ProofComplete

Proof of Urysohn Lemma

We present the complete proof of the Urysohn lemma, one of the most elegant constructions in point-set topology. The proof builds a continuous function from the topology alone, using the normality axiom and an intricate inductive construction indexed by the dyadic rationals.


Statement

Theorem6.11Urysohn Lemma

Let XX be a normal space and let A,BA, B be disjoint closed subsets of XX. Then there exists a continuous function f:X→[0,1]f: X \to [0, 1] with f∣A≡0f|_A \equiv 0 and f∣B≡1f|_B \equiv 1.


Complete Proof

Proof

Setup. Let D=Q∩[0,1]D = \mathbb{Q} \cap [0, 1] denote the rationals in [0,1][0, 1]. We will construct a family {Ur}r∈D\{U_r\}_{r \in D} of open sets satisfying:

  • (i) A⊆UrA \subseteq U_r for all r∈Dr \in D,
  • (ii) Ur⊆X∖BU_r \subseteq X \setminus B for all r∈Dr \in D,
  • (iii) If r<sr < s (both in DD), then Ur‾⊆Us\overline{U_r} \subseteq U_s.

We then define ff using these sets.

Step 1: Construction of {Ur}\{U_r\} for dyadic rationals.

Let D0={k/2n:0≤k≤2n,n≥0}∩[0,1]D_0 = \{k/2^n : 0 \leq k \leq 2^n, n \geq 0\} \cap [0, 1] be the dyadic rationals. We enumerate D0D_0 as r1,r2,r3,…r_1, r_2, r_3, \ldots with r1=1r_1 = 1 and r2=0r_2 = 0.

Base: Set U1=X∖BU_1 = X \setminus B. This is open and A⊆U1A \subseteq U_1 (since A∩B=∅A \cap B = \emptyset).

Since AA is closed and contained in the open set U1U_1, and XX is normal, by the normality characterization there exists an open U0U_0 with: A⊆U0⊆U0‾⊆U1.A \subseteq U_0 \subseteq \overline{U_0} \subseteq U_1.

Induction: Suppose we have defined UrU_r for a finite set of dyadic rationals r1,…,rnr_1, \ldots, r_n satisfying condition (iii). Let rn+1r_{n+1} be the next dyadic rational. Among r1,…,rnr_1, \ldots, r_n, let pp be the largest value less than rn+1r_{n+1} and qq the smallest value greater than rn+1r_{n+1}. Then Up‾⊆Uq\overline{U_p} \subseteq U_q by the inductive hypothesis.

Apply normality: Up‾\overline{U_p} is closed and contained in the open set UqU_q, so there exists an open Urn+1U_{r_{n+1}} with: Up‾⊆Urn+1⊆Urn+1‾⊆Uq.\overline{U_p} \subseteq U_{r_{n+1}} \subseteq \overline{U_{r_{n+1}}} \subseteq U_q.

By induction, {Ur}r∈D0\{U_r\}_{r \in D_0} satisfies (i), (ii), (iii) for all dyadic rationals.

Extension to all rationals. For any r∈Dr \in D, we can extend by setting Ur=⋃{Us:s∈D0,s≤r}U_r = \bigcup \{U_s : s \in D_0, s \leq r\}. The nestedness property (iii) ensures this is consistent. (In practice, the dyadic rationals suffice for defining ff.)

Step 2: Definition of ff.

For each x∈Xx \in X, define: f(x)=inf⁡{r∈D0:x∈Ur},f(x) = \inf\{r \in D_0 : x \in U_r\}, with the convention that inf⁡∅=1\inf \emptyset = 1.

Properties:

  • If x∈Ax \in A: then x∈Urx \in U_r for all r∈D0r \in D_0 (by (i)), so f(x)=inf⁡D0=0f(x) = \inf D_0 = 0.
  • If x∈Bx \in B: then x∉Urx \notin U_r for all r∈D0r \in D_0 (by (ii)), so f(x)=1f(x) = 1.
  • For all xx: 0≤f(x)≤10 \leq f(x) \leq 1.
  • f(x)<r  ⟺  x∈Urf(x) < r \iff x \in U_r for some r′<rr' < r in D0D_0   ⟺  \iff x∈⋃s<r,s∈D0Usx \in \bigcup_{s < r, s \in D_0} U_s.
  • f(x)≤r  ⟺  x∈Usf(x) \leq r \iff x \in U_s for all s>rs > r in D0D_0   ⟺  \iff x∈⋂s>r,s∈D0Usx \in \bigcap_{s > r, s \in D_0} U_s. By (iii), this implies x∈Ur‾x \in \overline{U_r}.

Step 3: Continuity of ff.

It suffices to show that f−1([0,a))f^{-1}([0, a)) and f−1((a,1])f^{-1}((a, 1]) are open for every a∈(0,1)a \in (0, 1), as these generate the topology on [0,1][0, 1].

Claim: f−1([0,a))=⋃r<a,r∈D0Urf^{-1}([0, a)) = \bigcup_{r < a, r \in D_0} U_r.

If f(x)<af(x) < a, then inf⁡{r:x∈Ur}<a\inf\{r : x \in U_r\} < a, so x∈Urx \in U_r for some r<ar < a. Conversely, if x∈Urx \in U_r for some r<ar < a, then f(x)≤r<af(x) \leq r < a. This set is open (union of open sets).

Claim: f−1((a,1])=⋃r>a,r∈D0(X∖Ur‾)f^{-1}((a, 1]) = \bigcup_{r > a, r \in D_0} (X \setminus \overline{U_r}).

If f(x)>af(x) > a, then x∉Urx \notin U_r for all r≤ar \leq a. Choose r∈D0r \in D_0 with a<r<f(x)a < r < f(x). Then x∉Urx \notin U_r, so x∉Us‾x \notin \overline{U_s} for some ss with a<s<ra < s < r (since Us‾⊆Ur\overline{U_s} \subseteq U_r). Thus x∈X∖Us‾x \in X \setminus \overline{U_s}.

Conversely, if x∈X∖Ur‾x \in X \setminus \overline{U_r} for some r>ar > a, then x∉Usx \notin U_s for any s≤rs \leq r (since Us⊆Us‾⊆UrU_s \subseteq \overline{U_s} \subseteq U_r for s<rs < r and Ur⊆Ur‾U_r \subseteq \overline{U_r}). Wait -- more carefully: x∉Ur‾x \notin \overline{U_r} implies x∉Urx \notin U_r. For s<rs < r, Us‾⊆Ur⊆Ur‾\overline{U_s} \subseteq U_r \subseteq \overline{U_r}, so x∉Usx \notin U_s either. Thus f(x)≥r>af(x) \geq r > a.

This set is a union of open sets (each X∖Ur‾X \setminus \overline{U_r} is open), hence open.

Therefore ff is continuous.

■

The Role of Dyadic Rationals

RemarkWhy Dyadic Rationals?

The dyadic rationals D0={k/2n}D_0 = \{k/2^n\} are used because they have a natural inductive structure: at each stage, we only need to "insert" one new open set between two existing ones. Any countable dense subset of [0,1][0, 1] would work (e.g., all rationals), but the dyadic rationals make the induction cleanest.

The key property of D0D_0 is that between any two elements, there is another element -- the density of D0D_0 in [0,1][0, 1] is what makes the function ff continuous (not just lower semicontinuous).

RemarkThe Axiom of Choice

This proof does not require the axiom of choice. At each inductive step, the normality axiom guarantees the existence of the open set Urn+1U_{r_{n+1}}, but no arbitrary choices are needed (the construction is performed over a countable index set with a definite enumeration).