# topological space

## Primary tabs

Defines:
open, closed
Keywords:
open set, closed set
Synonym:
topology
Type of Math Object:
Definition
Major Section:
Reference
Groups audience:

## Mathematics Subject Classification

22-00 General reference works (handbooks, dictionaries, bibliographies, etc.)
55-00 General reference works (handbooks, dictionaries, bibliographies, etc.)
54-00 General reference works (handbooks, dictionaries, bibliographies, etc.)

### closed sets

it might be interesting to note that you can equivalently define a topology in terms of it's closed sets, by demorgan's set laws. what do you think?

also, can you link the various examples of topological spaces to this entry? there's an examples thing now isn't there? i can't seem to find a definition for the topology induced by a metric space either, which is something you probably want to add.

Cheers,
Dave

### Re: closed sets

The examples are already parented to something else and multiparenting hasn't been implemented yet, so the most I can do is set them as related, which I have done.

Metric spaces have their own entry already. I will add a related link to the metric spaces entry.

As for closed sets, I suppose I will get around to it eventually. File an addendum to remind me about it.

### topologies on complete lattices

Can a topology be defined as a subset of an arbitrary complete (and complemented) lattice, instead of a power set?
If yes, is this lattice required to be complemented? Does it have to be a distributed lattice?

A definition would look like that (tex code). \bigwedge is the infimum operator, \bigvee the supremum operator induced by the non-reflexive order relation "<".

\begin{defi}[topology]
Let $(L, <)$ be a complete lattice. A set $T \subseteq L$ is a topology on $L$, if
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $\bigwedge L, \bigvee L \in T$.
\item[(ii)] For any subset $X \subseteq T$, $\bigvee X \in T$.
\item[(iii)] For any finite subset $X \subseteq T$, $\bigwedge X \in T$.
\end{itemize}
The elements of $T$ are called the open elements of $L$.
\end{defi}

Ok, without a complement operator, it will be hard to define what a closed element should be... Any comments? Weblinks for further reading?

### Re: topologies on complete lattices

Schneemann writes:

> Can a topology be defined as a subset of an arbitrary complete
> (and complemented) lattice, instead of a power set?

There is a form of topology that deals only with a lattice of open sets, rather than with points. This is not quite the same as you're asking about, but you might want to take a look at it. Wikipedia has an article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointless_topology