For a closed $G_delta$ set $Fsubseteq X,$ does there exist a continuous function $f:Xto [0,1]$ such that...












6












$begingroup$


(All spaces are Hausdorff.)



This question is a variant of my previous question.



Let $X$ be a completely regular space, that is, for every closed set $Fsubseteq X$ and $xnotin F,$ there exists a continuous function $g:Xto [0,1]$ such that $g(F) = {0}$ and $g(x) =1.$




Question: For every closed $G_delta$ set $Fsubseteq X,$ does there exist a continuous function $f:Xto [0,1]$ such that $f=0$ on $F$ and $fneq 0$ outside $F?$




A subset $Usubseteq X$ is a zero set if there exists a continuous function $g:Xto [0,1]$ such that $g^{-1}({0}) = U.$



It is well-known that if $X$ is normal then all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero sets.



However, I am not sure whether the same holds for completely regular space.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I know that $X$ normal implies that all closed $G_delta$'s are zero-sets, but I believe the reverse does not hold. If it did your question would be useless. Do you have a reference ? "well-known" it is not, it's not mentioned in Engelking, a standard reference for such matters.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 14:26






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Note that this can only be true when $F$ is closed and $G_delta$. You cannot ask this for all closed sets.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 14:27










  • $begingroup$
    @HennoBrandsma yes, you are right. I have edited my post.
    $endgroup$
    – Idonknow
    Jan 5 at 14:59










  • $begingroup$
    @HennoBrandsma by the way, if the converse holds, why would by question be useless?
    $endgroup$
    – Idonknow
    Jan 5 at 15:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @PaulFrost that is the direction I agreed with, yes. The OP originally claimed that if all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero-sets then $X$ is normal. This I doubt the truth of, as said.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 18:46
















6












$begingroup$


(All spaces are Hausdorff.)



This question is a variant of my previous question.



Let $X$ be a completely regular space, that is, for every closed set $Fsubseteq X$ and $xnotin F,$ there exists a continuous function $g:Xto [0,1]$ such that $g(F) = {0}$ and $g(x) =1.$




Question: For every closed $G_delta$ set $Fsubseteq X,$ does there exist a continuous function $f:Xto [0,1]$ such that $f=0$ on $F$ and $fneq 0$ outside $F?$




A subset $Usubseteq X$ is a zero set if there exists a continuous function $g:Xto [0,1]$ such that $g^{-1}({0}) = U.$



It is well-known that if $X$ is normal then all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero sets.



However, I am not sure whether the same holds for completely regular space.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I know that $X$ normal implies that all closed $G_delta$'s are zero-sets, but I believe the reverse does not hold. If it did your question would be useless. Do you have a reference ? "well-known" it is not, it's not mentioned in Engelking, a standard reference for such matters.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 14:26






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Note that this can only be true when $F$ is closed and $G_delta$. You cannot ask this for all closed sets.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 14:27










  • $begingroup$
    @HennoBrandsma yes, you are right. I have edited my post.
    $endgroup$
    – Idonknow
    Jan 5 at 14:59










  • $begingroup$
    @HennoBrandsma by the way, if the converse holds, why would by question be useless?
    $endgroup$
    – Idonknow
    Jan 5 at 15:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @PaulFrost that is the direction I agreed with, yes. The OP originally claimed that if all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero-sets then $X$ is normal. This I doubt the truth of, as said.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 18:46














6












6








6





$begingroup$


(All spaces are Hausdorff.)



This question is a variant of my previous question.



Let $X$ be a completely regular space, that is, for every closed set $Fsubseteq X$ and $xnotin F,$ there exists a continuous function $g:Xto [0,1]$ such that $g(F) = {0}$ and $g(x) =1.$




Question: For every closed $G_delta$ set $Fsubseteq X,$ does there exist a continuous function $f:Xto [0,1]$ such that $f=0$ on $F$ and $fneq 0$ outside $F?$




A subset $Usubseteq X$ is a zero set if there exists a continuous function $g:Xto [0,1]$ such that $g^{-1}({0}) = U.$



It is well-known that if $X$ is normal then all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero sets.



However, I am not sure whether the same holds for completely regular space.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




(All spaces are Hausdorff.)



This question is a variant of my previous question.



Let $X$ be a completely regular space, that is, for every closed set $Fsubseteq X$ and $xnotin F,$ there exists a continuous function $g:Xto [0,1]$ such that $g(F) = {0}$ and $g(x) =1.$




Question: For every closed $G_delta$ set $Fsubseteq X,$ does there exist a continuous function $f:Xto [0,1]$ such that $f=0$ on $F$ and $fneq 0$ outside $F?$




A subset $Usubseteq X$ is a zero set if there exists a continuous function $g:Xto [0,1]$ such that $g^{-1}({0}) = U.$



It is well-known that if $X$ is normal then all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero sets.



However, I am not sure whether the same holds for completely regular space.







general-topology separation-axioms






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 5 at 18:32









Paul Frost

11.4k3934




11.4k3934










asked Jan 5 at 12:51









IdonknowIdonknow

2,504850114




2,504850114












  • $begingroup$
    I know that $X$ normal implies that all closed $G_delta$'s are zero-sets, but I believe the reverse does not hold. If it did your question would be useless. Do you have a reference ? "well-known" it is not, it's not mentioned in Engelking, a standard reference for such matters.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 14:26






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Note that this can only be true when $F$ is closed and $G_delta$. You cannot ask this for all closed sets.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 14:27










  • $begingroup$
    @HennoBrandsma yes, you are right. I have edited my post.
    $endgroup$
    – Idonknow
    Jan 5 at 14:59










  • $begingroup$
    @HennoBrandsma by the way, if the converse holds, why would by question be useless?
    $endgroup$
    – Idonknow
    Jan 5 at 15:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @PaulFrost that is the direction I agreed with, yes. The OP originally claimed that if all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero-sets then $X$ is normal. This I doubt the truth of, as said.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 18:46


















  • $begingroup$
    I know that $X$ normal implies that all closed $G_delta$'s are zero-sets, but I believe the reverse does not hold. If it did your question would be useless. Do you have a reference ? "well-known" it is not, it's not mentioned in Engelking, a standard reference for such matters.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 14:26






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Note that this can only be true when $F$ is closed and $G_delta$. You cannot ask this for all closed sets.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 14:27










  • $begingroup$
    @HennoBrandsma yes, you are right. I have edited my post.
    $endgroup$
    – Idonknow
    Jan 5 at 14:59










  • $begingroup$
    @HennoBrandsma by the way, if the converse holds, why would by question be useless?
    $endgroup$
    – Idonknow
    Jan 5 at 15:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @PaulFrost that is the direction I agreed with, yes. The OP originally claimed that if all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero-sets then $X$ is normal. This I doubt the truth of, as said.
    $endgroup$
    – Henno Brandsma
    Jan 5 at 18:46
















$begingroup$
I know that $X$ normal implies that all closed $G_delta$'s are zero-sets, but I believe the reverse does not hold. If it did your question would be useless. Do you have a reference ? "well-known" it is not, it's not mentioned in Engelking, a standard reference for such matters.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Jan 5 at 14:26




$begingroup$
I know that $X$ normal implies that all closed $G_delta$'s are zero-sets, but I believe the reverse does not hold. If it did your question would be useless. Do you have a reference ? "well-known" it is not, it's not mentioned in Engelking, a standard reference for such matters.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Jan 5 at 14:26




2




2




$begingroup$
Note that this can only be true when $F$ is closed and $G_delta$. You cannot ask this for all closed sets.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Jan 5 at 14:27




$begingroup$
Note that this can only be true when $F$ is closed and $G_delta$. You cannot ask this for all closed sets.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Jan 5 at 14:27












$begingroup$
@HennoBrandsma yes, you are right. I have edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Idonknow
Jan 5 at 14:59




$begingroup$
@HennoBrandsma yes, you are right. I have edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Idonknow
Jan 5 at 14:59












$begingroup$
@HennoBrandsma by the way, if the converse holds, why would by question be useless?
$endgroup$
– Idonknow
Jan 5 at 15:00




$begingroup$
@HennoBrandsma by the way, if the converse holds, why would by question be useless?
$endgroup$
– Idonknow
Jan 5 at 15:00




1




1




$begingroup$
@PaulFrost that is the direction I agreed with, yes. The OP originally claimed that if all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero-sets then $X$ is normal. This I doubt the truth of, as said.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Jan 5 at 18:46




$begingroup$
@PaulFrost that is the direction I agreed with, yes. The OP originally claimed that if all closed $G_delta$ sets are zero-sets then $X$ is normal. This I doubt the truth of, as said.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Jan 5 at 18:46










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

There is a well-known counterexample. Let $S$ be the Sorgenfrey line, that is the real
line endowed with the Sorgenfrey topology (generated by the base consisting of half-intervals $[a,b)$, $a<b$). It is well-known that a product $X=Stimes S$ is a Tychonoff but non-normal space (see, for instance, Examples 1.4.4 and 2.3.12 in [Eng]). Let $D={(x,-x)in Stimes S: xin S}$. Then any subset $Y$ of $D$ is closed in $X$, and we have $2^{|D|}=2^{frak c}$ such subsets. Moreover, since $Y=bigcap_{ninBbb N} Y+[0,1/n)times [0,1/n)$, $Y$ is a $G_delta$-subset of $X$.
On the other hand, let $C$ be a countable dense subset of $X$. By Theorem 2.1.9 in [Eng], each continuous real-valued function $f$ on $X$ is uniquely determined by its restriction on $C$, so there are at most $frak c^omega=frak c$ such functions. Thus most subsets of $D$ are not zero-sets.



References



[Eng] Ryszard Engelking, General Topology, 2nd ed., Heldermann, Berlin, 1989.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062690%2ffor-a-closed-g-delta-set-f-subseteq-x-does-there-exist-a-continuous-functi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3












    $begingroup$

    There is a well-known counterexample. Let $S$ be the Sorgenfrey line, that is the real
    line endowed with the Sorgenfrey topology (generated by the base consisting of half-intervals $[a,b)$, $a<b$). It is well-known that a product $X=Stimes S$ is a Tychonoff but non-normal space (see, for instance, Examples 1.4.4 and 2.3.12 in [Eng]). Let $D={(x,-x)in Stimes S: xin S}$. Then any subset $Y$ of $D$ is closed in $X$, and we have $2^{|D|}=2^{frak c}$ such subsets. Moreover, since $Y=bigcap_{ninBbb N} Y+[0,1/n)times [0,1/n)$, $Y$ is a $G_delta$-subset of $X$.
    On the other hand, let $C$ be a countable dense subset of $X$. By Theorem 2.1.9 in [Eng], each continuous real-valued function $f$ on $X$ is uniquely determined by its restriction on $C$, so there are at most $frak c^omega=frak c$ such functions. Thus most subsets of $D$ are not zero-sets.



    References



    [Eng] Ryszard Engelking, General Topology, 2nd ed., Heldermann, Berlin, 1989.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      3












      $begingroup$

      There is a well-known counterexample. Let $S$ be the Sorgenfrey line, that is the real
      line endowed with the Sorgenfrey topology (generated by the base consisting of half-intervals $[a,b)$, $a<b$). It is well-known that a product $X=Stimes S$ is a Tychonoff but non-normal space (see, for instance, Examples 1.4.4 and 2.3.12 in [Eng]). Let $D={(x,-x)in Stimes S: xin S}$. Then any subset $Y$ of $D$ is closed in $X$, and we have $2^{|D|}=2^{frak c}$ such subsets. Moreover, since $Y=bigcap_{ninBbb N} Y+[0,1/n)times [0,1/n)$, $Y$ is a $G_delta$-subset of $X$.
      On the other hand, let $C$ be a countable dense subset of $X$. By Theorem 2.1.9 in [Eng], each continuous real-valued function $f$ on $X$ is uniquely determined by its restriction on $C$, so there are at most $frak c^omega=frak c$ such functions. Thus most subsets of $D$ are not zero-sets.



      References



      [Eng] Ryszard Engelking, General Topology, 2nd ed., Heldermann, Berlin, 1989.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        3












        3








        3





        $begingroup$

        There is a well-known counterexample. Let $S$ be the Sorgenfrey line, that is the real
        line endowed with the Sorgenfrey topology (generated by the base consisting of half-intervals $[a,b)$, $a<b$). It is well-known that a product $X=Stimes S$ is a Tychonoff but non-normal space (see, for instance, Examples 1.4.4 and 2.3.12 in [Eng]). Let $D={(x,-x)in Stimes S: xin S}$. Then any subset $Y$ of $D$ is closed in $X$, and we have $2^{|D|}=2^{frak c}$ such subsets. Moreover, since $Y=bigcap_{ninBbb N} Y+[0,1/n)times [0,1/n)$, $Y$ is a $G_delta$-subset of $X$.
        On the other hand, let $C$ be a countable dense subset of $X$. By Theorem 2.1.9 in [Eng], each continuous real-valued function $f$ on $X$ is uniquely determined by its restriction on $C$, so there are at most $frak c^omega=frak c$ such functions. Thus most subsets of $D$ are not zero-sets.



        References



        [Eng] Ryszard Engelking, General Topology, 2nd ed., Heldermann, Berlin, 1989.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        There is a well-known counterexample. Let $S$ be the Sorgenfrey line, that is the real
        line endowed with the Sorgenfrey topology (generated by the base consisting of half-intervals $[a,b)$, $a<b$). It is well-known that a product $X=Stimes S$ is a Tychonoff but non-normal space (see, for instance, Examples 1.4.4 and 2.3.12 in [Eng]). Let $D={(x,-x)in Stimes S: xin S}$. Then any subset $Y$ of $D$ is closed in $X$, and we have $2^{|D|}=2^{frak c}$ such subsets. Moreover, since $Y=bigcap_{ninBbb N} Y+[0,1/n)times [0,1/n)$, $Y$ is a $G_delta$-subset of $X$.
        On the other hand, let $C$ be a countable dense subset of $X$. By Theorem 2.1.9 in [Eng], each continuous real-valued function $f$ on $X$ is uniquely determined by its restriction on $C$, so there are at most $frak c^omega=frak c$ such functions. Thus most subsets of $D$ are not zero-sets.



        References



        [Eng] Ryszard Engelking, General Topology, 2nd ed., Heldermann, Berlin, 1989.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 7 at 7:14









        Alex RavskyAlex Ravsky

        42.4k32383




        42.4k32383






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062690%2ffor-a-closed-g-delta-set-f-subseteq-x-does-there-exist-a-continuous-functi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Quarter-circle Tiles

            build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

            Mont Emei