International Journal of Modern Nonlinear Theory and Application
Vol.2 No.4(2013), Article ID:40322,4 pages DOI:10.4236/ijmnta.2013.24032
On Dislocated Metric Topology
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Assiut University, Qesm Than Asyut, Egypt
Email: mahmed68@yahoo.com, zeyada1@hotmail.com
Copyright © 2013 Mohamed A. Ahmed et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received April 4, 2013; revised May 18, 2013; accepted June 10, 2013
Keywords: Generalized Topology; Dislocated Neighbourhood Systems; Dislocated Metric
ABSTRACT
In this paper, we give a comment on the dislocated-neighbourhood systems due to Hitzler and Seda [1]. Also, we recover the open sets of the dislocated topology.
1. Introduction
In recent years, the role of topology is of fundamental importance in quantum particle physics and in logic programming semantics (see, e.g. [2-6]). Dislocated metrics were studied under the name of metric domains in the context of domain theory (see, [7]). Dislocated topologies were introduced and studied by Hitzler and Seda [1].
Now, we recall some definitions and a proposition due to Hitzler and Seda [1] as follows.
Definition 1.1. Let be a set.
is called a distance function. Consider the following conditions, for all
,
(d1);
(d2) if, then
;
(d3);
(d4).
If satisfies conditions (d1) - (d4), then it is called a metric on
. If it satisfies conditions (d2) - (d4), then it is called a dislocated metric (or simply d-metric) on
.
Definition 1.2. Let be a set. A distance function
is called a partial metric on
if it satisfies (d3) and the conditions:
(d5) if and only if
;
(d6);
(d7)for each
.
It is obvious that any partial metric is a d-metric.
Definition 1.3. An (open) ball in a d-metric space
with centre
is a set of the form
, where
.
It is clear that may be empty in a d-metric space
because the centre
of the ball
doesn’t belong to
.
Definition 1.4. Let be set. A relation
is called a d-membership relation(on
) if it satisfies the following property for all
and
:
and
implies
.
It is noted that the “d-membership”-relation is a generalization of the membership relation from the set theory.
In the sequel, any concept due to Hitzler and Seda will be denoted by “HS”.
Definition 1.5.Let be a nonempty set. Suppose that
is a d-membership relation on
and
is a collection of subsets of
for each
. We call
a d-neighbourhood system (d-nbhood system) for
if it satisfies the following conditions:
(Ni) if, then
;
(Nii) if, then
;
(Niii) if, then there is a
with
such that for all
we have
;
(Niv) if and
then
.
Each is called an HS-d-neighborhood (HS d-nbhood) of
. The ordered triple
is called an HS-d-topological space where
.
Proposition 1.1. Let be a d-metric space. Define the d-membership relation
as the relation
. For each
, let
be the collection of all subsets
of
such that
. Then
is an HS d-nbhood system for
for each
, i.e.,
is an HS d-topological neighbourhood space.
The present paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we redefine the dislocated neighbourhood systems given due to Hitzler and Seda [1]. Section 3 is devoted to define the concept of dislocated topological space by open sets. In Section 4, we study topological properties of dislocated closure and dislocated interior operation of a set using the concept of open sets. Finally, in Section 5, we study some further properties of the well-known notions of dislocated continuous functions and dislocated convergence sequence via d-topologies.
2. Redefinition of Definition 1.5.
In Proposition 1.1, it is proved that is an HS d-topological neighbourhood space. We remark that Property (Niii) can be replaced by the following condition:
(Niii) * If, then for each
.
One can easily verifies that satisfies (Niii) *.
According to the above comment, we introduce a redefinition of the concept of the dislocated-neighbourhood systems due to Hitzler and Seda [1] as follows.
Definition 2.1. Let be a nonempty set. Suppose that
is a d-membership relation on
and
be a collection of subsets of
for each
. We call
a d*-neighbourhood system (d*-nbhood system) for
if it satisfies the following conditions:
(Ni) if, then
;
(Nii) if, then
;
(Niii)* if and
, then
;
(Niv) if and
, then
.
Each is called a d*-neighborhood of
. If
, then
is called a d*-topological neighborhood space.
Now, we state the following theorem without proof.
Theorem 2.1. Let be a d-metric space. Define the d-membership relation
as the relation
iff there exists
for which
. Assume that
and
. Then
is a d*-topological neighborhood space.
3. Dislocated-Topological Space
In what follows we define the concept of dislocatedtopological space (for short, d-topological space) by the open sets and prove that this concept and the concept of d*-topological neighborhood space are the same.
Definition 3.1. Let be a nonempty set. Suppose that
is a d-membership relation and
for each
. We call
an
-topology on
iff it satisfies the following conditions:
(dτx1)
(dτx2)
(dτx3) and
.
Each is called a
-open set. If
is an
-topology on
for each
, then
is called a d-topology on
. The triple
is called an
-topological space and the triple
is called a d-topological space.
Definition 3.2. Let be an
-topological space.
is called a
-closed iff
is a
- open..
Theorem 3.1. The concepts of d*-topological neighborhood space and d-topological space are the same.
Proof. Let be the family of all d*- topological neighbourhood systems on
and let
be the family of all d-topologies on
. The proof is complete if we point out a bijection between
and
. Let
and
be functions defined as follows:
, where
for each
and
, where
for each
. One can easily verifies that these functions are well defined,
and
.
The following counterexample illustrates that the statement: iff
may not be true.
Counterexample 3.1. Let and
.

, then
, i.e.
such that
and
.
We get the following theorem without proof.
Theorem 3.2. Let be a nonempty set. Suppose that
is a d-membership relation and
for each
. Assume that
satisfies the following conditions:
(dFx1);
(dFx2);
(dFx3) and
.
Then is a d-topology on
, where
. If
is a dtopological space, then for each
the family
of all
-closed sets satisfies the conditions (dFx1)- (dFx3).
4. Dislocated Closure and Dislocated Interior Operations
In the sequel we define the dislocated closure and dislocated interior operations of a set and study some topological properties of dislocated closure and dislocated interior operation.
Definition 4.1. Let be an
-topological space. The
-interior of a subset
of
is denoted and defined by:
.
Remark 4.1. From Definition 4.1, if, then
is undefined. If
, then
is defined.
Theorem 4.1. Let be an
-topological space.
(A) If, then
for each
.
(B) If, then
(i);
(ii) for each
;
(iii) for each
;
(iv) or
for each
.
(v) if
or
.
Corollary 4.1. (1) If, then
is a
-open.
(2) If, then
.
Theorem 4.2. If such that the conditions B(i), B(iii) and B(iv) are satisfied then
is an
-topology on
. The
-membership relation is defined as
iff
.
Proof. The desired result is obtained from the following:
(I) (dτx1) since
;
(dτx2) and
;
(dτx3) and
,
(from B(iii)-(iv)).
(II) and
and
(from I
).
Definition 4.2. Let be an
-topological space. The
-closure of a subset
of
is denoted and defined by:
.
If, then
is undefined but if
, then
is defined.
Theorem 4.3. Let be an
-topological space. Then for each
,
.
Proof.
From Theorems 4.1 and 4.3, we obtain the following theorem without proof.
Theorem 4.4. Let be an
-topological space.
(A) If, then
for each
.
(B) If, then
(i);
(ii) for each
;
(iii);
(iv) or
for each
;
(v) if
or
.
Corollary 4.2. (1) If, then
is a
-closed.
(2) If, then
.
5. Dislocated Continuous Functions and Dislocated Convergence Sequences via d-Topologies
Now, we define the dislocated continuous functions and dislocated convergence sequences. We also obtain a decomposition of dislocated continuous function and dislocated convergence sequences.
Definition 5.1. Let and
be dislocated-metric spaces. A function
is called d-continuous at
iff
such that
. We say
is d-continuous iff
is d-continuous at each
Theorem 5.1. Let and
be dislocated-metric spaces and
be any function. Assume that
(resp.
) be the d-topological space obtained from
(resp.
). Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1) is d-continuous at
.
(2)
(3) such that
, where
and
are the d*-topological neighborhood systems obtained from
and
respectively.
(4) such that
.
Proof. ((1)Þ(2)): Let. Then
such that
. Thus
such that
, i.e.,
,
, then
. Hence
.
((2)Þ(1)): Let. Suppose that for each
,
such that
. Now,
. From the assumption
, i.e.,
such that
. Then
. The contradiction demands that
is d-continuous at
.
(1) Û (4) and (2) Û (3) are immediate.
Definition 5.2. Let be a d-metric space. A sequence
d-converges to
if
such that
,
.
Theorem 5.2. Let be a d-metric space and
be the d-topological space obtained from it. Then the sequence
d-converges to
iff
such that for each
.
Proof. (Þ:) Let. Then there exists
such that
. From the assumption
such that
. Thus
for each
. So
for each
.
(Ü:) Let. Since
, then
. Thus
such that for each
,i.e.,
for each
. Hence
.
REFERENCES
- P. Hitzler and A. K. Seda, “Dislocated Topologies,” Journal of Electrical Engineering, Vol. 51, No. 12, 2000, pp. 3-7.
- A. Batarekh and V. S. Subrahmanian, “Topological Model Set Deformations in Logic Programming,” Fundamenta Informaticae, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1998, pp. 357-400.
- M. S. El Naschie, “A Review of E-Infinity Theory and the Mass Spectrum of High Energy Particle Physics,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2004, pp. 209-236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0960-0779(03)00278-9
- M. S. El Naschie, “The Idealized Quantum Two-Slit Gedanken Experiment Revisted-Criticism and Reinterpretation,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2006, pp. 9-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2005.05.010
- P. Hitzler, “Generalized Metrics and Topology in Logic Programming Semantics,” Ph.D. Thesis, National University of Ireland, University College, Cork, 2001.
- A. K. Seda, ‘Topology and the Semantics of Logic Programs,” Fundamenta Informaticae, Vol. 24, No. 4, 1995, pp. 359-386.
- S. G. Matthews, “Metric Domains for Completeness,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Warwick, Warwick, 1986.
NOTES
*Current address: Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Northern Boarders University, Arar, KSA.