Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-15T19:39:47.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Open Extensions of Maps

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

S. P. Franklin  and
J. K. Kohli
S. P. Franklin
Affiliation:
Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India
J. K. Kohli
Affiliation:
Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In recent years there has been some interest in trying to improve the behaviour of maps by extending their domains. For example, in 1953 Whyburn showed that every map is the restriction of a compact map [17]. Similarly, Krolevec proved in 1967 that each locally perfect map can be extended to a perfect map [12] and in an as yet unpublished paper, Dickman obtained the same result for arbitrary maps [4]. In this paper we show that every map can be extended to an open map so that certain properties of the domain and range are preserved in the new domain. These results are then used to obtain analogues and improvements of recent theorems of Arhangel'skiï, Ĉoban, Hodel, and Proizvolov.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Mathematics , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , 01 June 1970 , pp. 691 - 696
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Mathematical Society 1970

References

1. Arhangel'skiï, A. B., Existence criterion of a bicompact element in a continuous decomposition. A theorem on the invariance of weight for open-closed finitely multiple mappings, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 166 (1966), 1263-1266 (Russian); translated as Soviet Math. Dokl. 7 (1966), 249–253.Google Scholar
2. Arhangel'skiï, A. B., A theorem on the metrizability of the inverse image of a metric space under an openclosed finite-to-one mapping: Example and unsolved problems, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 170 (1966), 759-762 (Russian); translated as Soviet Math. Dokl. 7 (1966), 1258–1262.Google Scholar
3. Coban, M. M., Open finite-to-one mappings, Soviet Math. Dokl. 8 (1967) 603–605.Google Scholar
4. Dickman, R. F. Jr., On closed extensions of functions (to appear).Google Scholar
5. Fleischer, I. and Franklin, S. P., On compactness and projections, pp. 70-79 in Contributions to extension theory of topological structures, Symposium, Berlin, 1967 (Academic Press, New York, 1969).Google Scholar
6. Franklin, S. P., Spaces in which sequences suffice, Fund. Math. 57 (1965), 107–115.Google Scholar
7. Franklin, S. P. and Rajagopalan, M., Some examples in topology (to appear in Trans. Amer. Math. Soc).Google Scholar
8. Gilman, L. and Jerison, M., Rings of continuous functions (Van Nostrand, Princeton, N.J., 1960).Google Scholar
9. Gleason, A. M., Universal locally connected refinements, Illinois J. Math. 7 (1963), 521–531.Google Scholar
10. Herrlich, H., Topologische Reflexionen und Coreflexionen (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1968).Google Scholar
11. Hodel, R. E., Open functions and dimension, Duke Math. J. 30 (1963), 461–467.Google Scholar
12. Krolevec, N., Locally perfect mappings, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 175 (1967), 1008–1011. (Russian)Google Scholar
13. Misra, A. K., Spaces in which chain nets suffice (to appear).Google Scholar
14. Moore, R. C. and Mrowka, S. G., Topologies determined by countable objects, Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 11 (1964), 554.Google Scholar
15. Proizvolov, V. V., On finite-to-one open mappings, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 166 (1966), 38-40 (Russian); translated as Soviet Math. Dokl. 7 (1966), 35–38.Google Scholar
16. Tsuda, M., On adjunction spaces, Proc. Japan Acad. 88 (1962), 23–26.Google Scholar
17. Whyburn, G. T., A unified space for mappings, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 74 (1953), 344–350.Google Scholar