12
$\begingroup$

One example of a subset of a group $G$ which has to be closed in any topology on $G$ compatible with the group operations is a centraliser. Are there any other interesting examples?

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ 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? $\endgroup$ Jan 22, 2014 at 10:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ 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? $\endgroup$
    – user1688
    Jan 22, 2014 at 10:40
  • $\begingroup$ @Alex: compatible means that the group is a topological group, i.e., the group operations are continuous. $\endgroup$
    – user1688
    Jan 22, 2014 at 10:43
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Voting to reopen in light of Anton's nice answer. $\endgroup$ Jan 22, 2014 at 22:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ 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. $\endgroup$
    – Rupert
    Jan 23, 2014 at 12:02

2 Answers 2

25
$\begingroup$

Subsets of a group that are closed with respect to any Hausdorff group topology are called unconditionally closed.

Clearly, all algebraic sets are unconditionally closed, where a subset of a group $G$ is called algebraic if it is an intersection of finite unions of the sets of solutions to some equations with coefficient from $G$.

A.A.Markov proved that for countable groups the converse is also true: $$ \hbox{unconditionally closed = algebraic}. $$ For uncountable groups, this is not always the case as follows from works of S. Shelah (under CH) and G. Hesse.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Klyachkon: Is there any English text about the work of Markov? Is there similar works for other algebraic systems? $\endgroup$
    – Sh.M1972
    Jan 23, 2014 at 4:03
3
$\begingroup$

This is not really an answer, rather a longer (and not very deep) remark about the question of the topology and the assumption that it should be Hausdorff.

Not every topology that makes a group a topological group is Hausdorff. But to any topological group we can associate a Hausdorff topological group in a canonical way. Let $G$ be a topological group and denote by $H$ the closure of $\{e\}$. Then $H$ is a normal subgroup in $G$, and the quotient group $G/H$ is Hausdorff with respect to the quotient topology. See Proposition 1-4 (vi) on page 6 of Ramakrishnan and Valenza, Fourier analysis on number field, 1999.

Based on this result, Ramakrishnan and Valenza write "Part (vi) shows that every topological group projects by a continuous homomorphism onto a topological group with Hausdorff topology. In this sense the assumption that a given group is Hausdorff is not too serious."

Nonetheless, the assumption plays an important role in Rupert's question. For, if we take the trivial topology $\mathcal{O}=\{\emptyset,G\}$, the $H=G$ and $G/H$ is the trivial group. Btw, the example of the trivial topology shows that the answer to the question (if we don't require Hausdorff) is easy: $G$ and the empty set are the only subsets that are closed in any topology on $G$ that makes $G$ a topological group.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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