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?

Why would five hundred and five be same as one?

Should I warn new/interviewing PhD Student that supervisor is terrible?

Would a primitive species be able to learn English from reading books alone?

ContourPlot — How do I color by contour curvature?

Given this phrasing in the lease, when should I pay my rent?

Quoting Keynes in a lecture

Are Captain Marvel's powers affected by Thanos breaking the Tesseract and claiming the stone?

Identifying "long and narrow" polygons in with PostGIS

Personal or impersonal in a technical resume

Make a Bowl of Alphabet Soup

If the only attacker is removed from combat, is a creature still counted as having attacked this turn?

Why do Radio Buttons not fill the entire outer circle?

What happens if I try to grapple an illusory duplicate from the Mirror Image spell?

Overlapping circles covering polygon

Language involving irrational number is not a CFL

If Captain Marvel (MCU) were to have a child with a human male, would the child be human or Kree?

Did I make a mistake by ccing email to boss to others?

Unable to disable Microsoft Store in domain environment

Isometric embedding of a genus g surface

How to preserve electronics (computers, iPads and phones) for hundreds of years

How do I fix the group tension caused by my character stealing and possibly killing without provocation?

What does "tick" mean in this sentence?

Sound waves in different octaves

Review your own paper in Mathematics



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

      2,0612637




      2,0612637










      asked Mar 17 at 11:12









      EEEBEEEB

      53138




      53138




















          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


















          5












          $begingroup$

          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
            2 days ago


















          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

            4,358114




            4,358114







            • 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











            5












            $begingroup$

            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
              2 days ago















            5












            $begingroup$

            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
              2 days ago













            5












            5








            5





            $begingroup$

            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

            68.6k53169




            68.6k53169







            • 1




              $begingroup$
              But the question was about limits, not continuity.
              $endgroup$
              – Paul Sinclair
              2 days ago












            • 1




              $begingroup$
              But the question was about limits, not continuity.
              $endgroup$
              – Paul Sinclair
              2 days ago







            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            But the question was about limits, not continuity.
            $endgroup$
            – Paul Sinclair
            2 days ago




            $begingroup$
            But the question was about limits, not continuity.
            $endgroup$
            – Paul Sinclair
            2 days ago











            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

                113k348123




                113k348123



























                    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

                    He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

                    Bunad

                    Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum