How can I prove that the Sorgenfrey line is a Lindelöf space?
How can I prove that the Sorgenfrey line is a Lindelöf space? Now, Sorgenfrey line is $mathbb{R}$ with the basis of ${[a,b) mid a,binmathbb{R}, a<b}$, and in general, a topological space is called a "Lindelöf space" iff every open cover has a countable subcover. Please show me an elegant proof.
general-topology
add a comment |
How can I prove that the Sorgenfrey line is a Lindelöf space? Now, Sorgenfrey line is $mathbb{R}$ with the basis of ${[a,b) mid a,binmathbb{R}, a<b}$, and in general, a topological space is called a "Lindelöf space" iff every open cover has a countable subcover. Please show me an elegant proof.
general-topology
Does this help?
– user642796
Dec 12 '13 at 10:44
add a comment |
How can I prove that the Sorgenfrey line is a Lindelöf space? Now, Sorgenfrey line is $mathbb{R}$ with the basis of ${[a,b) mid a,binmathbb{R}, a<b}$, and in general, a topological space is called a "Lindelöf space" iff every open cover has a countable subcover. Please show me an elegant proof.
general-topology
How can I prove that the Sorgenfrey line is a Lindelöf space? Now, Sorgenfrey line is $mathbb{R}$ with the basis of ${[a,b) mid a,binmathbb{R}, a<b}$, and in general, a topological space is called a "Lindelöf space" iff every open cover has a countable subcover. Please show me an elegant proof.
general-topology
general-topology
edited Apr 17 '16 at 9:36
bof
50.4k457119
50.4k457119
asked Dec 12 '13 at 10:43
user115322
Does this help?
– user642796
Dec 12 '13 at 10:44
add a comment |
Does this help?
– user642796
Dec 12 '13 at 10:44
Does this help?
– user642796
Dec 12 '13 at 10:44
Does this help?
– user642796
Dec 12 '13 at 10:44
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Here's a simple direct proof, which works just as well for the Sorgenfrey topology as for the usual topology of the line.
Let $mathcal U$ be a collection of Sorgenfrey-open sets that covers $mathbb R$. Let's say that a set $Xsubseteq R$ is countably covered if $X$ is covered by countably many members of $mathcal U$. We want to show that $mathbb R$ is countably covered.
Consider any $ainmathbb R$, and let $C_a={x: xge a,text{ and the interval }[a,x]text{ is countably covered}}$. It's easy to see that $sup C_a=infty$; assuming the contrary leads to a contradiction. Hence every finite interval $[a,b]$ is countably covered, and so is $mathbb R=bigcup_{ninmathbb N}[-n,n]$.
P.S. I have been asked to explain why assuming that $sup C_a=binmathbb R$ leads to a contradiction. Let $b_n=b-frac{b-a}{2^n}$ for $n=1,2,3,dots,$ so that $alt b_nlt b$ and $b_nto b.$ Thus for each $n$ there is a countable collection $mathcal S_nsubseteqmathcal U$ such that $[a,b_n]$ is covered by $mathcal S_n,$ and the half-open interval $[a,b)$ is covered by the countable collection $bigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n.$ Moreover, since $mathcal U$ covers $mathbb R,$ there is some $Uinmathcal U$ such that $bin U.$ Since $U$ is Sorgenfrey-open, there is some neighborhood $[b,b+varepsilon)$ of $b$ (with $varepsilongt0$) such that $[b,b+varepsilon)subseteq U.$ Then $[a,b+varepsilon)$ is covered by ${U}cupbigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n,$ whence $b+fracvarepsilon2in C_a,$ contradicting our assumption that $b=sup C_a.$
Wow! I got it!! Thanks a lot!!!
– user115322
Jan 10 '14 at 14:29
Why does $sup C_a in mathbb{R}$ lead to a contradiction? Thanks :)
– Math_QED
May 10 '18 at 17:03
Thanks it is clear now !
– Math_QED
May 11 '18 at 4:30
add a comment |
The proof given by bof is correct, but incomplete. Here is a completion.
When bof assumed ad absurdum that $sup{C_a} = b in mathbb{R}$, he implicitely assumed that $b > a$, which a priori does not need to be true (as $b$ could be equal to $a$). For the sake of completeness, first remark that $C_a$ is non-empty, as the interval $[a, a]$ is trivially countably covered, so $a in C_a$.
Now let $A$ be a Sorgenfrey-open set that covers $a$. Then, because $A$ is open, there must exist a neighbourhood $[a, a+epsilon[$ in $A$ for some $epsilon > 0$. Now observe that the interval $[a, a+frac{epsilon}{2}]$ is covered by $A$, so $a + frac{epsilon}{2}$ will certainly be a member of $C_a$. It follows that $b = sup{C_a} geq a + frac{epsilon}{2} > a$, which justifies bofs assumption that $b > a$.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f604077%2fhow-can-i-prove-that-the-sorgenfrey-line-is-a-lindel%25c3%25b6f-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Here's a simple direct proof, which works just as well for the Sorgenfrey topology as for the usual topology of the line.
Let $mathcal U$ be a collection of Sorgenfrey-open sets that covers $mathbb R$. Let's say that a set $Xsubseteq R$ is countably covered if $X$ is covered by countably many members of $mathcal U$. We want to show that $mathbb R$ is countably covered.
Consider any $ainmathbb R$, and let $C_a={x: xge a,text{ and the interval }[a,x]text{ is countably covered}}$. It's easy to see that $sup C_a=infty$; assuming the contrary leads to a contradiction. Hence every finite interval $[a,b]$ is countably covered, and so is $mathbb R=bigcup_{ninmathbb N}[-n,n]$.
P.S. I have been asked to explain why assuming that $sup C_a=binmathbb R$ leads to a contradiction. Let $b_n=b-frac{b-a}{2^n}$ for $n=1,2,3,dots,$ so that $alt b_nlt b$ and $b_nto b.$ Thus for each $n$ there is a countable collection $mathcal S_nsubseteqmathcal U$ such that $[a,b_n]$ is covered by $mathcal S_n,$ and the half-open interval $[a,b)$ is covered by the countable collection $bigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n.$ Moreover, since $mathcal U$ covers $mathbb R,$ there is some $Uinmathcal U$ such that $bin U.$ Since $U$ is Sorgenfrey-open, there is some neighborhood $[b,b+varepsilon)$ of $b$ (with $varepsilongt0$) such that $[b,b+varepsilon)subseteq U.$ Then $[a,b+varepsilon)$ is covered by ${U}cupbigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n,$ whence $b+fracvarepsilon2in C_a,$ contradicting our assumption that $b=sup C_a.$
Wow! I got it!! Thanks a lot!!!
– user115322
Jan 10 '14 at 14:29
Why does $sup C_a in mathbb{R}$ lead to a contradiction? Thanks :)
– Math_QED
May 10 '18 at 17:03
Thanks it is clear now !
– Math_QED
May 11 '18 at 4:30
add a comment |
Here's a simple direct proof, which works just as well for the Sorgenfrey topology as for the usual topology of the line.
Let $mathcal U$ be a collection of Sorgenfrey-open sets that covers $mathbb R$. Let's say that a set $Xsubseteq R$ is countably covered if $X$ is covered by countably many members of $mathcal U$. We want to show that $mathbb R$ is countably covered.
Consider any $ainmathbb R$, and let $C_a={x: xge a,text{ and the interval }[a,x]text{ is countably covered}}$. It's easy to see that $sup C_a=infty$; assuming the contrary leads to a contradiction. Hence every finite interval $[a,b]$ is countably covered, and so is $mathbb R=bigcup_{ninmathbb N}[-n,n]$.
P.S. I have been asked to explain why assuming that $sup C_a=binmathbb R$ leads to a contradiction. Let $b_n=b-frac{b-a}{2^n}$ for $n=1,2,3,dots,$ so that $alt b_nlt b$ and $b_nto b.$ Thus for each $n$ there is a countable collection $mathcal S_nsubseteqmathcal U$ such that $[a,b_n]$ is covered by $mathcal S_n,$ and the half-open interval $[a,b)$ is covered by the countable collection $bigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n.$ Moreover, since $mathcal U$ covers $mathbb R,$ there is some $Uinmathcal U$ such that $bin U.$ Since $U$ is Sorgenfrey-open, there is some neighborhood $[b,b+varepsilon)$ of $b$ (with $varepsilongt0$) such that $[b,b+varepsilon)subseteq U.$ Then $[a,b+varepsilon)$ is covered by ${U}cupbigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n,$ whence $b+fracvarepsilon2in C_a,$ contradicting our assumption that $b=sup C_a.$
Wow! I got it!! Thanks a lot!!!
– user115322
Jan 10 '14 at 14:29
Why does $sup C_a in mathbb{R}$ lead to a contradiction? Thanks :)
– Math_QED
May 10 '18 at 17:03
Thanks it is clear now !
– Math_QED
May 11 '18 at 4:30
add a comment |
Here's a simple direct proof, which works just as well for the Sorgenfrey topology as for the usual topology of the line.
Let $mathcal U$ be a collection of Sorgenfrey-open sets that covers $mathbb R$. Let's say that a set $Xsubseteq R$ is countably covered if $X$ is covered by countably many members of $mathcal U$. We want to show that $mathbb R$ is countably covered.
Consider any $ainmathbb R$, and let $C_a={x: xge a,text{ and the interval }[a,x]text{ is countably covered}}$. It's easy to see that $sup C_a=infty$; assuming the contrary leads to a contradiction. Hence every finite interval $[a,b]$ is countably covered, and so is $mathbb R=bigcup_{ninmathbb N}[-n,n]$.
P.S. I have been asked to explain why assuming that $sup C_a=binmathbb R$ leads to a contradiction. Let $b_n=b-frac{b-a}{2^n}$ for $n=1,2,3,dots,$ so that $alt b_nlt b$ and $b_nto b.$ Thus for each $n$ there is a countable collection $mathcal S_nsubseteqmathcal U$ such that $[a,b_n]$ is covered by $mathcal S_n,$ and the half-open interval $[a,b)$ is covered by the countable collection $bigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n.$ Moreover, since $mathcal U$ covers $mathbb R,$ there is some $Uinmathcal U$ such that $bin U.$ Since $U$ is Sorgenfrey-open, there is some neighborhood $[b,b+varepsilon)$ of $b$ (with $varepsilongt0$) such that $[b,b+varepsilon)subseteq U.$ Then $[a,b+varepsilon)$ is covered by ${U}cupbigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n,$ whence $b+fracvarepsilon2in C_a,$ contradicting our assumption that $b=sup C_a.$
Here's a simple direct proof, which works just as well for the Sorgenfrey topology as for the usual topology of the line.
Let $mathcal U$ be a collection of Sorgenfrey-open sets that covers $mathbb R$. Let's say that a set $Xsubseteq R$ is countably covered if $X$ is covered by countably many members of $mathcal U$. We want to show that $mathbb R$ is countably covered.
Consider any $ainmathbb R$, and let $C_a={x: xge a,text{ and the interval }[a,x]text{ is countably covered}}$. It's easy to see that $sup C_a=infty$; assuming the contrary leads to a contradiction. Hence every finite interval $[a,b]$ is countably covered, and so is $mathbb R=bigcup_{ninmathbb N}[-n,n]$.
P.S. I have been asked to explain why assuming that $sup C_a=binmathbb R$ leads to a contradiction. Let $b_n=b-frac{b-a}{2^n}$ for $n=1,2,3,dots,$ so that $alt b_nlt b$ and $b_nto b.$ Thus for each $n$ there is a countable collection $mathcal S_nsubseteqmathcal U$ such that $[a,b_n]$ is covered by $mathcal S_n,$ and the half-open interval $[a,b)$ is covered by the countable collection $bigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n.$ Moreover, since $mathcal U$ covers $mathbb R,$ there is some $Uinmathcal U$ such that $bin U.$ Since $U$ is Sorgenfrey-open, there is some neighborhood $[b,b+varepsilon)$ of $b$ (with $varepsilongt0$) such that $[b,b+varepsilon)subseteq U.$ Then $[a,b+varepsilon)$ is covered by ${U}cupbigcup_{ninmathbb N}mathcal S_n,$ whence $b+fracvarepsilon2in C_a,$ contradicting our assumption that $b=sup C_a.$
edited May 10 '18 at 23:10
answered Dec 12 '13 at 12:52
bof
50.4k457119
50.4k457119
Wow! I got it!! Thanks a lot!!!
– user115322
Jan 10 '14 at 14:29
Why does $sup C_a in mathbb{R}$ lead to a contradiction? Thanks :)
– Math_QED
May 10 '18 at 17:03
Thanks it is clear now !
– Math_QED
May 11 '18 at 4:30
add a comment |
Wow! I got it!! Thanks a lot!!!
– user115322
Jan 10 '14 at 14:29
Why does $sup C_a in mathbb{R}$ lead to a contradiction? Thanks :)
– Math_QED
May 10 '18 at 17:03
Thanks it is clear now !
– Math_QED
May 11 '18 at 4:30
Wow! I got it!! Thanks a lot!!!
– user115322
Jan 10 '14 at 14:29
Wow! I got it!! Thanks a lot!!!
– user115322
Jan 10 '14 at 14:29
Why does $sup C_a in mathbb{R}$ lead to a contradiction? Thanks :)
– Math_QED
May 10 '18 at 17:03
Why does $sup C_a in mathbb{R}$ lead to a contradiction? Thanks :)
– Math_QED
May 10 '18 at 17:03
Thanks it is clear now !
– Math_QED
May 11 '18 at 4:30
Thanks it is clear now !
– Math_QED
May 11 '18 at 4:30
add a comment |
The proof given by bof is correct, but incomplete. Here is a completion.
When bof assumed ad absurdum that $sup{C_a} = b in mathbb{R}$, he implicitely assumed that $b > a$, which a priori does not need to be true (as $b$ could be equal to $a$). For the sake of completeness, first remark that $C_a$ is non-empty, as the interval $[a, a]$ is trivially countably covered, so $a in C_a$.
Now let $A$ be a Sorgenfrey-open set that covers $a$. Then, because $A$ is open, there must exist a neighbourhood $[a, a+epsilon[$ in $A$ for some $epsilon > 0$. Now observe that the interval $[a, a+frac{epsilon}{2}]$ is covered by $A$, so $a + frac{epsilon}{2}$ will certainly be a member of $C_a$. It follows that $b = sup{C_a} geq a + frac{epsilon}{2} > a$, which justifies bofs assumption that $b > a$.
add a comment |
The proof given by bof is correct, but incomplete. Here is a completion.
When bof assumed ad absurdum that $sup{C_a} = b in mathbb{R}$, he implicitely assumed that $b > a$, which a priori does not need to be true (as $b$ could be equal to $a$). For the sake of completeness, first remark that $C_a$ is non-empty, as the interval $[a, a]$ is trivially countably covered, so $a in C_a$.
Now let $A$ be a Sorgenfrey-open set that covers $a$. Then, because $A$ is open, there must exist a neighbourhood $[a, a+epsilon[$ in $A$ for some $epsilon > 0$. Now observe that the interval $[a, a+frac{epsilon}{2}]$ is covered by $A$, so $a + frac{epsilon}{2}$ will certainly be a member of $C_a$. It follows that $b = sup{C_a} geq a + frac{epsilon}{2} > a$, which justifies bofs assumption that $b > a$.
add a comment |
The proof given by bof is correct, but incomplete. Here is a completion.
When bof assumed ad absurdum that $sup{C_a} = b in mathbb{R}$, he implicitely assumed that $b > a$, which a priori does not need to be true (as $b$ could be equal to $a$). For the sake of completeness, first remark that $C_a$ is non-empty, as the interval $[a, a]$ is trivially countably covered, so $a in C_a$.
Now let $A$ be a Sorgenfrey-open set that covers $a$. Then, because $A$ is open, there must exist a neighbourhood $[a, a+epsilon[$ in $A$ for some $epsilon > 0$. Now observe that the interval $[a, a+frac{epsilon}{2}]$ is covered by $A$, so $a + frac{epsilon}{2}$ will certainly be a member of $C_a$. It follows that $b = sup{C_a} geq a + frac{epsilon}{2} > a$, which justifies bofs assumption that $b > a$.
The proof given by bof is correct, but incomplete. Here is a completion.
When bof assumed ad absurdum that $sup{C_a} = b in mathbb{R}$, he implicitely assumed that $b > a$, which a priori does not need to be true (as $b$ could be equal to $a$). For the sake of completeness, first remark that $C_a$ is non-empty, as the interval $[a, a]$ is trivially countably covered, so $a in C_a$.
Now let $A$ be a Sorgenfrey-open set that covers $a$. Then, because $A$ is open, there must exist a neighbourhood $[a, a+epsilon[$ in $A$ for some $epsilon > 0$. Now observe that the interval $[a, a+frac{epsilon}{2}]$ is covered by $A$, so $a + frac{epsilon}{2}$ will certainly be a member of $C_a$. It follows that $b = sup{C_a} geq a + frac{epsilon}{2} > a$, which justifies bofs assumption that $b > a$.
edited 2 days ago
answered Dec 23 '18 at 14:46
Safron
84
84
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f604077%2fhow-can-i-prove-that-the-sorgenfrey-line-is-a-lindel%25c3%25b6f-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Does this help?
– user642796
Dec 12 '13 at 10:44