Purchase Solution

Urysohn's lemma

Not what you're looking for?

Ask Custom Question

A Hausdorff space is said to be completely regular if
for each pt. x in X and closed set C with x not in C,
there exists a continuous function f: X --> {0,1} s.t.
f(x)=0 and f(C)={1}.

Show that if a space is normal, it is completely regular.
How do I use Urysohn's lemma along with Hausdorffiness to show this.

Thank You

Purchase this Solution
Solution Summary

This is a proof regarding regular and normal spaces. The expert examines Hausdorffiness lemmas.

Solution Preview

Urysohn's Lemma: The topological space X satisfies T4 axiom if and only if for any nonintersected closed set A and B, there exists a continuous function f: X->[0,1], such that f(A)={0}, ...

Purchase this Solution
Free BrainMass Quizzes
Solving quadratic inequalities

This quiz test you on how well you are familiar with solving quadratic inequalities.

Graphs and Functions

This quiz helps you easily identify a function and test your understanding of ranges, domains , function inverses and transformations.

Probability Quiz

Some questions on probability

Multiplying Complex Numbers

This is a short quiz to check your understanding of multiplication of complex numbers in rectangular form.

Exponential Expressions

In this quiz, you will have a chance to practice basic terminology of exponential expressions and how to evaluate them.

View More Free Quizzes
Related BrainMass Solutions

  • Statistics: Moment Generating Function

    the lemma above for for and get: = , so Now, since we have: , we get: = = (by Lemma 2)

  • Extreme value theorem

    Lemma 4: K closed implies closure(K)=K. Proof: Since K is compact, f(K) is compact in R from (Lemma 1). from (Lemma 2), f(K) is closed and bounded in R. Let M=sup(f(x)) x in K, m=inf(f(x)) x in K.

  • Neyman Pearson Lemma

    2063 Proving Neyman-Pearson Lemma Prove the Neyman-Pearson Lemma. Please see attached files The solution proves the Neyman-Pearson Lemma.

  • Proof of Dual

    48994 Proof of Dual using Farkas Lemma (PhD) Hello, Could you please help me to prove this using Farkas Lemma?

  • Jordan's Lemma and Loop Integrals

    Explain why Jordan's Lemma (see below) is inadequate here, and write a complete formulation of a more general Jordan's lemma which applies in this case. Please see the attached file for the fully formatted problems.

  • Irreducible Polynomials

    Proof of "if": If f(a) is not 0 for all a in F, then, from Lemma A, f(x) cannot have factor (x-a) for any a in F, and therefore, from Lemma B it cannot be reducible.

  • Bore-Cantelli Lemma

    Hint: Pick c_n such that m ({x : |f_n (x) / c_n| > 1/n} ) < 2^(-n), and apply the Bore-Cantelli Lemma. See the attachment, please. Bore-Cantelli Lemma is integrated into the solution..

  • Question about Connected point sets

    There is a basic lemma that says: If the sets C and D form a separation of X, and if Y is a connected subset of X, then Y lies entirely within either C or D. Call this "Lemma A". Suppose cl(M) is not connected.

  • Lebesque Number and Connectivity

    Restate the lemma for the following special cases: (1) A covering by two open sets (2) The sets {Ui} are linearly ordered by inclusion Using the restated lemma for special case (1), prove that the unit n-sphere Sn, n ≥ 2, is simply connected.

View More Related Solutions