Do the metrics $d$ and $frac{d}{1+d}$ induce the same uniformity?












2












$begingroup$


Let $d_1$ and $d_2$ be two metrics on the same set $M$. Then $d_1$ and $d_2$ are called uniformly equivalent if the identity maps $i:(M,d_1)rightarrow(M,d_2)$ and $i^{-1}:(M,d_2)rightarrow(M,d_1)$ are uniformly continuous. Now this textbook gives the following exercise:




Given any metric space $(M,d)$, show that the metric $rho=frac{d}{1+d}$ is always uniformly equivalent to $d$[.]




My question is, is the result of the exercise correct? Because two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity, and if two metrics induce the same uniformity then they have the same bounded sets. Yet all sets are bounded with respect to $frac{d}{1+d}$, whereas all sets need not be bounded with respect to $d$.



Where am I going wrong?






general-topology metric-spaces examples-counterexamples uniform-continuity uniform-spaces







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Presumably you need $i^{-1}$ to be uniformly continuous as well?
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    Dec 23 '18 at 2:42
















2












$begingroup$


Let $d_1$ and $d_2$ be two metrics on the same set $M$. Then $d_1$ and $d_2$ are called uniformly equivalent if the identity maps $i:(M,d_1)rightarrow(M,d_2)$ and $i^{-1}:(M,d_2)rightarrow(M,d_1)$ are uniformly continuous. Now this textbook gives the following exercise:




Given any metric space $(M,d)$, show that the metric $rho=frac{d}{1+d}$ is always uniformly equivalent to $d$[.]




My question is, is the result of the exercise correct? Because two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity, and if two metrics induce the same uniformity then they have the same bounded sets. Yet all sets are bounded with respect to $frac{d}{1+d}$, whereas all sets need not be bounded with respect to $d$.



Where am I going wrong?






general-topology metric-spaces examples-counterexamples uniform-continuity uniform-spaces







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Presumably you need $i^{-1}$ to be uniformly continuous as well?
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    Dec 23 '18 at 2:42














2












2








2





$begingroup$


Let $d_1$ and $d_2$ be two metrics on the same set $M$. Then $d_1$ and $d_2$ are called uniformly equivalent if the identity maps $i:(M,d_1)rightarrow(M,d_2)$ and $i^{-1}:(M,d_2)rightarrow(M,d_1)$ are uniformly continuous. Now this textbook gives the following exercise:




Given any metric space $(M,d)$, show that the metric $rho=frac{d}{1+d}$ is always uniformly equivalent to $d$[.]




My question is, is the result of the exercise correct? Because two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity, and if two metrics induce the same uniformity then they have the same bounded sets. Yet all sets are bounded with respect to $frac{d}{1+d}$, whereas all sets need not be bounded with respect to $d$.



Where am I going wrong?






general-topology metric-spaces examples-counterexamples uniform-continuity uniform-spaces







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Let $d_1$ and $d_2$ be two metrics on the same set $M$. Then $d_1$ and $d_2$ are called uniformly equivalent if the identity maps $i:(M,d_1)rightarrow(M,d_2)$ and $i^{-1}:(M,d_2)rightarrow(M,d_1)$ are uniformly continuous. Now this textbook gives the following exercise:




Given any metric space $(M,d)$, show that the metric $rho=frac{d}{1+d}$ is always uniformly equivalent to $d$[.]




My question is, is the result of the exercise correct? Because two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity, and if two metrics induce the same uniformity then they have the same bounded sets. Yet all sets are bounded with respect to $frac{d}{1+d}$, whereas all sets need not be bounded with respect to $d$.



Where am I going wrong?






general-topology metric-spaces examples-counterexamples uniform-continuity uniform-spaces




general-topology metric-spaces examples-counterexamples uniform-continuity uniform-spaces






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 23 '18 at 4:27







Keshav Srinivasan

















asked Dec 23 '18 at 2:25









Keshav SrinivasanKeshav Srinivasan

2,38421446




2,38421446












  • $begingroup$
    Presumably you need $i^{-1}$ to be uniformly continuous as well?
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    Dec 23 '18 at 2:42


















  • $begingroup$
    Presumably you need $i^{-1}$ to be uniformly continuous as well?
    $endgroup$
    – copper.hat
    Dec 23 '18 at 2:42
















$begingroup$
Presumably you need $i^{-1}$ to be uniformly continuous as well?
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Dec 23 '18 at 2:42




$begingroup$
Presumably you need $i^{-1}$ to be uniformly continuous as well?
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Dec 23 '18 at 2:42










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

The textbook you linked distinguishes between $3$ types of equivalence:



•strong equivalence



•uniform equivalence &



•equivalence.



Evidently the condition that the identity map and its inverse be uniformly continuous corresponds to uniform equivalence. But strong equivalence is stronger, and is the one for which bounded sets are preserved.



As pointed out in the text, $rhole Csigma$ may fail under uniform equivalence. In particular, it may fail when $sigma =frac{rho}{1+rho}$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    But don't uniformly equivalent metrics induce the same uniformity? And don't metrics which induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:57










  • $begingroup$
    Apparently not.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Custer
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:58










  • $begingroup$
    So which part is wrong? Is it not true that two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity? Or is it not true that metrics that induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:59










  • $begingroup$
    I didn't see the "uniformity" terminology anywhere, though admittedly I only looked at a small portion.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Custer
    Dec 23 '18 at 4:02










  • $begingroup$
    Uniformities aren't discussed in that book at all. But see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_space
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 4:08



















1












$begingroup$

Yes, the exercise is correct, and $mathcal{U}(d) = mathcal{U}(d')$ where $d'=frac{d}{1+d}$. In the latter uniformity all subsets of $X$ are $d'$-bounded but the $mathcal{U}(d')$-bounded sets are not always the same as the $d'$-bounded sets. $d$ and $d'$ induce the same uniform structure (and thus the same uniform-bounded and totally-bounded bornologies) but not the same metric bornologies.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$














    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3050017%2fdo-the-metrics-d-and-fracd1d-induce-the-same-uniformity%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3












    $begingroup$

    The textbook you linked distinguishes between $3$ types of equivalence:



    •strong equivalence



    •uniform equivalence &



    •equivalence.



    Evidently the condition that the identity map and its inverse be uniformly continuous corresponds to uniform equivalence. But strong equivalence is stronger, and is the one for which bounded sets are preserved.



    As pointed out in the text, $rhole Csigma$ may fail under uniform equivalence. In particular, it may fail when $sigma =frac{rho}{1+rho}$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      But don't uniformly equivalent metrics induce the same uniformity? And don't metrics which induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:57










    • $begingroup$
      Apparently not.
      $endgroup$
      – Chris Custer
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:58










    • $begingroup$
      So which part is wrong? Is it not true that two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity? Or is it not true that metrics that induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:59










    • $begingroup$
      I didn't see the "uniformity" terminology anywhere, though admittedly I only looked at a small portion.
      $endgroup$
      – Chris Custer
      Dec 23 '18 at 4:02










    • $begingroup$
      Uniformities aren't discussed in that book at all. But see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_space
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 4:08
















    3












    $begingroup$

    The textbook you linked distinguishes between $3$ types of equivalence:



    •strong equivalence



    •uniform equivalence &



    •equivalence.



    Evidently the condition that the identity map and its inverse be uniformly continuous corresponds to uniform equivalence. But strong equivalence is stronger, and is the one for which bounded sets are preserved.



    As pointed out in the text, $rhole Csigma$ may fail under uniform equivalence. In particular, it may fail when $sigma =frac{rho}{1+rho}$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      But don't uniformly equivalent metrics induce the same uniformity? And don't metrics which induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:57










    • $begingroup$
      Apparently not.
      $endgroup$
      – Chris Custer
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:58










    • $begingroup$
      So which part is wrong? Is it not true that two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity? Or is it not true that metrics that induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:59










    • $begingroup$
      I didn't see the "uniformity" terminology anywhere, though admittedly I only looked at a small portion.
      $endgroup$
      – Chris Custer
      Dec 23 '18 at 4:02










    • $begingroup$
      Uniformities aren't discussed in that book at all. But see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_space
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 4:08














    3












    3








    3





    $begingroup$

    The textbook you linked distinguishes between $3$ types of equivalence:



    •strong equivalence



    •uniform equivalence &



    •equivalence.



    Evidently the condition that the identity map and its inverse be uniformly continuous corresponds to uniform equivalence. But strong equivalence is stronger, and is the one for which bounded sets are preserved.



    As pointed out in the text, $rhole Csigma$ may fail under uniform equivalence. In particular, it may fail when $sigma =frac{rho}{1+rho}$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    The textbook you linked distinguishes between $3$ types of equivalence:



    •strong equivalence



    •uniform equivalence &



    •equivalence.



    Evidently the condition that the identity map and its inverse be uniformly continuous corresponds to uniform equivalence. But strong equivalence is stronger, and is the one for which bounded sets are preserved.



    As pointed out in the text, $rhole Csigma$ may fail under uniform equivalence. In particular, it may fail when $sigma =frac{rho}{1+rho}$.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Dec 23 '18 at 3:18

























    answered Dec 23 '18 at 3:03









    Chris CusterChris Custer

    14.3k3827




    14.3k3827












    • $begingroup$
      But don't uniformly equivalent metrics induce the same uniformity? And don't metrics which induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:57










    • $begingroup$
      Apparently not.
      $endgroup$
      – Chris Custer
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:58










    • $begingroup$
      So which part is wrong? Is it not true that two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity? Or is it not true that metrics that induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:59










    • $begingroup$
      I didn't see the "uniformity" terminology anywhere, though admittedly I only looked at a small portion.
      $endgroup$
      – Chris Custer
      Dec 23 '18 at 4:02










    • $begingroup$
      Uniformities aren't discussed in that book at all. But see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_space
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 4:08


















    • $begingroup$
      But don't uniformly equivalent metrics induce the same uniformity? And don't metrics which induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:57










    • $begingroup$
      Apparently not.
      $endgroup$
      – Chris Custer
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:58










    • $begingroup$
      So which part is wrong? Is it not true that two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity? Or is it not true that metrics that induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 3:59










    • $begingroup$
      I didn't see the "uniformity" terminology anywhere, though admittedly I only looked at a small portion.
      $endgroup$
      – Chris Custer
      Dec 23 '18 at 4:02










    • $begingroup$
      Uniformities aren't discussed in that book at all. But see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_space
      $endgroup$
      – Keshav Srinivasan
      Dec 23 '18 at 4:08
















    $begingroup$
    But don't uniformly equivalent metrics induce the same uniformity? And don't metrics which induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:57




    $begingroup$
    But don't uniformly equivalent metrics induce the same uniformity? And don't metrics which induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:57












    $begingroup$
    Apparently not.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Custer
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:58




    $begingroup$
    Apparently not.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Custer
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:58












    $begingroup$
    So which part is wrong? Is it not true that two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity? Or is it not true that metrics that induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:59




    $begingroup$
    So which part is wrong? Is it not true that two metrics are uniformly equivalent if and only if they induce the same uniformity? Or is it not true that metrics that induce the same uniformity have the same bounded sets?
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 3:59












    $begingroup$
    I didn't see the "uniformity" terminology anywhere, though admittedly I only looked at a small portion.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Custer
    Dec 23 '18 at 4:02




    $begingroup$
    I didn't see the "uniformity" terminology anywhere, though admittedly I only looked at a small portion.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Custer
    Dec 23 '18 at 4:02












    $begingroup$
    Uniformities aren't discussed in that book at all. But see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_space
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 4:08




    $begingroup$
    Uniformities aren't discussed in that book at all. But see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_space
    $endgroup$
    – Keshav Srinivasan
    Dec 23 '18 at 4:08











    1












    $begingroup$

    Yes, the exercise is correct, and $mathcal{U}(d) = mathcal{U}(d')$ where $d'=frac{d}{1+d}$. In the latter uniformity all subsets of $X$ are $d'$-bounded but the $mathcal{U}(d')$-bounded sets are not always the same as the $d'$-bounded sets. $d$ and $d'$ induce the same uniform structure (and thus the same uniform-bounded and totally-bounded bornologies) but not the same metric bornologies.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      Yes, the exercise is correct, and $mathcal{U}(d) = mathcal{U}(d')$ where $d'=frac{d}{1+d}$. In the latter uniformity all subsets of $X$ are $d'$-bounded but the $mathcal{U}(d')$-bounded sets are not always the same as the $d'$-bounded sets. $d$ and $d'$ induce the same uniform structure (and thus the same uniform-bounded and totally-bounded bornologies) but not the same metric bornologies.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Yes, the exercise is correct, and $mathcal{U}(d) = mathcal{U}(d')$ where $d'=frac{d}{1+d}$. In the latter uniformity all subsets of $X$ are $d'$-bounded but the $mathcal{U}(d')$-bounded sets are not always the same as the $d'$-bounded sets. $d$ and $d'$ induce the same uniform structure (and thus the same uniform-bounded and totally-bounded bornologies) but not the same metric bornologies.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Yes, the exercise is correct, and $mathcal{U}(d) = mathcal{U}(d')$ where $d'=frac{d}{1+d}$. In the latter uniformity all subsets of $X$ are $d'$-bounded but the $mathcal{U}(d')$-bounded sets are not always the same as the $d'$-bounded sets. $d$ and $d'$ induce the same uniform structure (and thus the same uniform-bounded and totally-bounded bornologies) but not the same metric bornologies.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Dec 23 '18 at 6:24

























        answered Dec 23 '18 at 6:14









        Henno BrandsmaHenno Brandsma

        115k348124




        115k348124






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3050017%2fdo-the-metrics-d-and-fracd1d-induce-the-same-uniformity%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            Bundesstraße 106

            Image
            Dieser Artikel beschreibt die Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland. Zur gleichnamigen Straße in Österreich siehe Mölltal Straße. Vorlage:Infobox hochrangige Straße/Wartung/DE-B Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland Karte Basisdaten Betreiber: Deutschland  Bundesrepublik Deutschland Straßenbeginn: Wismar ( 53° 54′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.900536 11.396875 ) Straßenende: Schwerin ( 53° 36′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.592785 11.404892 ) Gesamtlänge: 40,7 km Bundesland: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Ausbauzustand: zweistreifig [1] Bundesstraße 106 in Schwerin (Umgehungsstraße) Straßenverlauf Land Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Landkreis Nordwestmecklenburg Ortsumgehung Wismar Wallensteingraben über   Dorf Mecklenburg Wallensteingraben Groß Stieten Bad Kleinen OT Niendorf Bahnstrecke Lübeck–Bad Kleinen Zickhusen Lübstorf Klein Trebbow OT Kirch Stück
            Read more

            Verónica Boquete

            Image
            Verónica Boquete im Trikot der Nationalmannschaft (2013) Personalia Name Verónica Boquete Giadans Geburtstag 9. April 1987 Geburtsort Santiago de Compostela, Spanien Größe 159 cm Position Mittelfeld / Sturm Juniorinnen Jahre Station 2001–2005 Xuventú Aguiño Frauen Jahre Station Spiele (Tore) 1 2005–2008 Prainsa Zaragoza 83 (40) 2008–2010 Espanyol Barcelona 53 (30) 2010 Buffalo Flash 9 0 (9) 2010 Chicago Red Stars 3 0 (1) 2010–2011 Espanyol Barcelona 26 (41) 2011 Philadelphia Independence 13 0 (5) 2011 Energija Woronesch 5 0 (1) 2012–2014 Tyresö FF 39 (14) 2014 Portland Thorns FC 15 0 (4) 2014–2015 1. FFC Frankfurt 23 0 (7) 2015–2016 FC Bayern München 9 0 (0) 2016–2018 Paris Saint-Germain 31 0 (8) 2018 Peking BG Phoenix 2019– Utah Royals FC 0 0 (0) Nationalmannschaft Jahre Auswahl
            Read more

            Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

            Image
            Die Lage des Ida-Boy-Ed-Gartens, rot markiert Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten, Blick von der Wakenitzmauer durch das Tor in der Stadtmauer Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten ist eine Straße der Lübecker Altstadt. Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Lage 2 Geschichte 3 Literatur 4 Weblinks Lage | Der etwa 90 Meter lange Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten befindet sich an der nördlichen Spitze der Altstadtinsel, vor dem Burgtor. Die in einem Bogen durch eine Grünanlage hangaufwärts führende Straße verbindet die Wakenitzmauer mit der Burgtorbrücke. Geschichte | Der heutige Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten wurde ursprünglich als Verlängerung der Wakenitzmauer angelegt. 1903 wurde in den erhaltenen Teil der mittelalterlichen Stadtmauer, an dem die Wakenitzmauer bei der Einmündung der Kaiserstraße begann, ein Tor mit einem großen Bogen für die Durchführung der Straße und zwei kleineren seitlichen Öffnungen für Fußgänger gebrochen, um für die neu errichteten Wohnhäuser in diesem Bereich
            Read more