Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

A question here on perfectly normal spaces got me into investigating the definition of such a space. The definition on wikipedia says

A perfectly normal space is a topological space X in which every two disjoint non-empty closed sets $E$ and $F$ can be precisely separated by a continuous function $f$ from $X$ to the real line $\mathbb{R}$: the preimages of $\{0\}$ and $\{1\}$ under $f$ are, respectively, $E$ and $F$. (In this definition, the real line can be replaced with the unit interval $[0,1]$.) It turns out that $X$ is perfectly normal if and only if $X$ is normal and every closed set is a $G_\delta$ set.

I took it for granted that a perfectly normal space was also assumed to be a normal space, which seems to be the case if you take the definition to be a perfect space where every closed set is $G_\delta$. If you take the other definition, I don't think you can assume automatically that the space is perfect. So this is kind of a follow up, from the first definition above, how can you conclude that a perfectly normal space is also normal?

share|improve this question
    
Related question: math.stackexchange.com/questions/72138/… –  Martin Sleziak Oct 13 '11 at 8:08

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Let $F$ and $G$ be disjoint closed sets in a perfectly normal space $X$ as defined in Wikipedia. There is a continuous function $f:X\to [0,1]$ such that $F = f^{-1}[\{0\}]$ and $G = f^{-1}[\{1\}]$. Let $$U = f^{-1}\left[\left[0,\frac13\right)\right]$$ and $$V = f^{-1}\left[\left(\frac23,1\right]\right].$$ Since $f$ is continuous, $U$ and $V$ are open in $X$. Clearly $U \cap V = \varnothing$, $F\subseteq U$, and $G\subseteq V$, so $U$ and $V$ separate the closed sets $F$ and $G$. It follows that $X$ is normal.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks very much! –  Danielle Intal Oct 13 '11 at 9:35
    
One last thing to ask, do you know why $\mathbb{R}$ can be replaced by $[0,1]$ in this definition? –  Danielle Intal Oct 15 '11 at 4:51
    
@Danielle: The existence of separating functions from $X$ to $\mathbb{R}$ implies that $X$ is normal and that every closed set in $X$ is $f^{-1}[\{0\}]$ for some continuous $f:X\to\mathbb{R}$. If $F=f^{-1}[\{0\}]$, let $g(x)=\min\{|f(x)|,1\}$; $F=g^{-1}[\{0\}]$, and $g:X\to[0,1]$. Now suppose that $F,G$ are disjoint closed sets, $f,g:X\to[0,1]$ are continuous, $F=f^{-1}[\{0\}]$, and $G=g^{-1}[\{0\}]$. Let $h(x)=\dfrac{f(x)}{f(x)+g(x)}$; then $h:X\to[0,1]$ is continuous, $F=h^{-1}[\{0\}]$, and $G=h^{-1}[\{1\}]$. –  Brian M. Scott Oct 15 '11 at 9:44
    
I had that same $h$ in mind, but was unsure how to know $f(x)+g(x)\neq 0$ for some $x$ unless the codomain was $[0,1]$ instead of $\mathbb{R}$. Thanks for your comment! –  Danielle Intal Oct 15 '11 at 17:20

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.