Timeline for On connectedness of the complement
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 20, 2021 at 6:08 | history | edited | YCor | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
removed meta from title, added tag
|
| S Oct 20, 2021 at 4:47 | history | suggested | Mark | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added some definite articles, split in three paragraphs for readibility
|
| Oct 19, 2021 at 16:18 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Oct 20, 2021 at 4:47 | |||||
| Oct 1, 2021 at 10:17 | comment | added | M. Rahmat | Yes, you are right! I corrected. Thanks. | |
| Oct 1, 2021 at 10:16 | history | edited | M. Rahmat | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Sep 30, 2021 at 19:07 | comment | added | Willie Wong | I still don't understand. Your question is "Are there some known conditions on $F$ so that the complement of $F$ in $\mathbb{R}^m$ is connected?" The other sets introduced play absolutely no role in that question. Did you mean to ask about whether the complement of $A$ is connected? | |
| Sep 30, 2021 at 9:50 | comment | added | Wlod AA | This sounds related to Karol Borsuk's results covered in the Appendix of the Eilenberg-Steenrod monograph. Also, the still more powerful Alexander-Pontryagin duality is here of interest. | |
| S Sep 30, 2021 at 9:32 | history | suggested | J. W. Tanner |
added reference-request tag
|
|
| Sep 30, 2021 at 3:52 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Sep 30, 2021 at 9:32 | |||||
| Sep 29, 2021 at 21:53 | comment | added | M. Rahmat | The set B is there to make all other sets compact. But I do need $F_r$, $F_R$ and $F$. My function is regular on a neighborhood of $F$ as it is. | |
| Sep 29, 2021 at 18:39 | comment | added | Willie Wong | What is the purpose of introducing the sets A, B, and $F_r, F_R$, when your question doesn't seem to invoke them at all? | |
| Sep 29, 2021 at 16:04 | history | edited | Ben McKay | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
fixed the spelling of whether
|
| Sep 29, 2021 at 14:26 | history | asked | M. Rahmat | CC BY-SA 4.0 |