Let c:I→X be a path and let W be a neighbourhood of c in the space Cc(I;X). There exists a real number ε∈]0,1/2], a neighbourhood V0 of c(0) and a neighbourhood V1 of c(1) in X having the following properties: one has c([0,ε])⊂V0,c([1−ε,1])⊂V1, and every path c′:I→X such that
c′(t)∈V0 for 0⩽t⩽ε,
(2) c′(t)=c(t) for ε⩽t⩽1−ε,
c′(t)∈V1 for 1−ε⩽t⩽1,
belongs to W.
By definition of the topology of compact convergence (TG, X, p. 26, déf. 1), there exists a finite set J, a family (Uj)j∈J of open sets in X and a family (Kj)j∈J of compact subsets of I such that the set W′ of paths c′ satisfying c′(Kj)⊂Uj for every index j is a neighbourhood of c contained in W. Let us then denote by A0 (resp. A1) the set of indices j such that 0∈Kj (resp. 1∈Kj); put V0=⋂j∈A0Uj and V1=⋂j∈A1Uj.
Since the mapping c is continuous, there exists a real number ε∈ ]0,1/2] such that c([0,ε])⊂V0,c([1−ε,1])⊂V1,[0,ε]∩Kj=∅ for all j∈/A0 and [1−ε,1]∩Kj=∅ for all j∈/A1. Let then c′ be a path satisfying the conditions (2). Let us prove that c′∈W′. Let j∈J and let t∈Kj. If ε⩽t⩽1−ε,c′(t)=c(t) belongs to Uj. If 0⩽t⩽ε,c′(t)∈V0; by the choice of ε, we have j∈A0, hence c′(t)∈Uj. Analogously, if 1−ε⩽t⩽1, we have j∈A1 and c′(t)∈V1⊂Uj. Thus, c′(Kj)⊂Uj and c′ belongs to W′, hence to W.
Let us now prove the second assertion of Proposition 10. Suppose that the space X is locally connected by arcs. Let c be a path in X and let W be a neighbourhood of c in Cc(I;X). Let ε,V0 and V1 be as in the lemma. Let T0 and T1 be connected by arcs neighbourhoods of c(0) and c(1) contained in V0 and V1 respectively. There exists a real number θ such that 0<θ<ε and such that c([0,θ])⊂T0,c([1−θ,1])⊂T1. Let x0∈T0 and x1∈T1; let c0 be a path of origin x0 and of term c(θ) in T0 and let c1 be a path of origin x1 and of term c(1−θ) in T1. Put
c0(t/θ) for 0⩽t⩽θ,
c′(t)=c(t) for θ⩽t⩽1−θ,
c1((1−t)/θ) for 1−θ⩽t⩽1.
One thus defines a path c′ joining x0 to x1 and satisfying the conditions (2). This proves that the image of W in X×X by the mapping (o,e) contains the neighbourhood T0×T1 of (c(0),c(1)), whence the proposition.
Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.
Nothing.
Nothing.