1998
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-1756-4_7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Historical Development of Uniform, Proximal, and Nearness Concepts in Topology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 145 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are two more approaches to define uniformity on a set. One of them [18] uses a certain specification of a system of coverings on X. The other is via a system of pseudo-metrics.…”
Section: Preliminariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are two more approaches to define uniformity on a set. One of them [18] uses a certain specification of a system of coverings on X. The other is via a system of pseudo-metrics.…”
Section: Preliminariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Remark. There is a strong analogy between the passage from X rig (with its Grothendieck topology defined in terms of rational domains) to 9 the author learned this result just after noticing that the counter-example on p. 55 of [34] is wrong -a fortunate mistake: proving that (along Lambrinos' theorem but contrarily to what is stated in loc. cit.)…”
Section: 4mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For a history of all kinds of "uniform" type structures, see [7,22]. Besides the three desirable properties mentioned above, Near provides a setting for handling a wide class of extensions of topological spaces.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%