How to define limit operations in general topological spaces? Are nets able to do this?is a net stronger than a transfinite sequence for characterizing topology?Permitted value of epsilon in Discrete Metric SpaceWhy are topological spaces interesting to study?Define $f(y)=d(x_0,y)$, prove that $f$ is continuous.Finite point set has limit points for general topological spaces?Is the uniform limit of continuous functions continuous for topological spaces?Can we define the concept of limit without a topology?Equivalent definition of limit of a function (Reference request)Can limits be defined in a more algebraic way, instead of using the completely analytic $delta$-$epsilon$ definition?Is Wikipedia correct about bounded sets?

How can I use the arrow sign in my bash prompt?

How could Frankenstein get the parts for his _second_ creature?

Is there any reason not to eat food that's been dropped on the surface of the moon?

How do I define a right arrow with bar in LaTeX?

Is the destination of a commercial flight important for the pilot?

Applicability of Single Responsibility Principle

Efficiently merge handle parallel feature branches in SFDX

I'm in charge of equipment buying but no one's ever happy with what I choose. How to fix this?

Can a monster with multiattack use this ability if they are missing a limb?

Print name if parameter passed to function

Why does John Bercow say “unlock” after reading out the results of a vote?

How to prove that the query oracle is unitary?

The baby cries all morning

Why are on-board computers allowed to change controls without notifying the pilots?

What to do with wrong results in talks?

At which point does a character regain all their Hit Dice?

Can I Retrieve Email Addresses from BCC?

Increase performance creating Mandelbrot set in python

Cynical novel that describes an America ruled by the media, arms manufacturers, and ethnic figureheads

Star/Wye electrical connection math symbol

How can I replace every global instance of "x[2]" with "x_2"

Time travel short story where a man arrives in the late 19th century in a time machine and then sends the machine back into the past

What are the ramifications of creating a homebrew world without an Astral Plane?

Do I need a multiple entry visa for a trip UK -> Sweden -> UK?



How to define limit operations in general topological spaces? Are nets able to do this?


is a net stronger than a transfinite sequence for characterizing topology?Permitted value of epsilon in Discrete Metric SpaceWhy are topological spaces interesting to study?Define $f(y)=d(x_0,y)$, prove that $f$ is continuous.Finite point set has limit points for general topological spaces?Is the uniform limit of continuous functions continuous for topological spaces?Can we define the concept of limit without a topology?Equivalent definition of limit of a function (Reference request)Can limits be defined in a more algebraic way, instead of using the completely analytic $delta$-$epsilon$ definition?Is Wikipedia correct about bounded sets?













4












$begingroup$


I was always under the impression that in order to take a limit, I need to have a metric defined on my underlying space.



For $f:mathbbRto mathbbR$,
$
lim_xto x_0f(x)=a
$

means that for all $epsilon >0 $ there exists a $delta(epsilon)>0$ such that $|f(x)-a|<epsilon$ whenever $0< |x-x_0|<delta$. The notion of a limit uses the underlying metric $|cdot|$ of $mathbbR$.



Is there a consistent way of dispensing with the metric and still define a limit operation in some topological space? Are nets able to do this?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    4












    $begingroup$


    I was always under the impression that in order to take a limit, I need to have a metric defined on my underlying space.



    For $f:mathbbRto mathbbR$,
    $
    lim_xto x_0f(x)=a
    $

    means that for all $epsilon >0 $ there exists a $delta(epsilon)>0$ such that $|f(x)-a|<epsilon$ whenever $0< |x-x_0|<delta$. The notion of a limit uses the underlying metric $|cdot|$ of $mathbbR$.



    Is there a consistent way of dispensing with the metric and still define a limit operation in some topological space? Are nets able to do this?










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      4












      4








      4


      1



      $begingroup$


      I was always under the impression that in order to take a limit, I need to have a metric defined on my underlying space.



      For $f:mathbbRto mathbbR$,
      $
      lim_xto x_0f(x)=a
      $

      means that for all $epsilon >0 $ there exists a $delta(epsilon)>0$ such that $|f(x)-a|<epsilon$ whenever $0< |x-x_0|<delta$. The notion of a limit uses the underlying metric $|cdot|$ of $mathbbR$.



      Is there a consistent way of dispensing with the metric and still define a limit operation in some topological space? Are nets able to do this?










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      I was always under the impression that in order to take a limit, I need to have a metric defined on my underlying space.



      For $f:mathbbRto mathbbR$,
      $
      lim_xto x_0f(x)=a
      $

      means that for all $epsilon >0 $ there exists a $delta(epsilon)>0$ such that $|f(x)-a|<epsilon$ whenever $0< |x-x_0|<delta$. The notion of a limit uses the underlying metric $|cdot|$ of $mathbbR$.



      Is there a consistent way of dispensing with the metric and still define a limit operation in some topological space? Are nets able to do this?







      real-analysis general-topology






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Mar 17 at 14:17









      YuiTo Cheng

      2,1362837




      2,1362837










      asked Mar 17 at 11:12









      EEEBEEEB

      53139




      53139




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          7












          $begingroup$

          The notion of limit is well-defined for any topological space, even non-metric ones.



          Here is the correct definition: let $f : X rightarrow Y$ be a function between two topological spaces. We say that the limit of $f$ at a point $x in X$ is the point $y in Y$ if for all neighborhoods $N$ of $y$ in $Y$, there exists a neighborhood $M$ of $x$ in $X$ such that $f(M) subset N$.



          But note that the sequential characterization of limit ($f$ tends to $y$ in $x$ iff for every sequence $(x_n) rightarrow x$, one has $f(x_n) rightarrow y$) is not true in a general topological space. It is true if $X$ is metrizable.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 4




            $begingroup$
            Perhaps it's worth mentioning that the limit might fail to be unique, in non-Hausdorff spaces.
            $endgroup$
            – chi
            Mar 17 at 19:05










          • $begingroup$
            @chi Yes, thank you for this comment ! Indeed the precision can be usefull.
            $endgroup$
            – TheSilverDoe
            Mar 17 at 19:07


















          4












          $begingroup$

          The general definition of continuity is as follows: let $X$ and $Y$ be topological spaces and $f:X to Y$ be a map. $F$ is continuous if the inverse image of any open set is open. $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff for every open set $V$ containing $f(x)$ there exists an open set $U$ containing $x$ such that $f(U) subset V$.



          Continuity of $f$ is equivalent to the following: whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to some point $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$. Similarly, $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            But the question was about limits, not continuity.
            $endgroup$
            – Paul Sinclair
            Mar 18 at 3:43


















          4












          $begingroup$

          A net is a function from an directed set $(I, le)$ (say) to a space $X$.



          $f: I to X$ converges to $x$ iff for every open set $O$ that contains $x$ there exists some $i_0 in I$ (depending on $O$, in general) such that for all $i in I, i ge i_0$ we know that $f(i) in O$.



          The point $f(i)$ is often denoted by subscript: $x_i$. This subscript an be any member of the directed set $I$. A sequence is the special case where $I=mathbbN, le)$ (in its standard order). The definition is non-metric in that we use open sets containing $x$ (not open balls) but for metric spaces it suffices to check this for open balls $B(x,varepsilon), varepsilon>0$ as these form a local base at $x$.



          I think that $lim_x to a f(x)$ can be defined by considering all nets $n$ on $Xsetminus a$ that converge to $a$, and if all those nets have the property that $f circ n$ is a net in $Y$ converging to the same $b in Y$, then this $b$ is called the limit of $f$ as $x$ tends to $a$.



          If $X$ has a topology induced from a metric, e.g. then we can restrict ourselves to sequences instead of general nets in the above characterisation.






          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%2f3151413%2fhow-to-define-limit-operations-in-general-topological-spaces-are-nets-able-to-d%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            3 Answers
            3






            active

            oldest

            votes








            3 Answers
            3






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            7












            $begingroup$

            The notion of limit is well-defined for any topological space, even non-metric ones.



            Here is the correct definition: let $f : X rightarrow Y$ be a function between two topological spaces. We say that the limit of $f$ at a point $x in X$ is the point $y in Y$ if for all neighborhoods $N$ of $y$ in $Y$, there exists a neighborhood $M$ of $x$ in $X$ such that $f(M) subset N$.



            But note that the sequential characterization of limit ($f$ tends to $y$ in $x$ iff for every sequence $(x_n) rightarrow x$, one has $f(x_n) rightarrow y$) is not true in a general topological space. It is true if $X$ is metrizable.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$








            • 4




              $begingroup$
              Perhaps it's worth mentioning that the limit might fail to be unique, in non-Hausdorff spaces.
              $endgroup$
              – chi
              Mar 17 at 19:05










            • $begingroup$
              @chi Yes, thank you for this comment ! Indeed the precision can be usefull.
              $endgroup$
              – TheSilverDoe
              Mar 17 at 19:07















            7












            $begingroup$

            The notion of limit is well-defined for any topological space, even non-metric ones.



            Here is the correct definition: let $f : X rightarrow Y$ be a function between two topological spaces. We say that the limit of $f$ at a point $x in X$ is the point $y in Y$ if for all neighborhoods $N$ of $y$ in $Y$, there exists a neighborhood $M$ of $x$ in $X$ such that $f(M) subset N$.



            But note that the sequential characterization of limit ($f$ tends to $y$ in $x$ iff for every sequence $(x_n) rightarrow x$, one has $f(x_n) rightarrow y$) is not true in a general topological space. It is true if $X$ is metrizable.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$








            • 4




              $begingroup$
              Perhaps it's worth mentioning that the limit might fail to be unique, in non-Hausdorff spaces.
              $endgroup$
              – chi
              Mar 17 at 19:05










            • $begingroup$
              @chi Yes, thank you for this comment ! Indeed the precision can be usefull.
              $endgroup$
              – TheSilverDoe
              Mar 17 at 19:07













            7












            7








            7





            $begingroup$

            The notion of limit is well-defined for any topological space, even non-metric ones.



            Here is the correct definition: let $f : X rightarrow Y$ be a function between two topological spaces. We say that the limit of $f$ at a point $x in X$ is the point $y in Y$ if for all neighborhoods $N$ of $y$ in $Y$, there exists a neighborhood $M$ of $x$ in $X$ such that $f(M) subset N$.



            But note that the sequential characterization of limit ($f$ tends to $y$ in $x$ iff for every sequence $(x_n) rightarrow x$, one has $f(x_n) rightarrow y$) is not true in a general topological space. It is true if $X$ is metrizable.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            The notion of limit is well-defined for any topological space, even non-metric ones.



            Here is the correct definition: let $f : X rightarrow Y$ be a function between two topological spaces. We say that the limit of $f$ at a point $x in X$ is the point $y in Y$ if for all neighborhoods $N$ of $y$ in $Y$, there exists a neighborhood $M$ of $x$ in $X$ such that $f(M) subset N$.



            But note that the sequential characterization of limit ($f$ tends to $y$ in $x$ iff for every sequence $(x_n) rightarrow x$, one has $f(x_n) rightarrow y$) is not true in a general topological space. It is true if $X$ is metrizable.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Mar 17 at 14:46









            psmears

            71149




            71149










            answered Mar 17 at 13:09









            TheSilverDoeTheSilverDoe

            4,645215




            4,645215







            • 4




              $begingroup$
              Perhaps it's worth mentioning that the limit might fail to be unique, in non-Hausdorff spaces.
              $endgroup$
              – chi
              Mar 17 at 19:05










            • $begingroup$
              @chi Yes, thank you for this comment ! Indeed the precision can be usefull.
              $endgroup$
              – TheSilverDoe
              Mar 17 at 19:07












            • 4




              $begingroup$
              Perhaps it's worth mentioning that the limit might fail to be unique, in non-Hausdorff spaces.
              $endgroup$
              – chi
              Mar 17 at 19:05










            • $begingroup$
              @chi Yes, thank you for this comment ! Indeed the precision can be usefull.
              $endgroup$
              – TheSilverDoe
              Mar 17 at 19:07







            4




            4




            $begingroup$
            Perhaps it's worth mentioning that the limit might fail to be unique, in non-Hausdorff spaces.
            $endgroup$
            – chi
            Mar 17 at 19:05




            $begingroup$
            Perhaps it's worth mentioning that the limit might fail to be unique, in non-Hausdorff spaces.
            $endgroup$
            – chi
            Mar 17 at 19:05












            $begingroup$
            @chi Yes, thank you for this comment ! Indeed the precision can be usefull.
            $endgroup$
            – TheSilverDoe
            Mar 17 at 19:07




            $begingroup$
            @chi Yes, thank you for this comment ! Indeed the precision can be usefull.
            $endgroup$
            – TheSilverDoe
            Mar 17 at 19:07











            4












            $begingroup$

            The general definition of continuity is as follows: let $X$ and $Y$ be topological spaces and $f:X to Y$ be a map. $F$ is continuous if the inverse image of any open set is open. $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff for every open set $V$ containing $f(x)$ there exists an open set $U$ containing $x$ such that $f(U) subset V$.



            Continuity of $f$ is equivalent to the following: whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to some point $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$. Similarly, $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              But the question was about limits, not continuity.
              $endgroup$
              – Paul Sinclair
              Mar 18 at 3:43















            4












            $begingroup$

            The general definition of continuity is as follows: let $X$ and $Y$ be topological spaces and $f:X to Y$ be a map. $F$ is continuous if the inverse image of any open set is open. $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff for every open set $V$ containing $f(x)$ there exists an open set $U$ containing $x$ such that $f(U) subset V$.



            Continuity of $f$ is equivalent to the following: whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to some point $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$. Similarly, $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              But the question was about limits, not continuity.
              $endgroup$
              – Paul Sinclair
              Mar 18 at 3:43













            4












            4








            4





            $begingroup$

            The general definition of continuity is as follows: let $X$ and $Y$ be topological spaces and $f:X to Y$ be a map. $F$ is continuous if the inverse image of any open set is open. $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff for every open set $V$ containing $f(x)$ there exists an open set $U$ containing $x$ such that $f(U) subset V$.



            Continuity of $f$ is equivalent to the following: whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to some point $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$. Similarly, $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            The general definition of continuity is as follows: let $X$ and $Y$ be topological spaces and $f:X to Y$ be a map. $F$ is continuous if the inverse image of any open set is open. $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff for every open set $V$ containing $f(x)$ there exists an open set $U$ containing $x$ such that $f(U) subset V$.



            Continuity of $f$ is equivalent to the following: whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to some point $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$. Similarly, $f$ is continuous at a point $x$ iff whenever a net $(x_i)_i in I$ converges to $x$ we have $x$ we have $(f(x_i))_i in I$ converges to $f(x)$.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Mar 17 at 13:11









            Kavi Rama MurthyKavi Rama Murthy

            70k53170




            70k53170







            • 1




              $begingroup$
              But the question was about limits, not continuity.
              $endgroup$
              – Paul Sinclair
              Mar 18 at 3:43












            • 1




              $begingroup$
              But the question was about limits, not continuity.
              $endgroup$
              – Paul Sinclair
              Mar 18 at 3:43







            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            But the question was about limits, not continuity.
            $endgroup$
            – Paul Sinclair
            Mar 18 at 3:43




            $begingroup$
            But the question was about limits, not continuity.
            $endgroup$
            – Paul Sinclair
            Mar 18 at 3:43











            4












            $begingroup$

            A net is a function from an directed set $(I, le)$ (say) to a space $X$.



            $f: I to X$ converges to $x$ iff for every open set $O$ that contains $x$ there exists some $i_0 in I$ (depending on $O$, in general) such that for all $i in I, i ge i_0$ we know that $f(i) in O$.



            The point $f(i)$ is often denoted by subscript: $x_i$. This subscript an be any member of the directed set $I$. A sequence is the special case where $I=mathbbN, le)$ (in its standard order). The definition is non-metric in that we use open sets containing $x$ (not open balls) but for metric spaces it suffices to check this for open balls $B(x,varepsilon), varepsilon>0$ as these form a local base at $x$.



            I think that $lim_x to a f(x)$ can be defined by considering all nets $n$ on $Xsetminus a$ that converge to $a$, and if all those nets have the property that $f circ n$ is a net in $Y$ converging to the same $b in Y$, then this $b$ is called the limit of $f$ as $x$ tends to $a$.



            If $X$ has a topology induced from a metric, e.g. then we can restrict ourselves to sequences instead of general nets in the above characterisation.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$

















              4












              $begingroup$

              A net is a function from an directed set $(I, le)$ (say) to a space $X$.



              $f: I to X$ converges to $x$ iff for every open set $O$ that contains $x$ there exists some $i_0 in I$ (depending on $O$, in general) such that for all $i in I, i ge i_0$ we know that $f(i) in O$.



              The point $f(i)$ is often denoted by subscript: $x_i$. This subscript an be any member of the directed set $I$. A sequence is the special case where $I=mathbbN, le)$ (in its standard order). The definition is non-metric in that we use open sets containing $x$ (not open balls) but for metric spaces it suffices to check this for open balls $B(x,varepsilon), varepsilon>0$ as these form a local base at $x$.



              I think that $lim_x to a f(x)$ can be defined by considering all nets $n$ on $Xsetminus a$ that converge to $a$, and if all those nets have the property that $f circ n$ is a net in $Y$ converging to the same $b in Y$, then this $b$ is called the limit of $f$ as $x$ tends to $a$.



              If $X$ has a topology induced from a metric, e.g. then we can restrict ourselves to sequences instead of general nets in the above characterisation.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$















                4












                4








                4





                $begingroup$

                A net is a function from an directed set $(I, le)$ (say) to a space $X$.



                $f: I to X$ converges to $x$ iff for every open set $O$ that contains $x$ there exists some $i_0 in I$ (depending on $O$, in general) such that for all $i in I, i ge i_0$ we know that $f(i) in O$.



                The point $f(i)$ is often denoted by subscript: $x_i$. This subscript an be any member of the directed set $I$. A sequence is the special case where $I=mathbbN, le)$ (in its standard order). The definition is non-metric in that we use open sets containing $x$ (not open balls) but for metric spaces it suffices to check this for open balls $B(x,varepsilon), varepsilon>0$ as these form a local base at $x$.



                I think that $lim_x to a f(x)$ can be defined by considering all nets $n$ on $Xsetminus a$ that converge to $a$, and if all those nets have the property that $f circ n$ is a net in $Y$ converging to the same $b in Y$, then this $b$ is called the limit of $f$ as $x$ tends to $a$.



                If $X$ has a topology induced from a metric, e.g. then we can restrict ourselves to sequences instead of general nets in the above characterisation.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                A net is a function from an directed set $(I, le)$ (say) to a space $X$.



                $f: I to X$ converges to $x$ iff for every open set $O$ that contains $x$ there exists some $i_0 in I$ (depending on $O$, in general) such that for all $i in I, i ge i_0$ we know that $f(i) in O$.



                The point $f(i)$ is often denoted by subscript: $x_i$. This subscript an be any member of the directed set $I$. A sequence is the special case where $I=mathbbN, le)$ (in its standard order). The definition is non-metric in that we use open sets containing $x$ (not open balls) but for metric spaces it suffices to check this for open balls $B(x,varepsilon), varepsilon>0$ as these form a local base at $x$.



                I think that $lim_x to a f(x)$ can be defined by considering all nets $n$ on $Xsetminus a$ that converge to $a$, and if all those nets have the property that $f circ n$ is a net in $Y$ converging to the same $b in Y$, then this $b$ is called the limit of $f$ as $x$ tends to $a$.



                If $X$ has a topology induced from a metric, e.g. then we can restrict ourselves to sequences instead of general nets in the above characterisation.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Mar 17 at 16:44

























                answered Mar 17 at 13:40









                Henno BrandsmaHenno Brandsma

                114k348123




                114k348123



























                    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%2f3151413%2fhow-to-define-limit-operations-in-general-topological-spaces-are-nets-able-to-d%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

                    Moe incest case Sentencing See also References Navigation menu"'Australian Josef Fritzl' fathered four children by daughter""Small town recoils in horror at 'Australian Fritzl' incest case""Victorian rape allegations echo Fritzl case - Just In (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)""Incest father jailed for 22 years""'Australian Fritzl' sentenced to 22 years in prison for abusing daughter for three decades""RSJ v The Queen"

                    Who is our nearest planetary neighbor, on average?Santa Claus flies to the South PoleSeven Spheres of Unequal Mass, a weighing problem with a twistDescribe a large integerFast Mental Calculation of $7.5^7$Math in Space (without the help of celebrities)Find the value of $bigstar$: Puzzle 8 - InequalityWho drinks beer while running anyway?A Crucial DeliveryRanking And AverageHow long will my money last at roulette?

                    Daza language Contents Vocabulary Phonology References External links Navigation menudaza1242Daza"Dazaga"eeee178086576