I found a neat characterization of connectedness in Bredon’s Topology and Geometry: so nice, in fact, that I am compelled to write up a quick note about it.
Let us recall that a topological space is disconnected if there exists a disjoint pair of open subsets
and
of
whose union is
, and that
is connected otherwise. A discrete-valued map is a continuous map
from a topological space
to a discrete space
, which is a topological space in which every subset is open. An alternate characterization of connectedness is as follows:
Proposition 1 (Alternate characterization of connectedness). A topological space
is connected if and only if every discrete-valued map
on
is constant.
The proof is quite simple. If is connected, then the preimage
of an element
in the image of
is nonempty, open, and closed: therefore,
must be the whole space. Conversely, if
is not connected, then we can find a disjoint pair of open subsets
and
of
whose union is
, whence the map
which is 0 on
and 1 on
is a nonconstant discrete-valued map on
.
Why would anyone think of such an alternate definition? Glen Wilson offered the following perspective, which I very much like. First off, following the “categorical” way of thinking, we submit that describing a collection of object in terms of maps between them—as opposed to the objects themselves—is a good thing. But why constant maps? We can consider “labeling” each connected component in a topological space by quotienting
out by its connected components. The resulting space
is a discrete space, and the quotient map
is a surjective continuous map that is constant if and only if
is a singleton. Of course, this happens precisely when
has one connected component, i.e., if
is connected.
This alternate characterization leads us to swift proofs of the key properties of connected space. Let us first consider the following
Proposition 2. The continuous image of a connected space is connected.
Here is a one-liner for the proof: If is a connected space,
a continuous map, and
any discrete-valued map, then the composition
must be constant, and so
is connected. The following triumph of intuition also admits a devastatingly simple proof:
Proposition 3. If a collection of connected sets share a point, then the union is connected.
Here, any discrete-valued map must be constant on each connected set, and the value of
must be the same because they all share a point: it follows that
is constant on the union. Another illustrative example is as follows:
Proposition 4. If
is a connected subset of a topological space
, and if
is a subset of
such that
, then
is connected.
Again, the proof is very short. Any discrete-valued map on
is a continuous, hence sequentially continuous, map that is constant on
, whence we conclude that the value of
on any limit point of
is the same as the value
takes on
. It follows that
is constant on
, hence on
.