MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $A = \lbrace (tr,1-t)\; | \; t \in [0,1], r \in \Bbb{Q}\rbrace$. Is it true that any continuous function from $A$ into $A$ has a fixed point?

share|cite|improve this question
Is the topology induced from $\mathbb{R}^2?$ – Igor Rivin Jul 28 '13 at 20:59
Yes, the usual topology – dimo Jul 28 '13 at 21:01
I don't understand the problem. $A$ is homeomorphic to the interval $[0,1]$. So everything follows from the Brouwer fixed-point theorem (it's variant for the dimension 1). The statement of the problem looks strange. – Sergei Akbarov Jul 29 '13 at 11:24
@SergeiAkbarov Would you please tell why $A\cong [0,1]$ ? – dimo Aug 5 '13 at 9:01
This is a general theorem: every bijective and continuous map from a compact space to a Hausdorff space is a homeomorphism, see R.Engelking, General topology, 3.1.13, see also Wikipedia (the properties of Hausdorff spaces). – Sergei Akbarov Aug 5 '13 at 9:08
up vote 3 down vote accepted

Yes (I assume $A$ has the induced topology). The point $V:=(0,1)$, common endpoint of all segments $S_r:=\{(rt,1-t): t\in[0,1]\}$, is either fixed by the continuous function $f:A\to A$, or it is mapped into some $S_r\setminus\{V\}$. But then $f $ has a fixed point on $S_r$.

share|cite|improve this answer
To prove the last statement, we may consider another alternative: either $S_r$ is mapped into itself, so $f_{|S_r}$ has a fixed point there, or not, in which case some point $W\in S_r$ is mapped to $V$ by connection (this because $A\setminus\{V\}$ is disconnected): but then $f$ exchanges $V$ and $W$ and has a fixed point in between. – Pietro Majer Jul 28 '13 at 21:17
Either it does or not: if it does not, then it exchanges two points, and in this case you do not need $f(S_r)\subset S_r$ to conclude. – Pietro Majer Jul 28 '13 at 22:11
(sorry, "exchange" is not the right word. What I mean is: in the former case we have $V < f(V)$ and $W > f(W)$ in the order of $S_r$) – Pietro Majer Jul 29 '13 at 1:43

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.