Timeline for subsets of groups which have to be closed no matter what
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2014 at 12:02 | comment | added | Rupert | Anton, yes, this is related to a research problem I am working on about the rigidity of the group topology on certain locally compact groups, and yes, you are right that I should have said Hausdorff. | |
| Jan 23, 2014 at 12:00 | vote | accept | Rupert | ||
| Jan 22, 2014 at 22:55 | history | reopened |
Benjamin Steinberg Dan Petersen Noah Schweber Jeremy Rickard Andrey Rekalo |
||
| Jan 22, 2014 at 22:18 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jan 22, 2014 at 22:55 | |||||
| Jan 22, 2014 at 22:00 | comment | added | Benjamin Steinberg | Voting to reopen in light of Anton's nice answer. | |
| S Jan 22, 2014 at 21:55 | history | suggested | Anton Klyachko |
arXiv's tags added
|
|
| Jan 22, 2014 at 21:53 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jan 22, 2014 at 21:55 | |||||
| Jan 22, 2014 at 18:47 | history | closed |
YCor Kevin Ventullo Andrey Rekalo Stefan Kohl♦ Ramiro de la Vega |
Needs more focus | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 12:03 | answer | added | Anton Klyachko | timeline score: 26 | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 11:50 | answer | added | UwF | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 11:28 | comment | added | jmc | @anton, just kidding. Why would the word exist after all. I was trying to point out a common mistake, like Alex also points out. | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 11:02 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 22, 2014 at 18:47 | |||||
| Jan 22, 2014 at 10:54 | comment | added | user1688 | @jmc: no they are not. | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 10:54 | comment | added | Alex Degtyarev | @jmc: that's exactly my point: definitions should be agreed upon :) But, assuming Hausdorff, any finite subset is closed. OP should be more specific about what kind of subsets is of interest. | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 10:43 | comment | added | jmc | @anton, but all topologies are Hausdorff. | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 10:43 | comment | added | user1688 | @Alex: compatible means that the group is a topological group, i.e., the group operations are continuous. | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 10:40 | comment | added | user1688 | First: this only holds if the group is Hausdorff. Second: any set which is described by quant or-free equations in the language of groups. Third: is this a research-related question? | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 10:39 | comment | added | Alex Degtyarev | What is "topology compatible with the group operations" and why does the centralizer have to be closed? E.g., is the anti-discrete topology compatible? | |
| Jan 22, 2014 at 10:31 | history | asked | Rupert | CC BY-SA 3.0 |