Skip to main content
added 70 characters in body
Source Link
Uri Bader
  • 12k
  • 2
  • 41
  • 62

I must admit that I hesitated answering this question, but here it is.

IdentifyingThe answer is "no". Assume there exist topological spaces $X$ and $Y$ such that $C(X,Y)\simeq \mathbb{R}$ and $Y\not\simeq\mathbb{R}$. Identifying $C(X,Y)$ with $\mathbb{R}$ and $Y$ with the constant functions in $Y^X$ we consider $Y$ as a closed subsapce of $\mathbb{R}$. Considering the surjection $\mathbb{R} \to C(X,Y)\to C(\{x\},Y) \simeq Y$$\mathbb{R} \to C(X,Y)\to C(\{x\},Y) \to Y$, we see that $Y$ is connected. WLOG we have Thus $0,1\in Y$ and 1$Y\subset\mathbb{R}$ is a closed convex subset. As $Y\not\simeq \mathbb{R}$ there must exist an endextreme point $y\in Y$. considering the constant functions $0,1\in C(X,Y)$, I claimNote that $C(X,Y)-\{1\}$ could be contracted to $\{0\}$. For this, consider the contraction$C(X,Y)$ is a convex subset of $Y$ to $0$ given by $c:Y\times [0,1]\to Y$, $(y,t) \mapsto (1-t)y$$C(X,\mathbb{R})$ and obtain the contractionconstant function $C(X,Y)\times [0,1] \to C(X,Y)$ given by postcomposition:$y$ is an extreme point of it. It follows that $(\phi,t)\mapsto [x \mapsto c(\phi(x),t)]$$C(X,Y)-\{y\}$ is also convex, hence contractible. We thus get a contraction ofBut $\mathbb{R}-\{1\}$$C(X,Y)-\{y\}$ is homeomorphic to 0,$\mathbb{R}$ minus a point. This is a contradiction.

I must admit that I hesitated answering this question, but here it is.

Identifying $C(X,Y)$ with $\mathbb{R}$ and $Y$ with the constant functions in $Y^X$ we consider $Y$ as a closed subsapce of $\mathbb{R}$. Considering the surjection $\mathbb{R} \to C(X,Y)\to C(\{x\},Y) \simeq Y$, we see that $Y$ is connected. WLOG we have $0,1\in Y$ and 1 is an end point. considering the constant functions $0,1\in C(X,Y)$, I claim that $C(X,Y)-\{1\}$ could be contracted to $\{0\}$. For this, consider the contraction of $Y$ to $0$ given by $c:Y\times [0,1]\to Y$, $(y,t) \mapsto (1-t)y$ and obtain the contraction $C(X,Y)\times [0,1] \to C(X,Y)$ given by postcomposition: $(\phi,t)\mapsto [x \mapsto c(\phi(x),t)]$. We thus get a contraction of $\mathbb{R}-\{1\}$ to 0, a contradiction.

I must admit that I hesitated answering this question, but here it is.

The answer is "no". Assume there exist topological spaces $X$ and $Y$ such that $C(X,Y)\simeq \mathbb{R}$ and $Y\not\simeq\mathbb{R}$. Identifying $C(X,Y)$ with $\mathbb{R}$ and $Y$ with the constant functions in $Y^X$ we consider $Y$ as a closed subsapce of $\mathbb{R}$. Considering the surjection $\mathbb{R} \to C(X,Y)\to C(\{x\},Y) \to Y$, we see that $Y$ is connected. Thus $Y\subset\mathbb{R}$ is a closed convex subset. As $Y\not\simeq \mathbb{R}$ there must exist an extreme point $y\in Y$. Note that $C(X,Y)$ is a convex subset of $C(X,\mathbb{R})$ and the constant function $y$ is an extreme point of it. It follows that $C(X,Y)-\{y\}$ is also convex, hence contractible. But $C(X,Y)-\{y\}$ is homeomorphic to $\mathbb{R}$ minus a point. This is a contradiction.

added 264 characters in body
Source Link
Uri Bader
  • 12k
  • 2
  • 41
  • 62

I must admit that I hesitated answering this question, but here it is.

Identifying $C(X,Y)$ with $\mathbb{R}$ and $Y$ with the constant functions in $Y^X$ we consider $Y$ as a closed subsapce of $\mathbb{R}$. Considering the surjection $\mathbb{R} \to C(X,Y)\to C(\{x\},Y) \simeq Y$, we see that $Y$ is connected. WLOG we have $0,1\in Y$ and 1 is an end point. Postcomposing considering the constant functions $C(X,Y)$ with$0,1\in C(X,Y)$, I claim that $C(X,Y)-\{1\}$ could be contracted to $\{0\}$. For this, consider the contraction of $Y\times [0,1]\to Y$$Y$ to $0$ given by $c:Y\times [0,1]\to Y$, $(y,t) \mapsto (1-t)y$ weand obtain the contraction $C(X,Y)\times [0,1] \to C(X,Y)$ given by postcomposition: $(\phi,t)\mapsto [x \mapsto c(\phi(x),t)]$. We thus get a contraction of $\mathbb{R}-\{1\}$ to 0, a contradiction.

I must admit that I hesitated answering this question, but here it is.

Identifying $C(X,Y)$ with $\mathbb{R}$ and $Y$ with the constant functions in $Y^X$ we consider $Y$ as a closed subsapce of $\mathbb{R}$. Considering the surjection $\mathbb{R} \to C(X,Y)\to C(\{x\},Y) \simeq Y$, we see that $Y$ is connected. WLOG we have $0,1\in Y$ and 1 is an end point. Postcomposing $C(X,Y)$ with the contraction $Y\times [0,1]\to Y$, $(y,t) \mapsto (1-t)y$ we get a contraction of $\mathbb{R}-\{1\}$ to 0, a contradiction.

I must admit that I hesitated answering this question, but here it is.

Identifying $C(X,Y)$ with $\mathbb{R}$ and $Y$ with the constant functions in $Y^X$ we consider $Y$ as a closed subsapce of $\mathbb{R}$. Considering the surjection $\mathbb{R} \to C(X,Y)\to C(\{x\},Y) \simeq Y$, we see that $Y$ is connected. WLOG we have $0,1\in Y$ and 1 is an end point. considering the constant functions $0,1\in C(X,Y)$, I claim that $C(X,Y)-\{1\}$ could be contracted to $\{0\}$. For this, consider the contraction of $Y$ to $0$ given by $c:Y\times [0,1]\to Y$, $(y,t) \mapsto (1-t)y$ and obtain the contraction $C(X,Y)\times [0,1] \to C(X,Y)$ given by postcomposition: $(\phi,t)\mapsto [x \mapsto c(\phi(x),t)]$. We thus get a contraction of $\mathbb{R}-\{1\}$ to 0, a contradiction.

Source Link
Uri Bader
  • 12k
  • 2
  • 41
  • 62

I must admit that I hesitated answering this question, but here it is.

Identifying $C(X,Y)$ with $\mathbb{R}$ and $Y$ with the constant functions in $Y^X$ we consider $Y$ as a closed subsapce of $\mathbb{R}$. Considering the surjection $\mathbb{R} \to C(X,Y)\to C(\{x\},Y) \simeq Y$, we see that $Y$ is connected. WLOG we have $0,1\in Y$ and 1 is an end point. Postcomposing $C(X,Y)$ with the contraction $Y\times [0,1]\to Y$, $(y,t) \mapsto (1-t)y$ we get a contraction of $\mathbb{R}-\{1\}$ to 0, a contradiction.