Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-24hb2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T00:48:43.342Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Shape morphisms and components of movable compacta

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

José M. R. Sanjurjo
Affiliation:
Facultad de Matemáticas, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain

Extract

The relationship between components and movability for compacta (i.e. compact metric spaces) was described by Borsuk in [5]. Borsuk proved that if each component of a compactum X is movable, then so is X. More recently Segal and Spiez[19], motivated by results of Alonso Morón[1], have constructed a (non-compact) metric space X of small inductive dimension zero and such that X is non-movable. The construction of Segal and Spiez was based on the famous space of P. Roy [16]. On the other hand, K. Borsuk gave in [5] an example of a movable compactum with non-movable components. The structure of such compacta was studied by Oledzki in [15], where he obtained an interesting result stating that if X is a movable compactum then the set of movable components of X is dense in the space of components of X. Oledzki's result was later strengthened by Nowak[14], who proved that if all movable components of a movable compactum X are of deformation dimension at most n, then so are the non-movable components and the compactum X itself.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Alonso-Morón, M.. Prabir Roy's space Δ as a counter-example in shape theory. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 98 (1986), 187188.Google Scholar
[2]Alonso-Morón, M.. On the problem of components in Shape Theory for metrizable spaces. Preprint.Google Scholar
[3]Ball, B. J.. Partitioning shape-equivalent spaces. Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Sér. Sci. Math. 29 (1981), 491497.Google Scholar
[4]Borsuk, K.. Theory of Retracts. Monografie Matematyczne no. 44 (Polish Scientific Publishers, 1967).Google Scholar
[5]Borsuk, K.. On movable compacta. Fund. Math. 66 (1969/1970), 137146.Google Scholar
[6]Borsuk, K.. Theory of Shape. Monografie Matematyczne no. 59 (Polish Scientific Publishers, 1975).Google Scholar
[7]Borsuk, K.. On the Lusternik–Schnirelman category in the theory of shape. Fund. Math. 99 (1978), 3542.Google Scholar
[8]Čerin, Z.. Locally compact spaces -tame at infinity. Publ. Inst. Math. (Beograd) (N.S.) 22 (36) (1977), 4959.Google Scholar
[9]Dydak, J. and Segal, J.. Shape Theory: An Introduction. Lecture Notes in Math. vol. 688 (Springer-Verlag, 1978).Google Scholar
[10]Godlewski, S.. On the shape of MAR and MANR-spaces. Fund. Math. 88 (1975), 8794.Google Scholar
[11]Hu, S. T.. Theory of Retracts (Wayne State University Press, 1965).Google Scholar
[12]Kodama, Y.. Decomposition spaces and shape in the sense of Fox. Fund. Math. 97 (1977), 199208.Google Scholar
[13]Mardešić, S. and Segal, J.. Shape Theory (North-Holland, 1982).Google Scholar
[14]Nowak, S.. Remarks on same shape properties of the components of movable compacta. Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Sér. Sci. Math. 27 (1979), 315319.Google Scholar
[15]Oledzki, J.. On the space of components of an R-movable compactum. Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Sér. Sci. Math. 22 (1974), 12391244.Google Scholar
[16]Roy, P.. Failure of equivalence of dimension concepts for metric spaces. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 68 (1962), 609613.Google Scholar
[17]Sanjurjo, J. M. R.. On a theorem of B. J. Ball. Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Sér. Sci. Math. 33 (1985), 177180.Google Scholar
[18]Sanjurjo, J. M. R.. On the shape category of compacta. J. London Math. Soc. (2) 34 (1986), 559567.Google Scholar
[19]Segal, J. and Spiez, S.. A non-movable space with movable components. Preprint.Google Scholar