Separating Sets in a Completely Regular Space

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a completely regular space X and closed, disjoint subsets A and B, with the goal of proving the existence of a continuous function that separates these sets under the condition that A is compact.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of compactness and complete regularity in constructing the desired continuous function. There are attempts to define functions based on open coverings and the properties of the space. Some participants question the order of applying these properties and explore different approaches to the problem.

Discussion Status

Participants have offered various insights and suggestions, including the use of specific functions for points in A and the implications of compactness. There is recognition of multiple approaches being explored, but no explicit consensus has been reached on a single method.

Contextual Notes

There is a discussion about the implications of the definitions of complete regularity and compactness, as well as the potential use of theorems related to embeddings in normal spaces. Some participants express uncertainty about the existence of certain embedding theorems for completely regular spaces.

e(ho0n3
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Let X by a completely regular space and let A and B be closed, disjoint subsets of X. Prove that if A is compact, then there is a continuous function f : X --> [0,1] such that f(A) = {0} and f(B) = {1}.


The attempt at a solution
Let {U} be an open covering of A, U_1, ..., U_n be the corresponding finite open covering afforded by compactness of A. Let a_i in U_i and let f_i : X --> [0,1] be the continuous function separating a_i and B afforded by the complete regularity of X. Define f by f_1 * ... * f_n. This is all I have at the moment. Unfortunately, my f is only 0 at a_i and I don't know how to extend it to be 0 on all of A without breaking continuity.

I believe that the open covering I choose for A must somehow play a role. For example, if the open covering is just {A}, then, proceeding as I did above, compactness plays no role. Any tips?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you used the fact that X is completely regular? What is the definition of "completely regular"?
 
Yes I did: The f_i's in my attempt are from complete regularity.

The definition is: For any a in X and any closed subset B of X, there exists a continuous function f : X --> [0,1] such that f(a) = 0 and f(B) = {1}.
 
Don't start with the open covering.

Obtain f_a for each a in A. Now pick any number between 0 and 1, say 1/2. Let U_a be the open set (containing a) where f_a is less than 1/2. Then invoke compactness.

Note: If you subtract 1/2 from f_a, you'll get a continuous function that is less than 0 on U_a. So, consider the max of 0 and f_a, which is also a continuous function.

Now use scaling and/or addition of these functions to get your desired function.
 
That is ingenious. What led you to devise the U_a's the way you did?
 
"Cheating." (ashamed...)
 
In hindsight, it seems to me that there are two viable approaches to this problem:

1. Invoke compactness first and then complete regularity.
2. Invoke complete regularity first and then compactness.

The first approach was my approach, and that clearly lead nowhere. The second I did not try, but I was already heading in that direction with last comment I made in my original post. In any case, thanks for the help.
 
Before "cheating," I was considering a third approach, using a theorem instead of first principles. I prefer first principles. But how about saying since X is completely regular, then by a theorem, X is (homeomorphic to) a subspace of a normal space X'. Now A is cpt in X, so cpt in X', so closed in X'. Can we get B' closed in X', disjoint from A, such that B= B' intersect X. Then apply Urysohn's lemma to A and B'.
 
I like that approach. However, I'm not aware of any embedding theorems for completely regular spaces. Is there such a theorem?
 
  • #10
There are several.

If X is completely regular, then X can be imbedded in a parallelotope (i.e. cartesian product of unit intevals [0,1]).

X is c.r. iff X is (homeomorphic to) a subspace of a cpt Hausdorff space iff X is (homeomorphic to) a subspace of a normal space.

Also, there is the Stone-Čech compactification of a c.r. space.
 
  • #11
Neat. Looks like my forays in topology have just begun.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K