that for every $A$, $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. Let $V$ be an open subset of $Y$; we want to show that $f^{-1}(V)$ is open; equivalently, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)$ is closed; that is, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)=overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}$.



By assumption, $fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)subseteq overline{f(X-f^{-1}(V))}$. Now, $X-f^{-1}(V) = f^{-1}(Y-V)$, so $f(X-f^{-1}(V)) subseteq Y-V$, which is closed; so
$$fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)=fleft(overline{f^{-1}(Y-V)}right)subseteqoverline{fleft(f^{-1}(Y-V)right)}subseteq Y-V.$$ Therefore,
$$overline{X-f^{-1}(V)} subseteq f^{-1}(Y-V).$$
Is this sufficient?






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 2




    That was more than sufficient, thank you.
    – Holdsworth88
    Feb 28 '12 at 16:51






  • 1




    Converse part is nice.
    – math is love
    Jan 26 '17 at 15:15


















up vote
9
down vote













Henno’s argument is probably the slickest, but one can also work pointwise, either directly or, if one already has those characterizations of continuity, with nets or filters.



Suppose that $f$ is not continuous. Then there is some point $x_0in X$ at which $f$ fails to be continuous. If $y_0=f(x_0)$, this means that there is an open nbhd $U$ of $y_0$ such that if $V$ is an open nbhd of $x_0$, there is a point $x_Vin V$ such that $f(x_V)notin U$. Let $$A={x_V:Vtext{ is an open nbhd of }x_0};.$$



Clearly $x_0inoverline{A}$, and $f[A]subseteq Ysetminus U$. Moreover, $Ysetminus U$ is closed, so $overline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U$, and hence



$$y_0in f[overline{A}]subseteqoverline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U;,$$



contradicting the choice of $U$.



Those who like nets may notice that $A$ actually is a net, over the directed set $langlemathscr{N}(x_0),supseteqrangle$, where $mathscr{N}(x_0)$ is the family of open nbhds of $x_0$, and the argument shows that $f$ doesn’t preserve the limit of this net. (I could of course just as well have used the nbhd filter at $x_0$, instead of using only open nbhds.)



Those who prefer filters may modify this to consider the filter $$mathscr{F}={Vcap f^{-1}[Ysetminus U]:Vinmathscr{N}(x_0)}$$ instead.






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    8
    down vote













    We show that $f$ is continuous at each $xin X$. Recall that $f$ is continuous at $x$ if for any open nhood $V$ of $f(x)$, there is an open nhood $U$ of $x$ with $f(U)subseteq V$.



    So, let $xin X$ and let $V$ be an open nhood of $f(x)$.
    Set $E=Xsetminus f^{-1}(V)$. Noting that $f(E)$ is contained in the closed set $V^C$,
    we see that
    $$f(overline{E})subseteq overline{f(E)}subseteq V^C; $$
    whence $xnotin overline E$ (since $f(x)$ is in $V$).



    But then $x$ is in the open set $Xsetminus overline{E}$. Moreover, since $Xsetminus overline{E}subseteq Xsetminus E=f^{-1}(V)$, it follows that $f(Xsetminus overline{E})subseteq V$, as desired.









    An aside:

    If $X$ were first countable, we could argue using sequences (where a sequence $(x_n)$ converges to $x$ if for any nhood $U$ of $x$ there is an $N$ so that $x_min U$ for all $mge N$); for in such a space a function is continuous at $x$ if and only if $(f (x_n))$ converges to $f(x)$ whenever $x_n$ converges to $x$.



    Indeed, it is easily verified that given $x_nrightarrow x$ and any subsequence $(x_{n_k})$ of $(x_n)$, that the image of this subsequence under $f$ when thought of as a sequence has a subsequence that converges to $f(x)$. Thus every subsequence of $(f(x_n))$ has a further subsequence which converges to $f(x)$, which implies that $(f(x_n))$ converges to $x$.



    Of course, $X$ need not be first countable...



    Though I think the sequential method above is a bit much here, I wonder if the argument can be suitably modified to arbitrary $X$ by using nets?






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      4
      down vote













      Here's one proof of the converse provided $X$ and $Y$ are metric spaces:



      Take a limit point $x$ of $A$. Then because $f(overline{A}) subseteq overline{f(A)}$, we have that $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$.



      Because $x$ is a limit point of $A$, for every $delta > 0$ there is a point $p in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$. And because $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$, for every $epsilon > 0$, there is a point $q in f(A)$ with $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$.



      We thus have that for every point $x in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$, in fact $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$, so $f$ must be continuous.






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 4




        I guess this is a decent enough answer for the case of the real numbers, but the question was about arbitrary topological spaces $X$ and $Y$.
        – kahen
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:45






      • 3




        We are not in a world where things like $|x-p|$ could make sense. Any "TOPOLOGICAL SPACE" is in question, but any way a good proof that will be useful. I am upvoting and don't delete this answer because of this as it will help close duplicates.
        – user21436
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:46












      • Can't you just substitute $d(x, p)$ for $|x - p|$?
        – jamaicanworm
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






      • 4




        @jamaicaworm: Only in a metric space. Not every topological space is a metric space, or even metrizable.
        – Arturo Magidin
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






      • 6




        @jamaicanworm: The post is labeled [general-topology], not [metric-spaces]. The definition of a topological space includes the notion of "open set", and "closed set" is a set whose complement is open. See the definition in Wikipedia.
        – Arturo Magidin
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:59


















      up vote
      2
      down vote













      A proof using nets:



      Suppose $yin f(overline{A})backslash overline{fA}$. Taking $xin overline{A}$ with $y=f(x)$; there is a net $x_iin A$ converging to $x$. Now $f(x_i)$ is a net in $f(A)$ which does not converge to $f(x)$ [for this would imply $f(x)in overline{fA}$]. Thus $f$ is not continuous.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















      • This is the direction that the OP had already been able to show.
        – Brian M. Scott
        Feb 29 '12 at 6:08










      • @Brian: Yes, sorry! I realized this the day after...
        – wildildildlife
        Mar 2 '12 at 13:15




















      up vote
      1
      down vote













      The assertion is equivalent to:

      $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$

      So, the assertion follows from:

      $overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$




      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) Rightarrow overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}$

      2. Inclusion: $f(A)subseteqoverline{f(A)} Rightarrow f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteq overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}$

      3. Equality: $overline{f(A)} text{ closed} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) text{ closed} Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$


      The converse assertion is equivalent to:

      $overline{B}=B Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(B)}=f^{-1}(B)$

      So, the converse assertion follows from:

      $f^{-1}(B)subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(B)}subseteq f^{-1}(f(overline{f^{-1}(B)}))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}) subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B}) =f^{-1}(B)$

      That gives:

      $f^{-1}(B)=overline{f^{-1}(B)}$




      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq overline{A} text{ in general}$

      2. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) text{ in general}$

      3. Inclusion: $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)} text{ by assumption}$

      4. Inclusion: $f(f^{-1}(B))subseteq B text{ in general} Rightarrow overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}subseteq overline{B} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))})subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B})$

      5. Equality: $overline{B}=B Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{B})=f^{-1}(B)$






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 1




        I don't see how this is shorter than Henno's answer, which is complete since the OP cleared out the other direction. I don't think it is good practice to claim your answer is somehow better than others, and specifically target another user's answer.
        – Pedro Tamaroff
        Jan 22 '14 at 17:51










      • I'm sorry for that ...got a little bit upset... I deleted that part so there's no bad discussion about it -sorry for that! Anyway Henno only shows that the preimage of a closed sst is closed what is a rather simple consequence. But the assertion is much more tricky than that. See my comment on Henno's answer.
        – C-Star-Puppy
        Jan 22 '14 at 17:57











      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f114462%2fa-map-is-continuous-if-and-only-if-for-every-set-the-image-of-closure-is-contai%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      7 Answers
      7






      active

      oldest

      votes








      7 Answers
      7






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      48
      down vote



      accepted










      Because the property is stated in terms of closures, it's I think slightly easier to use the inverse image of closed is closed equivalence of continuity instead:



      If $C$ is closed in $Y$, we need to show that $D = f^{-1}[C]$ is closed in $X$.



      Now using our closure property for $D$: $$f[overline{D}] subseteq overline{f[D]} = overline{f[f^{-1}[C]]} subseteq overline{C} = C,$$ as $C$ is closed.



      This means that $overline{D} subseteq f^{-1}[C] = D$, making $D$ closed, as required.






      share|cite|improve this answer























      • I agree, no need to mess with complements.
        – wildildildlife
        Feb 28 '12 at 22:06










      • $C$ should be closed in $Y$, not $X$.
        – Holdsworth88
        Feb 29 '12 at 10:16










      • There's a misleading in the argumentation:<br> What you're showing is that in fact the preimage of closed sets is closed for continuous functions. That is a simple consequence as: $f^{-1}(C)=f^{-1}(C)^{c c}=f^{-1}(C^c)^c text{closed}$. However, the assertion is much more subtle!<br> Moreover there's a missing step in your derivation, which is precisely the desired assertion: $f(overline{D})subseteq overline{f(D)}text{???}$
        – C-Star-Puppy
        Jan 22 '14 at 16:57








      • 1




        @Freeze_S, it seems to me that you have misread the question. The OP was looking for the direction that Henno has proved here.
        – Carsten S
        Jan 22 '14 at 18:09










      • why the result is imeadiat if $f$ is continuous?
        – Guerlando OCs
        May 9 '16 at 0:18















      up vote
      48
      down vote



      accepted










      Because the property is stated in terms of closures, it's I think slightly easier to use the inverse image of closed is closed equivalence of continuity instead:



      If $C$ is closed in $Y$, we need to show that $D = f^{-1}[C]$ is closed in $X$.



      Now using our closure property for $D$: $$f[overline{D}] subseteq overline{f[D]} = overline{f[f^{-1}[C]]} subseteq overline{C} = C,$$ as $C$ is closed.



      This means that $overline{D} subseteq f^{-1}[C] = D$, making $D$ closed, as required.






      share|cite|improve this answer























      • I agree, no need to mess with complements.
        – wildildildlife
        Feb 28 '12 at 22:06










      • $C$ should be closed in $Y$, not $X$.
        – Holdsworth88
        Feb 29 '12 at 10:16










      • There's a misleading in the argumentation:<br> What you're showing is that in fact the preimage of closed sets is closed for continuous functions. That is a simple consequence as: $f^{-1}(C)=f^{-1}(C)^{c c}=f^{-1}(C^c)^c text{closed}$. However, the assertion is much more subtle!<br> Moreover there's a missing step in your derivation, which is precisely the desired assertion: $f(overline{D})subseteq overline{f(D)}text{???}$
        – C-Star-Puppy
        Jan 22 '14 at 16:57








      • 1




        @Freeze_S, it seems to me that you have misread the question. The OP was looking for the direction that Henno has proved here.
        – Carsten S
        Jan 22 '14 at 18:09










      • why the result is imeadiat if $f$ is continuous?
        – Guerlando OCs
        May 9 '16 at 0:18













      up vote
      48
      down vote



      accepted







      up vote
      48
      down vote



      accepted






      Because the property is stated in terms of closures, it's I think slightly easier to use the inverse image of closed is closed equivalence of continuity instead:



      If $C$ is closed in $Y$, we need to show that $D = f^{-1}[C]$ is closed in $X$.



      Now using our closure property for $D$: $$f[overline{D}] subseteq overline{f[D]} = overline{f[f^{-1}[C]]} subseteq overline{C} = C,$$ as $C$ is closed.



      This means that $overline{D} subseteq f^{-1}[C] = D$, making $D$ closed, as required.






      share|cite|improve this answer














      Because the property is stated in terms of closures, it's I think slightly easier to use the inverse image of closed is closed equivalence of continuity instead:



      If $C$ is closed in $Y$, we need to show that $D = f^{-1}[C]$ is closed in $X$.



      Now using our closure property for $D$: $$f[overline{D}] subseteq overline{f[D]} = overline{f[f^{-1}[C]]} subseteq overline{C} = C,$$ as $C$ is closed.



      This means that $overline{D} subseteq f^{-1}[C] = D$, making $D$ closed, as required.







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited Nov 17 at 9:15

























      answered Feb 28 '12 at 20:55









      Henno Brandsma

      102k344108




      102k344108












      • I agree, no need to mess with complements.
        – wildildildlife
        Feb 28 '12 at 22:06










      • $C$ should be closed in $Y$, not $X$.
        – Holdsworth88
        Feb 29 '12 at 10:16










      • There's a misleading in the argumentation:<br> What you're showing is that in fact the preimage of closed sets is closed for continuous functions. That is a simple consequence as: $f^{-1}(C)=f^{-1}(C)^{c c}=f^{-1}(C^c)^c text{closed}$. However, the assertion is much more subtle!<br> Moreover there's a missing step in your derivation, which is precisely the desired assertion: $f(overline{D})subseteq overline{f(D)}text{???}$
        – C-Star-Puppy
        Jan 22 '14 at 16:57








      • 1




        @Freeze_S, it seems to me that you have misread the question. The OP was looking for the direction that Henno has proved here.
        – Carsten S
        Jan 22 '14 at 18:09










      • why the result is imeadiat if $f$ is continuous?
        – Guerlando OCs
        May 9 '16 at 0:18


















      • I agree, no need to mess with complements.
        – wildildildlife
        Feb 28 '12 at 22:06










      • $C$ should be closed in $Y$, not $X$.
        – Holdsworth88
        Feb 29 '12 at 10:16










      • There's a misleading in the argumentation:<br> What you're showing is that in fact the preimage of closed sets is closed for continuous functions. That is a simple consequence as: $f^{-1}(C)=f^{-1}(C)^{c c}=f^{-1}(C^c)^c text{closed}$. However, the assertion is much more subtle!<br> Moreover there's a missing step in your derivation, which is precisely the desired assertion: $f(overline{D})subseteq overline{f(D)}text{???}$
        – C-Star-Puppy
        Jan 22 '14 at 16:57








      • 1




        @Freeze_S, it seems to me that you have misread the question. The OP was looking for the direction that Henno has proved here.
        – Carsten S
        Jan 22 '14 at 18:09










      • why the result is imeadiat if $f$ is continuous?
        – Guerlando OCs
        May 9 '16 at 0:18
















      I agree, no need to mess with complements.
      – wildildildlife
      Feb 28 '12 at 22:06




      I agree, no need to mess with complements.
      – wildildildlife
      Feb 28 '12 at 22:06












      $C$ should be closed in $Y$, not $X$.
      – Holdsworth88
      Feb 29 '12 at 10:16




      $C$ should be closed in $Y$, not $X$.
      – Holdsworth88
      Feb 29 '12 at 10:16












      There's a misleading in the argumentation:<br> What you're showing is that in fact the preimage of closed sets is closed for continuous functions. That is a simple consequence as: $f^{-1}(C)=f^{-1}(C)^{c c}=f^{-1}(C^c)^c text{closed}$. However, the assertion is much more subtle!<br> Moreover there's a missing step in your derivation, which is precisely the desired assertion: $f(overline{D})subseteq overline{f(D)}text{???}$
      – C-Star-Puppy
      Jan 22 '14 at 16:57






      There's a misleading in the argumentation:<br> What you're showing is that in fact the preimage of closed sets is closed for continuous functions. That is a simple consequence as: $f^{-1}(C)=f^{-1}(C)^{c c}=f^{-1}(C^c)^c text{closed}$. However, the assertion is much more subtle!<br> Moreover there's a missing step in your derivation, which is precisely the desired assertion: $f(overline{D})subseteq overline{f(D)}text{???}$
      – C-Star-Puppy
      Jan 22 '14 at 16:57






      1




      1




      @Freeze_S, it seems to me that you have misread the question. The OP was looking for the direction that Henno has proved here.
      – Carsten S
      Jan 22 '14 at 18:09




      @Freeze_S, it seems to me that you have misread the question. The OP was looking for the direction that Henno has proved here.
      – Carsten S
      Jan 22 '14 at 18:09












      why the result is imeadiat if $f$ is continuous?
      – Guerlando OCs
      May 9 '16 at 0:18




      why the result is imeadiat if $f$ is continuous?
      – Guerlando OCs
      May 9 '16 at 0:18










      up vote
      17
      down vote













      If $f$ is continuous, then $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)})$ is open; since $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)}) = X -f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, then $f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$ is closed; since $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}overline{f(A)}$, we conclude that $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, and therefore $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq fleft(f^{-1}left(overline{f(A)}right)right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. This proves one direction. (Since you said you already had this, I posted the full argument).



      Conversely, assume that for every $A$, $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. Let $V$ be an open subset of $Y$; we want to show that $f^{-1}(V)$ is open; equivalently, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)$ is closed; that is, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)=overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}$.



      By assumption, $fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)subseteq overline{f(X-f^{-1}(V))}$. Now, $X-f^{-1}(V) = f^{-1}(Y-V)$, so $f(X-f^{-1}(V)) subseteq Y-V$, which is closed; so
      $$fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)=fleft(overline{f^{-1}(Y-V)}right)subseteqoverline{fleft(f^{-1}(Y-V)right)}subseteq Y-V.$$ Therefore,
      $$overline{X-f^{-1}(V)} subseteq f^{-1}(Y-V).$$
      Is this sufficient?






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 2




        That was more than sufficient, thank you.
        – Holdsworth88
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:51






      • 1




        Converse part is nice.
        – math is love
        Jan 26 '17 at 15:15















      up vote
      17
      down vote













      If $f$ is continuous, then $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)})$ is open; since $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)}) = X -f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, then $f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$ is closed; since $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}overline{f(A)}$, we conclude that $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, and therefore $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq fleft(f^{-1}left(overline{f(A)}right)right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. This proves one direction. (Since you said you already had this, I posted the full argument).



      Conversely, assume that for every $A$, $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. Let $V$ be an open subset of $Y$; we want to show that $f^{-1}(V)$ is open; equivalently, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)$ is closed; that is, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)=overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}$.



      By assumption, $fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)subseteq overline{f(X-f^{-1}(V))}$. Now, $X-f^{-1}(V) = f^{-1}(Y-V)$, so $f(X-f^{-1}(V)) subseteq Y-V$, which is closed; so
      $$fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)=fleft(overline{f^{-1}(Y-V)}right)subseteqoverline{fleft(f^{-1}(Y-V)right)}subseteq Y-V.$$ Therefore,
      $$overline{X-f^{-1}(V)} subseteq f^{-1}(Y-V).$$
      Is this sufficient?






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 2




        That was more than sufficient, thank you.
        – Holdsworth88
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:51






      • 1




        Converse part is nice.
        – math is love
        Jan 26 '17 at 15:15













      up vote
      17
      down vote










      up vote
      17
      down vote









      If $f$ is continuous, then $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)})$ is open; since $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)}) = X -f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, then $f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$ is closed; since $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}overline{f(A)}$, we conclude that $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, and therefore $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq fleft(f^{-1}left(overline{f(A)}right)right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. This proves one direction. (Since you said you already had this, I posted the full argument).



      Conversely, assume that for every $A$, $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. Let $V$ be an open subset of $Y$; we want to show that $f^{-1}(V)$ is open; equivalently, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)$ is closed; that is, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)=overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}$.



      By assumption, $fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)subseteq overline{f(X-f^{-1}(V))}$. Now, $X-f^{-1}(V) = f^{-1}(Y-V)$, so $f(X-f^{-1}(V)) subseteq Y-V$, which is closed; so
      $$fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)=fleft(overline{f^{-1}(Y-V)}right)subseteqoverline{fleft(f^{-1}(Y-V)right)}subseteq Y-V.$$ Therefore,
      $$overline{X-f^{-1}(V)} subseteq f^{-1}(Y-V).$$
      Is this sufficient?






      share|cite|improve this answer














      If $f$ is continuous, then $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)})$ is open; since $f^{-1}(Y-overline{f(A)}) = X -f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, then $f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$ is closed; since $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}overline{f(A)}$, we conclude that $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$, and therefore $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq fleft(f^{-1}left(overline{f(A)}right)right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. This proves one direction. (Since you said you already had this, I posted the full argument).



      Conversely, assume that for every $A$, $fleft(overline{A}right)subseteq overline{f(A)}$. Let $V$ be an open subset of $Y$; we want to show that $f^{-1}(V)$ is open; equivalently, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)$ is closed; that is, we want to show that $X-f^{-1}(V)=overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}$.



      By assumption, $fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)subseteq overline{f(X-f^{-1}(V))}$. Now, $X-f^{-1}(V) = f^{-1}(Y-V)$, so $f(X-f^{-1}(V)) subseteq Y-V$, which is closed; so
      $$fleft(overline{X-f^{-1}(V)}right)=fleft(overline{f^{-1}(Y-V)}right)subseteqoverline{fleft(f^{-1}(Y-V)right)}subseteq Y-V.$$ Therefore,
      $$overline{X-f^{-1}(V)} subseteq f^{-1}(Y-V).$$
      Is this sufficient?







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited Feb 28 '12 at 17:01

























      answered Feb 28 '12 at 16:26









      Arturo Magidin

      259k32581902




      259k32581902








      • 2




        That was more than sufficient, thank you.
        – Holdsworth88
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:51






      • 1




        Converse part is nice.
        – math is love
        Jan 26 '17 at 15:15














      • 2




        That was more than sufficient, thank you.
        – Holdsworth88
        Feb 28 '12 at 16:51






      • 1




        Converse part is nice.
        – math is love
        Jan 26 '17 at 15:15








      2




      2




      That was more than sufficient, thank you.
      – Holdsworth88
      Feb 28 '12 at 16:51




      That was more than sufficient, thank you.
      – Holdsworth88
      Feb 28 '12 at 16:51




      1




      1




      Converse part is nice.
      – math is love
      Jan 26 '17 at 15:15




      Converse part is nice.
      – math is love
      Jan 26 '17 at 15:15










      up vote
      9
      down vote













      Henno’s argument is probably the slickest, but one can also work pointwise, either directly or, if one already has those characterizations of continuity, with nets or filters.



      Suppose that $f$ is not continuous. Then there is some point $x_0in X$ at which $f$ fails to be continuous. If $y_0=f(x_0)$, this means that there is an open nbhd $U$ of $y_0$ such that if $V$ is an open nbhd of $x_0$, there is a point $x_Vin V$ such that $f(x_V)notin U$. Let $$A={x_V:Vtext{ is an open nbhd of }x_0};.$$



      Clearly $x_0inoverline{A}$, and $f[A]subseteq Ysetminus U$. Moreover, $Ysetminus U$ is closed, so $overline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U$, and hence



      $$y_0in f[overline{A}]subseteqoverline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U;,$$



      contradicting the choice of $U$.



      Those who like nets may notice that $A$ actually is a net, over the directed set $langlemathscr{N}(x_0),supseteqrangle$, where $mathscr{N}(x_0)$ is the family of open nbhds of $x_0$, and the argument shows that $f$ doesn’t preserve the limit of this net. (I could of course just as well have used the nbhd filter at $x_0$, instead of using only open nbhds.)



      Those who prefer filters may modify this to consider the filter $$mathscr{F}={Vcap f^{-1}[Ysetminus U]:Vinmathscr{N}(x_0)}$$ instead.






      share|cite|improve this answer

























        up vote
        9
        down vote













        Henno’s argument is probably the slickest, but one can also work pointwise, either directly or, if one already has those characterizations of continuity, with nets or filters.



        Suppose that $f$ is not continuous. Then there is some point $x_0in X$ at which $f$ fails to be continuous. If $y_0=f(x_0)$, this means that there is an open nbhd $U$ of $y_0$ such that if $V$ is an open nbhd of $x_0$, there is a point $x_Vin V$ such that $f(x_V)notin U$. Let $$A={x_V:Vtext{ is an open nbhd of }x_0};.$$



        Clearly $x_0inoverline{A}$, and $f[A]subseteq Ysetminus U$. Moreover, $Ysetminus U$ is closed, so $overline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U$, and hence



        $$y_0in f[overline{A}]subseteqoverline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U;,$$



        contradicting the choice of $U$.



        Those who like nets may notice that $A$ actually is a net, over the directed set $langlemathscr{N}(x_0),supseteqrangle$, where $mathscr{N}(x_0)$ is the family of open nbhds of $x_0$, and the argument shows that $f$ doesn’t preserve the limit of this net. (I could of course just as well have used the nbhd filter at $x_0$, instead of using only open nbhds.)



        Those who prefer filters may modify this to consider the filter $$mathscr{F}={Vcap f^{-1}[Ysetminus U]:Vinmathscr{N}(x_0)}$$ instead.






        share|cite|improve this answer























          up vote
          9
          down vote










          up vote
          9
          down vote









          Henno’s argument is probably the slickest, but one can also work pointwise, either directly or, if one already has those characterizations of continuity, with nets or filters.



          Suppose that $f$ is not continuous. Then there is some point $x_0in X$ at which $f$ fails to be continuous. If $y_0=f(x_0)$, this means that there is an open nbhd $U$ of $y_0$ such that if $V$ is an open nbhd of $x_0$, there is a point $x_Vin V$ such that $f(x_V)notin U$. Let $$A={x_V:Vtext{ is an open nbhd of }x_0};.$$



          Clearly $x_0inoverline{A}$, and $f[A]subseteq Ysetminus U$. Moreover, $Ysetminus U$ is closed, so $overline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U$, and hence



          $$y_0in f[overline{A}]subseteqoverline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U;,$$



          contradicting the choice of $U$.



          Those who like nets may notice that $A$ actually is a net, over the directed set $langlemathscr{N}(x_0),supseteqrangle$, where $mathscr{N}(x_0)$ is the family of open nbhds of $x_0$, and the argument shows that $f$ doesn’t preserve the limit of this net. (I could of course just as well have used the nbhd filter at $x_0$, instead of using only open nbhds.)



          Those who prefer filters may modify this to consider the filter $$mathscr{F}={Vcap f^{-1}[Ysetminus U]:Vinmathscr{N}(x_0)}$$ instead.






          share|cite|improve this answer












          Henno’s argument is probably the slickest, but one can also work pointwise, either directly or, if one already has those characterizations of continuity, with nets or filters.



          Suppose that $f$ is not continuous. Then there is some point $x_0in X$ at which $f$ fails to be continuous. If $y_0=f(x_0)$, this means that there is an open nbhd $U$ of $y_0$ such that if $V$ is an open nbhd of $x_0$, there is a point $x_Vin V$ such that $f(x_V)notin U$. Let $$A={x_V:Vtext{ is an open nbhd of }x_0};.$$



          Clearly $x_0inoverline{A}$, and $f[A]subseteq Ysetminus U$. Moreover, $Ysetminus U$ is closed, so $overline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U$, and hence



          $$y_0in f[overline{A}]subseteqoverline{f[A]}subseteq Ysetminus U;,$$



          contradicting the choice of $U$.



          Those who like nets may notice that $A$ actually is a net, over the directed set $langlemathscr{N}(x_0),supseteqrangle$, where $mathscr{N}(x_0)$ is the family of open nbhds of $x_0$, and the argument shows that $f$ doesn’t preserve the limit of this net. (I could of course just as well have used the nbhd filter at $x_0$, instead of using only open nbhds.)



          Those who prefer filters may modify this to consider the filter $$mathscr{F}={Vcap f^{-1}[Ysetminus U]:Vinmathscr{N}(x_0)}$$ instead.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Feb 29 '12 at 6:26









          Brian M. Scott

          453k38504904




          453k38504904






















              up vote
              8
              down vote













              We show that $f$ is continuous at each $xin X$. Recall that $f$ is continuous at $x$ if for any open nhood $V$ of $f(x)$, there is an open nhood $U$ of $x$ with $f(U)subseteq V$.



              So, let $xin X$ and let $V$ be an open nhood of $f(x)$.
              Set $E=Xsetminus f^{-1}(V)$. Noting that $f(E)$ is contained in the closed set $V^C$,
              we see that
              $$f(overline{E})subseteq overline{f(E)}subseteq V^C; $$
              whence $xnotin overline E$ (since $f(x)$ is in $V$).



              But then $x$ is in the open set $Xsetminus overline{E}$. Moreover, since $Xsetminus overline{E}subseteq Xsetminus E=f^{-1}(V)$, it follows that $f(Xsetminus overline{E})subseteq V$, as desired.









              An aside:

              If $X$ were first countable, we could argue using sequences (where a sequence $(x_n)$ converges to $x$ if for any nhood $U$ of $x$ there is an $N$ so that $x_min U$ for all $mge N$); for in such a space a function is continuous at $x$ if and only if $(f (x_n))$ converges to $f(x)$ whenever $x_n$ converges to $x$.



              Indeed, it is easily verified that given $x_nrightarrow x$ and any subsequence $(x_{n_k})$ of $(x_n)$, that the image of this subsequence under $f$ when thought of as a sequence has a subsequence that converges to $f(x)$. Thus every subsequence of $(f(x_n))$ has a further subsequence which converges to $f(x)$, which implies that $(f(x_n))$ converges to $x$.



              Of course, $X$ need not be first countable...



              Though I think the sequential method above is a bit much here, I wonder if the argument can be suitably modified to arbitrary $X$ by using nets?






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                8
                down vote













                We show that $f$ is continuous at each $xin X$. Recall that $f$ is continuous at $x$ if for any open nhood $V$ of $f(x)$, there is an open nhood $U$ of $x$ with $f(U)subseteq V$.



                So, let $xin X$ and let $V$ be an open nhood of $f(x)$.
                Set $E=Xsetminus f^{-1}(V)$. Noting that $f(E)$ is contained in the closed set $V^C$,
                we see that
                $$f(overline{E})subseteq overline{f(E)}subseteq V^C; $$
                whence $xnotin overline E$ (since $f(x)$ is in $V$).



                But then $x$ is in the open set $Xsetminus overline{E}$. Moreover, since $Xsetminus overline{E}subseteq Xsetminus E=f^{-1}(V)$, it follows that $f(Xsetminus overline{E})subseteq V$, as desired.









                An aside:

                If $X$ were first countable, we could argue using sequences (where a sequence $(x_n)$ converges to $x$ if for any nhood $U$ of $x$ there is an $N$ so that $x_min U$ for all $mge N$); for in such a space a function is continuous at $x$ if and only if $(f (x_n))$ converges to $f(x)$ whenever $x_n$ converges to $x$.



                Indeed, it is easily verified that given $x_nrightarrow x$ and any subsequence $(x_{n_k})$ of $(x_n)$, that the image of this subsequence under $f$ when thought of as a sequence has a subsequence that converges to $f(x)$. Thus every subsequence of $(f(x_n))$ has a further subsequence which converges to $f(x)$, which implies that $(f(x_n))$ converges to $x$.



                Of course, $X$ need not be first countable...



                Though I think the sequential method above is a bit much here, I wonder if the argument can be suitably modified to arbitrary $X$ by using nets?






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  8
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  8
                  down vote









                  We show that $f$ is continuous at each $xin X$. Recall that $f$ is continuous at $x$ if for any open nhood $V$ of $f(x)$, there is an open nhood $U$ of $x$ with $f(U)subseteq V$.



                  So, let $xin X$ and let $V$ be an open nhood of $f(x)$.
                  Set $E=Xsetminus f^{-1}(V)$. Noting that $f(E)$ is contained in the closed set $V^C$,
                  we see that
                  $$f(overline{E})subseteq overline{f(E)}subseteq V^C; $$
                  whence $xnotin overline E$ (since $f(x)$ is in $V$).



                  But then $x$ is in the open set $Xsetminus overline{E}$. Moreover, since $Xsetminus overline{E}subseteq Xsetminus E=f^{-1}(V)$, it follows that $f(Xsetminus overline{E})subseteq V$, as desired.









                  An aside:

                  If $X$ were first countable, we could argue using sequences (where a sequence $(x_n)$ converges to $x$ if for any nhood $U$ of $x$ there is an $N$ so that $x_min U$ for all $mge N$); for in such a space a function is continuous at $x$ if and only if $(f (x_n))$ converges to $f(x)$ whenever $x_n$ converges to $x$.



                  Indeed, it is easily verified that given $x_nrightarrow x$ and any subsequence $(x_{n_k})$ of $(x_n)$, that the image of this subsequence under $f$ when thought of as a sequence has a subsequence that converges to $f(x)$. Thus every subsequence of $(f(x_n))$ has a further subsequence which converges to $f(x)$, which implies that $(f(x_n))$ converges to $x$.



                  Of course, $X$ need not be first countable...



                  Though I think the sequential method above is a bit much here, I wonder if the argument can be suitably modified to arbitrary $X$ by using nets?






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  We show that $f$ is continuous at each $xin X$. Recall that $f$ is continuous at $x$ if for any open nhood $V$ of $f(x)$, there is an open nhood $U$ of $x$ with $f(U)subseteq V$.



                  So, let $xin X$ and let $V$ be an open nhood of $f(x)$.
                  Set $E=Xsetminus f^{-1}(V)$. Noting that $f(E)$ is contained in the closed set $V^C$,
                  we see that
                  $$f(overline{E})subseteq overline{f(E)}subseteq V^C; $$
                  whence $xnotin overline E$ (since $f(x)$ is in $V$).



                  But then $x$ is in the open set $Xsetminus overline{E}$. Moreover, since $Xsetminus overline{E}subseteq Xsetminus E=f^{-1}(V)$, it follows that $f(Xsetminus overline{E})subseteq V$, as desired.









                  An aside:

                  If $X$ were first countable, we could argue using sequences (where a sequence $(x_n)$ converges to $x$ if for any nhood $U$ of $x$ there is an $N$ so that $x_min U$ for all $mge N$); for in such a space a function is continuous at $x$ if and only if $(f (x_n))$ converges to $f(x)$ whenever $x_n$ converges to $x$.



                  Indeed, it is easily verified that given $x_nrightarrow x$ and any subsequence $(x_{n_k})$ of $(x_n)$, that the image of this subsequence under $f$ when thought of as a sequence has a subsequence that converges to $f(x)$. Thus every subsequence of $(f(x_n))$ has a further subsequence which converges to $f(x)$, which implies that $(f(x_n))$ converges to $x$.



                  Of course, $X$ need not be first countable...



                  Though I think the sequential method above is a bit much here, I wonder if the argument can be suitably modified to arbitrary $X$ by using nets?







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Feb 28 '12 at 18:10









                  David Mitra

                  62.6k697160




                  62.6k697160






















                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote













                      Here's one proof of the converse provided $X$ and $Y$ are metric spaces:



                      Take a limit point $x$ of $A$. Then because $f(overline{A}) subseteq overline{f(A)}$, we have that $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$.



                      Because $x$ is a limit point of $A$, for every $delta > 0$ there is a point $p in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$. And because $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$, for every $epsilon > 0$, there is a point $q in f(A)$ with $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$.



                      We thus have that for every point $x in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$, in fact $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$, so $f$ must be continuous.






                      share|cite|improve this answer



















                      • 4




                        I guess this is a decent enough answer for the case of the real numbers, but the question was about arbitrary topological spaces $X$ and $Y$.
                        – kahen
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:45






                      • 3




                        We are not in a world where things like $|x-p|$ could make sense. Any "TOPOLOGICAL SPACE" is in question, but any way a good proof that will be useful. I am upvoting and don't delete this answer because of this as it will help close duplicates.
                        – user21436
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:46












                      • Can't you just substitute $d(x, p)$ for $|x - p|$?
                        – jamaicanworm
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






                      • 4




                        @jamaicaworm: Only in a metric space. Not every topological space is a metric space, or even metrizable.
                        – Arturo Magidin
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






                      • 6




                        @jamaicanworm: The post is labeled [general-topology], not [metric-spaces]. The definition of a topological space includes the notion of "open set", and "closed set" is a set whose complement is open. See the definition in Wikipedia.
                        – Arturo Magidin
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:59















                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote













                      Here's one proof of the converse provided $X$ and $Y$ are metric spaces:



                      Take a limit point $x$ of $A$. Then because $f(overline{A}) subseteq overline{f(A)}$, we have that $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$.



                      Because $x$ is a limit point of $A$, for every $delta > 0$ there is a point $p in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$. And because $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$, for every $epsilon > 0$, there is a point $q in f(A)$ with $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$.



                      We thus have that for every point $x in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$, in fact $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$, so $f$ must be continuous.






                      share|cite|improve this answer



















                      • 4




                        I guess this is a decent enough answer for the case of the real numbers, but the question was about arbitrary topological spaces $X$ and $Y$.
                        – kahen
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:45






                      • 3




                        We are not in a world where things like $|x-p|$ could make sense. Any "TOPOLOGICAL SPACE" is in question, but any way a good proof that will be useful. I am upvoting and don't delete this answer because of this as it will help close duplicates.
                        – user21436
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:46












                      • Can't you just substitute $d(x, p)$ for $|x - p|$?
                        – jamaicanworm
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






                      • 4




                        @jamaicaworm: Only in a metric space. Not every topological space is a metric space, or even metrizable.
                        – Arturo Magidin
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






                      • 6




                        @jamaicanworm: The post is labeled [general-topology], not [metric-spaces]. The definition of a topological space includes the notion of "open set", and "closed set" is a set whose complement is open. See the definition in Wikipedia.
                        – Arturo Magidin
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:59













                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote









                      Here's one proof of the converse provided $X$ and $Y$ are metric spaces:



                      Take a limit point $x$ of $A$. Then because $f(overline{A}) subseteq overline{f(A)}$, we have that $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$.



                      Because $x$ is a limit point of $A$, for every $delta > 0$ there is a point $p in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$. And because $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$, for every $epsilon > 0$, there is a point $q in f(A)$ with $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$.



                      We thus have that for every point $x in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$, in fact $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$, so $f$ must be continuous.






                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      Here's one proof of the converse provided $X$ and $Y$ are metric spaces:



                      Take a limit point $x$ of $A$. Then because $f(overline{A}) subseteq overline{f(A)}$, we have that $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$.



                      Because $x$ is a limit point of $A$, for every $delta > 0$ there is a point $p in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$. And because $f(x)$ is a limit point of $f(A)$, for every $epsilon > 0$, there is a point $q in f(A)$ with $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$.



                      We thus have that for every point $x in A$ with $|x - p| < delta$, in fact $|f(x) - f(p)| < epsilon$, so $f$ must be continuous.







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited Feb 28 '12 at 17:11









                      Austin Mohr

                      19.9k35097




                      19.9k35097










                      answered Feb 28 '12 at 16:33









                      jamaicanworm

                      1,41062237




                      1,41062237








                      • 4




                        I guess this is a decent enough answer for the case of the real numbers, but the question was about arbitrary topological spaces $X$ and $Y$.
                        – kahen
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:45






                      • 3




                        We are not in a world where things like $|x-p|$ could make sense. Any "TOPOLOGICAL SPACE" is in question, but any way a good proof that will be useful. I am upvoting and don't delete this answer because of this as it will help close duplicates.
                        – user21436
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:46












                      • Can't you just substitute $d(x, p)$ for $|x - p|$?
                        – jamaicanworm
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






                      • 4




                        @jamaicaworm: Only in a metric space. Not every topological space is a metric space, or even metrizable.
                        – Arturo Magidin
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






                      • 6




                        @jamaicanworm: The post is labeled [general-topology], not [metric-spaces]. The definition of a topological space includes the notion of "open set", and "closed set" is a set whose complement is open. See the definition in Wikipedia.
                        – Arturo Magidin
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:59














                      • 4




                        I guess this is a decent enough answer for the case of the real numbers, but the question was about arbitrary topological spaces $X$ and $Y$.
                        – kahen
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:45






                      • 3




                        We are not in a world where things like $|x-p|$ could make sense. Any "TOPOLOGICAL SPACE" is in question, but any way a good proof that will be useful. I am upvoting and don't delete this answer because of this as it will help close duplicates.
                        – user21436
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:46












                      • Can't you just substitute $d(x, p)$ for $|x - p|$?
                        – jamaicanworm
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






                      • 4




                        @jamaicaworm: Only in a metric space. Not every topological space is a metric space, or even metrizable.
                        – Arturo Magidin
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:50






                      • 6




                        @jamaicanworm: The post is labeled [general-topology], not [metric-spaces]. The definition of a topological space includes the notion of "open set", and "closed set" is a set whose complement is open. See the definition in Wikipedia.
                        – Arturo Magidin
                        Feb 28 '12 at 16:59








                      4




                      4




                      I guess this is a decent enough answer for the case of the real numbers, but the question was about arbitrary topological spaces $X$ and $Y$.
                      – kahen
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:45




                      I guess this is a decent enough answer for the case of the real numbers, but the question was about arbitrary topological spaces $X$ and $Y$.
                      – kahen
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:45




                      3




                      3




                      We are not in a world where things like $|x-p|$ could make sense. Any "TOPOLOGICAL SPACE" is in question, but any way a good proof that will be useful. I am upvoting and don't delete this answer because of this as it will help close duplicates.
                      – user21436
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:46






                      We are not in a world where things like $|x-p|$ could make sense. Any "TOPOLOGICAL SPACE" is in question, but any way a good proof that will be useful. I am upvoting and don't delete this answer because of this as it will help close duplicates.
                      – user21436
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:46














                      Can't you just substitute $d(x, p)$ for $|x - p|$?
                      – jamaicanworm
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:50




                      Can't you just substitute $d(x, p)$ for $|x - p|$?
                      – jamaicanworm
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:50




                      4




                      4




                      @jamaicaworm: Only in a metric space. Not every topological space is a metric space, or even metrizable.
                      – Arturo Magidin
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:50




                      @jamaicaworm: Only in a metric space. Not every topological space is a metric space, or even metrizable.
                      – Arturo Magidin
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:50




                      6




                      6




                      @jamaicanworm: The post is labeled [general-topology], not [metric-spaces]. The definition of a topological space includes the notion of "open set", and "closed set" is a set whose complement is open. See the definition in Wikipedia.
                      – Arturo Magidin
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:59




                      @jamaicanworm: The post is labeled [general-topology], not [metric-spaces]. The definition of a topological space includes the notion of "open set", and "closed set" is a set whose complement is open. See the definition in Wikipedia.
                      – Arturo Magidin
                      Feb 28 '12 at 16:59










                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      A proof using nets:



                      Suppose $yin f(overline{A})backslash overline{fA}$. Taking $xin overline{A}$ with $y=f(x)$; there is a net $x_iin A$ converging to $x$. Now $f(x_i)$ is a net in $f(A)$ which does not converge to $f(x)$ [for this would imply $f(x)in overline{fA}$]. Thus $f$ is not continuous.






                      share|cite|improve this answer





















                      • This is the direction that the OP had already been able to show.
                        – Brian M. Scott
                        Feb 29 '12 at 6:08










                      • @Brian: Yes, sorry! I realized this the day after...
                        – wildildildlife
                        Mar 2 '12 at 13:15

















                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      A proof using nets:



                      Suppose $yin f(overline{A})backslash overline{fA}$. Taking $xin overline{A}$ with $y=f(x)$; there is a net $x_iin A$ converging to $x$. Now $f(x_i)$ is a net in $f(A)$ which does not converge to $f(x)$ [for this would imply $f(x)in overline{fA}$]. Thus $f$ is not continuous.






                      share|cite|improve this answer





















                      • This is the direction that the OP had already been able to show.
                        – Brian M. Scott
                        Feb 29 '12 at 6:08










                      • @Brian: Yes, sorry! I realized this the day after...
                        – wildildildlife
                        Mar 2 '12 at 13:15















                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote









                      A proof using nets:



                      Suppose $yin f(overline{A})backslash overline{fA}$. Taking $xin overline{A}$ with $y=f(x)$; there is a net $x_iin A$ converging to $x$. Now $f(x_i)$ is a net in $f(A)$ which does not converge to $f(x)$ [for this would imply $f(x)in overline{fA}$]. Thus $f$ is not continuous.






                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      A proof using nets:



                      Suppose $yin f(overline{A})backslash overline{fA}$. Taking $xin overline{A}$ with $y=f(x)$; there is a net $x_iin A$ converging to $x$. Now $f(x_i)$ is a net in $f(A)$ which does not converge to $f(x)$ [for this would imply $f(x)in overline{fA}$]. Thus $f$ is not continuous.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Feb 28 '12 at 22:02









                      wildildildlife

                      4,4442121




                      4,4442121












                      • This is the direction that the OP had already been able to show.
                        – Brian M. Scott
                        Feb 29 '12 at 6:08










                      • @Brian: Yes, sorry! I realized this the day after...
                        – wildildildlife
                        Mar 2 '12 at 13:15




















                      • This is the direction that the OP had already been able to show.
                        – Brian M. Scott
                        Feb 29 '12 at 6:08










                      • @Brian: Yes, sorry! I realized this the day after...
                        – wildildildlife
                        Mar 2 '12 at 13:15


















                      This is the direction that the OP had already been able to show.
                      – Brian M. Scott
                      Feb 29 '12 at 6:08




                      This is the direction that the OP had already been able to show.
                      – Brian M. Scott
                      Feb 29 '12 at 6:08












                      @Brian: Yes, sorry! I realized this the day after...
                      – wildildildlife
                      Mar 2 '12 at 13:15






                      @Brian: Yes, sorry! I realized this the day after...
                      – wildildildlife
                      Mar 2 '12 at 13:15












                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      The assertion is equivalent to:

                      $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$

                      So, the assertion follows from:

                      $overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$




                      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) Rightarrow overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}$

                      2. Inclusion: $f(A)subseteqoverline{f(A)} Rightarrow f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteq overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}$

                      3. Equality: $overline{f(A)} text{ closed} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) text{ closed} Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$


                      The converse assertion is equivalent to:

                      $overline{B}=B Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(B)}=f^{-1}(B)$

                      So, the converse assertion follows from:

                      $f^{-1}(B)subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(B)}subseteq f^{-1}(f(overline{f^{-1}(B)}))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}) subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B}) =f^{-1}(B)$

                      That gives:

                      $f^{-1}(B)=overline{f^{-1}(B)}$




                      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq overline{A} text{ in general}$

                      2. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) text{ in general}$

                      3. Inclusion: $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)} text{ by assumption}$

                      4. Inclusion: $f(f^{-1}(B))subseteq B text{ in general} Rightarrow overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}subseteq overline{B} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))})subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B})$

                      5. Equality: $overline{B}=B Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{B})=f^{-1}(B)$






                      share|cite|improve this answer



















                      • 1




                        I don't see how this is shorter than Henno's answer, which is complete since the OP cleared out the other direction. I don't think it is good practice to claim your answer is somehow better than others, and specifically target another user's answer.
                        – Pedro Tamaroff
                        Jan 22 '14 at 17:51










                      • I'm sorry for that ...got a little bit upset... I deleted that part so there's no bad discussion about it -sorry for that! Anyway Henno only shows that the preimage of a closed sst is closed what is a rather simple consequence. But the assertion is much more tricky than that. See my comment on Henno's answer.
                        – C-Star-Puppy
                        Jan 22 '14 at 17:57















                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      The assertion is equivalent to:

                      $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$

                      So, the assertion follows from:

                      $overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$




                      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) Rightarrow overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}$

                      2. Inclusion: $f(A)subseteqoverline{f(A)} Rightarrow f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteq overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}$

                      3. Equality: $overline{f(A)} text{ closed} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) text{ closed} Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$


                      The converse assertion is equivalent to:

                      $overline{B}=B Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(B)}=f^{-1}(B)$

                      So, the converse assertion follows from:

                      $f^{-1}(B)subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(B)}subseteq f^{-1}(f(overline{f^{-1}(B)}))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}) subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B}) =f^{-1}(B)$

                      That gives:

                      $f^{-1}(B)=overline{f^{-1}(B)}$




                      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq overline{A} text{ in general}$

                      2. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) text{ in general}$

                      3. Inclusion: $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)} text{ by assumption}$

                      4. Inclusion: $f(f^{-1}(B))subseteq B text{ in general} Rightarrow overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}subseteq overline{B} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))})subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B})$

                      5. Equality: $overline{B}=B Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{B})=f^{-1}(B)$






                      share|cite|improve this answer



















                      • 1




                        I don't see how this is shorter than Henno's answer, which is complete since the OP cleared out the other direction. I don't think it is good practice to claim your answer is somehow better than others, and specifically target another user's answer.
                        – Pedro Tamaroff
                        Jan 22 '14 at 17:51










                      • I'm sorry for that ...got a little bit upset... I deleted that part so there's no bad discussion about it -sorry for that! Anyway Henno only shows that the preimage of a closed sst is closed what is a rather simple consequence. But the assertion is much more tricky than that. See my comment on Henno's answer.
                        – C-Star-Puppy
                        Jan 22 '14 at 17:57













                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote









                      The assertion is equivalent to:

                      $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$

                      So, the assertion follows from:

                      $overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$




                      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) Rightarrow overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}$

                      2. Inclusion: $f(A)subseteqoverline{f(A)} Rightarrow f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteq overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}$

                      3. Equality: $overline{f(A)} text{ closed} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) text{ closed} Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$


                      The converse assertion is equivalent to:

                      $overline{B}=B Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(B)}=f^{-1}(B)$

                      So, the converse assertion follows from:

                      $f^{-1}(B)subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(B)}subseteq f^{-1}(f(overline{f^{-1}(B)}))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}) subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B}) =f^{-1}(B)$

                      That gives:

                      $f^{-1}(B)=overline{f^{-1}(B)}$




                      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq overline{A} text{ in general}$

                      2. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) text{ in general}$

                      3. Inclusion: $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)} text{ by assumption}$

                      4. Inclusion: $f(f^{-1}(B))subseteq B text{ in general} Rightarrow overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}subseteq overline{B} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))})subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B})$

                      5. Equality: $overline{B}=B Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{B})=f^{-1}(B)$






                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      The assertion is equivalent to:

                      $overline{A}subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$

                      So, the assertion follows from:

                      $overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$




                      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) Rightarrow overline{A}subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(f(A))}$

                      2. Inclusion: $f(A)subseteqoverline{f(A)} Rightarrow f^{-1}(f(A))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(f(A))}subseteq overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}$

                      3. Equality: $overline{f(A)} text{ closed} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(A)}) text{ closed} Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})}=f^{-1}(overline{f(A)})$


                      The converse assertion is equivalent to:

                      $overline{B}=B Rightarrow overline{f^{-1}(B)}=f^{-1}(B)$

                      So, the converse assertion follows from:

                      $f^{-1}(B)subseteqoverline{f^{-1}(B)}subseteq f^{-1}(f(overline{f^{-1}(B)}))subseteq f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}) subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B}) =f^{-1}(B)$

                      That gives:

                      $f^{-1}(B)=overline{f^{-1}(B)}$




                      1. Inclusion: $Asubseteq overline{A} text{ in general}$

                      2. Inclusion: $Asubseteq f^{-1}(f(A)) text{ in general}$

                      3. Inclusion: $f(overline{A})subseteq overline{f(A)} text{ by assumption}$

                      4. Inclusion: $f(f^{-1}(B))subseteq B text{ in general} Rightarrow overline{f(f^{-1}(B))}subseteq overline{B} Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{f(f^{-1}(B))})subseteq f^{-1}(overline{B})$

                      5. Equality: $overline{B}=B Rightarrow f^{-1}(overline{B})=f^{-1}(B)$







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited Jan 22 '14 at 18:35

























                      answered Jan 22 '14 at 17:38









                      C-Star-Puppy

                      7,86631961




                      7,86631961








                      • 1




                        I don't see how this is shorter than Henno's answer, which is complete since the OP cleared out the other direction. I don't think it is good practice to claim your answer is somehow better than others, and specifically target another user's answer.
                        – Pedro Tamaroff
                        Jan 22 '14 at 17:51










                      • I'm sorry for that ...got a little bit upset... I deleted that part so there's no bad discussion about it -sorry for that! Anyway Henno only shows that the preimage of a closed sst is closed what is a rather simple consequence. But the assertion is much more tricky than that. See my comment on Henno's answer.
                        – C-Star-Puppy
                        Jan 22 '14 at 17:57














                      • 1




                        I don't see how this is shorter than Henno's answer, which is complete since the OP cleared out the other direction. I don't think it is good practice to claim your answer is somehow better than others, and specifically target another user's answer.
                        – Pedro Tamaroff
                        Jan 22 '14 at 17:51










                      • I'm sorry for that ...got a little bit upset... I deleted that part so there's no bad discussion about it -sorry for that! Anyway Henno only shows that the preimage of a closed sst is closed what is a rather simple consequence. But the assertion is much more tricky than that. See my comment on Henno's answer.
                        – C-Star-Puppy
                        Jan 22 '14 at 17:57








                      1




                      1




                      I don't see how this is shorter than Henno's answer, which is complete since the OP cleared out the other direction. I don't think it is good practice to claim your answer is somehow better than others, and specifically target another user's answer.
                      – Pedro Tamaroff
                      Jan 22 '14 at 17:51




                      I don't see how this is shorter than Henno's answer, which is complete since the OP cleared out the other direction. I don't think it is good practice to claim your answer is somehow better than others, and specifically target another user's answer.
                      – Pedro Tamaroff
                      Jan 22 '14 at 17:51












                      I'm sorry for that ...got a little bit upset... I deleted that part so there's no bad discussion about it -sorry for that! Anyway Henno only shows that the preimage of a closed sst is closed what is a rather simple consequence. But the assertion is much more tricky than that. See my comment on Henno's answer.
                      – C-Star-Puppy
                      Jan 22 '14 at 17:57




                      I'm sorry for that ...got a little bit upset... I deleted that part so there's no bad discussion about it -sorry for that! Anyway Henno only shows that the preimage of a closed sst is closed what is a rather simple consequence. But the assertion is much more tricky than that. See my comment on Henno's answer.
                      – C-Star-Puppy
                      Jan 22 '14 at 17:57


















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f114462%2fa-map-is-continuous-if-and-only-if-for-every-set-the-image-of-closure-is-contai%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      AnyDesk - Fatal Program Failure

                      How to calibrate 16:9 built-in touch-screen to a 4:3 resolution?

                      QoS: MAC-Priority for clients behind a repeater