The Sorgenfrey Line is $\mathbb R_/ = (\mathbb R, \tau_s)$ where $\tau_s$ is the topology on $\mathbb R$ with base $\{[a, b)\ |\ a, b \in \mathbb R\}$. I know how to show $\mathbb R_/$ is not locally compact. It turns out that the only compact sets in $\mathbb R_/$ are at best countable.

What I want to prove is that it is paracompact. You can't use the usual proof that works on $\mathbb R$ because that uses a refinement of any open cover of $\mathbb R$ that is constructed using the fact that closed balls are compact in $\mathbb R$, which can't be used here.

I'm sure I'll figure this out eventually but any feedback would be good. This is not a homework question, it's a sidetrack from my Honours project, where I have to use paracompactness as a prerequisite in some of the proofs I'm studying. I got sucked into studying the Sorgenfrey line, but I need to get back to my project, I'm too easily distracted.


Locally Compact: $X$ is locally compact if for every $x \in X$ there exists a compact set $K \subset X$ that itself contains an open neighbourhood of $x$.

Paracompact: $X$ is paracompact if every open cover $A$ of $X$ has a refinement $B$ so that every $x \in X$ has an open neighbourhood that intersects with finitely many members of $B$.


HINT: Prove that the Sorgenfrey line is Lindelöf, and use the fact that a regular Lindelöf space is paracompact. To prove that it’s Lindelöf, start with a basic open cover $\mathscr{U}$ (i.e., a cover by sets of the form $[a,b)$). Show that $\{(a,b):[a,b)\in\mathscr{U}\}$ covers all but a countable subset of $\Bbb R$, and use the fact that $\Bbb R$ with the usual topology, being second countable, is hereditarily Lindelöf.

  • $\begingroup$ Is there a direct way you know, of proving it by demonstrating a refinement of a general open cover? I imagine that would possibly be pointless given there are probably more technically appropriate ways of doing it. Just as you're pointing out, and I am interested in pursuing topology further, but I'm currently trying to escape a sidetrack and was just curious about finding a first principles method like the one I've seen for showing $\mathbb R$ is paracompact. $\endgroup$ – Geoff Pointer Sep 26 '13 at 7:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Geoff: Direct proofs of paracompactness tend to be rather messy, so I tend not to look if an easy alternative is available. I suspect that any direct proof will essentially recapitulate at least parts of the proof that a regular Lindelöf space is paracompact or the proof that a generalized ordered space is paracompact iff it has one of a rather long list of properties known to be equivalent to paracompactness in GO-spaces. $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Sep 26 '13 at 7:40
  • $\begingroup$ Looked up Lindelöf concept inspired by your answer. Using Munkres' Topology 2nd Ed. Using it as reference for homology, as cohomology is big part of my project. One text I have for that, Bott & Tu's, Differential Forms in Algebraic Topology, keeps referring to homology. My supervisor says I can avoid it but I have a pathological aversion to reading mathematics and skipping over stuff "I don't have to understand". Munkres has the Sorgenfrey Plane as $\mathbb R_\ell \times \mathbb R_\ell$ but doesn't call $\mathbb R_\ell$ the Sorgenfrey Line, just lower limit topology. Thanks for your interest. $\endgroup$ – Geoff Pointer Sep 26 '13 at 8:19
  • $\begingroup$ @Geoff: $\Bbb R$ with the lower limit topology is the Sorgenfrey line. At the risk of contributing to your tendency to indulge in cat-vacuuming, you might want to look at this post to Dan Ma’s Topology Blog; it contains most of the basic information about the Sorgenfrey line and plane. $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Sep 26 '13 at 8:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Geoff: Though his book is pretty good, my impression is that Munkres was/is a bit outside the mainstream of general/set-theoretic topology. Dan Ma’s Topology Blog is also pretty good; it’s definitely one of the better place to look on-line for standard results in general topology that you won’t necessarily find in undergraduate texts. $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Sep 26 '13 at 8:33

Late answer, but I thought I'd add a "getting your hands dirty" approach. Below I will denote by $\mathbb{S}$ the Sorgenfrey line, by $\mathbb{R}$ the real line (with the usual topology), and by $\mathsf{R}$ simply the set of real numbers. If I give a subset of $\mathsf{R}$ the superscript either $^{\langle \mathbb{S} \rangle}$ or $^{\langle \mathbb{R} \rangle}$ I intend to consider it as a subset (or subspace) of the Sorgenfrey line or the real line, respectively. (So, for example, "$A^{\langle \mathbb{S} \rangle}$ is open" means that $A$ is an open subset of $\mathbb{S}$.)

  1. Let $\mathcal{U}$ be an arbitrary open cover of $\mathbb{S}$.

  2. Consider $W := \bigcup_{U \in \mathcal{U}} \operatorname{Int}_{\mathbb{R}} ( U )$ (where the interior is taken with respect to $\mathbb{R}$). Clearly, $W^{\langle \mathbb{R} \rangle}$ is open, and so it is a countable union of pairwise disjoint open intervals. Without any essential loss of generality, we may assume that each of these open intervals is bounded, i.e., $W = \bigcup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} (a_n,b_n)$, and $(a_m,b_m) \cap (a_n,b_n) = \varnothing$ whenever $m \neq n$.

  3. We can show that $\mathsf{R} \setminus W = \{ a_n : n \in \mathbb{N} \}$.

  4. Given any $n \in \mathbb{N}$:

    • There is a $U_n \in \mathcal{U}$ and a $d_n > a_n$ such that $[a_n,d_n) \subseteq U_n$. Note that it must be that $d_n \leq b_n$. (If $d_n = b_n$ we can set $\mathcal{W}_n := \varnothing$ and skip the next two points for this $n$; we thus assume that $d_n < b_n$ in the next two points.)

    • Consider $\mathcal{W}_n^* := \{ \operatorname{Int}_{\mathbb{R}} ( U ) \cap (a_n,b_n) : U \in \mathcal{U}, U \cap (a_n,b_n) \neq \varnothing \}$. It follows that $\mathcal{W}_n^*$ is an open cover of $(a_n,b_n)^{\langle \mathbb{R} \rangle}$, and since $(a_n,b_n)^{\langle \mathbb{R} \rangle}$ is paracompact, there is a locally finite open refinement $\mathcal{W}_n^\prime$ of $\mathcal{W}_n^*$.

    • Now let $\mathcal{W}_n := \{ W \cap [ d_n , b_n ) : W \in \mathcal{W}_n^\prime \}$. It follows that $\mathcal{W}_n$ is a locally finite family of open subsets of $\mathbb{S}$ which covers $[d_n,b_n)$.

  5. It can then be shown that $\mathcal{V} := \{ [a_n,d_n) : n \in \mathbb{N} \} \cup \bigcup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \mathcal{W}_n$ is a locally finite open refinement of $\mathcal{U}$.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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