How can I prove that the Sorgenfrey line is a Lindelöf space?












3














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.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Does this help?
    – user642796
    Dec 12 '13 at 10:44
















3














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.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Does this help?
    – user642796
    Dec 12 '13 at 10:44














3












3








3


1





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.










share|cite|improve this question















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






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








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


















  • 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










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















5














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 $b=sup C_a.$






share|cite|improve this answer























  • 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



















0














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 $b > a$.






share|cite|improve this answer























    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    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









    5














    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 $b=sup C_a.$






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • 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
















    5














    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 $b=sup C_a.$






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • 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














    5












    5








    5






    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 $b=sup C_a.$






    share|cite|improve this answer














    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 $b=sup C_a.$







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    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


















    • 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











    0














    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 $b > a$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      0














      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 $b > a$.






      share|cite|improve this answer


























        0












        0








        0






        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 $b > a$.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        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 $b > a$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited 2 days ago

























        answered Dec 23 '18 at 14:46









        Safron

        84




        84






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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





















































            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            An IMO inspired problem

            Management

            Investment