Is Every Cauchy Sequence in the Real Numbers Convergent?

Click For Summary
The discussion clarifies that the set of real numbers is a complete metric space under the Euclidean metric because all Cauchy sequences within it converge. It emphasizes that completeness is defined by the convergence of Cauchy sequences, not all sequences. An example provided is the sequence approximating π, which is Cauchy but does not converge within the rational numbers, illustrating their incompleteness. The distinction between Cauchy sequences and divergent sequences is crucial for understanding metric space completeness. Overall, the real numbers are complete because every Cauchy sequence converges to a limit within the set.
lukaszh
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Hello,

why the set of all real numbers is complete metric space with euclidean metric? I know, that metric space is complete iff all sequences in it converges. But 1,2,3,4,... diverges.

Thanx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lukaszh said:
Hello,

why the set of all real numbers is complete metric space with euclidean metric? I know, that metric space is complete iff all sequences in it converges. But 1,2,3,4,... diverges.

Thanx

Complete is if all Cauchy sequences converge, not any sequence
 
lukaszh said:
Hello,

why the set of all real numbers is complete metric space with euclidean metric? I know, that metric space is complete iff all sequences in it converges. But 1,2,3,4,... diverges.

Thanx
It's what we "know" that gets us into trouble!:biggrin:

As wofsy said, a metric space is complete iff all Cauchy sequences converge, not "all sequences".

And a sequence, {an} is "Cauchy" if and only if the sequence {an- am} converges to 0 as m and n go to infinity independently. It is easy to show that any Cauchy sequence converges. The rational numbers are not "complete" because there exist Cauchy sequences that do not converge. For example, the sequence, {3, 3.1, 3.14, 3.1415, 3.14159, 3.141592, ...}, where the nth term is the decimal expansion of \pi to n places, is Cauchy because the nth and mth term are identical to the min(n, m) place and so their difference goes to 0 as m and n go to infinity. But the sequence does not converge because, as a sequence in the real numbers, it converges to \pi and \pi is not a rational number.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K