Fibrations between finite topological spaces
Nicol\'as Cianci, Miguel Ottina

TL;DR
This paper explores Hurewicz fibrations in finite T0-spaces, establishing combinatorial conditions, linking them to Grothendieck bifibrations, and providing examples to illustrate the theory and necessity of assumptions.
Contribution
It introduces combinatorial criteria for Hurewicz fibrations in finite T0-spaces and connects them to Grothendieck bifibrations, expanding understanding of their structure.
Findings
Established strong conditions for Hurewicz fibrations in finite T0-spaces.
Demonstrated the relationship between Hurewicz fibrations and Grothendieck bifibrations.
Provided examples illustrating the theory and necessity of assumptions.
Abstract
We study Hurewicz fibrations between finite T--spaces from a combinatorial viewpoint and give strong conditions that a continuous map between finite T--spaces must satisfy in order to be a Hurewicz fibration. We also show that there exists a strong relationship between Hurewicz fibrations between finite T--spaces and Grothendieck bifibrations. Finally we give several interesting examples that illustrate this theory and show that many of the assumptions of our results are necessary.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology · Algebraic structures and combinatorial models · Advanced Topics in Algebra
Fibrations between finite topological spaces
Nicolas Cianci
Facultad de Ciencias Exactas and Naturales
Universidad Nacional de Cuyo
Mendoza, Argentina.
and
Miguel Ottina
Facultad de Ciencias Exactas and Naturales
Universidad Nacional de Cuyo
Mendoza, Argentina.
Abstract.
We study Hurewicz fibrations between finite T0–spaces from a combinatorial viewpoint and give strong conditions that a continuous map between finite T0–spaces must satisfy in order to be a Hurewicz fibration. We also show that there exists a strong relationship between Hurewicz fibrations between finite T0–spaces and Grothendieck bifibrations. Finally we give several interesting examples that illustrate this theory and show that many of the assumptions of our results are necessary.
Key words and phrases:
Finite topological space, Finite poset, Hurewicz Fibration, Grothendieck fibration, Serre fibration.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary: 55R05, 55R15. Secondary: 54C15.
Research partially supported by grant M044 (2016–2018) of SeCTyP, UNCuyo. The first author was also partially supported by a CONICET doctoral fellowship.
1. Introduction
In this article we will study the combinatorial aspects of the Hurewicz fibrations between finite T0–spaces. Some of the results we obtain can be easily extended to Hurewicz fibrations between Alexandroff T0–spaces. However, we will not do explicit mention of these facts in this work since we are interested in studying this problem in the context of finite topological spaces, where more things can be said.
We mention that in [4] we gave a complete combinatorial characterization of the cofibrations between finite topological spaces, while in [3] we obtained a classification theorem for fiber bundles over Alexandroff spaces with T0 fiber. However, the same problem for fibrations seems a much harder task.
This article is organized as follows. In section 3 we give two preliminary results about continuity of maps whose codomain is an Alexandroff space. In section 4 we extend some of Stong’s definitions to the category for a given finite T0–space , and we prove that many of the results of the theory of Stong, as well as the results of [4] regarding bp–retracts, can be generalized to this category. Then, in section 5, we develop results which relate the beat points of fibrations between finite T0–spaces with the beat points of its base space, total space and fibers, as well as the behaviour of the Hurewicz fibrations in the presence or absense of such beat points.
In section 6, we study the regularity of Hurewicz fibrations between finite T0–spaces and we apply the results obtained to give a strong relationship between Hurewicz fibrations and Grothendieck bifibrations which, under specific and strong conditions over the base space, suffices to completely characterize the Hurewicz fibrations between finite T0–spaces over that base space.
Finally, in the last section of the article we give examples that show that many of the assumptions of our results are indeed necessary.
2. Preliminaries
In this section we will recall several definitions and results that will be needed to develop the results of this article.
First of all we will introduce some notation that will be used throughout the article.
Notation*.*
- •
The topological space with the usual topology will be denoted by .
- •
Let be a topological space. For each we define the map by .
- •
Let and be topological spaces. The space of continuous maps from to with the compact-open topology will be denoted by .
- •
Let and be topological spaces. We define the evaluation map as the map given by . We also define, for each , the map given by .
- •
Let , and be topological spaces. Let be a continuous map. We define the map by .
- •
The category of topological spaces and continuous maps will be denoted by Top. In addition, if is a topological space, will denote the slice category of Top over , that is the category whose objects are the continuous maps with codomain and whose morphisms are given by commutative triangles.
- •
Similarly, the category of finite topological spaces and continuous maps will be denoted by FinTop. The full subcategory of FinTop whose objects are the finite T0–spaces will be denoted by . In addition, if is a finite T0–space, will denote the slice category of over .
- •
The category of small categories will be denoted by Cat. The category of posets and order-preserving morphisms will be denoted by Pos. We will frequently consider a poset as a small category with arrows given by the order relation and therefore Pos will be sometimes regarded as a subcategory of Cat.
We also recall some definitions regarding homotopies in a slice category of Top.
Definition 2.1**.**
Let be a topological space and let and be two continuous maps considered as objects of . Let be an arrow over . We say that is a homotopy equivalence (over ) if there exists an arrow over , which is called homotopy inverse of (over ) such that and . In that case, we say that and are homotopy equivalent over or fiber homotopy equivalent.
Let be a subspace and let be the inclusion map. Consider the continuous map as an object over .
We will say that is a strong deformation retract of if there exists a retraction , such that .
Note that if is a strong deformation retract of in , then is a strong deformation retract of in Top.
2.1. Finite topological spaces
Let be an Alexandroff topological space. For each we define as the intersection of all the open subsets of that contain , and it will be also denoted by when the space in which it is considered is clear from the context. Clearly, is the smallest open subset of that contains and is a basis for the topology of . We define a preorder relation in by if and only if . It follows that, for each , .
The preorder given above is a partial order if and only if is a T0–space. Moreover, this defines a one-to-one correspondence between Alexandroff topologies in a set and preorder relations in , which was first stated by Alexandroff [1]. Moreover, a map between Alexandroff spaces is continuous if and only if it is an order-preserving morphism between the associated preordered sets.
If is an Alexandroff space and it is standard to define
- •
,
- •
, and
- •
.
where the superindex is usually omitted from the notation when the Alexandroff space in which these sets are considered is clear from the context.
Now let be a finite T0–space and let . We say that is a down beat point of if the set has a maximum element and we say that is an up beat point of if the set has a minimum element. We say that is a beat point of if it is either a down beat point or an up beat point [2, 8, 9]. In addition, we say that is a minimal space if does not have beat points. A subspace is a core of if is a minimal space and a strong deformation retract of . Observe that one can obtain a core of by successively removing its beat points.
Stong proved in [9] that if is a finite T0–space and is a beat point of , then is a strong deformation retract of . In addition, he proved that two cores of a finite T0–space are homeomorphic and that two finite T0–spaces are homotopy equivalent if and only if they have homeomorphic cores. He also obtained the following result in [9, Theorem 3] and its proof.
Proposition 2.2** ([9, p.330]).**
Let be a finite T0–space and let be a continuous map.
- (1)
If does not have down beat points and , then . 2. (2)
If does not have up beat points and , then . 3. (3)
* does not have beat points and , then .*
Stong also proves that finite spaces are exponentiable [9, Lemma 1] and obtains as a corollary that if are continuous maps between finite spaces such that for all then and are homotopic relative to the subset . We will give a generalization of this result in 3.5.
The following is a generalization of [9, Theorem 7(b)] for maps over a finite space . We will omit its proof since it is analogous to that of the original result of Stong.
Proposition 2.3**.**
Let , and be finite topological spaces, let and let and be continuous maps, considered as objects over . Let be continuous maps such that and , considered as arrows over from to .
- (1)
If , then is fiber homotopic to relative to . 2. (2)
If and are fiber homotopic relative to , then there exist and continuous maps over from to whose restrictions to coincide with those of , such that .
bp-retracts
In this subsection we will recall some definitions and results from [4].
Definition 2.4** ([4, Definition 3.1]).**
Let be a finite T0–space and let . We will say that is a dbp–retract (resp. ubp–retract) of if can be obtained from by successively removing down beat points (resp. up beat points), that is, if there exist and a sequence of subspaces of such that, for all , the space is obtained from by removing a single down beat point (resp. up beat point) of .
We will say that is a bp–retract of if is either a dbp–retract or a ubp–retract of .
Theorem 2.5** ([4, Theorem 3.5]).**
Let be a finite T0–space, let be a subspace of and let be the inclusion map. Then, the following propositions are equivalent:
- (1)
* is a dbp–retract of .* 2. (2)
There exists a continuous map such that , and . 3. (3)
There exists a unique continuous map such that , and . 4. (4)
There exists a retraction of such that . 5. (5)
There exists a unique retraction of such that .
Corollary 2.6** ([4, Corollary 3.11]).**
Let be a finite T0–space and, for , let be a continuous map such that and . Then if and only if .
Topological Grothendieck construction and fiber bundles
In [3], we introduced the notion of topological Grothendieck construction of a (covariant) functor from a preordered set to the category of topological spaces, which coincides with the Grothendieck construction if the functor takes values in the subcategory of Alexandroff spaces. In this subsection we will recall the definition of topological Grothendieck construction and some results of [3] that will be needed later.
Definition 2.7** ([3, Definition 3.1]).**
Let be an Alexandroff space considered as a preordered set and let be a functor. We define
[TABLE]
For each and for each open subset of we define
[TABLE]
Let \mathcal{B}=\{J(b,V):b\in B\text{ and VD(b)}\}. The set is a basis for a topology on . We consider as a topological space with the topology generated by . The topological space will be called the topological Grothendieck construction of .
Proposition 2.8** ([3, Remark 3.8]).**
Let be an Alexandroff space, let be functors and let be a natural transformation. Let be defined by . Then is continuous and hence a map over .
Proposition 2.9** ([3, Proposition 3.9]).**
Let be a connected Alexandroff space and let be a morphism-inverting functor. Then is a fiber bundle over with fiber for any .
Theorem 2.10** ([3, Theorem 3.20]).**
Let be a connected Alexandroff space and let be any T0–space. Then there exists a canonical bijection between isomorphism classes of fiber bundles over with fiber and isomorphism classes of functors from to . This bijection is induced by the canonical representation and its inverse is induced by the topological Grothendieck construction.
Corollary 2.11** ([3, Corollary 3.21]).**
Let be a simply connected Alexandroff space, let be any T0–space and let be a fiber bundle over with fiber . Then is a trivial fiber bundle.
Fibrations
Recall that a continuous map between topological spaces is called a (Hurewicz) fibration if it has the homotopy lifting property with respect to all topological spaces, that is, if for all topological spaces and continuous maps and such that there exists a continuous map such that and .
Similarly, a continuous map between topological spaces is called a Serre fibration if it has the homotopy lifting property with respect to the –dimensional disks for all .
It is well known that compositions, products, pullbacks and retracts of fibrations are fibrations. Moreover, if is a fibration and is an exponentiable space, then is also a fibration. In particular, if is a fibration and is a finite space, then is also a fibration.
Definition 2.12**.**
Let and be topological spaces and let be a continuous map. Let and let and denote the corresponding projection maps. A path-lifting map for is a continuous map such that and .
From the exponential law it follows that a continuous map is a (Hurewicz) fibration if and only if admits a path-lifting map.
Definition 2.13**.**
Let be a topological space, let be a path in and let be such that . We define the map by for all . Note that is a continuous map and hence, a path in .
Definition 2.14**.**
Let be an Alexandroff space and let be such that . We define the path by
[TABLE]
We define, on the other hand, the path by
[TABLE]
Thus, the path is the inverse path of .
Grothendieck fibrations
Definition 2.15**.**
Let and be small categories and let be a funtor.
- •
Let be an arrow of . We say that is cartesian (with respect to ) if for every arrow of and every arrow of such that there exists a unique arrow such that and p\big{(}\tilde{h}\big{)}=h.
e^{\prime\prime}$$e^{\prime}$$e$$f$$g$$\tilde{h}$$p$$p(e^{\prime\prime})$$p(e^{\prime})$$p(e)$$p(f)$$p(g)$$h
- •
Let be an arrow of . We say that is cocartesian (with respect to ) if for every arrow of and every arrow of such that there exists a unique arrow such that and p\big{(}\tilde{h}\big{)}=h.
e^{\prime\prime}$$e$$e^{\prime}$$f$$g$$\tilde{h}$$p$$p(e^{\prime\prime})$$p(e)$$p(e^{\prime})$$p(f)$$p(g)$$h
Definition 2.16**.**
Let and be small categories and let be a functor. We say that is a Grothendieck fibration if for all , all and all arrows , there exists and a cartesian arrow such that p\big{(}\tilde{f}\big{)}=f. The arrow is called cartesian lift of to .
Dually, we say that is a Grothendieck opfibration if is a Grothendieck fibration. In other words, is a Grothendieck opfibration if for all , all and all arrows , there exists and a cocartesian arrow such that p\big{(}\tilde{f}\big{)}=f. The arrow is called cocartesian lift of from .
We say that is a Grothendieck bifibration if is both a Grothendieck fibration and a Grothendieck opfibration.
Definition 2.17**.**
Let and be small categories and let be a functor. A cleavage (for ) is a map that assigns to each and each arrow in , a cartesian lift of to . We say that a cleavage is closed if it preserves identity maps and compositions, that is, for all and for all , for all arrows and in , where is the domain of .
Dually, an opcleavage (for ) is a map that assigns to each and each arrow in , a cocartesian lift of from . We say that the opcleavage is closed if it preserves identity maps and compositions, that is, for all and for all and for all arrows and in , where is the codomain of .
Observe that assuming the axiom of choice, a functor between small categories is a Grothendieck fibration if and only if it admits a cleavage and it is a Grothendieck opfibration if and only if it admits an opcleavage.
Definition 2.18**.**
A split (Grothendieck) fibration is a pair where is a Grothendieck fibration and is a cleavage for .
Dually, a split (Grothendieck) opfibration is a pair where is a Grothendieck opfibration and is an opcleavage for .
Theorem 2.19**.**
Let and be small categories and let be a split Grothendieck fibration. Then there exists a contravariant functor such that the canonical projection is an object over isomorphic to .
3. Preliminary results
In this section we will prove two propositions that will allow us to deduce the continuity of a map whose codomain is an Alexandroff space from the continuity of other that is comparable with the first one. These propositions can be considered as ‘pasting lemmas’ for maps of this type. They will be used in the following sections to prove that certain path lifting maps are continuous.
To this end, we will use the following lemmas.
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let be a topological space, let be an open subspace, let be a closed subspace, and let be such that is open in . Then
[TABLE]
is open in .
Proof.
Since is open in , there exists an open subset of such that . In particular, as , we have that . Hence,
[TABLE]
Since , and are open subsets of , the result follows. ∎
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let be a topological space, let be an open subspace, let be a closed subspace, and let be such that is closed in . Then
[TABLE]
is closed in .
Proof.
The proof of this lemma is analogous to the proof of 3.1. ∎
Proposition 3.3**.**
Let be a topological space and let be an Alexandroff space. Let be a closed subspace and let be two maps. If
- (1)
* is continuous,* 2. (2)
, 3. (3)
, and 4. (4)
* is continuous*
then is continuous.
Proof.
Let be an open subset. We have that
[TABLE]
It is clear that is open in . Now, as and is open, then . On the other hand, is open in . Applying 3.1, it follows that is open in . Hence, is continuous. ∎
Proposition 3.4**.**
Let be a topological space and let be an Alexandroff space. Let be an open subspace and let be two maps. If
- (1)
* is continuous,* 2. (2)
, 3. (3)
, and 4. (4)
* is continuous*
then is continuous.
Proof.
This proposition can be proved in a similar way as 3.3 applying 3.2. ∎
As a corollary of the previous propositions we obtain the following result, which generalizes Corollary 3 and Proposition 14 of [9].
Proposition 3.5**.**
Let be a topological space and let be an Alexandroff space. Let be continuous maps such that for all . Let . Then .
Proof.
Follows easily from 3.3 or from 3.4. ∎
4. Beat points and bp–retracts in
We begin this section introducing the definitions of beat points and bp–retracts in the category of objects over , for some , and extending some results of the classical theory of Stong and of the theory of bp–retracts of [4] to this category.
Definition 4.1**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map. Let .
- •
We say that is a down beat point of if it is a down beat point of both and .
- •
We say that is an up beat point of if it is an up beat point of both and .
- •
We say that is a beat point of if it is either a down beat point of or an up beat point of .
If is a beat point of , we will also say that the restriction of can be obtained from by removing the beat point .
We will say that the map is minimal if does not have beat points.
Definition 4.2**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map.
We will say that a map is a dbp–retract (resp. ubp–retract) of if it can be obtained by successively removing down beat points (resp. up beat points) of .
We will say that a continuous map is a core of if it is a minimal map and a strong deformation retract of the map (cf. definition 2.1).
Remark 4.3*.*
Let and be finite T0–spaces, let be a continuous map and let . From the previous definition it follows that is a down beat point of if and only if is a down beat point of and where . In a similar way, is an up beat point of if and only if is an up beat point of and where .
Proposition 4.4**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces, let be a continuous map, let be a down beat point (resp. up beat point) of , let be the inclusion map and let be the retraction associated to the removal of the down beat point (resp. up beat point) .
If is a down beat point (resp. up beat point) of , then is an arrow over and is a strong deformation retract of . Conversely, if is an arrow over from to , then is a down beat point (resp. up beat point) of .
Proof.
We will prove the case in which is a down beat point of . The other case is similar.
First suppose that is a down beat point of . It is clear that is an arrow over and from remark 4.3 it follows that is also an arrow over . Moreover, and the canonical homotopy is clearly a homotopy over relative to . It follows that is a strong deformation retract of .
Now suppose that is an arrow over and let . Then
[TABLE]
The result follows from remark 4.3. ∎
The following corollary is immediate.
Corollary 4.5**.**
Every continuous map between finite T0–spaces has a core.
Example 4.6**.**
Let be a finite T0–space and let be a core of . Let be the inclusion map and let be a retraction of obtained by successively removing the beat points . We will prove that is a core of .
We define and, inductively, for . In addition, we consider for , the retraction corresponding to the removal of the beat point and the inclusion map . We will prove that, for all , the point is a beat point of the restriction
[TABLE]
of .
Let . Since , it follows that
[TABLE]
Thus, by 4.4 it follows that is a beat point of the restriction of . Hence, is strong deformation retract of .
Inductively, it is easy to see that is strong deformation retract of for . In particular, is strong deformation retract of . Moreover, since the fibers of are one-point spaces, it is clear that the map is minimal. It follows that is a core of .
Proposition 4.7**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map. If does not have down beat points (resp. up beat points) and is an arrow over such that (resp. ), then .
Proof.
We will prove the case in which does not have down beat points and . The other case is similar. Let and suppose that . Let . It is not difficult to prove that and hence is a down beat point of . Moreover, as is an arrow over , . From remark 4.3 it follows that is a down beat point of , which entails a contradiction. Hence, is empty and thus . ∎
Corollary 4.8**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces, let be a minimal map and let be an arrow over such that over . Then .
Proof.
Follows easily from 2.3 and the previous proposition. ∎
Corollary 4.9**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map. Then, two cores of are isomorphic.
The results of [4] regarding bp–retracts in can be extended in a natural way to the category for all . In what follows we will show how some of these results can be extended.
The following theorem is a generalization of 2.5 ([4, Theorem 3.5]).
Theorem 4.10**.**
Let , and be finite T0–spaces with . Let be the inclusion map and let and be continuous maps such that . We consider and as objects over and the map as an arrow over . Then, the following propositions are equivalent:
- (1)
* is a dbp–retract of .* 2. (2)
There exists an arrow over such that , and . 3. (3)
There exists a unique arrow over such that , and . 4. (4)
There exists a retraction of such that . 5. (5)
There exists a unique retraction of such that .
Proof.
From the definition of down beat point of , it is clear that the retraction associated to the removal of a down beat point of is an arrow over . Thus, the implication follows. On the other hand, the implication can be proved easily taking as in the proof of Theorem 3.5 of [4].
Now, we will prove . We proceed as in the proof of Theorem 3.5 of [4]. Suppose that there exists an arrow over such that , and . Let . Suppose that and take . In the proof of Theorem 3.5 of [4] it is proved that is down beat point of with . Since , it follows that and from remark 4.3, we obtain that is down beat point of . The proof follows as in [4].
The rest of the implications can be proved as in [4] applying the fact that the maps involved are arrows over . ∎
Proposition 4.11**.**
Let , , and be finite T0–spaces with and let be a continuous map. Let and be restrictions of . If is a dbp–retract of then is a dbp–retract of .
Proof.
The proof of this proposition is analogous to the proof of Proposition 3.8 of [4]. ∎
The following proposition will be useful in the following sections.
Proposition 4.12**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map. Let be the set of dbp–retracts of . We define the following partial order in : given , we define if and only if is a dbp–retract of .
Then has a minimum element.
Proof.
The proof of this proposition is similar to the proof of proposition 3.18 of [4], applying the analogous versions of the results given in that article. ∎
Now we will prove that the core of a fiber bundle between finite T0–spaces is again a fiber bundle.
Proposition 4.13**.**
Let , and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fiber bundle with fiber . Then the core of is a fiber bundle with base and whose fiber is a core of .
Proof.
By Theorem 2.10, we may assume without loss of generality that and that for some functor .
Let be the smallest dbp–retract of . Let be the inclusion map and let be the retraction associated to . Let be an automorphism of . Then
[TABLE]
and since does not have down beat points, it follows that . Interchanging and we obtain that and hence, is an automorphism of with inverse .
Let be the functor defined by
[TABLE]
for every such that . We will prove that is indeed a functor. First, it is clear that
[TABLE]
for all . Now, given such that , it follows that
[TABLE]
from where we obtain that
[TABLE]
by Lemma 8.1.1 of [2]. Thus, is a functor.
Now, from 2.9 we obtain that that is a fiber bundle over with fiber . We will prove that is the smallest dbp–retract of .
Let be again an automorphism of and let . Then
[TABLE]
In addition, it is clear that . It follows from 2.5 and 2.6 that the image of is a dbp–retract of which is contained in . Since is the smallest dbp–retract of , it follows from 2.6 that . Hence, and since is an epimorphism, we obtain that , or equivalently, .
In a similar way, taking and noting that and that , it can be proved that and hence, . This shows that and induce natural transformations and , respectively, where and are the inclusion functors.
By 2.8, and induce morphisms of fiber bundles over , and . It is clear that the map is a inclusion map of sets. By functoriality of the topological Grothendieck construction, and since , it follows that . Hence, the inclusion map of in is a subspace map, and hence, we may consider as a subspace of .
On the other hand, since for all , an explicit calculation shows that
[TABLE]
for all and all , from where we obtain that . It follows that is a dbp–retract of . Moreover, since and are arrows over , it follows from 4.10 that is a dbp–retract of , and since the fibers of do not have down beat points, we obtain that is the smallest dbp–retract of , as desired.
Thus, we have proved that the smallest dbp–retract of a fiber bundle between finite T0–spaces is a fiber bundle whose fiber is the smallest dbp–retract of the fibers of the first. An analogous result for ubp–retracts of fiber bundles can be proved in a similar way. By an inductive argument, we obtain that any core of a fiber bundle between finite T0–spaces is again a fiber bundle, whose fibers are homeomorphic to the cores of the fibers of the original fiber bundle. ∎
The following proposition is easy and will be applied to prove proposition 4.15 which shows a relationship between the beat points of an open or closed map with the beat points of its fibers and of its codomain.
Proposition 4.14**.**
Let and Alexandroff spaces and let be a continuous map. The following propositions are equivalent.
- (1)
The map is open. 2. (2)
For all , . 3. (3)
For all and all , .
In a similar way, the following propositions are equivalent.
- (4)
The map is closed. 2. (5)
For all , . 3. (6)
For all and all , .
Proof.
It is clear that . We will prove that . Let and let . Since is open, is an open subset of that contains and hence . It follows that there exists such that . It is clear then that .
Now we will prove . Let . Since is continuous we have that . Now, let and let . Then and the result follows.
The equivalence can be proved in a similar way. ∎
Proposition 4.15**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map. If is an open map and is a down beat point of , then either is down beat point of or is down beat point of .
In a similar way, if is a closed map and is an up beat point of , then either is an up beat point of or is an up beat point of .
Proof.
Suppose that is an open map and that is a down beat point of . Let . If the result follows from remark 4.3. Thus suppose that . We will prove that . Let . By 4.14 there exists . Since we obtain that . Hence, and thus . Then and the result follows.
The second part of the proposition can be proved in a similar way. ∎
5. Fibrations and beat points
In the following, all maps will be considered non-empty.
Proposition 5.1**.**
Let and be two finite T0–spaces, let be a fibration and let be a beat point of . Then, the restriction of is a fibration which is fiber homotopy equivalent to .
Proof.
Since is retract of we obtain that is fibration. The result then follows by proposition 4.4. ∎
Theorem 5.2**.**
Let and be two finite T0–spaces, let be a continuous map and let be a down beat point of such that the restriction of is a fibration. Then is a fibration.
Proof.
Let be a path-lifting map for . Let be the map induced by and the exponential law. Let be the inclusion map and let be the retraction associated to the removal of the beat point . It is easy to see that the arrows , and induce a morphism from the diagram to the diagram and hence, a continuous map that sends the pair to . The map is clearly continuous and sends the element of to . We define by
[TABLE]
Observe that and that coincides with on . On the other hand, the restriction of to is the projection to and hence it is a continuous map. By 3.3, it follows that is a continuous map. It is easy to verify that induces a path-lifting map for . ∎
We will see in subsection 7.1 that the previous proposition does not hold if we change down beat points to up beat points.
Corollary 5.3**.**
Let and be two finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map. The following propositions are equivalent.
- (1)
* is a fibration.* 2. (2)
Every dbp–retract of is fibration. 3. (3)
There exists a dbp–retract of which is fibration.
Proof.
The implication follows from 5.1 and the implication is immediate. The implication follows easily from 5.2 applying an inductive argument. ∎
The following result generalizes 2.2.
Theorem 5.4**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces, let be a fibration and let be a continuous map which is homotopic to . If is a minimal map, then .
Proof.
Let be a homotopy. Then and hence there exists such that and . Since is minimal and , we obtain that by 2.2. Then . ∎
Corollary 5.5**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. If is minimal and is connected, then is minimal.
Proof.
We will prove that the unique continuous map which is homotopic to is . Let be a continuous map such that . Then , and since is minimal, we deduce that by 5.4. And since (non-empty) Hurewicz fibrations over path-connected spaces are surjective it follows that as desired.
Now let be a bp–retract of . Applying 2.5 (or its dual version for up beat points), we obtain that there exists a continuous map which is homotopic to and which satisfies that . By the result proved in the previous paragraph we obtain that , from where it follows that . Therefore is minimal. ∎
Theorem 5.6**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. Let and let . Then .
Proof.
If the result follows, since, in that case . Thus suppose that . Let be the Sierpinski space with and let the map defined by
[TABLE]
It is clear that and hence, is a continuous map. Let be defined by . Then and hence there exists a continuous map such that and . Since , we obtain that and hence, there exists such that . In particular, . But and then . Hence . ∎
Corollary 5.7**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. Then is an open map.
If, in addition, is connected, then is a quotient map.
Proof.
In [4] we gave the following definition.
Definition 5.8** ([4, Definition 3.15]).**
Let be a finite T0–space and let be a continuous function such that . We define by where is such that .
It is easy to verify that, under the assumptions of the previous definition, the map is well defined [4, p.240].
The following lemma will be applied to prove 5.10.
Lemma 5.9**.**
Let be a finite T0–space, let be the smallest dbp–retract of and let be the map associated to the dbp–retract given by 2.5, that is, the unique continuous map from to itself such that , and . Then is the minimum element of .
Proof.
Let . By Lemma 3.16 of [4], and . By 2.5, is a dbp–retract of and thus . By 2.6, . The result follows. ∎
Theorem 5.10**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces such that is connected. Let be a fibration and let and the smallest dbp–retracts of and respectively. Then is a dbp–retract of .
Proof.
Let and be the continuous maps which are associated to the dbp–retracts and respectively, given by 2.5. By 5.9, and are the minimum elements of and respectively.
Since is a finite space, is a Hurewicz fibration between finite T0–spaces. It follows from 5.7 that is an open map. In particular, sends each minimal element of to a minimal element of . Since is a minimal element of , is a minimal element of . On the other hand, as , we have that from where we obtain that . Hence and then . By [4, Proposition 2.8], we obtain that is a dbp–retract of . ∎
Corollary 5.11**.**
Let , and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. Let be a continuous map and let be a continuous map such that . Then there exists a continuous map such that and .
Proof.
Since is a finite space, is a fibration between finite T0–spaces. Since by 5.6 we obtain that there exists . Then and . ∎
In 5.5 we proved that if is a fibration between finite T0–spaces and is connected and does not have beat points, then does not have beat points either. The following result shows that is also true if we consider only down beat points. We will see in 7.1, that this result does not hold if we only consider up beat points.
Corollary 5.12**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. Suppose that does not have down beat points. Then is a minimal element of .
If, in addition, is connected, then does not have down beat points.
Proof.
Since does not have down beat points, it follows from 2.2 that is a minimal element of . Hence, as in the proof of 5.10, we have that is a minimal element of .
Now suppose that is connected. Let be the minimal dbp–retract of and let be the map associated to given by 2.5. Since , we have as in 5.10 that and hence . Since is connected, it follows that is surjective and hence . Then and thus does not have down beat points. ∎
Combining 4.15 and 5.12 we immediately obtain the following result.
Corollary 5.13**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces such that is connected and let be a fibration without down beat points. Then has down beat points if and only if has down beat points.
The following result is a generalization of 5.6.
Theorem 5.14**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. Let and let . Then is contractible.
Proof.
Let and let . Let be the inclusion map. Then and by 5.11 it follows that there exists such that and . It is easy to see then that .
Let be the restriction of . Since , it follows that . On the other hand, . Therefore and thus is contractible. ∎
The following result can be considered as a notably weaker dual version of 5.6.
Theorem 5.15**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. Let and let . Then there exists such that .
Proof.
Let be the topological space whose underlying set is and whose topology is generated by the subbase . Observe that is a locally finite T0–space and that and for all .
Let . It is clear that is an open subset of . We define the map by
[TABLE]
It is easy to verify that is continuous. Note that , where is the constant map with value . Hence, there exists a continuous map such that and . Now, and hence is an open subset of that contains . Then there exists such that .
Let be such that . Then and . Taking it follows that . On the other hand, since , then and hence
[TABLE]
But and then . Hence and the result follows. ∎
The previous result shows that if is a fibration between finite T0–spaces, then for any and for any , there exists a point such that , belongs to the same fiber than and is smaller than some point of the fiber of . In subsection 7.1 we will give an example that shows that, in general, it is not true that for any .
Corollary 5.16**.**
Let , and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. Let and be continuous maps such that . Then there exist continuous maps such that , and .
Proof.
The proof of this result is analogous to the proof of 5.11. ∎
Proposition 5.17**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration without down beat points. Then is a closed map.
Proof.
By 4.14, it suffices to prove that for all and all , there exists . Let , let and let be the restriction of . Then is the pullback of along the inclusion map and hence it is a fibration. Since is an open subset of , any down beat point of is a down beat point of . Thus the down beat points of are down beat points of . In particular, does not have down beat points.
Now, and hence there exist continuous maps such that , and . In particular, is an arrow over from to and . Since does not have down beat points, it follows from 4.7 that and hence . Since and , we obtain that . ∎
Proposition 5.18**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a Hurewicz fibration.
- (1)
If is a down beat point of , then is a down beat point of or is a down beat point of . 2. (2)
If does not have down beat points and is an up beat point of , then is an up beat point of or is an up beat point of .
Proof.
The first item follows from 4.15 and 5.7. The second item follows from 4.15 and 5.17. ∎
Theorem 5.19**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces such that is connected and let be a fibration which is a minimal map. Then is minimal if and only if is minimal.
Proof.
In 5.5 we have proved that if is minimal then is also minimal. Thus suppose that is minimal. Since does not have down beat points, it follows from 5.18 that if is a beat point of then is a beat point of or is a beat point of . Since and do not have beat points, it is clear that will not have beat points either. ∎
A Hurewicz fibration is called trivial if it is fiber homotopy equivalent to the projection for some space which is homotopy equivalent to the fibers of . If is a space which is homotopy equivalent to , then the projection is fiber homotopy equivalent to the projection . It follows that is fiber homotopy equivalent to the projection .
Proposition 5.20**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces such that is connected and let be a trivial fibration which is a minimal map. Then is isomorphic to the projection for some minimal finite T0–space . In particular, the fibers of are minimal spaces.
Proof.
Let be the core of a fiber of . Since is a trivial fibration and its fibers have the homotopy type of , then is fiber homotopy equivalent to the projection . Let be a homotopy equivalence over with inverse . Since is minimal, then is minimal. And since and are minimal maps, it follows from 4.8 that and . Hence and are isomorphisms over . Thus . In particular, the fibers of are all homeomorphic to , which is a minimal space. ∎
6. Hurewicz and Grothendieck fibrations
A continuous map between T0 topological spaces can be viewed as a functor between posets and hence we can study whether it is a Grothendieck fibration or not (cf. definition 2.16). Since in a poset the arrows only depend on its domain and its codomain, the definition of Grothendieck fibration between posets adopts a much simpler form that is stated in the following lemma.
Lemma 6.1**.**
Let and be Alexandroff T0–spaces and let be a continuous map. For each and each , the unique arrow in of to has a cartesian lift to if and only if there exists such that , in which case, the arrow is the only cartesian lift of to .
In particular, is a Grothendieck fibration if and only if for all and all , the set has a maximum element and this maximum element belongs to .
Proof.
If the cartesian lift of an arrow to a given object exists, then it is unique up to composition with a unique isomorphism. Since in a poset there do not exist non-trivial isomorphisms, then the cartesian lift of an arrow for and is unique if it exists.
Let and let . Suppose that there exists such that the unique arrow is a cartesian lift of . It is clear that and that . Now let . Since the arrow is cartesian, there exists an arrow . It follows that . Hence .
Now suppose that has a maximum element . It is clear that the arrow is a lift of to . On the other hand, for each arrow such that , we have that and hence . Therefore there exists a unique arrow and the composition is equal to . Thus, the arrow is cartesian. The result follows. ∎
Remark 6.2*.*
It follows from 6.1 that a continuous map between Alexandroff T0–spaces is a Grothendieck opfibration if and only if for all and all , the set has a minimum element and this minimum element belongs to .
In [6] it is observed that if a category does not have non-trivial isomorphisms, then the unique possible cleavage for a Grothendieck fibration is closed. This is also mentioned in section B1.3 of [7]. In particular, is a split fibration. We will prove the particular case of this relevant fact in our context, that is, in the case that is a Grothendieck fibration between posets.
Lemma 6.3**.**
Let and be Alexandroff T0–spaces and let be a Grothendieck fibration (resp. Grothendieck opfibration). Then there exists a unique cleavage (resp. opcleavage) for and that cleavage is closed.
Proof.
Suppose that is a Grothendieck fibration. By the previous lemma, if and then there exists a unique cartesian lift of to that is the unique arrow of to , where and . It follows that there exists a unique cleavage for . We will prove that this cleavage is closed.
It is clear that the cartesian lift of to is , for all . Now, suppose that . We want to prove that the cartesian lift of to coincides with the composition where is the cartesian lift of to and is the cartesian lift of to . In other words, we want to prove that
[TABLE]
where .
Since it follows that , from where we obtain that and hence, that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, as , then from where we obtain that . Thus,
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
Thus, it is clear that
[TABLE]
The result follows.
The case in which is a Grothendieck opfibration follows applying the previous case to . ∎
It is known that the split Grothendieck fibrations are those functors that can be realized as Grothendieck constructions over contravariant functors to Cat (Theorem 1.3.5, B1.3 of [7], see also [5]). In a similar way, the split Grothendieck opfibrations are those functors that can be realized as Grothendieck constructions over covariant functors to Cat.
Now, it is clear that if is a Grothendieck opfibration between posets, then the fibers of are posets and hence can be realized as the Grothendieck construction over a covariant functor to Pos, or equivalently, as the topological Grothendieck construction over a covariant functor to Top. Conversely, if is the projection associated to the topological Grothendieck construction over a functor from a poset in Top that maps each element of to an Alexandroff T0–space, then it coincides with the classical Grothendieck construction over a functor to Cat and hence it is a Grothendieck opfibration. Thus, the Grothendieck opfibrations over between posets are those functors that can be realized, in a canonical way, as projections associated to topological Grothendieck constructions of functors from to Pos.
In a similar way, the Grothendieck fibrations over between posets are those functors that can be realized as projections associated to topological Grothendieck constructions of functors from to Pos.
Theorem 6.4**.**
Let and be Alexandroff T0–spaces and let be a continuous map.
- (1)
The map is a Grothendieck fibration if and only if there exists a functor such that . In that case, the functor can be defined canonically by
[TABLE]
for all and by
[TABLE]
for all and all such that . 2. (2)
* is a Grothendieck opfibration if and only if there exists a functor such that . In that case, the functor can be canonically defined by*
[TABLE]
for all and by
[TABLE]
for all and all such that .
Proof.
Item follows from the version of 2.19 for covariant functors applying the unique opcleavage for that can be obtained from 6.2, which is closed by 6.3.
Item can be proved as follows. If is a Grothendieck fibration then is a Grothendieck opfibration and hence, by , there exists a functor such that . Conversely, if there exists a functor such that , since is a Grothendieck opfibration, we have that is also a Grothendieck opfibration. Then is a Grothendieck fibration. ∎
In the following lemma, we state some properties of the functors and constructed in 6.4.
Lemma 6.5**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a Grothendieck bifibration. Let and the functors defined in 6.4 and let such that . Then
- (1)
. 2. (2)
. 3. (3)
. 4. (4)
.
Proof.
First we will prove item . Let . Then and hence, from where it is clear that .
Item can be proved in a similar way.
From it follows that
[TABLE]
and that
[TABLE]
while from it follows that
[TABLE]
and that
[TABLE]
Thus, items and follow. ∎
Remark 6.6*.*
Let and be finite T0–spaces, let be a Grothendieck bifibration and let and be the functors defined in 6.4. Let be such that . From 6.5 we obtain that and are homotopy equivalences. Moreover, from 6.5 and 2.5 it follows that is an ubp–retract of that is homeomorphic to the space , which is a dbp–retract of .
However, as the following example shows, in general it is not true that the minimum ubp–retract of is homeomorphic to a dbp–retract of , neither is it true that the smallest dbp–retract of is homeomorphic to an ubp–retract of .
In particular, in general it is not true that the minimum ubp–retract of is homeomorphic to the smallest dbp–retract of .
Example 6.7**.**
Let be the poset with underlying set with partial order generated by , and and let be the Sierpinski space. Let be the canonical projection, which is represented in the following diagram.
\bullet$$(d,0)$$\bullet$$(c,0)$$\bullet$$(b,0)$$\bullet$$(a,0)$$\bullet$$(d,1)$$\bullet$$(c,1)$$\bullet$$(b,1)$$\bullet$$(a,1)$$\pi_{\mathcal{S}}$$\bullet[math]\bullet$$1
It is easy to see that is a Grothendieck bifibration, that the minimal ubp–retract of is not homeomorphic to any dbp–retract of and that the minimal dbp–retract of is not homeomorphic to any ubp–retract of .
The following proposition follows immediately from 6.6.
Proposition 6.8**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces with connected and let be a Grothendieck bifibration. Then the fibers of are homotopy equivalent.
Theorem 6.9**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces with connected and let be a Grothendieck bifibration with minimal fibers. Then is a fiber bundle.
Proof.
Consider the functors and defined in 6.4. Since the fibers of are minimal, by 2.2 and 6.5, the maps and are mutually inverse homeomorphisms for every such that . In particular, is a morphism-inverting functor. It follows from 2.9 that is a fiber bundle. By 6.4, we have that and hence is also a fiber bundle. ∎
However, it is not true that a minimal Grothendieck bifibration between finite T0–spaces is a fiber bundle, as the following example shows.
Example 6.10**.**
Let be the finite topological space with underlying set and with topology generated by the basis . Let be the finite topological space with underlying set and with topology generated by the basis . Let and let be the projection map.
\bullet$$(a,0)$$\bullet$$(a,1)$$\bullet$$(a,2)$$\bullet$$(b,0)$$\bullet$$(b,1)$$\bullet$$(b,2)$$\bullet$$(c,0)$$\bullet$$(c,1)$$\bullet$$(c,2)$$\bullet$$(d,0)$$\bullet$$(d,1)$$\bullet$$(d,2)$$p$$\bullet$$a$$\bullet$$c$$\bullet$$b$$\bullet$$d
An exhaustive verification shows that is a Grothendieck bifibration and that is a minimal map. Since the fibers of are not homeomorphic, it is clear that is not a fiber bundle.
Observe that, by 4.13, can not be obtained from a fiber bundle between finite T0–spaces by successively removing beat points of that fiber bundle.
Lemma 6.11**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a Grothendieck bifibration. Suppose, in addition, that has a maximum element and that (that is, is homeomorphic to the non-Hausdorff cone of a discrete finite topological space). Then is a retract of the canonical projection .
Proof.
The idea of the proof is the following. First observe that the fiber is an ubp–retract of and hence, we may retract to by successively removing up beat points of the projection to . After that, we may retract each subspace with to , removing up beat points again. These two steps can be done simultaneously, obtaining an ubp–retract of . Finally, we may retract each subspace with to removing down beat points. The space obtained is homeomorphic over to , and thus it follows that is a retract of . In what follows, we will state formally and prove these facts.
Let , let be the inclusion map and let be the map defined by
[TABLE]
It is easy to see that is well defined, that , that and that . Hence, if we prove that is continuous, from the dual version for ubp–retracts of 4.10 it will follow that is an ubp–retract of . And since is a subspace map, it suffices to prove that is continuous. Moreover, since , it suffices to prove that is continuous, where is the canonical projection.
Note that . Let . Clearly is an open subset of and coincides with in . On the other hand, the restriction of to is the map defined by
[TABLE]
for all . Then, it is easy to prove that is continuous. From 3.3, it follows that is continuous as desired. Thus, is an ubp–retract of and is an ubp–retract of .
Let be the map defined by and let be the map defined by for all . It is clear that is continuous, and since , it follows that is a subspace map.
We will prove now that is continuous. Let be such that . Then and . It follows that
[TABLE]
where the second and third equalities hold by 6.1. Thus, is continuous.
On the other hand, it is easy to see that , that , that and that . It follows that is a dbp–retract of and that is a dbp–retract of . In particular, is a retract of as we wanted to prove. ∎
In order to stablish a relationship between Hurewicz fibrations between finite T0–spaces and Grothendieck fibrations, we will need to study the regularity of path lifting maps associated to Hurewicz fibrations and its relationship with the existence of beat points.
Theorem 6.12**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a fibration. Then:
- (1)
If is minimal, all path-lifting maps for are regular. 2. (2)
If does not have down beat points, then there exists a regular path-lifting map for .
Proof.
For each , let be defined by . Let be the canonical projection.
First we will prove . Suppose that is a minimal map and that is a path-lifting map for . Then and hence we may apply to lift from , obtaining a continuous map such that and . It is not difficult to verify that is equal to , the map induced by by the exponential law, where is the map induced in the pullback by the maps and . Explicitly, for all and . Hence, it suffices to prove that for every and .
Note that, in particular, for all . Hence, is a homotopy over . Then is homotopic to over for all . Since is minimal, it follows from 4.8 that . Hence for all and all as desired. The result follows.
Now we will prove . Suppose that does not have down beat points and that is a path-lifting map for . As we have done previously, we use the map to lift from , obtaining again a homotopy such that and . For each , and hence there exists such that . Let . Then for all . Since does not have down beat points, it follows from 4.7 that for all . In particular, lifts constant paths to paths that are constant in the interval .
Given , we define by . Note that the assignment from to is continuous. Applying the exponential law it is easy to prove that the map defined by
[TABLE]
is continuous. A direct computation shows that is a path-lifting map for .
Now, if is a constant path in and , then is a constant path and hence for all . It follows that for all . Hence, is a regular path-lifting map for . ∎
Example 6.13**.**
In this example we will exhibit a Hurewicz fibration between finite T0–spaces that does not have down beat points and that admits a path-lifting map which is not regular. This shows that a fibration without down beat points can have non-regular path-lifting maps.
Let be the finite T0–space whose underlying set is and whose topology is . Let be the singleton and let the only possible map. Note that is a Hurewicz fibration which does not have down beat points.
Let be defined by
[TABLE]
for all and all , where is the only possible path in . It is easy to verify that is a path-lifting map for which is not regular.
In subsection 7.1 we will exhibit a Hurewicz fibration that does not have up beat points and that does not have regular path-lifting maps.
Recall that if is a path in a topological space and , the map is the path in defined by for all (definition 2.13).
Definition 6.14**.**
Let and be topological spaces and let be a fibration. Let be a regular path-lifting map for . We say that is a normalized regular path-lifting map if for all and for all .
Lemma 6.15**.**
Let and be topological spaces and let be a fibration which admits a regular path-lifting map . Then there exists a normalized regular path-lifting map for .
Proof.
We define by
[TABLE]
for all and for all . The assignment of in is clearly continuous, since it can be factored as the composition
[TABLE]
where is the multiplication map. By the exponential law, the assignment from to is also continuous.
It is not difficult to prove that this map induces a continuous map
[TABLE]
which sends the element to . Composing this map with
[TABLE]
we conclude that is continuous. Thus is also a continuous map.
Since is regular and for all , it follows that
[TABLE]
for all . On the other hand,
[TABLE]
for all and . Thus, is a path-lifting map for .
Now, since for every and , , it follows that
[TABLE]
for every and . Thus for all and for all as desired. ∎
Remark 6.16*.*
Under the hypotheses of the previous lemma, we may consider the assignment as an operator in the set of regular path-lifting maps of . In this case, it is easy to verify that .
Definition 6.17**.**
Let be a finite T0–space and let be a path in . We say that is a path of type if it is constant in the interval and we say that is a path of type if it is constant in the interval .
In informal terms, the paths of type “go down” in time and remain constant in the interval , while the paths of type remain constant in the interval and then “go up” in time . We make these claims precise in the following remark.
Remark 6.18*.*
Let be a finite T0–space and let be a path in . It is easy to see that
- (1)
if is of type , then for all , and 2. (2)
if is of type , then for all .
Equivalently, is of type if and (cf. definition 2.14) and is of type if and .
Lemma 6.19**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces, let be a fibration and let be a normalized regular path-lifting map for . Let be a path in and let .
- (1)
If is of type , then is of type . 2. (2)
If is of type , then is of type .
Proof.
Suppose that is of type . Then for all and hence
[TABLE]
for all . Hence, is of type .
Now suppose that is of type . Then for all . It follows that
[TABLE]
for all . Hence, is of type . ∎
The following theorem is the principal result of this section.
Theorem 6.20**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a Hurewicz fibration which admits a regular path-lifting map. Then is a Grothendieck bifibration.
Proof.
We have to prove that
- (1)
for all and for all , the set has a maximum element which belongs to , and 2. (2)
for all and for all , the set has a minimum element which belongs to .
By 6.15, we may consider a normalized regular path-lifting map for .
First we will prove . Let and let . Note that if the result follows trivially since in that case and . Then, we may suppose that .
Let and let be the inclusion map. Let be the map defined by
[TABLE]
It is easy to see that is continuous and that in . The path induces a homotopy from to (cf. definition 2.14). Since , we may use the map to obtain a lift of by from , which is the map induced by by the exponential law, where is the induced map in the pullback by and .
Note that, for all , the path is the constant path . By the regularity of we obtain that is the constant path . On the other hand, the path is the path which is a path of type . It follows from 6.19 that is the path of type , where .
It is easy to see that . Indeed,
[TABLE]
We will prove that . Let . By the continuity of and since , we obtain that
[TABLE]
The result follows.
Now we will prove . Let and let . Let , let be the inclusion map and let be defined by
[TABLE]
It is not difficult to prove that is continuous. Note that . Now, the path in induces a homotopy from to and we may use to obtain a lift of by from . Note that the path is the constant path for all . Note also that the path is the path which is a path of type . It follows from 6.19 that is the path of type , where . Thus . The proof that is similar to the one that was done for the previous case. ∎
From the results given in this section, we obtain the following theorem.
Theorem 6.21**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a Hurewicz fibration without down beat points. Then
- (1)
* has a normalized regular path-lifting map.* 2. (2)
* is a Grothendieck bifibration.*
Proof.
Since does not have down beat points, it follows from 6.12 and 6.15 that there exists a normalized regular path-lifting map for . This proves , while proposition follows from and 6.20. ∎
The following result is immediate.
Corollary 6.22**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a Hurewicz fibration. Then the smallest dbp–retract of is a Grothendieck bifibration.
As a corollary of the previous results, we obtain a combinatorial proof of the fact that the fibers of a fibration with connected codomain are homotopy equivalent for the particular case of Hurewicz fibrations between finite T0–spaces.
Corollary 6.23**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces such that is connected and let be a Hurewicz fibration. Then the fibers of are homotopy equivalent.
Proof.
Let be the smallest dbp–retract of . Then is a Hurewicz fibration without down beat points. It follows from 6.21 that is a Grothendieck bifibration. Since is connected, it follows from 6.8 that the fibers of are homotopy equivalent. But for each , the fiber is a dbp–retract of the fiber since it can be obtained from it by successively removing down beat points of . The result follows. ∎
Lemma 6.24**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map without down beat points. Suppose, in addition, that has a maximum element and that . Then the following propositions are equivalent.
- (1)
* is a Hurewicz fibration.* 2. (2)
* is a Grothendieck bifibration.* 3. (3)
* is a retract of the canonical projection .*
Proof.
The implication follows from 6.21. From 6.11 it follows that . The implication is clear. ∎
It follows from the previous lemma and from 5.3 that if is a finite T0–space, is the Sierpinski space and is a continuous map, then is a Hurewicz fibration if and only if the smallest dbp–retract of is a Grothendieck bifibration. The following theorem extends this result to other codomains which have a minimum element.
Theorem 6.25**.**
Let and be finite T0–spaces and let be a continuous map. Suppose, in addition, that has a minimum element . Then is a Hurewicz fibration if and only if the smallest dbp–retract of is a Grothendieck bifibration.
Proof.
By corollaries 6.22 and 5.3, it suffices to prove that if is a Grothendieck bifibration, then it is a Hurewicz fibration. Thus suppose that is a Grothendieck bifibration. Consider the functors and constructed in 6.4.
We define the map by
[TABLE]
for each and for each .
We will prove that is well defined. If are such that , then . Thus for all by remark 6.2. Given and taking in the previous inequality, it follows that . Hence, is continuous for all . Therefore is well defined as desired.
Now we will prove that is continuous. Let be such that . Then and thus
[TABLE]
Now, if , from the continuity of it follows that
[TABLE]
Hence, .
Observe that the maps and induce a continuous map
[TABLE]
that sends each element of to the element of . Composing this map with the evaluation map we obtain a continuous map defined by for all and all .
We define now by
[TABLE]
It is clear that for all in the open subset . On the other hand, if , we have that
[TABLE]
where the inequality holds by item of 6.5. Thus, . In addition, it is clear that the restriction of to the closed subset is continuous since it coincides with the projection to . By 3.3, it follows that is continuous. On the other hand, we have that for all and since is a section of for all it follows that for all and all . Hence, is a path-lifting map for . Therefore, is a Hurewicz fibration. ∎
7. Examples
In this section we will show several important examples which give counterexamples to natural questions related to this work.
7.1. A Hurewicz fibration that is not a closed map
In this example we exhibit a Hurewicz fibration between finite T0–spaces that is not closed. As a consequence we obtain an example of a Hurewicz fibration between finite T0–spaces whose opposite map is not a Hurewicz fibration.
Let and be the finite T0–spaces represented in the following diagram and let be defined by .
\bullet$$(b,0)$$\bullet$$(a,0)$$\bullet$$(a,1)$$p_{1}$$\bullet$$a$$\bullet$$b$$E_{1}$$B_{1}
Note that if we remove the down beat point of we obtain a homeomorphism, and in particular, a Hurewicz fibration. From 5.2, it follows that is a Hurewicz fibration. Note also that, since , then is not closed. Hence, the Hurewicz fibrations between finite T0–spaces are not necessarily closed.
Observe also that the space has up beat points although the space does not have up beat points. This shows that 5.12 does not hold if we replace down beat points by up beat points.
Since is not a closed map, then is not an open map. Thus, from 5.7 it follows that is not a fibration.
\bullet$$(b,0)$$\bullet$$(a,0)$$\bullet$$(a,1)$$p_{1}^{\textnormal{op}}$$\bullet$$a$$\bullet$$b$$E_{1}^{\textnormal{op}}$$B_{1}^{\textnormal{op}}
Note that if we remove the up beat point of we obtain a homeomorphism. This shows that in 5.2 it is essential that the beat point that is removed is a down beat point of the considered map.
Moreover, the map does not have up beat points, and as is not a Grothendieck bifibration, it follows from 6.20 that does not have regular path-lifting maps. This shows that item of 6.12 does not hold changing down beat points to up beat points.
7.2. A Serre fibration that is not a Hurewicz fibration
In this example we will show that there exist maps between finite T0–spaces that have the homotopy lifting property with respect to metric spaces (and in particular, with respect to locally finite CW–complexes) which are not Hurewicz fibrations.
Let and be the finite T0–spaces represented in the following diagram and let be defined by .
\bullet$$(b,0)$$\bullet$$(a,0)$$\bullet$$(a,1)$$\bullet$$(a,2)$$p_{2}$$\bullet$$a$$\bullet$$b$$E_{2}$$B_{2}
Note that the map does not have down beat points. Since , then is not a closed map and it follows from 5.17 that is not a Hurewicz fibration. Naturally, we could have arrived to the same conclusion from 5.15 observing that there does not exist a point in the fiber of which is smaller than and whose closure intersects the fiber of . We will see, however, that the map has the homotopy lifting property with respect to metric spaces and with respect to compact spaces. This implies that the map has the homotopy lifting property with respect to locally finite CW–complexes and with respect to finite topological spaces.
Lemma 7.1**.**
Let be a topological space. If is either a metric space or a compact space, then the map has the homotopy lifting property with respect to .
Proof.
Let and be continuous maps such that .
First suppose that is a metric space. Note that is also a metric space and hence it is a normal space. Since is a closed subset of , we have that is a closed subset of which is contained in the open subset . Since is a normal space, there exists an open subset of such that
[TABLE]
It is not difficult to verify that
- (1)
The set is closed in . 2. (2)
The set is open in . 3. (3)
The set is closed in . 4. (4)
The set is open in .
Moreover, these four sets are pairwise disjoint and cover .
We define the map by
[TABLE]
It is immediate that and are open subsets of . Moreover, since is closed, it follows that is open. Finally, and hence, it is closed in . It follows that is open. Therefore, is continuous. It is easy to verify that and that .
Now suppose that is compact. Then is a compact subspace. Since , by the Tube Lemma there exists such that .
In this case, we define the map by
[TABLE]
As in the previous case, it is not difficult to prove that is a continuous map and that and that . ∎
Since locally finite CW–complexes are metric spaces, we immediately obtain the following corollary.
Corollary 7.2**.**
The map is a Serre fibration that is not a Hurewicz fibration.
7.3. A Grothendieck bifibration that is not a retract of a fiber bundle
In this example we exhibit a Grothendieck bifibration between finite T0–spaces that is not a retract of a fiber bundle of the same type. In particular, it can not be obtained by successively removing beat points of a fiber bundle between finite T0–spaces.
Let and be the finite T0–spaces represented in the following diagram and let be defined by .
\bullet$$(a,0)$$\bullet$$(a,1)$$\bullet$$(a,2)$$\bullet$$(b,0)$$\bullet$$(c,0)$$\bullet$$(c,1)$$\bullet$$(d,0)$$\bullet$$(d,1)$$\bullet$$(e,0)$$p_{3}$$\bullet$$a$$\bullet$$b$$\bullet$$c$$\bullet$$d$$\bullet$$e$$E_{3}$$B_{3}
Observe that is a Grothendieck bifibration. In particular, the restriction
[TABLE]
is also a Grothendieck bifibration.
We will prove that is not a retract of a projection associated to a product of finite T0–spaces. This will show that the hypothesis over the height of the base of in 6.11 is necessary.
Let and be finite T0–spaces, let and be the projection maps and suppose that is a retract of . Then, there exist continuous maps , , , such that , , and , as the following commutative diagram shows.
B_{3}$$X$$B_{3}$$E_{3}$$X\times Y$$E_{3}$$j$$s$$i$$r$$p_{3}$$\pi_{X}$$p_{3}$$\mathrm{Id}_{E_{3}}$$\mathrm{Id}_{B_{3}}
Now, since then
[TABLE]
and since then . It follows that
[TABLE]
Therefore . Similarly, .
On the other hand,
[TABLE]
and hence . Then , which entails a contradiction. Therefore the map is not a retract of the projection of a product of finite T0–spaces.
In a similar way it can be proved that is not a retract of the projection of a product of finite T0–spaces, which shows that the hypothesis that has a maximum element in 6.11 is also necessary.
Note that since has a maximum element then, by 2.11, all fiber bundles with base and fiber T0 are isomorphic to projections of products. Hence, is not a retract of a fiber bundle over whose total space is finite and T0. In particular, can not be obtained by successively removing beat points of a fiber bundle between finite T0–spaces as we wanted to show.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Alexandroff, P. Diskrete Räume. Mathematiceskii Sbornik (N.S.) 2 , 3 (1937), 501–518.
- 2[2] Barmak, J. Algebraic topology of finite topological spaces and applications , vol. 2032 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics . Springer, Heidelberg, 2011.
- 3[3] Cianci, N., and Ottina, M. Classification of fiber bundles over Alexandroff spaces with T 0 fiber. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1907.03614 (2019). Disponible en https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.03614 .
- 4[4] Cianci, N., and Ottina, M. A combinatorial characterization of Hurewicz cofibrations between finite topological spaces. Topology Appl. 256 (2019), 235–247.
- 5[5] Gray, J. W. Fibred and cofibred categories. In Proceedings of the Conference on Categorical Algebra (1966), Springer, pp. 21–83.
- 6[6] Grothendieck, A., and Raynaud, M. Revêtements Etales et Groupe Fondamental: Séminaire de Géométrie Algébrique de Bois-Marie 1960/61. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 224 , 176.
- 7[7] Johnstone, P. T. Sketches of an elephant: A topos theory compendium , vol. 1. Oxford University Press, 2002.
- 8[8] May, J. P. Finite spaces and larger contexts. Unpublished book (2016).
