Skip to main content
added possesive s to `De Groot'
Source Link
KP Hart
  • 11.4k
  • 38
  • 48

Another answer was given by Aarts and De Groot in Complete regularity as a separation axiom Canadian Journal of Mathematics 21 1969 96–105. Frink's condition sets things up for a proof a la Urysohn's Lemma; Aarts and De Groot'Groot's condition is in terms of subbases and the proof proceeds by constructing a Hausdorff compactification.

Another answer was given by Aarts and De Groot in Complete regularity as a separation axiom Canadian Journal of Mathematics 21 1969 96–105. Frink's condition sets things up for a proof a la Urysohn's Lemma; Aarts and De Groot' condition is in terms of subbases and the proof proceeds by constructing a Hausdorff compactification.

Another answer was given by Aarts and De Groot in Complete regularity as a separation axiom Canadian Journal of Mathematics 21 1969 96–105. Frink's condition sets things up for a proof a la Urysohn's Lemma; Aarts and De Groot's condition is in terms of subbases and the proof proceeds by constructing a Hausdorff compactification.

Source Link
KP Hart
  • 11.4k
  • 38
  • 48

Another answer was given by Aarts and De Groot in Complete regularity as a separation axiom Canadian Journal of Mathematics 21 1969 96–105. Frink's condition sets things up for a proof a la Urysohn's Lemma; Aarts and De Groot' condition is in terms of subbases and the proof proceeds by constructing a Hausdorff compactification.