Jones’ lemma is a great tool in working with normal spaces. It is useful, under cerntain conditions, to show the non-normality of a space. The lemma establishes an upper bound for the cardinality of closed and discrete sets in any separable and normal space. Thus, whenever you have a separable space with a closed and discrete set whose cardinality exceeds the upper bound, you have a non-normal space (see examples discussed below). One way to prove the Jones’ lemma is to explore the set-theoretic relationship between the density (the minimum cardinality of a dense set) and the cardinality of closed and discrete sets in normal spaces. We sketch a proof of this lemma and give some examples. We also state an extension of Jones’ lemma. All spaces under consideration are at least Hausdorff.

Let be a space. A subset of is said to be a closed and discrete set in if is a closed set in and , in the relative topology, is a discrete space. Good basic references are [1] and [3]. For more detailed information about cardinal functions, see [2].

____________________________________________________________________________

**Jones’ Lemma**

Let be a separable and normal space. Then for any set that is a closed and discrete set in , we have .

**Corollary 1**

Let be a separable and normal space. Then for any set that is a closed and discrete set in , we have .

Jones' lemma, as stated above, is essentially saying that the cardinality of continuum is an upper bound of the cardinalities of the power sets of closed and discrete sets in any separable and normal space. The corollary says that the cardinality of continuum is an upper bound of the cardinalities of closed and discrete sets in any separable and normal space. As indicated at the beginning, the corollary is a great way for checking the non-normality of a separable space.

We now give a sketch of the proof Jones' lemma. Let be the set of all continuous real-valued functions defined on the space . Suppose is a separable space. A key point is that the cardinality of is sandwiched between the two cardinalities in the lemma:

The first inequality in says that there are at least as many continuous real-valued functions as there are subsets of the closed and discrete set . To see this, we appeal for some help from Urysohn's lemma. For each , and are disjoint closed sets in . By Urysohn's lemma, there is a continuous function such that maps to and maps to . Note that the mapping defined by is a one-to-one map, where is the collection of all subsets of .

The second inequality in says that there are at most continuum many continuous real-valued functions defined on the space . In other words, the number of continuous functions is capped by the cardinality continuum (actually equals continuum in this case, but one inequality is all we need here). Let be a countable dense subset of . Consider the map defined by , which is the function restricted to the set . The notation refers to the set of all functions from the set into .

The key point here is that any continuous functions and , if they agree on the countable dense set (), then on the whole space .So is a one-to-one map. Some elementary cardinal arithmetic shows that . Thus the second inequality in is established.

____________________________________________________________________________

**Examples**

Let be the Sorgenfrey line. This is the real line with the topology generated by half open intervals of the form . The Sorgenfrey line is a classic example of a normal space whose square is not normal. The Sorgenfrey plane is separable with a closed and discrete set of cardinality continuum. By the corollary of Jones’ lemma, the Sorgenfrey plane is not normal. The Sorgenfrey line is discussed in greater details in this post.

The tangent disc space is another example of a separable space with a closed and discrete set of size continuum, hence ensuring that it is a non-normal space.

____________________________________________________________________________

**Generalization**

The generalization involves the notion of density and the notion of extent. The density of an infinite Hausdorff space is the smallest cardinal number of the form where is a dense subset of . This cardinal number is denoted by . For any separable space , we have . If the space is finite, then the convention adopted by many authors is that .

The extent of a space is the smallest infinite cardinal such that every closed and discrete set in has cardinality . The extent of the space is denoted by . For more detailed information about cardinal functions, see [2].

The following are the generalization of Jones’ lemma.

**Jones’ Lemma**

Let be a normal space. Then for any set that is a closed and discrete set in , we have .

**Corollary 2**

Let be a normal space. Then for any set that is a closed and discrete set in , we have , which implies .

Corollary 2 suggests that the cardinal number is an upper bound of the cardinalities of closed and discrete sets in any normal space . As a result of this, the cardinal number dominates the extent in a normal space.

____________________________________________________________________________

*Reference*

- Engelking, R.,
*General Topology, Revised and Completed edition*, 1989, Heldermann Verlag, Berlin. - Hodel, R.,
*Cardinal Functions I, Handbook of Set-Theoretic Topology*, (K. Kunen and J. E. Vaughan, eds), 1984, Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., Amsterdam, 1-61. - Willard, S.,
*General Topology*, 1970, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Pingback: Mathblogging.org Weekly Picks « Mathblogging.org — the Blog