Bourbaki

Exercise 20, § 6

General Topology, III, 320

Bourbaki marks this one as harder than the rest.

a) Let KK be a division ring endowed with a non-discrete Hausdorff topology T\mathfrak{T} compatible with the ring structure of KK. A subset MM of KK is right (resp. left) bounded if and only if, for each neighbourhood UU of oo there exists a∈K∗a \in K^* such that aM⊂UaM \subset U (resp. Ma⊂UMa \subset U); MM is then right (resp. left) bounded for every Hausdorff topology T′\mathfrak{T}' which is coarser than T\mathfrak{T} and is compatible with the ring structure of KK.

b) If T\mathfrak{T} is locally bounded (Exercise 12) and if UU is a bounded neighbourhood of oo with respect to T\mathfrak{T}, then the sets xUxU (resp. UxUx) form a fundamental system of neighbourhoods of oo (with respect to T\mathfrak{T}) as xx runs through K∗K^*. Every point of KK has a countable fundamental system of neighbourhoods of oo with respect to T\mathfrak{T} if and only if there is a sequence (an)(a_n) of points of KK which has oo as a cluster point.

c) The least upper bound of any finite family of locally bounded topologies on KK (compatible with the ring structure of KK) is locally bounded. Conversely, if the least upper bound T\mathfrak{T} of a family (Ti)(\mathfrak{T}_i) of locally bounded topologies on KK is locally bounded, then T\mathfrak{T} is the least upper bound of a finite subfamily of (Ti)(\mathfrak{T}_i). (Remark that if UU is a neighbourhood of oo which is bounded with respect to T\mathfrak{T}, then there is a finite system of indices (lk)(l_k) and for each kk a neighbourhood VkV_k of oo, bounded with respect to Tlk\mathfrak{T}_{l_k}, such that ⋂Vk⊂U\bigcap V_k \subset U; on the other hand, there exists ak∈K∗a_k \in K^* such that U⊂akVkU \subset a_k V_k.)

d) A subset FF of a division ring KK is said to be a quasi-ring if: (i) F≠KF \neq K, o∈Fo \in F, 1∈F1 \in F, −F=F-F = F, FF⊂FFF \subset F; (ii) there is an element c∈F∗=F∩K∗c \in F^* = F \cap K^* such that c(F+F)⊂Fc(F + F) \subset F; and (iii) for each x∈Fx \in F, there exists y∈Fy \in F such that yF⊂FxyF \subset Fx and Fy⊂xFFy \subset xF. Show that if T\mathfrak{T} is a non-discrete Hausdorff topology which is locally bounded and compatible with the ring structure of KK, then every symmetric bounded neighbourhood UU of oo (with respect to T\mathfrak{T}), such that UU⊂UUU \subset U and 1∈U1 \in U, is a quasi-ring, and that U∗(U∗)−1=K∗U^*(U^*)^{-1} = K^* [Exercise 19 b)]. If VV is any symmetric bounded neighbourhood of oo with respect to T\mathfrak{T}, then the set UU of elements x∈Kx \in K such that xV⊂VxV \subset V (or Vx⊂VVx \subset V) is a symmetric bounded neighbourhood of oo with respect to T\mathfrak{T} such that UU⊂UUU \subset U and 1∈U1 \in U, and hence is a quasi-ring.

e) Conversely, let FF be a quasi-ring in KK such that F∗(F∗)−1=K∗F^*(F^*)^{-1} = K^*. Show that there is a Hausdorff topology T\mathfrak{T} which is not discrete and is compatible with the ring structure of KK, such that FF is a bounded neighbourhood of oo with respect to T\mathfrak{T}. In particular we may take FF to be any subring AA of KK such that KK is the division ring of right fractions of AA. In particular, if K=QK = \mathbf{Q} and F=ZF = \mathbf{Z}, the corresponding topology T\mathfrak{T} on KK is not compatible with the field structure of KK.

Solution

No solution has been written yet.

Transcribed from the printed volume. Not translated.