There are three equivalent definitions for a uniform space. They all consist of a space equipped with a uniform structure.
Entourage definition This definition adapts the presentation of a topological space in terms of
neighborhood systems. A nonempty collection \Phi of subsets of X \times X is a '
(or a ') if it satisfies the following axioms: • If U\in\Phi then \Delta \subseteq U, where \Delta = \{(x,x) : x \in X\} is the diagonal on X \times X. • If U\in\Phi and U \subseteq V \subseteq X \times X then V\in\Phi. • If U\in\Phi and V\in\Phi then U \cap V \in \Phi. • If U\in\Phi then there is some V \in\Phi such that V \circ V \subseteq U, where V \circ V denotes the composite of V with itself. The
composite of two subsets V and U of X \times X is defined by V \circ U = \{(x,z) ~:~ \text{ there exists } y \in X \, \text{ such that } \, (x,y) \in U \wedge (y,z) \in V \,\}. • If U\in\Phi then U^{-1} \in \Phi, where U^{-1} = \{(y,x) : (x,y)\in U\} is the
inverse of U. The non-emptiness of \Phi taken together with (2) and (3) states that \Phi is a
filter on X \times X. If the last property is omitted we call the space '
. An element U of \Phi is called a or ' from the
French word for
surroundings. One usually writes U[x] = \{y : (x, y) \in U\} = \operatorname{pr}_2(U \cap (\{x\} \times X)\,), where U \cap (\{x\} \times X) is the vertical cross section of U and \operatorname{pr}_2 is the canonical projection onto the second coordinate. On a graph, a typical entourage is drawn as a blob surrounding the "y = x" diagonal; all the different U[x]'s form the vertical cross-sections. If (x, y) \in U then one says that x and y are ''''
. Similarly, if all pairs of points in a subset A of X are U-close (that is, if A \times A is contained in U), A is called U-small
. An entourage U is '''' if (x, y) \in U precisely when (y, x) \in U, or equivalently, if U^{-1} = U. The first axiom states that each point is U-close to itself for each entourage U. The third axiom guarantees that being "both U-close and V-close" is also a closeness relation in the uniformity. The fourth axiom states that for each entourage U there is an entourage V that is "not more than half as large". Finally, the last axiom states that the property "closeness" with respect to a uniform structure is symmetric in x and y. A '
or (or vicinities') of a uniformity \Phi is any set \mathcal{B} of entourages of \Phi such that every entourage of \Phi contains a set belonging to \mathcal{B}. Thus, by property 2 above, a fundamental systems of entourages \mathcal{B} is enough to specify the uniformity \Phi unambiguously: \Phi is the set of subsets of X \times X that contain a set of \mathcal{B}. Every uniform space has a fundamental system of entourages consisting of symmetric entourages. Intuition about uniformities is provided by the example of
metric spaces: if (X, d) is a metric space, the sets U_a = \{(x,y) \in X \times X : d(x,y) \leq a\} \quad \text{where} \quad a > 0 form a fundamental system of entourages for the standard uniform structure of X. Then x and y are U_a-close precisely when the distance between x and y is at most a. A uniformity \Phi is
finer than another uniformity \Psi on the same set if \Phi \supseteq \Psi; in that case \Psi is said to be
coarser than \Phi.
Pseudometrics definition Uniform spaces may be defined alternatively and equivalently using systems of
pseudometrics, an approach that is particularly useful in
functional analysis (with pseudometrics provided by
seminorms). More precisely, let f : X \times X \to \R be a pseudometric on a set X. The inverse images U_a = f^{-1}([0, a]) for a > 0 can be shown to form a fundamental system of entourages of a uniformity. The uniformity generated by the U_a is the uniformity defined by the single pseudometric f. Certain authors call spaces the topology of which is defined in terms of pseudometrics
gauge spaces. For a
family \left(f_i\right) of pseudometrics on X, the uniform structure defined by the family is the
least upper bound of the uniform structures defined by the individual pseudometrics f_i. A fundamental system of entourages of this uniformity is provided by the set of
finite intersections of entourages of the uniformities defined by the individual pseudometrics f_i. If the family of pseudometrics is
finite, it can be seen that the same uniform structure is defined by a
single pseudometric, namely the
upper envelope \sup_{} f_i of the family. Less trivially, it can be shown that a uniform structure that admits a
countable fundamental system of entourages (hence in particular a uniformity defined by a countable family of pseudometrics) can be defined by a single pseudometric. A consequence is that
any uniform structure can be defined as above by a (possibly uncountable) family of pseudometrics (see Bourbaki: General Topology Chapter IX §1 no. 4).
Uniform cover definition A
uniform space (X, \Theta) is a set X equipped with a distinguished family of coverings \Theta, called "uniform covers", drawn from the set of
coverings of X, that form a
filter when ordered by star refinement. One says that a cover \mathbf{P} is a
star refinement of cover \mathbf{Q}, written \mathbf{P} if for every A \in \mathbf{P}, there is a U \in \mathbf{Q} such that if A \cap B \neq \varnothing,B \in \mathbf{P}, then B \subseteq U. Axiomatically, the condition of being a filter reduces to: • \{X\} is a uniform cover (that is, \{X\} \in \Theta). • If \mathbf{P} with \mathbf{P} a uniform cover and \mathbf{Q} a cover of X, then \mathbf{Q} is also a uniform cover. • If \mathbf{P} and \mathbf{Q} are uniform covers then there is a uniform cover \mathbf{R} that star-refines both \mathbf{P} and \mathbf{Q} Given a point x and a uniform cover \mathbf{P}, one can consider the union of the members of \mathbf{P} that contain x as a typical neighbourhood of x of "size" \mathbf{P}, and this intuitive measure applies uniformly over the space. Given a uniform space in the entourage sense, define a cover \mathbf{P} to be uniform if there is some entourage U such that for each x \in X, there is an A \in \mathbf{P} such that U[x] \subseteq A. These uniform covers form a uniform space as in the second definition. Conversely, given a uniform space in the uniform cover sense, the supersets of \bigcup \{A \times A : A \in \mathbf{P}\}, as \mathbf{P} ranges over the uniform covers, are the entourages for a uniform space as in the first definition. Moreover, these two transformations are inverses of each other. ==Topology of uniform spaces==