The Lindel

of number is f u-invariant
A. V. Arbit
Abstract
Two Tychonoff spaces X and Y are said to be l-equivalent (u-equivalent) if Cp (X) and
Cp (Y ) are linearly (uniformly) homeomorphic. In [5], N.V.Velichko proved that the Lindelof property is preserved by the relation of l-equivalence. A.Bouziad (see [1]) strengthened this result and proved that the Lindelof number is preserved by the relation of
l-equivalence. In this paper the concept of the support different variants of which can
be founded in the papers of S.P.Gulko [3] and O.G.Okunev [4] is introduced. Using this
concept we introduce an equivalence relation on the class of topological spaces. Two
Tychonoff spaces X and Y are said to be f u-equivalent if there exists an uniform homeo1
morphism h : Cp (Y ) Cp (X) such that supph x and supph y are finite sets for all x X
and y Y . This is an intermediate relation between relations of u- and l-equivalence.
In this paper it has been proved that the Lindelof number is preserved by the relation of
f u-equivalence.

Introduction
All spaces below are assumed to be Tychonoff. RX is a space of all real-valued functions on
X, Cp (X) is a space of all real-valued continuous functions on X equipped with the topology
of pointwise convergence. Cp (X|F ) = {f Cp (X) : f (x) = 0 for all x F }, where F is a
subset of X. The restriction of a function f to a subset A is denoted by f |A . The cardinality
of a set A is denoted by |A|. 0 is the countable cardinal, is the first infinite ordinal, l(X)
is the Lindelof number of X. Fin F is a family of all finite subsets of a set F. For a setvalued mapping
p : X Y and sets A X and B Y , we define the image of A as a set
S
p(A) = {p(x) : x A}, and preimage of B as a set p1 (B) = {x X : p(x) B 6= }.
A set-valued mapping p : X Y is called lower semicontinuous if a preimage of every open
subset of Y is open in X. It is called surjective if for any y Y there exist x X such that
y p(x).

Concept of the support

Definition 1.1. Let X be a topological space. A linear subspace A RX is called suitable

if for any point x X, its open neighborhood Ox , and two functions f 0 , f 00 A there exist a
function f A such that f (x) = f 00 (x) and f (x0 ) = f 0 (x0 ) for all x0 X \ Ox .
A point x X is said to be a zero-point of a family A RX if f (x) = 0 for all f A.
Denote by ker A the set of all zero-points of a family A.
The examples of suitable subspaces are Cp (X) RX , Cp (X|F ) RX , where F is a closed
subset of a space X, and then ker Cp (X|F ) = F .
Following definitions are analogous to the definitions introduced by O.G.Okunev in [4] for
t-equivalent spaces.
Definition 1.2. Let X, Y be topological spaces, A, B suitable subspaces of spaces RX and
RY , respectively, and let h : B A be an uniform homeomorphism such that the image of the
zero-function 0Y B under h is the zero-function 0X A. Fix a point x X and > 0. We

call a point y Y -essential for x (under h) if for any open neighborhood Oy of y there exist
functions g 0 , g 00 B, coinciding on the set Y \ Oy and satisfying the following inequality:
|h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > .

(1)

Furthermore, we say that a point y -inessential for x if it is not -essential for x, and call the
set of all points that are -essential for x the -support of x (under h) and denote it by supph x.
The union of -supports of x (under h) over all positive is called the support of x (under h)
and is denoted by supph x. If h is fixed, then we write supp x (supp x, respectively).
Remark 1.3. If x ker A, then supp x = .

S
It is clear that if < , then supp x supp x, therefore supp x = nN supp 1 x. It is not
n
difficult to verify that supp x is a closed set. Then we have the following two properties of the
support.
(i) supp x is a nonempty finite subset of Y for any > 0 (if x
/ ker A);
(ii) supp : X Y is a countable-valued, surjective, lower semicontinuous mapping.
To prove these properties, we note some results of S.P.Gulko [3]. Let X, Y be topological
spaces, A, B suitable subspaces of spaces RX and RY , respectively , and let h : B A be
an uniform homeomorphism such that the image of the zero function 0Y B under h is the
zero function 0X A.
Let x X, > 0, and let K Y be a finite subset. We introduce into consideration the
quantity
a(x, K, ) = sup |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)|,
(2)
where the supremum is taken over all g 0 , g 00 B such that |g 0 (y) g 00 (y)| < for all y K.
This definition was introduced by S.P.Gulko in [3]. We also define
a(x, K, 0) = sup |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)|,

(3)

where the supremum is taken over all g 0 , g 00 B coinciding on K (if K is empty, then the
supremum is taken over all g 0 , g 00 B). It is obvious that if 0 6 1 6 2 , then a(x, K, 1 ) 6
a(x, K, 2 ), and if K1 K2 Y , then a(x, K2 , ) 6 a(x, K2 , ) for all > 0. In [3], it was
proved that for all x X \ ker A there exist a nonempty finite subset K(x) Y such that
1. a(x, K(x), ) < for any > 0,
2. a(x, K 0 , ) = for any proper subset K 0 of K(x) and any > 0.
For all x ker A we put K(x) = . We now prove that the set K(x) has a stronger property
which we get substituting > 0 for > 0 in (2). To prove this, we need the following
Lemma 1.4. If a(x, K, 0) < , then a(x, K, ) < for all > 0.
Proof. Fix x X and finite K Y such that a(x, K, 0) < . We prove that the function
7 a(x, K, ) is continuous at the point 0. Let > 0. Since h is an uniform homeomorphism,
there exist a finite set K 0 Y and > 0 such that for all g 0 , g 00 B we have the implication
(|g 0 (y) g 00 (y)| < for all y K 0 ) |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| < .

Let g 0 , g 00 B and |g 0 (y) g 00 (y)| < for all y K. Since B is a suitable subspace, there is a
function g B such that
0
g (y), y K;
g(y) =
(4)
g 00 (y), y K 0 \ K.
Then |g(y) g 00 (y)| < for all y K 0 , hence, |h(g)(x) h(g 00 )(x)| < . Now by the triangle
inequality we obtain
|h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| 6 |h(g 0 )(x) h(g)(x)| + |h(g)(x) h(g 00 )(x)| < a(x, K, 0) + .
Passing to the supremum over all g 0 , g 00 B such that |g 0 (y) g 00 (y)| < for all y K we
have inequality a(x, K, ) 6 a(x, K, 0) + , which implies that the function 7 a(x, K, ) is
continuous at the point 0.
def
For any x X put a(x) = a(x, K(x), 0).
Now we can rewrite the properties of the set-valued mapping x 7 K(x) in new notations.
(K1) If g 0 , g 00 B and g 0 |K(x) = g 00 |K(x) , then |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| 6 a(x).
(K2) For any proper subset K 0 of K(x) and any real b there exist functions g 0 , g 00 B such
that g 0 |K 0 = g 00 |K 0 and |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > b.
Besides, this mapping surjectively maps the space X \ ker A onto Y \ ker B (see [3]), i.e for
any y Y \ ker B there exist x X \ ker A such that y K(x).
Now we shall prove the properties (i) and (ii) of the support supp x (page 2).
Lemma 1.5. K(x) supp x for any > 0.
Proof. Let x
/ ker A. Fix a point y0 K(x) and > 0. We shall show that y0 is -essential
for x. Put a = max(, a(x)), K 0 = K(x) \ {y0 }. By the property (K2), there exist functions
g 0 , g 00 B such that g 0 |K 0 = g 00 |K 0 and |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > 2a.
Then there is a neighborhood U of y0 that does not meet K 0 . Choose a function g B
such that g|Y \U = g 0 |Y \U and g(y0 ) = g 00 (y0 ). Then we have g|K(x) = g 00 |K(x) and |h(g)(x)
h(g 00 )(x)| 6 a(x) 6 a. By the triangle inequality we obtain that |h(g)(x) h(g 0 )(x)| > a > .
Besides, g coincides with g 0 on the set Y \ U . By definition this means that y0 is -essential for
x.
So, lemma 1.5 implies that the set supp x is nonempty for any > 0 and any x
/ ker A,
and it also implies that the set-valued mapping x 7 supp x from X \ ker A onto Y \ ker B is
surjective.
Lemma 1.6. The set supp x is finite for any > 0.
Proof. Let x
/ ker A and > 0. Since h is an uniform homeomorphism, there exist a finite
set K Y and > 0 such that for all g 0 , g 00 B we have the implication
(|g 0 (y) g 00 (y)| < for all y K) |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| < .
Let us show that supp x K. Fix y0 Y \ K. Then there is a neighborhood U of y0 that
does not meet K. Choose functions g 0 , g 00 B coinciding on the set Y \ U . Then they coincide
on K, hence, |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| < . By the definition this means that y0 is -inessential for
x, i.e. y0
/ supp x. Thus, supp x K.
Property (i) of the support is proved. For the proof of property (ii) we introduce into
consideration the set K (x) Y for any x X \ ker A and any > 0, satisfying the following
properties:
3

(KE0) K (x) is finite and nonempty;

(KE1) a(x, K (x), 0) 6 ;
(KE2) a(x, K 0 , 0) > for any proper subset K 0 of K (x).
Such a set we could obtain from the set K from the previous proof, decreasing this set while it
satisfies point (KE2).
There can be several sets, satisfying properties (KE1) and (KE2), then we denote by K (x)
anyone of them.
The following lemma is an analogous to result obtained by O.G.Okunev [4] for t-equivalence.
Lemma 1.7. Let A Cp (X), x0 X \ ker A, > 0, G is open subset of Y such that
supp x0 G 6= . Then there is an open neighborhood U of x0 such that K (x) G 6= for
all x from U .
Proof. We may assume that supp x0 G = {y0 }, where y0 is any -essential point for x0 . By
definition, for the neighborhood G of y0 there exist functions g 0 , g 00 B coinciding on Y \ G
such that |h(g 0 )(x0 ) h(g 00 )(x0 )| > . Put U = {x X : |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > }; then U is
an open neighborhood of x0 . Let us check that K (x) G 6= for all x from U . Assume the
converse. Let x U be a point such that K (x) G = . Then g 0 coincide with g 00 on K (x).
Therefore |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| 6 , contradiction with x U .
From the result obtained by O.G.Okunev for t-equivalence it follows that the set-valued
mapping supp has a weaker property then the lower semicontinuity. In our case this property
of supp implies the lower semicontinuity of the mapping supp . To prove this fact we shall
need
Lemma 1.8. Let x X \ ker A, > 0. There exists > 0 , such that K (x) supp x.
Proof. Fix a point y0 K (x). Put K 0 = K (x) \ {y0 }. By definition of K (x), there exist
functions g 0 , g 00 B coinciding on K 0 such that |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > . There exists 0 > 0
such that
|h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > + 0 .
(5)
Let us show that y0 supp0 x. Choose a neighborhood U of y0 that does not meet K 0 , and
a function g B coinciding with g 0 on Y \ U such that g(y0 ) = g 00 (y0 ). Then g coincides
with g 0 on K (x), hence, |h(g 00 )(x) h(g)(x)| 6 . From this and inequality (5) it follows that
|h(g 0 )(x) h(g)(x)| > 0 . But g 0 coincide with g on Y \ U , consequently, y0 is 0 -essential for x.
Lets enumerate all the points of the set K (x) = {y1 , . . . , yn }, and for any yi chose i so that
yi is i -essential for x. Put = min{i : i 6 n}; then K (x) supp x.
Theorem 1.9. If A Cp (X), then the set-valued mapping supp : X Y is lower semicontinuous.
Proof. Put (x) = supp x. We need to show that for any nonempty open set G Y its
preimage 1 (G) = {x X : (x) G 6= } is open in X. Let G Y is any nonempty open set
such that 1 (G) 6= , and let x 1 (G). Then there exists > 0 such that supp x G 6= .
By Lemma 1.7 there exists an open neighborhood U of x such that K (z) G 6= for all z
from U . By Lemma 1.8 for all z X and > 0 we can find 0 > 0 (depending on z and ) such
that K (z) supp0 z supp z, i.e., supp z G 6= , hence, 1 (G) is open, and the mapping
supp is lower semicontinuous.
Besides, the set supp x has the following property.
4

Theorem 1.10. Let x X.

(a) If two functions g 0 , g 00 B coincide on the set supp x, then h(g 0 )(x) = h(g 00 )(x).
(b) If F is a closed subspace of Y such that h(g 0 )(x) = h(g 00 )(x) for any two functions g 0 , g 00 B
coinciding on F , then supp x F .
Proof. (a) Let > 0. Fix K (x). Let functions g 0 , g 00 B coincide on the set supp x. By
Lemma 1.8, K (x) supp x, therefore, |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| 6 . Since is arbitrary, we obtain
h(g 0 )(x) = h(g 00 )(x).
(b) Assume the converse. Let y0 supp x \ F 6= . There exists > 0 such that y0 supp x.
Let U is an open neighborhood of y0 that does not meet F . Then there are g 0 , g 00 B coinciding
on Y \ U such that |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > . But in this case g 0 coincides with g 00 on F , whence
h(g 0 )(x) = h(g 00 )(x). This contradiction proves the theorem.
The concept of the support can be generalized.
Definition 1.11. If h : B A is an arbitrary uniform homeomorphism we shall define a
: B A by the formula h(g)

is also an
mapping h
= h(g) h(0Y ) for all g B. Then h

uniform homeomorphism and h(0Y ) = 0X . Put

def

def

supph x = supph x ,
1

def

supph y = supph y ,

supph x = supph x ,
def

supph y = supph y .

Main result

Definition 2.1. Two Tychonoff spaces X and Y are said to be f u-equivalent if there exists
1
an uniform homeomorphism h : Cp (Y ) Cp (X) such that supph x and supph y are finite sets
for all x X and y Y .
The main result of the paper is following.
Theorem 2.2. If X and Y are f u-equivalent then l(X) = l(Y ).
For the proof we need some notions.
Definition 2.3. Let : X Y be a finite-valued, surjective, lower semicontinuous mapping
of X to Y . For and any U Y we put
def

(U ) = {x X : (x) U } .
We denote by T the family of all open subsets of Y .
Definition 2.4. A set-valued mapping G : T X is said to be -extractor (simply extractor )
if the following conditions hold:
S(1) (U ) G(U ) for any U T ;
S(2) For any increasing consequence (Un )nN , Un T such that
[ \
X=
G (Un )

(6)

kN n>k

the following equality holds:

Y =

[
nN

Un .

(7)

The complement of G(U ) to X we denote by F (U ) and the set-valued mapping F : T X we

call -co-extractor (simply co-extractor ).
The concept of extractor was introduced by A.Bouziad in [1].
Let U be an open cover of Y closed with respect to finite unions. Fix any infinite cardinal
. Let us introduce some notations.
n[
o
def
[U] =
U 0 : U 0 U , | U 0| 6 .
We say that the set A X has a type F in X or A is F -subset of X, where is a cardinal,
if A can be represented as a union of a family F of closed subsets so that |F| 6 . By F
we denote the family of all subsets of X that have a type F . Denote by L the family of all
subsets A of X such that l(A) 6 .
Let l(X) 6 . Then F L . Define the mapping
U : Fin F [U] ,

U = U (F), F Fin F ,

(8)

which will be called -constructor from U (simply constructor ). For this aim we define a
number
def
(x) = | (x)|
for any x X. For any F X we put
def

(F ) = min {(x) : x F } .
The number (F ) is said to be level of F .
Further, for any U T and k N put
def

U [k] = { x X : | (x) U | > k } .

Since is lower semicontinuous, we see that U [k] is open in X for any k N ( it can be
empty for k > 2).
def T
Suppose F = {F1 , . . . , Fn } F . By definition, put FA = iA Fi for any A {1, . . . , n},
A 6= and put
def
F = { FA : 6= A {1, . . . , n}, FA 6= },
i.e., F is the family of all nonempty intersections of elements from F .
Let F F and k = (F ). It is not difficult to verify that the family

U [k] = U [k] : U U
is
open cover
of F which Lindelof number does not exceed , hence it contains a subcover
an
U [k] : U UF of F , where UF U such that | UF | 6 . By definition, put
[ [
def
U (F) =
UF .
FF

Obviously, U (F) [U] , and if F1 F2 , then U (F1 ) U (F2 ). The constructor (8) is defined.
Note one property of the constructor.

(*) For any F Fin F , nonempty F F, and x F the following inequality holds:
| (x) U (F)| > (F ).

(9)

Definition 2.5. An open cover U of Y is said to be -trivial if it has subcover which cardinality
does not exceed . Otherwise this cover is said to be -nontrivial.
Proof of theorem 2.2. Let h : Cp (Y ) Cp (X) be an uniform homeomorphism such that
1
supph x and supph y are finite sets for all x X and y Y , and let l(X) 6 . Every
uniform homeomorphism between Cp -spaces can be extended to some uniform homeomorphism
h between the spaces of all functions (see [2]). The following lemma states that the mapping
supph will not changes if we substitute the uniform homeomorphism h : Cp (Y ) Cp (X) for its
extension h : RY RX .
Lemma 2.6. Let h : Cp (Y ) Cp (X) be an uniform homeomorphism and h : RY RX - its
uniformly continuous extension. Then supp h x = supp h x for any x X.
Proof. Let y be -essential point for x under h for some > 0. It follows from definition, that
y is -essential for x under h. Therefore, supph x supph x.
Then, we shall prove that supph x supph x if 0 < < . Let y be -essential point for x
. Let Oy be an open neighborhood of
under h for some > 0, and let 0 < < . Put 0 =
2
0 00
Y
y. There exist functions g , g R , coinciding on the set Y \ Oy and satisfying the following
inequality:
|h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > .
Since h is an uniform homeomorphism, there exist a finite set K Y and > 0 such that for
all g 0 , g 00 RY we have the implication
(|g 0 (y) g 00 (y)| < for all y K) |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| < 0 .

(10)

Put F = K Oy . There is a function g1 Cp (Y ) such that

g1 |K = g 0 |K ,

(11)

and a function g2 Cp (Y ) such that

g2 |Y \Oy = g1 |Y \Oy ,

g2 |F = g 00 |F .

Then
g2 |K = g 00 |K .

(12)

By (11), (12), and (10) we have

|h(g 0 )(x) h(g1 )(x)| < 0 ,

|h(g 00 )(x) h(g2 )(x)| < 0 ,

hence,
|h(g1 )(x) h(g2 )(x)| >
> |h(g 0 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| |h(g 0 )(x) h(g1 )(x)| |h(g2 )(x) h(g 00 )(x)| > 20 = .
Inclusion supph x supph x is proved. This completes the proof.
Further, we can assume without loss of generality that h is an uniform homeomorphism
from RY to RX satisfying following conditions:
7

1. h(Cp (Y )) = Cp (X) and h1 (Cp (X)) = Cp (Y );

2. h takes zero-function 0Y Y to zero-function 0X X;
1

3. supph x and supph

y are finite sets for all x X and y Y .

Suppose that l(Y ) > to obtain a contradiction. In our terminology it means that there
exists -nontrivial open cover U of Y . We can assume without loss of generality that U is
closed with respect to finite unions and U B, where B is a base of Y which consists of all
functionally open subsets of Y . Family B is closed with respect to finite unions.
Let
def
= supph : X Y.
Note an important property of .
() If g 0 , g 00 RY and g 0 | (x) = g 00 | (x) , then h(g 0 )(x) = h(g 00 )(x).
For any A Y define the function eA RY by the formula

0, y A;
eA (y) =
1, y
/ A.
For every open set V T put
G(V ) = {x X : h(eV )(x) = 0} ,

F (V ) = {x X : h(eV )(x) 6= 0} .

Lemma 2.7. G is -extractor.

Proof. Check that condition S(1) is fulfilled. Let V T and x (V ). Since (x) V , we
have eV | (x) 0, hence, by property (), we get inequality h(eV )(x) = 0 , i.e. x G(V ).
It remains to check S(2). Let (U
S increasing consequence, satisfying
Sn )nN , Un T , be any
condition (6). Assume that Y 6= nN Un . Put U = nN Un . Let y Y \ U . Choose a
finite subset K = {x1 , . . . , xp } X and > 0 so that for any function f RX the following
implication holds:

|f (xi )| 6 for all i 1, p | h1 (f )(y)| < 1.

(13)

Such a choice is possible because of the continuity of the mapping h1 and the condition
h1 (0X ) = 0Y . By condition (6), we can choose a number N such that xi G (Un ) for all
n > N and i 1, p, i.e., h(eUn )(xi ) = 0. Passing to the limit as n , we obtain
h(eU )(xi ) = 0 for all i 1, p.
Then from (13) we have | eU (y)| < 1, hence, y U . This contradiction concludes the proof.
Now denote by C the family of all functionally closed subsets of Y . Any functionally open
subset V admits a decomposition
[
V =
Fn , where Fn C and Fn Fn+1 for all n N.
nN

If there exist a decomposition satisfying the following condition:

(V ) \ (Fn ) 6= for all n N ,
then we say that the subset V is adequate. This notion was introduced by A.Bouziad in [1].
8

Lemma 2.8. Let be an infinite cardinal, U B an open, -nontrivial cover of Y , closed

with respect to finite unions, and {Ut }tT U a subfamily such that |T | 6 . Then there is
a family {Vs }sS [U]0 , closed with respect to finite unions, such that
1. |S| 6 ,
2. each set Vs is adequate,
S
S
3. tT Ut sS Vs .
S
Proof. Put U = tT Ut . Since the cover U is -nontrivial, we have Y \ U 6= . Choose
x1 X such that (x1 ) * U and a set V1 U such that (x1 ) V1 . Suppose x1 , . . . , xn and
V1 , . . . , Vn are already chosen. The set Y \ (U V1 . . . Vn ) is nonempty, hence there is an
element xn+1 X such that (xn+1 ) * U V1 . . . Vn . There exist Vn+1 U such that
(xn+1 ) SVn+1 . We get two consequences (xn )nN , xn X and (Vn )nN , Vn U for all n N.
Put V = nN Vn . Let (Ws )sS be the family of all finite unions of sets from the family (Ut )tT .
For each s S put Vs = Ws V . It
S the family (Vs )sS [U]0 is closed with
S is clear that
respect to finite unions, |S| 6 , and tT Ut sS Vs . Let us check that
each
Vs is adequate.
Let s S. Fix a decomposition (Fns )nN of Ws and a decomposition Fnk nN of Vk , k N.
The consequence (Gsn )nN , where Gsn = Fns Fn1 . . . Fnn , is a required decomposition of Vs .
Besides, we have (xn )nN (Vs ) and xn+1
/ (Gsn ) for all n N.
Lemma 2.9. Let S be infinite set and {Vs }sS be afamily
of adequate functionally open subsets
S
of Y , closed with respect to finite unions. Then F
sS Vs is F -subset of X, where = |S|.
S
Proof. Put V = sS Vs . Let (Fns )nN be a decomposition of Vs such that Fns C and
s
Fns Fn+1
for all n N. For any natural n and s S choose a function gns C(Y ) such that
gns |Fns 0 ,

gns |Y \Vs 1.

For every x (Vs ), and every natural k put

s
0
s
1
def
s
0
Uk (x) = x X : h gk+n(x,s) (x ) h gk+n(x,s) (x) <
,
k
where n(x, s) is the least number n such that (x) Fns . Then Uks (x) is an open neighborhood
of x in X. Put
\ [
\
As =
Uks (x) , Bs = {x X : (x) (V \ Vs ) 6= } , A =
(As Bs ).
kN x (Vs )

sS

We now prove that

G(V ) = A.
Since the sets As and Bs are G -subsets of X, it will be enough for the proof of the Lemma.
First we shall show that
F (V ) X \ A.
(14)
Let x0 F (V ). Then there exists > 0 such that |h(eV )(x0 )| > . Since (x0 ) is a finite
set and the family {Vs )sS closed with respect to finite unions, there exists s S such that
(x0 ) V Vs , i.e., x0
/ Bs .

Note that, since eV |(x0 ) = eVs |(x0 ) , by () we have h(eV )(x0 ) = h(eVs )(x0 ). Since |h(eVs )(x0 )| =
|h(eV )(x0 )| > and limn gns = eVs , there exist natural N such that
|h (gns ) (x0 )| > for all n > N.
Choose a number k such that the following inequality holds:

1
k > max N,
.

We shall check that

x0
/

Uks (x).

x (Vs )

It will imply
that x0
/ As , and

(14) will be proved. Let x (Vs ) . Note that, since

inclusion

s
s
(x) = 0. Then
0, we have h gk+n(x,s)
gk+n(x,s)

(x)

s
s

1
h gk+n(x,s) (x0 ) h gk+n(x,s)
(x) = h gk+n(x,s) (x0 ) > > ,
k
i.e., x0
/ Uks (x). Inclusion (14) is proved.
Let us prove the inverse inclusion
X \ A F (V ).
Since the sets Vs are adequate, we can assume that there decompositions satisfy the following
property:
(Vs ) \ (Fns ) 6= for all n N.
Let x0
/ A. Choose
that x0
/ As Bs . Then we have (x0 ) V Vs . Fix natural
S s S such
0
s
k such that x
/ x (Vs ) Uk (x), natural m such that (x0 ) V Fms , and x0 (Vs ) such
that (x0 ) * Fms . Then we have n(x0 , s) > m and
s
(x0 ) V = (x0 ) Vs Fms Fk+n(x
.
0 ,s)

Put i = k + n(x0 , s). Since x0

/ Uks (x0 ), we have
|h (gis ) (x0 ) h (gis ) (x0 )| >

1
.
k

Besides, h (gis ) (x0 ) = 0. From this we obtain that |h (gis ) (x0 )| > k1 . But since eV |(x0 ) = eVs |(x0 )
and eVs |(x0 ) = gis |(x0 ) , we have h(gis )(x0 ) = h(eV )(x0 ), and, finally,
1
,
k
i.e., x0 F (V ). The statement of the lemma is proved.
|h(eV )(x0 )| >

By 2.9 and 2.8 we have

Theorem 2.10. Let be an infinite cardinal and U B an open, -nontrivial cover of Y ,
closed with respect to S
finite unions, {Ut }tT U a subfamily such that |T | 6 . Then there
is V [U] such that tT Ut V and F (V ) is F -subset of X.

10

Now we have all the facts necessary to prove the result, formulated in the beginning.
We
S
shall construct by induction increasing consequence (Vn )nN , Vn [U] such that Y = nN Vn .
Simultaneously we shall construct the consequence (Fn )nN , Fn Fin F , such that Fn0 Fn00
for n0 < n00 . For this aim we shall use the constructor U and the co-extractor F defined above.
Put F0 = {X}. Pick a set V1 [U] such that
U (F0 ) V1

and

F (V1 ) F

(this is possible by Theorem 2.10), and put

F1 = {X, F (V1 )} .
Choose the set V2 [U] so that
V1 U (F1 ) V2

and

F (V2 ) F .

Suppose we have already defined the sets Vi [U] and Fi Fin F for all numbers i such that
1 6 i 6 k, satisfying the following conditions:
1. F (Vi ) F ,

1 6 i 6 k;

2. Vi U (Fi ) Vi+1 ,

1 6 i 6 k 1,

where Fi = {X, F (V1 ) , . . . , F (Vi )} ,

1 6 i 6 k.

Choose the set Vk+1 [U] so that the following conditions hold:
Vk U (Fk ) Vk+1

and

F (Vk+1 ) F .

(15)

Put
Fk+1 = {X, F (V1 ) , . . . , F (Vk+1 )} .
The consequences (Vn )nN , Vn [U] and (Fn )nN , Fn Fin F are already defined. Prove by
induction over n the following statement:
ST: For any natural n and any subset
{j1 , . . . , jk } {1, . . . , n}
such that
F (Vj1 ) . . . F (Vjk ) 6= ,
the following inequality holds:
(F (Vj1 ) . . . F (Vjk )) > k + 1.

(16)

For k = 1 it is enough to show that (F (Vn )) > 2. For any x X by inequality (9) we have
| (x) Vn | > | (x) V1 | > | (x) U (F0 )| > (X) > 1.
Therefore, if (x) = 1 for some x X, then (x) Vn , consequently by S(1) we have
x
/ F (Vn ), and thus, (F (Vn )) > 2.
Suppose statement ST is true for all numbers n such that 1 6 n 6 N . Let us prove that it
is true for n = N + 1. It suffices to show that for any subset
{j1 , . . . , jk } {1, . . . , N }
11

such that
F = F (Vj1 ) . . . F (Vjk ) F (VN +1 ) 6= ,
the following inequality holds:
(F ) > k + 2.
Put
F 0 = F (Vj1 ) . . . F (Vjk ) ,
then
F = F 0 F (VN +1 ) .
By the inductive assumption, we have (F 0 ) > k + 1. Assume that (F ) = k + 1 to obtain a
contradiction.
Let x F such that | (x)| = k + 1. Since F 0 FN , we see that by condition (15) and
inequality (9), it follows that
| (x) VN +1 | > | (x) U (FN )| > (F 0 ) > k + 1.
Hence, (x) VN +1 , and by condition S(2), it follows that x
/ F (VN +1 ) , therefore, x
/ F.
This contradiction concludes the proof of statement ST .
In particular, inequality (16) involves that for any x X there is a number n0 such that
x
/ F (Vn ) for all n > n0 , i.e., x G (Vn ). In other words, equality (6) holds. So, by condition
S(2), we have
[
Y =
Vn .
nN

Since Vn [U] for all n N, we see that the cover U of Y is -trivial, a contradiction. So,
l(Y ) 6 . Consequently, l(Y ) 6 l(X). Analogously, l(X) 6 l(Y ). Theorem is proved.

References
[1] A. Bouziad, Le degre de Lindelof est l-invariant, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 129 (3) 913-919.
[2] R. Engelking, General Topology (PWN, Warszava, 1977).
[3] S. P. Gulko, On uniform homeomorphisms of spaces of continuous functions, Proceedings
of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics 3 (1993) 87-93.
[4] O. Okunev, Homeomorphisms of function spaces and hereditary cardinal invariants,
Topol. and its Appl. 80 (1997) 177-188.
[5] N. V. Velichko, The Lindelof property is l-invariant, Topol. and its Appl. 89 (1998) 277283.

12