2019-04-12 19:47:28 8 Comments

*Continuum* means compact connected metrizable with more than one point.

A continuum is *Suslinean* if every collection of pairwise disjoint subcontinua is countable.

There is an apparent contradiction in the literature I would like to resolve...

In Example 3 at the end of **Paper A**, there is constructed a continuum $Y:=X/\sim$ which is the quotient of another continuum $X$. It is clear from the construction that $X$ is Suslinean, and since the quotient map is monotone $Y$ is also Suslinean. Actually, the author claims $X$ and $Y$ are hereditarily locally connected, and such continua are automatically known to be Suslinean.

On the other hand, $Y$ is the closure of a ray (a one-to-one continuous image of $[0,1)$) such that the ray is first category in $Y$. In other words, the ray and its complement are each dense in $Y$. It follows that there is a sequence of pairwise disjoint arcs in $Y$ which converges to $Y$ in the Hausdorff distance. By Theorem 30 in **Paper B**, $Y$ is non-Suslinean.

**Question 1**: Am I correct in finding a contradiction?

**Question 2**: Is Example 3 correct? Specifically, why is it Hausdorff (and therefore metrizable)? I found a couple of typos, e.g. $A_n$ should be $C_n\cup \bigcup ...$ and $\overline{z_1 z_1}$ should be $\overline{z_1 z_2}$, but otherwise it seems okay.

If there is a problem with Theorem 30, then I think the error must be in the proof of Lemma 29. Specifically there is a claim that $H_W$ is non-degenerate since it is an inverse limit of non-degenerate continua. This is a false statement in general because we can take the continua $[0,1/n]$ with bonding maps the inclusions $[0,1/(n+1)] \hookrightarrow[0,1/n]$, and the inverse limit is just the single point $\langle 0,0,..\rangle$. However, since each factor of the inverse limit for $H_W$ projects into $\partial U$ and $\partial V$ in the first factor, the inverse limits on preimages of these boundary sets should be non-empty and disjoint subsets of $H_W$...

Upon closer inspection, the proof of Lemma 29 (Paper B) is flawed in more ways than one. I'm not sure it can be saved.

At this point I would lean toward the example being correct. I really just need to see that $Y=X/\sim$ is Hausdorff.

**Paper A**:

*Tymchatyn, E. D.*, **Some rational continua**, Rocky Mt. J. Math. 13, 309-319 (1983). ZBL0514.54022.

**Paper B**:

*Mouron, Christopher*, **The topology of continua that are approximated by disjoint subcontinua**, Topology Appl. 156, No. 3, 558-576 (2009). ZBL1165.54012.

### Related Questions

#### Sponsored Content

#### 0 Answered Questions

### Cellular-Lindelof: a common generalization of the Lindelof property and the CCC

**2017-11-15 10:12:34****Santi Spadaro****176**View**8**Score**0**Answer- Tags: set-theory gn.general-topology

#### 0 Answered Questions

### Is each Peano continuum a topological fractal?

**2018-10-20 22:20:27****Lviv Scottish Book****92**View**5**Score**0**Answer- Tags: gn.general-topology fractals continuum-theory

#### 1 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Is every metric continuum almost path-connected?

**2018-08-14 06:49:35****Taras Banakh****294**View**9**Score**1**Answer- Tags: gn.general-topology mg.metric-geometry path-connected continuum-theory

#### 1 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Does each separator between points of a continuum contain an irreducible separator?

**2018-09-04 07:40:34****Taras Banakh****79**View**3**Score**1**Answer- Tags: gn.general-topology continuum-theory

#### 1 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Example of a non-locally connected continuum

**2017-05-29 03:15:47****Forever Mozart****404**View**7**Score**1**Answer- Tags: gn.general-topology counterexamples continuum-theory

#### 0 Answered Questions

### Is each metric continuum $\ell_p$-chain connected?

**2018-08-14 20:47:48****Taras Banakh****83**View**3**Score**0**Answer- Tags: gn.general-topology mg.metric-geometry continuum-theory

#### 3 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Example of an $\omega_1$ decreasing chain of dense semicontinua?

**2018-04-07 16:10:30****Daron****213**View**2**Score**3**Answer- Tags: set-theory gn.general-topology limits-and-colimits ordinal-numbers continuum-hypothesis

#### 1 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Beautiful examples of arc-like continua

**2012-11-13 21:02:54****Lasse Rempe-Gillen****740**View**6**Score**1**Answer- Tags: cv.complex-variables ds.dynamical-systems gn.general-topology

#### 0 Answered Questions

### Inverse limits of the interval with a single bonding map below the identity

**2016-07-03 23:45:02****Lasse Rempe-Gillen****106**View**1**Score**0**Answer- Tags: gn.general-topology ds.dynamical-systems complex-dynamics

#### 1 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] On the cardinality of perfect spaces with the countable chain condition

**2013-05-13 21:43:43****Santi Spadaro****478**View**7**Score**1**Answer- Tags: gn.general-topology

## 1 comments

## @D.S. Lipham 2019-04-14 20:43:09

Example 3 in Paper A is indeed a counterexample to Theorem 30 in Paper B.

Lemma 29 must also be false because it implies Theorem 30.

The only thing left to verify is that $Y=X/\sim$ (from Example 3) is Hausdorff, so that $Y$ is actually a

metrizablecontinuum. This can be proved in a few steps:We can argue 1 as follows. Let $x$ be any point in the closure of $\hat K$. Suppose for a contradiction that $x\notin \hat K$. Then $x\in [0,1]\setminus K$ and there is a sequence of semi-circular arcs $\overline{z^n_1 z^n_2}\in Y$ with $z^n_1\in K$ and $z^n_2\to x$. (I assume without loss of generality that the subscripts on the $z$'s are arranged in this way).

Since $d(x,K)>0$ this means infinitely many semicircles have radius greater than some positive constant. But this is impossible by the construction of $X$. Therefore $x\in \hat K$ and $\hat K$ is compact.

Now 1 $\Rightarrow$ 2 $\Rightarrow$ 3 and the proof is complete.