Proving the completion of a metric space is complete

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving that the completion of a metric space is complete, as outlined in Chapter 3 of Rudin's "Principles of Mathematical Analysis." The original metric space is denoted as X, while its completion is represented as X^*, defined through the limit of distances between sequences in equivalence classes. The user contemplates using Baire's theorem and constructing shrinking neighborhoods to demonstrate that Cauchy sequences of equivalence classes converge within X^*. Key insights include the necessity of showing that these neighborhoods are dense in X^* and that the equivalence classes maintain convergence properties.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of metric spaces and their properties
  • Familiarity with Cauchy sequences and equivalence classes
  • Knowledge of Baire's theorem and its applications
  • Proficiency in limit concepts and convergence in analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the proof of Baire's theorem and its implications for metric spaces
  • Explore the concept of dense subsets in metric spaces
  • Review the properties of Cauchy sequences in the context of equivalence classes
  • Investigate the construction of neighborhoods in metric spaces and their convergence properties
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, particularly those studying real analysis, as well as educators and researchers interested in metric space theory and its applications in analysis.

tbrown122387
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Having a little trouble on number 24 of Chapter 3 in Rudin's Principles of Mathematical Analysis. How do I prove that the completion of a metric space is complete?



Homework Equations



X is the original metric space, X^* is the completion, or the set of equivalence classes generated by the metric \bigtriangleup(P,Q) = \lim_{n \to \infty} d(p_n, q_n) where P,Q \in X^* and \{p_n\} \in P and \{q_n\} \in Q.


The Attempt at a Solution



I guess the thing that's confusing me is thinking about Cauchy sequences of equivalence classes. Every time you compare two new equivalence classes, you compare the limit of two real number sequences I guess. Am I thinking about this correctly?

My gut instinct is to use Baire's theorem for this. Maybe construct some shrinking neighborhoods and show the infinite intersection is nonempty? If this is a good path to take, I'll have two questions:
1. How to construct the neighborhoods (maybe let N_{r_n}p_n be the smallest neighborhood containing the previous point, centered at p_n)?

2. How to show these neighborhoods are dense in X^*? How can an equivalence class be a limit or a point of a neighborhood?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Tell me if you think this works:

Assume \{P_n\} is Cauchy in X^* . Fix \epsilon > 0 and pick N large enough so that n \ge N implies \bigtriangleup (P_n, P_m) < \epsilon . This means that \lim_{n \to \infty} d(p_n, p_m) < \epsilon for \{p_n\}, \{p_m\} in P_n, P_m respectively. Since \epsilon was arbitrary, \{p_n\}, \{p_m\} are equivalent, meaning they're in the same equivalence class. Name this class P. Clearly \bigtriangleup (P_n, P) = 0 since for any \{p_j\} \in P, \lim d(p_n, p_j) = 0 (by 24(b)). So, Cauchy sequences of equivalence classes converge to some specific equivalence class.

Note: in 24(b) we showed that it if you substitute in different sequences from the same equivalence class, \bigtriangleup stays the same.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K