Homeomorphism from square to unit circle

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
17
down vote

favorite
10












Can we find a homeomorphism from the square $Q_2$ of side length $2$ centered on the origin and the unit circle $S^1$?



We can easily define a map $r:Q longrightarrow S^1$ by



$$(x,y) mapsto bigg(fracxsqrtx^2+y^2,fracysqrtx^2+y^2 bigg)$$ which is a radial projection onto the unit circle, but how can we define $r^-1$ and show that it is continuous?



Thoughts



I think we may define the inverse map as



$$(x,y) mapsto bigg(fracxsqrt2max│x│, │y│ , fracysqrt2max │x│, │y│bigg)$$At least intuitively this maps to a square, and the $frac1sqrt2$ term scales appropriately. However, how can we demonstrate these are continuous maps, thus demonstrating that $Q_2$ and $S^1$ are homeomorphic?



Any help would be appreciated. Regards, MM.







share|cite|improve this question
















  • 1




    Is your goal to construct a homeomorphism explicitly, or just to prove that the two things are homeomorphic? If the latter, then there are clearly nicer ways to do it than by trying to write down a closed-form expression for a homeomorphism. After all, a guitar shape is clearly homeomorphic to a circle, but there would be little hope of writing down a homeomorphism in closed form.
    – Ben Crowell
    Jan 29 '12 at 19:51










  • @BenCrowell, the question says "find a homeomorphism", but, even so, doesn't ask for, as you put it, a "closed-form expression": see e.g. my answer.
    – msh210
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:03











  • @BenCrowell: The aim of my question is to determine how to prove the spaces are homeomorphic, although I am also interested in how we can show that the map $r$ is continuous. I agree that finding an explicit function $r^-1$ is unnecessary. Apologies, I should have been more clear.
    – Mathmo
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:22






  • 2




    I think it's perhaps easier to apply the closed map lemma to your map and observe that it is a closed continuous bijection, that is a homeomorphism.
    – JSchlather
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:40






  • 3




    You actually don't need to prove that $r^-1$ is continuous. Once you show that it exists, you're done because a continuous bijection between compact Hausdorff spaces is a homeomorphism.
    – Qiaochu Yuan
    Jan 30 '12 at 2:02














up vote
17
down vote

favorite
10












Can we find a homeomorphism from the square $Q_2$ of side length $2$ centered on the origin and the unit circle $S^1$?



We can easily define a map $r:Q longrightarrow S^1$ by



$$(x,y) mapsto bigg(fracxsqrtx^2+y^2,fracysqrtx^2+y^2 bigg)$$ which is a radial projection onto the unit circle, but how can we define $r^-1$ and show that it is continuous?



Thoughts



I think we may define the inverse map as



$$(x,y) mapsto bigg(fracxsqrt2max│x│, │y│ , fracysqrt2max │x│, │y│bigg)$$At least intuitively this maps to a square, and the $frac1sqrt2$ term scales appropriately. However, how can we demonstrate these are continuous maps, thus demonstrating that $Q_2$ and $S^1$ are homeomorphic?



Any help would be appreciated. Regards, MM.







share|cite|improve this question
















  • 1




    Is your goal to construct a homeomorphism explicitly, or just to prove that the two things are homeomorphic? If the latter, then there are clearly nicer ways to do it than by trying to write down a closed-form expression for a homeomorphism. After all, a guitar shape is clearly homeomorphic to a circle, but there would be little hope of writing down a homeomorphism in closed form.
    – Ben Crowell
    Jan 29 '12 at 19:51










  • @BenCrowell, the question says "find a homeomorphism", but, even so, doesn't ask for, as you put it, a "closed-form expression": see e.g. my answer.
    – msh210
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:03











  • @BenCrowell: The aim of my question is to determine how to prove the spaces are homeomorphic, although I am also interested in how we can show that the map $r$ is continuous. I agree that finding an explicit function $r^-1$ is unnecessary. Apologies, I should have been more clear.
    – Mathmo
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:22






  • 2




    I think it's perhaps easier to apply the closed map lemma to your map and observe that it is a closed continuous bijection, that is a homeomorphism.
    – JSchlather
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:40






  • 3




    You actually don't need to prove that $r^-1$ is continuous. Once you show that it exists, you're done because a continuous bijection between compact Hausdorff spaces is a homeomorphism.
    – Qiaochu Yuan
    Jan 30 '12 at 2:02












up vote
17
down vote

favorite
10









up vote
17
down vote

favorite
10






10





Can we find a homeomorphism from the square $Q_2$ of side length $2$ centered on the origin and the unit circle $S^1$?



We can easily define a map $r:Q longrightarrow S^1$ by



$$(x,y) mapsto bigg(fracxsqrtx^2+y^2,fracysqrtx^2+y^2 bigg)$$ which is a radial projection onto the unit circle, but how can we define $r^-1$ and show that it is continuous?



Thoughts



I think we may define the inverse map as



$$(x,y) mapsto bigg(fracxsqrt2max│x│, │y│ , fracysqrt2max │x│, │y│bigg)$$At least intuitively this maps to a square, and the $frac1sqrt2$ term scales appropriately. However, how can we demonstrate these are continuous maps, thus demonstrating that $Q_2$ and $S^1$ are homeomorphic?



Any help would be appreciated. Regards, MM.







share|cite|improve this question












Can we find a homeomorphism from the square $Q_2$ of side length $2$ centered on the origin and the unit circle $S^1$?



We can easily define a map $r:Q longrightarrow S^1$ by



$$(x,y) mapsto bigg(fracxsqrtx^2+y^2,fracysqrtx^2+y^2 bigg)$$ which is a radial projection onto the unit circle, but how can we define $r^-1$ and show that it is continuous?



Thoughts



I think we may define the inverse map as



$$(x,y) mapsto bigg(fracxsqrt2max│x│, │y│ , fracysqrt2max │x│, │y│bigg)$$At least intuitively this maps to a square, and the $frac1sqrt2$ term scales appropriately. However, how can we demonstrate these are continuous maps, thus demonstrating that $Q_2$ and $S^1$ are homeomorphic?



Any help would be appreciated. Regards, MM.









share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Jan 29 '12 at 19:19









Mathmo

2,07212054




2,07212054







  • 1




    Is your goal to construct a homeomorphism explicitly, or just to prove that the two things are homeomorphic? If the latter, then there are clearly nicer ways to do it than by trying to write down a closed-form expression for a homeomorphism. After all, a guitar shape is clearly homeomorphic to a circle, but there would be little hope of writing down a homeomorphism in closed form.
    – Ben Crowell
    Jan 29 '12 at 19:51










  • @BenCrowell, the question says "find a homeomorphism", but, even so, doesn't ask for, as you put it, a "closed-form expression": see e.g. my answer.
    – msh210
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:03











  • @BenCrowell: The aim of my question is to determine how to prove the spaces are homeomorphic, although I am also interested in how we can show that the map $r$ is continuous. I agree that finding an explicit function $r^-1$ is unnecessary. Apologies, I should have been more clear.
    – Mathmo
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:22






  • 2




    I think it's perhaps easier to apply the closed map lemma to your map and observe that it is a closed continuous bijection, that is a homeomorphism.
    – JSchlather
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:40






  • 3




    You actually don't need to prove that $r^-1$ is continuous. Once you show that it exists, you're done because a continuous bijection between compact Hausdorff spaces is a homeomorphism.
    – Qiaochu Yuan
    Jan 30 '12 at 2:02












  • 1




    Is your goal to construct a homeomorphism explicitly, or just to prove that the two things are homeomorphic? If the latter, then there are clearly nicer ways to do it than by trying to write down a closed-form expression for a homeomorphism. After all, a guitar shape is clearly homeomorphic to a circle, but there would be little hope of writing down a homeomorphism in closed form.
    – Ben Crowell
    Jan 29 '12 at 19:51










  • @BenCrowell, the question says "find a homeomorphism", but, even so, doesn't ask for, as you put it, a "closed-form expression": see e.g. my answer.
    – msh210
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:03











  • @BenCrowell: The aim of my question is to determine how to prove the spaces are homeomorphic, although I am also interested in how we can show that the map $r$ is continuous. I agree that finding an explicit function $r^-1$ is unnecessary. Apologies, I should have been more clear.
    – Mathmo
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:22






  • 2




    I think it's perhaps easier to apply the closed map lemma to your map and observe that it is a closed continuous bijection, that is a homeomorphism.
    – JSchlather
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:40






  • 3




    You actually don't need to prove that $r^-1$ is continuous. Once you show that it exists, you're done because a continuous bijection between compact Hausdorff spaces is a homeomorphism.
    – Qiaochu Yuan
    Jan 30 '12 at 2:02







1




1




Is your goal to construct a homeomorphism explicitly, or just to prove that the two things are homeomorphic? If the latter, then there are clearly nicer ways to do it than by trying to write down a closed-form expression for a homeomorphism. After all, a guitar shape is clearly homeomorphic to a circle, but there would be little hope of writing down a homeomorphism in closed form.
– Ben Crowell
Jan 29 '12 at 19:51




Is your goal to construct a homeomorphism explicitly, or just to prove that the two things are homeomorphic? If the latter, then there are clearly nicer ways to do it than by trying to write down a closed-form expression for a homeomorphism. After all, a guitar shape is clearly homeomorphic to a circle, but there would be little hope of writing down a homeomorphism in closed form.
– Ben Crowell
Jan 29 '12 at 19:51












@BenCrowell, the question says "find a homeomorphism", but, even so, doesn't ask for, as you put it, a "closed-form expression": see e.g. my answer.
– msh210
Jan 29 '12 at 20:03





@BenCrowell, the question says "find a homeomorphism", but, even so, doesn't ask for, as you put it, a "closed-form expression": see e.g. my answer.
– msh210
Jan 29 '12 at 20:03













@BenCrowell: The aim of my question is to determine how to prove the spaces are homeomorphic, although I am also interested in how we can show that the map $r$ is continuous. I agree that finding an explicit function $r^-1$ is unnecessary. Apologies, I should have been more clear.
– Mathmo
Jan 29 '12 at 20:22




@BenCrowell: The aim of my question is to determine how to prove the spaces are homeomorphic, although I am also interested in how we can show that the map $r$ is continuous. I agree that finding an explicit function $r^-1$ is unnecessary. Apologies, I should have been more clear.
– Mathmo
Jan 29 '12 at 20:22




2




2




I think it's perhaps easier to apply the closed map lemma to your map and observe that it is a closed continuous bijection, that is a homeomorphism.
– JSchlather
Jan 29 '12 at 20:40




I think it's perhaps easier to apply the closed map lemma to your map and observe that it is a closed continuous bijection, that is a homeomorphism.
– JSchlather
Jan 29 '12 at 20:40




3




3




You actually don't need to prove that $r^-1$ is continuous. Once you show that it exists, you're done because a continuous bijection between compact Hausdorff spaces is a homeomorphism.
– Qiaochu Yuan
Jan 30 '12 at 2:02




You actually don't need to prove that $r^-1$ is continuous. Once you show that it exists, you're done because a continuous bijection between compact Hausdorff spaces is a homeomorphism.
– Qiaochu Yuan
Jan 30 '12 at 2:02










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
9
down vote



accepted










Let me outline a proof; I shall leave the details of this proof as exercises.



Exercise 1: Prove that the unit circle $S^1$ is homeomorphic to the space obtained from the unit interval $[0,1]$ by identifying the endpoints $0$ and $1$. (Hint: the exponential mapping $thetato e^itheta$ can be composed with a linear mapping to give a homeomorphism.)



Let $C$ be the image of a simple closed curve in the plane, that is, let $C$ be the image of a continuous function $f:[0,1]to mathbbR^2$ such that $f:(0,1)tomathbbR^2$ is injective and $f(0)=f(1)$.



Exercise 2: Prove that $C$ is homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$. (Hint: show that $f:[0,1]to C$ induces a continuous bijection $tildef:S^1to C$ using Exercise 1 and then show that $f$ is an open mapping using the compactness of $S^1$ and the fact that the plane is Hausdorff.)



We now need an elementary lemma of point-set topology:



Exercise 3: Let $X$ be a topological space and let $X=Acup B$ where $A$ and $B$ are closed subspaces of $X$. Prove that if $g:Ato Y$ and $h:Bto Y$ are continuous functions into a topological space $Y$ such that $g(x)=h(x)$ for all $xin Acap B$, then there is a unique continuous function $f:Xto Y$ such that $f(a)=g(a)$ and $f(b)=h(b)$ for all $ain A$ and $bin B$.



Finally, we can prove the result of your question:



Exercise 4: Prove that the unit square is the image of a simple closed curve in the plane and conclude that it is homeomorphic to the unit circle. (Hint: you can use Exercise 3 to "glue" continuous mappings together.)



Exercise 5: Give examples of images of simple closed curves in the plane (using Exercise 3) and conclude (using Exercise 2) that they are homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$.



I hope this helps!






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • Thanks! This is very thorough and clear.
    – Mathmo
    Jan 30 '12 at 10:50

















up vote
5
down vote













I'm not sure why you need algebraic formulas. Define each map $f$ to be radial projection onto the appropriate curve (from the origin) and find continuity by the property "$forall$ neighborhood $U$ of $f(x)$ $exists$ a neighborhood of $x$ whose image is contained in $U$", which is easy to check by eye.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    Many thanks for this contribution. Are we able to be more specific about the radial projection 'from the appropriate curve' and how we can deduce continuity from it?
    – Mathmo
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:23






  • 2




    Radial projection: Your image is the point on the target curve on the same line through the origin as the point in the domain. Continuity: Pick a neighborhood of that image, and a neighborhood of its preimage small enough (say, of small enough angular length around the origin) that its image is contained in that neighborhood. These are very nice spaces, so such a neighborhood exists by inspection.
    – msh210
    Jan 29 '12 at 20:33


















up vote
4
down vote













It seems off to me. For example, in your second map, the point $(1,0)$, which is on the unit circle, gets mapped to $(frac1sqrt2,0)$, which is not on the square.



If I were you, I would write out the four different maps for each side of the square - I think it simplifies the process, especially since once you remove the max terms, the function is easier to work with.






share|cite|improve this answer





























    up vote
    0
    down vote













    If you choose to go about it in a computational manner, you can prove that both of the maps are continuous by noting that they are compositions of continuous functions.






    share|cite|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Following in line with @Amitesh Datta's answer above, rather than proving the homeomorphism directly there are simpler ways that one can arrive at the desired result.



      This following technique uses a fairly high-powered result (in the sense that once you know it, you can prove a lot of things are homeomorphic quite easily), but I think it's a very useful result that anyone doing topology should be aware of.




      Definition: An open $n$-cell is any topological space that is homeomorphic to the open unit ball $mathbbB^n$. A closed $n$-cell is any topological space homeomorphic to $overlinemathbbB^n$




      This is the high-powered result that I mentioned earlier.




      Theorem: If $D subseteq mathbbR^n$ is a compact convex subset with nonempty interior, then $D$ is a closed $n$-cell and it's interior is an open $n$-cell. In fact given any point $p in operatornameInt(D)$, there exists a homeomorphism $F: overlinemathbbB^n to D$ that sends $0$ to $p$, $mathbbB^n$ to $operatornameInt(D)$ and $mathbbS^n-1$ to $operatornameBd D$.




      Now note that if we let $A subseteq mathbbR^2$ be the (solid) square of side length $2$, then $A$ is easily seen to be a convex subset, and is thus a closed $2$-cell by the theorem above. Moreover the square $Q_2$ is the topological boundary of the solid square $A$ and the theorem above then immediately shows that $operatornameBd(A) = Q_2 cong S^1$ as desired.






      share|cite|improve this answer




















        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: false,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: 10,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        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%2f103660%2fhomeomorphism-from-square-to-unit-circle%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest






























        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes








        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        9
        down vote



        accepted










        Let me outline a proof; I shall leave the details of this proof as exercises.



        Exercise 1: Prove that the unit circle $S^1$ is homeomorphic to the space obtained from the unit interval $[0,1]$ by identifying the endpoints $0$ and $1$. (Hint: the exponential mapping $thetato e^itheta$ can be composed with a linear mapping to give a homeomorphism.)



        Let $C$ be the image of a simple closed curve in the plane, that is, let $C$ be the image of a continuous function $f:[0,1]to mathbbR^2$ such that $f:(0,1)tomathbbR^2$ is injective and $f(0)=f(1)$.



        Exercise 2: Prove that $C$ is homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$. (Hint: show that $f:[0,1]to C$ induces a continuous bijection $tildef:S^1to C$ using Exercise 1 and then show that $f$ is an open mapping using the compactness of $S^1$ and the fact that the plane is Hausdorff.)



        We now need an elementary lemma of point-set topology:



        Exercise 3: Let $X$ be a topological space and let $X=Acup B$ where $A$ and $B$ are closed subspaces of $X$. Prove that if $g:Ato Y$ and $h:Bto Y$ are continuous functions into a topological space $Y$ such that $g(x)=h(x)$ for all $xin Acap B$, then there is a unique continuous function $f:Xto Y$ such that $f(a)=g(a)$ and $f(b)=h(b)$ for all $ain A$ and $bin B$.



        Finally, we can prove the result of your question:



        Exercise 4: Prove that the unit square is the image of a simple closed curve in the plane and conclude that it is homeomorphic to the unit circle. (Hint: you can use Exercise 3 to "glue" continuous mappings together.)



        Exercise 5: Give examples of images of simple closed curves in the plane (using Exercise 3) and conclude (using Exercise 2) that they are homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$.



        I hope this helps!






        share|cite|improve this answer




















        • Thanks! This is very thorough and clear.
          – Mathmo
          Jan 30 '12 at 10:50














        up vote
        9
        down vote



        accepted










        Let me outline a proof; I shall leave the details of this proof as exercises.



        Exercise 1: Prove that the unit circle $S^1$ is homeomorphic to the space obtained from the unit interval $[0,1]$ by identifying the endpoints $0$ and $1$. (Hint: the exponential mapping $thetato e^itheta$ can be composed with a linear mapping to give a homeomorphism.)



        Let $C$ be the image of a simple closed curve in the plane, that is, let $C$ be the image of a continuous function $f:[0,1]to mathbbR^2$ such that $f:(0,1)tomathbbR^2$ is injective and $f(0)=f(1)$.



        Exercise 2: Prove that $C$ is homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$. (Hint: show that $f:[0,1]to C$ induces a continuous bijection $tildef:S^1to C$ using Exercise 1 and then show that $f$ is an open mapping using the compactness of $S^1$ and the fact that the plane is Hausdorff.)



        We now need an elementary lemma of point-set topology:



        Exercise 3: Let $X$ be a topological space and let $X=Acup B$ where $A$ and $B$ are closed subspaces of $X$. Prove that if $g:Ato Y$ and $h:Bto Y$ are continuous functions into a topological space $Y$ such that $g(x)=h(x)$ for all $xin Acap B$, then there is a unique continuous function $f:Xto Y$ such that $f(a)=g(a)$ and $f(b)=h(b)$ for all $ain A$ and $bin B$.



        Finally, we can prove the result of your question:



        Exercise 4: Prove that the unit square is the image of a simple closed curve in the plane and conclude that it is homeomorphic to the unit circle. (Hint: you can use Exercise 3 to "glue" continuous mappings together.)



        Exercise 5: Give examples of images of simple closed curves in the plane (using Exercise 3) and conclude (using Exercise 2) that they are homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$.



        I hope this helps!






        share|cite|improve this answer




















        • Thanks! This is very thorough and clear.
          – Mathmo
          Jan 30 '12 at 10:50












        up vote
        9
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        9
        down vote



        accepted






        Let me outline a proof; I shall leave the details of this proof as exercises.



        Exercise 1: Prove that the unit circle $S^1$ is homeomorphic to the space obtained from the unit interval $[0,1]$ by identifying the endpoints $0$ and $1$. (Hint: the exponential mapping $thetato e^itheta$ can be composed with a linear mapping to give a homeomorphism.)



        Let $C$ be the image of a simple closed curve in the plane, that is, let $C$ be the image of a continuous function $f:[0,1]to mathbbR^2$ such that $f:(0,1)tomathbbR^2$ is injective and $f(0)=f(1)$.



        Exercise 2: Prove that $C$ is homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$. (Hint: show that $f:[0,1]to C$ induces a continuous bijection $tildef:S^1to C$ using Exercise 1 and then show that $f$ is an open mapping using the compactness of $S^1$ and the fact that the plane is Hausdorff.)



        We now need an elementary lemma of point-set topology:



        Exercise 3: Let $X$ be a topological space and let $X=Acup B$ where $A$ and $B$ are closed subspaces of $X$. Prove that if $g:Ato Y$ and $h:Bto Y$ are continuous functions into a topological space $Y$ such that $g(x)=h(x)$ for all $xin Acap B$, then there is a unique continuous function $f:Xto Y$ such that $f(a)=g(a)$ and $f(b)=h(b)$ for all $ain A$ and $bin B$.



        Finally, we can prove the result of your question:



        Exercise 4: Prove that the unit square is the image of a simple closed curve in the plane and conclude that it is homeomorphic to the unit circle. (Hint: you can use Exercise 3 to "glue" continuous mappings together.)



        Exercise 5: Give examples of images of simple closed curves in the plane (using Exercise 3) and conclude (using Exercise 2) that they are homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$.



        I hope this helps!






        share|cite|improve this answer












        Let me outline a proof; I shall leave the details of this proof as exercises.



        Exercise 1: Prove that the unit circle $S^1$ is homeomorphic to the space obtained from the unit interval $[0,1]$ by identifying the endpoints $0$ and $1$. (Hint: the exponential mapping $thetato e^itheta$ can be composed with a linear mapping to give a homeomorphism.)



        Let $C$ be the image of a simple closed curve in the plane, that is, let $C$ be the image of a continuous function $f:[0,1]to mathbbR^2$ such that $f:(0,1)tomathbbR^2$ is injective and $f(0)=f(1)$.



        Exercise 2: Prove that $C$ is homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$. (Hint: show that $f:[0,1]to C$ induces a continuous bijection $tildef:S^1to C$ using Exercise 1 and then show that $f$ is an open mapping using the compactness of $S^1$ and the fact that the plane is Hausdorff.)



        We now need an elementary lemma of point-set topology:



        Exercise 3: Let $X$ be a topological space and let $X=Acup B$ where $A$ and $B$ are closed subspaces of $X$. Prove that if $g:Ato Y$ and $h:Bto Y$ are continuous functions into a topological space $Y$ such that $g(x)=h(x)$ for all $xin Acap B$, then there is a unique continuous function $f:Xto Y$ such that $f(a)=g(a)$ and $f(b)=h(b)$ for all $ain A$ and $bin B$.



        Finally, we can prove the result of your question:



        Exercise 4: Prove that the unit square is the image of a simple closed curve in the plane and conclude that it is homeomorphic to the unit circle. (Hint: you can use Exercise 3 to "glue" continuous mappings together.)



        Exercise 5: Give examples of images of simple closed curves in the plane (using Exercise 3) and conclude (using Exercise 2) that they are homeomorphic to the unit circle $S^1$.



        I hope this helps!







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 30 '12 at 1:57









        Amitesh Datta

        16.7k44785




        16.7k44785











        • Thanks! This is very thorough and clear.
          – Mathmo
          Jan 30 '12 at 10:50
















        • Thanks! This is very thorough and clear.
          – Mathmo
          Jan 30 '12 at 10:50















        Thanks! This is very thorough and clear.
        – Mathmo
        Jan 30 '12 at 10:50




        Thanks! This is very thorough and clear.
        – Mathmo
        Jan 30 '12 at 10:50










        up vote
        5
        down vote













        I'm not sure why you need algebraic formulas. Define each map $f$ to be radial projection onto the appropriate curve (from the origin) and find continuity by the property "$forall$ neighborhood $U$ of $f(x)$ $exists$ a neighborhood of $x$ whose image is contained in $U$", which is easy to check by eye.






        share|cite|improve this answer


















        • 1




          Many thanks for this contribution. Are we able to be more specific about the radial projection 'from the appropriate curve' and how we can deduce continuity from it?
          – Mathmo
          Jan 29 '12 at 20:23






        • 2




          Radial projection: Your image is the point on the target curve on the same line through the origin as the point in the domain. Continuity: Pick a neighborhood of that image, and a neighborhood of its preimage small enough (say, of small enough angular length around the origin) that its image is contained in that neighborhood. These are very nice spaces, so such a neighborhood exists by inspection.
          – msh210
          Jan 29 '12 at 20:33















        up vote
        5
        down vote













        I'm not sure why you need algebraic formulas. Define each map $f$ to be radial projection onto the appropriate curve (from the origin) and find continuity by the property "$forall$ neighborhood $U$ of $f(x)$ $exists$ a neighborhood of $x$ whose image is contained in $U$", which is easy to check by eye.






        share|cite|improve this answer


















        • 1




          Many thanks for this contribution. Are we able to be more specific about the radial projection 'from the appropriate curve' and how we can deduce continuity from it?
          – Mathmo
          Jan 29 '12 at 20:23






        • 2




          Radial projection: Your image is the point on the target curve on the same line through the origin as the point in the domain. Continuity: Pick a neighborhood of that image, and a neighborhood of its preimage small enough (say, of small enough angular length around the origin) that its image is contained in that neighborhood. These are very nice spaces, so such a neighborhood exists by inspection.
          – msh210
          Jan 29 '12 at 20:33













        up vote
        5
        down vote










        up vote
        5
        down vote









        I'm not sure why you need algebraic formulas. Define each map $f$ to be radial projection onto the appropriate curve (from the origin) and find continuity by the property "$forall$ neighborhood $U$ of $f(x)$ $exists$ a neighborhood of $x$ whose image is contained in $U$", which is easy to check by eye.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        I'm not sure why you need algebraic formulas. Define each map $f$ to be radial projection onto the appropriate curve (from the origin) and find continuity by the property "$forall$ neighborhood $U$ of $f(x)$ $exists$ a neighborhood of $x$ whose image is contained in $U$", which is easy to check by eye.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Jan 29 '12 at 20:33

























        answered Jan 29 '12 at 19:48









        msh210

        1,96311431




        1,96311431







        • 1




          Many thanks for this contribution. Are we able to be more specific about the radial projection 'from the appropriate curve' and how we can deduce continuity from it?
          – Mathmo
          Jan 29 '12 at 20:23






        • 2




          Radial projection: Your image is the point on the target curve on the same line through the origin as the point in the domain. Continuity: Pick a neighborhood of that image, and a neighborhood of its preimage small enough (say, of small enough angular length around the origin) that its image is contained in that neighborhood. These are very nice spaces, so such a neighborhood exists by inspection.
          – msh210
          Jan 29 '12 at 20:33













        • 1




          Many thanks for this contribution. Are we able to be more specific about the radial projection 'from the appropriate curve' and how we can deduce continuity from it?
          – Mathmo
          Jan 29 '12 at 20:23






        • 2




          Radial projection: Your image is the point on the target curve on the same line through the origin as the point in the domain. Continuity: Pick a neighborhood of that image, and a neighborhood of its preimage small enough (say, of small enough angular length around the origin) that its image is contained in that neighborhood. These are very nice spaces, so such a neighborhood exists by inspection.
          – msh210
          Jan 29 '12 at 20:33








        1




        1




        Many thanks for this contribution. Are we able to be more specific about the radial projection 'from the appropriate curve' and how we can deduce continuity from it?
        – Mathmo
        Jan 29 '12 at 20:23




        Many thanks for this contribution. Are we able to be more specific about the radial projection 'from the appropriate curve' and how we can deduce continuity from it?
        – Mathmo
        Jan 29 '12 at 20:23




        2




        2




        Radial projection: Your image is the point on the target curve on the same line through the origin as the point in the domain. Continuity: Pick a neighborhood of that image, and a neighborhood of its preimage small enough (say, of small enough angular length around the origin) that its image is contained in that neighborhood. These are very nice spaces, so such a neighborhood exists by inspection.
        – msh210
        Jan 29 '12 at 20:33





        Radial projection: Your image is the point on the target curve on the same line through the origin as the point in the domain. Continuity: Pick a neighborhood of that image, and a neighborhood of its preimage small enough (say, of small enough angular length around the origin) that its image is contained in that neighborhood. These are very nice spaces, so such a neighborhood exists by inspection.
        – msh210
        Jan 29 '12 at 20:33











        up vote
        4
        down vote













        It seems off to me. For example, in your second map, the point $(1,0)$, which is on the unit circle, gets mapped to $(frac1sqrt2,0)$, which is not on the square.



        If I were you, I would write out the four different maps for each side of the square - I think it simplifies the process, especially since once you remove the max terms, the function is easier to work with.






        share|cite|improve this answer


























          up vote
          4
          down vote













          It seems off to me. For example, in your second map, the point $(1,0)$, which is on the unit circle, gets mapped to $(frac1sqrt2,0)$, which is not on the square.



          If I were you, I would write out the four different maps for each side of the square - I think it simplifies the process, especially since once you remove the max terms, the function is easier to work with.






          share|cite|improve this answer
























            up vote
            4
            down vote










            up vote
            4
            down vote









            It seems off to me. For example, in your second map, the point $(1,0)$, which is on the unit circle, gets mapped to $(frac1sqrt2,0)$, which is not on the square.



            If I were you, I would write out the four different maps for each side of the square - I think it simplifies the process, especially since once you remove the max terms, the function is easier to work with.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            It seems off to me. For example, in your second map, the point $(1,0)$, which is on the unit circle, gets mapped to $(frac1sqrt2,0)$, which is not on the square.



            If I were you, I would write out the four different maps for each side of the square - I think it simplifies the process, especially since once you remove the max terms, the function is easier to work with.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Jan 29 '12 at 19:52









            msh210

            1,96311431




            1,96311431










            answered Jan 29 '12 at 19:29









            davidlowryduda♦

            72.6k6113244




            72.6k6113244




















                up vote
                0
                down vote













                If you choose to go about it in a computational manner, you can prove that both of the maps are continuous by noting that they are compositions of continuous functions.






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote













                  If you choose to go about it in a computational manner, you can prove that both of the maps are continuous by noting that they are compositions of continuous functions.






                  share|cite|improve this answer






















                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote









                    If you choose to go about it in a computational manner, you can prove that both of the maps are continuous by noting that they are compositions of continuous functions.






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    If you choose to go about it in a computational manner, you can prove that both of the maps are continuous by noting that they are compositions of continuous functions.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered May 16 '12 at 0:09









                    J. David Taylor

                    1,646613




                    1,646613




















                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        Following in line with @Amitesh Datta's answer above, rather than proving the homeomorphism directly there are simpler ways that one can arrive at the desired result.



                        This following technique uses a fairly high-powered result (in the sense that once you know it, you can prove a lot of things are homeomorphic quite easily), but I think it's a very useful result that anyone doing topology should be aware of.




                        Definition: An open $n$-cell is any topological space that is homeomorphic to the open unit ball $mathbbB^n$. A closed $n$-cell is any topological space homeomorphic to $overlinemathbbB^n$




                        This is the high-powered result that I mentioned earlier.




                        Theorem: If $D subseteq mathbbR^n$ is a compact convex subset with nonempty interior, then $D$ is a closed $n$-cell and it's interior is an open $n$-cell. In fact given any point $p in operatornameInt(D)$, there exists a homeomorphism $F: overlinemathbbB^n to D$ that sends $0$ to $p$, $mathbbB^n$ to $operatornameInt(D)$ and $mathbbS^n-1$ to $operatornameBd D$.




                        Now note that if we let $A subseteq mathbbR^2$ be the (solid) square of side length $2$, then $A$ is easily seen to be a convex subset, and is thus a closed $2$-cell by the theorem above. Moreover the square $Q_2$ is the topological boundary of the solid square $A$ and the theorem above then immediately shows that $operatornameBd(A) = Q_2 cong S^1$ as desired.






                        share|cite|improve this answer
























                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          Following in line with @Amitesh Datta's answer above, rather than proving the homeomorphism directly there are simpler ways that one can arrive at the desired result.



                          This following technique uses a fairly high-powered result (in the sense that once you know it, you can prove a lot of things are homeomorphic quite easily), but I think it's a very useful result that anyone doing topology should be aware of.




                          Definition: An open $n$-cell is any topological space that is homeomorphic to the open unit ball $mathbbB^n$. A closed $n$-cell is any topological space homeomorphic to $overlinemathbbB^n$




                          This is the high-powered result that I mentioned earlier.




                          Theorem: If $D subseteq mathbbR^n$ is a compact convex subset with nonempty interior, then $D$ is a closed $n$-cell and it's interior is an open $n$-cell. In fact given any point $p in operatornameInt(D)$, there exists a homeomorphism $F: overlinemathbbB^n to D$ that sends $0$ to $p$, $mathbbB^n$ to $operatornameInt(D)$ and $mathbbS^n-1$ to $operatornameBd D$.




                          Now note that if we let $A subseteq mathbbR^2$ be the (solid) square of side length $2$, then $A$ is easily seen to be a convex subset, and is thus a closed $2$-cell by the theorem above. Moreover the square $Q_2$ is the topological boundary of the solid square $A$ and the theorem above then immediately shows that $operatornameBd(A) = Q_2 cong S^1$ as desired.






                          share|cite|improve this answer






















                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote









                            Following in line with @Amitesh Datta's answer above, rather than proving the homeomorphism directly there are simpler ways that one can arrive at the desired result.



                            This following technique uses a fairly high-powered result (in the sense that once you know it, you can prove a lot of things are homeomorphic quite easily), but I think it's a very useful result that anyone doing topology should be aware of.




                            Definition: An open $n$-cell is any topological space that is homeomorphic to the open unit ball $mathbbB^n$. A closed $n$-cell is any topological space homeomorphic to $overlinemathbbB^n$




                            This is the high-powered result that I mentioned earlier.




                            Theorem: If $D subseteq mathbbR^n$ is a compact convex subset with nonempty interior, then $D$ is a closed $n$-cell and it's interior is an open $n$-cell. In fact given any point $p in operatornameInt(D)$, there exists a homeomorphism $F: overlinemathbbB^n to D$ that sends $0$ to $p$, $mathbbB^n$ to $operatornameInt(D)$ and $mathbbS^n-1$ to $operatornameBd D$.




                            Now note that if we let $A subseteq mathbbR^2$ be the (solid) square of side length $2$, then $A$ is easily seen to be a convex subset, and is thus a closed $2$-cell by the theorem above. Moreover the square $Q_2$ is the topological boundary of the solid square $A$ and the theorem above then immediately shows that $operatornameBd(A) = Q_2 cong S^1$ as desired.






                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            Following in line with @Amitesh Datta's answer above, rather than proving the homeomorphism directly there are simpler ways that one can arrive at the desired result.



                            This following technique uses a fairly high-powered result (in the sense that once you know it, you can prove a lot of things are homeomorphic quite easily), but I think it's a very useful result that anyone doing topology should be aware of.




                            Definition: An open $n$-cell is any topological space that is homeomorphic to the open unit ball $mathbbB^n$. A closed $n$-cell is any topological space homeomorphic to $overlinemathbbB^n$




                            This is the high-powered result that I mentioned earlier.




                            Theorem: If $D subseteq mathbbR^n$ is a compact convex subset with nonempty interior, then $D$ is a closed $n$-cell and it's interior is an open $n$-cell. In fact given any point $p in operatornameInt(D)$, there exists a homeomorphism $F: overlinemathbbB^n to D$ that sends $0$ to $p$, $mathbbB^n$ to $operatornameInt(D)$ and $mathbbS^n-1$ to $operatornameBd D$.




                            Now note that if we let $A subseteq mathbbR^2$ be the (solid) square of side length $2$, then $A$ is easily seen to be a convex subset, and is thus a closed $2$-cell by the theorem above. Moreover the square $Q_2$ is the topological boundary of the solid square $A$ and the theorem above then immediately shows that $operatornameBd(A) = Q_2 cong S^1$ as desired.







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered Aug 24 at 22:08









                            Perturbative

                            3,62311139




                            3,62311139



























                                 

                                draft saved


                                draft discarded















































                                 


                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f103660%2fhomeomorphism-from-square-to-unit-circle%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                );

                                Post as a guest













































































                                這個網誌中的熱門文章

                                How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                                Carbon dioxide

                                Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?