Documentation

TauCeti.Topology.Algebra.Nonarchimedean.SubmodulesBasis

The neighbourhood basis of a submodules basis, and when two of them agree #

Mathlib's SubmodulesBasis B turns a family B : ι → Submodule R M into a topology on M, SubmodulesBasis.topology, by routing the family through SubmodulesBasis.toModuleFilterBasis. That route leaves the neighbourhoods of 0 indexed by sets U carrying a proof ∃ i, U = B i rather than by ι. This file adds the ι-indexed form, which Mathlib already has one level down for subgroups as RingSubgroupsBasis.hasBasis_nhds_zero, and the comparison lemma it makes routine: two submodule bases on the same module that are mutually cofinal induce the same topology.

Neither statement mentions anything beyond SubmodulesBasis, so both live in that namespace rather than in a TauCeti one.

Main results #

References #

theorem SubmodulesBasis.hasBasis_nhds_zero {ι : Type u_1} {R : Type u_3} {M : Type u_4} [CommRing R] [TopologicalSpace R] [AddCommGroup M] [Module R M] {B : ι → Submodule R M} [Nonempty ι] (hB : SubmodulesBasis B) :
(nhds 0).HasBasis (fun (x : ι) => True) fun (i : ι) => ↑(B i)

The family is a neighbourhood basis at 0, indexed by ι: a set is a neighbourhood of 0 for the induced topology exactly when it contains some B i.

Mathlib reaches the same filter only through SubmodulesBasis.toModuleFilterBasis, whose basis is indexed by the sets U with ∃ i, U = B i; this is the ι-indexed form, mirroring RingSubgroupsBasis.hasBasis_nhds_zero.

theorem SubmodulesBasis.topology_eq {ι : Type u_1} {ι' : Type u_2} {R : Type u_3} {M : Type u_4} [CommRing R] [TopologicalSpace R] [AddCommGroup M] [Module R M] {B : ι → Submodule R M} {B' : ι' → Submodule R M} [Nonempty ι] [Nonempty ι'] (hB : SubmodulesBasis B) (hB' : SubmodulesBasis B') (h : ∀ (i : ι), ∃ (j : ι'), B' j ≤ B i) (h' : ∀ (j : ι'), ∃ (i : ι), B i ≤ B' j) :

Mutually cofinal submodule bases induce the same topology. If every B i contains some B' j and every B' j contains some B i, the two families are neighbourhood bases at 0 for the same filter, and both topologies are additive group topologies, so they agree everywhere.

No relation between the two index types is needed, and neither family need be antitone: cofinality in both directions is the whole hypothesis.