Talk:Topologist's sine curve: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 1 WikiProject template. Remove 1 deprecated parameter: field. Tag: |
||
(11 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| |
|||
{{WikiProject Mathematics| importance=mid}} |
|||
}} |
|||
This page is useless without the figure. Could I scan it from a book? I guess a mathematical figure cannot be copyrighted. [[User:Wshun|wshun]] 03:50, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC) |
This page is useless without the figure. Could I scan it from a book? I guess a mathematical figure cannot be copyrighted. [[User:Wshun|wshun]] 03:50, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC) |
||
Line 5: | Line 8: | ||
Seems like this space is too weird for Iceweasel 2.0.0.3 (Debian version of Firefox) ;) Works fine in Konqueror. |
Seems like this space is too weird for Iceweasel 2.0.0.3 (Debian version of Firefox) ;) Works fine in Konqueror. |
||
[[User:Functor salad|Functor salad]] 19:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC) |
[[User:Functor salad|Functor salad]] 19:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC) |
||
------ |
|||
Image looks inconsistant with definition as the plot goes to negative x and in definition we take x from (0;1]. |
|||
I may be just wrong though. |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/83.21.141.16|83.21.141.16]] ([[User talk:83.21.141.16|talk]]) 10:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
== Something's very very wrong here == |
== Something's very very wrong here == |
||
Line 17: | Line 26: | ||
The question is now: When topologists talk about "topologist's sine curve" do they mean the one with the interval or the one with just a point? --[[Special:Contributions/131.234.106.197|131.234.106.197]] ([[User talk:131.234.106.197|talk]]) 16:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC) |
The question is now: When topologists talk about "topologist's sine curve" do they mean the one with the interval or the one with just a point? --[[Special:Contributions/131.234.106.197|131.234.106.197]] ([[User talk:131.234.106.197|talk]]) 16:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
: Fixed. I don't know the answer to your last question. In Munkres, the closure is used. –[[User talk:Pomte|Pomte]] 16:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:: thanx--[[Special:Contributions/131.234.106.197|131.234.106.197]] ([[User talk:131.234.106.197|talk]]) 12:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::The current terminology of the article (with 'topologist's sine curve' denoting a non-closed set) is that of ''Counterexamples in Topology''. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 22:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Hausdorff dimension of this space == |
|||
Is the [[Hausdorff dimension]] of this space known exactly or just approximately? Does it exceed 1? <br/> [[Special:Contributions/92.105.139.80|92.105.139.80]] ([[User talk:92.105.139.80|talk]]) 22:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Graph improvement? == |
|||
I'm not sure how to do this, but it would be neat to come up with a graph whose color becomes darker and/or more saturated to suggest increasing density approaching 0. As it is, at a certain point it just turns into a solid block. --[[User:Dfeuer|Dfeuer]] ([[User talk:Dfeuer|talk]]) 17:05, 12 January 2013 (UTC) |
|||
== Definition: including origin vs interval == |
|||
An anonymous contributor in the last month changed the formula of the definition of the set T to include not just the origin but the whole interval <math>\{0\} \times [-1,1]</math>. This contradicts with the text, and it is a bit confusing, since later in the article the closed version of this set is referenced. |
|||
I have thus reverted the change: I think both definitions are used in the literature, so it does not really matter which one we give first, but we should be consistent in the article. |
|||
== ''make page'': [[Fourier analysis on topological space]] == |
|||
My title is very generic. If we make the page we then have to update the title. But the page should be created! <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.75.194.216|85.75.194.216]] ([[User talk:85.75.194.216#top|talk]]) 22:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Latest revision as of 05:30, 9 March 2024
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This page is useless without the figure. Could I scan it from a book? I guess a mathematical figure cannot be copyrighted. wshun 03:50, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Image crashes browser when viewed full-size
[edit]Seems like this space is too weird for Iceweasel 2.0.0.3 (Debian version of Firefox) ;) Works fine in Konqueror. Functor salad 19:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Image looks inconsistant with definition as the plot goes to negative x and in definition we take x from (0;1]. I may be just wrong though. 83.21.141.16 (talk) 10:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Something's very very wrong here
[edit]In the article, it says: You take the closure of the graph of sin(1/x) with x\in ]0,1]. The function is bounded, the domain is bounded, hence the graph is bounded. The closure of a bounded set w.r.t. the topology of a finite dimensional euclidean space is always compact. => Therefore, the topologist's sine curve is always compact, hence locally compact. But in the article, it says: "T is the continuous image of a locally compact space (namely, let V be the space {−1} ∪ (0, 1], and use the map f from V to T defined by f(−1) = (0,0) and f(x) = (x, sin(1/x)) for x > 0), but is not locally compact itself."
Later, it says in the article, that you may a variation, named "closed topologist's sine curve", which is now exactly the closure of the graph and therefore - by defintion - equal to the topologist's sine curve. So, the original topologist's sine curve is already the closed one...
I guess that some of the statements in this article refer to another sort of sine curve, where you just add (0,0) to the graph of sin(1/x). Then it would make sense to take the closure of it and then it would not be locally compact, but the image of a locally compact set (even a compact set)
The question is now: When topologists talk about "topologist's sine curve" do they mean the one with the interval or the one with just a point? --131.234.106.197 (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Fixed. I don't know the answer to your last question. In Munkres, the closure is used. –Pomte 16:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- thanx--131.234.106.197 (talk) 12:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- The current terminology of the article (with 'topologist's sine curve' denoting a non-closed set) is that of Counterexamples in Topology. Algebraist 22:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- thanx--131.234.106.197 (talk) 12:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Hausdorff dimension of this space
[edit]Is the Hausdorff dimension of this space known exactly or just approximately? Does it exceed 1?
92.105.139.80 (talk) 22:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Graph improvement?
[edit]I'm not sure how to do this, but it would be neat to come up with a graph whose color becomes darker and/or more saturated to suggest increasing density approaching 0. As it is, at a certain point it just turns into a solid block. --Dfeuer (talk) 17:05, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Definition: including origin vs interval
[edit]An anonymous contributor in the last month changed the formula of the definition of the set T to include not just the origin but the whole interval . This contradicts with the text, and it is a bit confusing, since later in the article the closed version of this set is referenced.
I have thus reverted the change: I think both definitions are used in the literature, so it does not really matter which one we give first, but we should be consistent in the article.
make page: Fourier analysis on topological space
[edit]My title is very generic. If we make the page we then have to update the title. But the page should be created! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.194.216 (talk) 22:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)