From: "Eduardo Ochs" <eduardoochs@gmail.com>
To: categories@mta.ca
Subject: A question about filter-powers (and infinitesimals)
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 23:05:55 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1KINm3-000125-Ac@mailserv.mta.ca> (raw)
Hello list,
I am looking for references on the following facts about interpreting
some sentences involving infinitesimals in filter-powers instead of in
ultrapowers...
Notation:
\I is an index set;
\F is a filter on \I;
\U is an ultrafilter on \I, possibly extending \F;
if X is a topological space and x is a point of X, then
\V_x is the filter of neighborhoods of x in X;
Set^\F is a shorthand for the filter-power (Set^\I)/\F;
Set^\U is a shorthand for the ultrapower (Set^\I)/\U;
Terminology:
Set is the "standard universe";
Set^\U is the "non-standard universe";
Set^\F is the "semi-standard universe";
points of Set^\I are called "sequences", or "pre-hyperpoints";
points of Set^\F or Set^\U are called "hyperpoints".
Well, the facts. Here they are:
(1) For any (standard) function f:X->Y from a topological space to
another, and for any standard point x in X, the following three
statements are equivalent:
(a) f is continuous at x;
(b) for all choices of a triple (\I, \F, x_1), where \I is an
index set, \F is a filter on \I, and x_1 is a hyperpoint
infinitely close to x, then f(x_1) is infinitely close to f(x);
(c) for the "natural infinitesimal" (\I, \F, x_1) := (X, \V_x, id),
the hyperpoint f(x_1) is infinitely close to f(x).
(2) Any filter-infinitesimal (\I, \F, x_1) infinitely close to x
factors through the natural infinitesimal (X, \V_x, id) in a unique
way.
(3) We can use these ideas to lift proofs done in a certain "strictly
calculational fragment" of the language of non-standard analysis to
constructions done in a filter-power; and then, if we replace the
free variables that stand for infinitesimals in our formulas by
natural infinitesimals, we get (by (c)<=>(a) in (1)) a translation
of our proof with infinitesimals to a standard proof, in terms of
limits and continuity.
On the one hand, I have never seen anything published about
filter-infinitesimals, and it took me a long time to find the right
formulations for this... on the other hand, ideas similar to these
seem to be implicit in many places (see the last sections of the PDF).
However, my guess is that at least parts of (3) are new.
There are more details at:
http://angg.twu.net/LATEX/2008filterp.pdf
http://angg.twu.net/math-b.html
Thanks in advance for any pointers, comments, etc...
Questions welcome, of course. Cheers,
Eduardo Ochs
eduardoochs@gmail.com
P.S.: the diagrams in the PDF were made with:
http://angg.twu.net/dednat4.html
reply other threads:[~2008-07-14 2:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1KINm3-000125-Ac@mailserv.mta.ca \
--to=eduardoochs@gmail.com \
--cc=categories@mta.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).