I am looking up the definition of "homeomorphic" and the source I am looking at says there are two different definitions:
Possessing similarity of form,
Continuous, one-to-one, in surjection, and having a continuous inverse.
- seems to be speaking of a particular function/mapping, so I'm okay with that. But "possessing similarity of form" is not rigorous so I don't understand what is meant by that. Does it just mean there exists a function that is continuous, one-to-one, in surjection, and has a continuous inverse from one set to another? Like when it is said that e.g. "the $2$-sphere is not homeomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^2$," does that mean there exists no function $f: S^2 \to \mathbb{R}^2$ such that $f$ is continuous, one-to-one, in surjection, and has a continuous inverse?
Two topological spaces are homeomorphic iff there exists a mapping as described in (2) between them, a continuous 1-1 map $f$ from one onto the other space whose inverse $f^{-1}$ is also continuous. Because of this condition, both $f$ and $f^{-1}$ are called homeomorphisms, i.e. maps that preserve the underlying topological structure of a space.
Thus the two topological spaces have the same topological structure. This gives a rigorous interpretation to (1); as the OP points out, without more context statement (1) about "similarity of form" lacks rigor.
The example of two spaces, the 2-sphere $S^2$ and the plane $\mathbb{R}^2$, that are not homeomorphic illustrates the topic. If these were homeomorphic spaces, their topological properties (preserved under homeomorphism) would be the same. But compactness is a topological property (preserved indeed by continuous surjections), and $S^2$ is compact but $\mathbb{R}^2$ is not compact. So we know these spaces are not homeomorphic.