topology munkres - urysohn lemma

by Fisicks
Tags: lemma, munkres, topology, urysohn
Fisicks is offline
Nov1-11, 11:10 PM
P: 85
Hi, the problem im referencing is section 33 problem 4.

Let X be normal. There exists a continuous function f: X -> [0,1] such that fx=0 for x in A and fx >0 for x not in A, if and only if A is a closed G(delta) set in X.

My question is about the <= direction.

So let B be the collection of open sets whose intersection is A and index them with the natural numbers. Let U_n be an element of B. For each U_n, define a function f_n. To define f_n follow the proof of Urysohn lemma using A=A, B=X-U_n.

Define fx= sup{f_n(x)} for all n.

Clearly fx=0 iff x is in A. My problem is with showing continuity. Part of me thinks that if x is an element of X and (a,b) is a basic open set of fx, then there exists an open set U such fU is contained in (a,b) since each f_n is continuous.
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on
NASA's space station Robonaut finally getting legs
Free the seed: OSSI nurtures growing plants without patent barriers
Going nuts? Turkey looks to pistachios to heat new eco-city

Register to reply

Related Discussions
Strong form of the Urysohn lemma Calculus & Beyond Homework 44
Stronger Urysohn lemma? General Math 2
Urysohn's lemma Calculus & Beyond Homework 4
Urysohn lemma? Linear & Abstract Algebra 14
Urysohn Lemma Calculus & Beyond Homework 3