2
$\begingroup$

Prerequisites in case you may need and I am correct about them:

An entourage is a member of uniformity structure on a set for it to be a uniform space. Intuitively, an entourage is a relation on a set, such that it specifies those pairs of points, the "between-distance" for each pair being bounded by some "value" specified by the entourage. It is easier to understand for a metric space, which is an example of uniform space.


  1. The definition I know for a Cauchy sequence in a uniform space is

    A sequence $(x_i)$ is a Cauchy sequence if for every entourage $V$ there exists $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that for all $i, j ≥ n$, $(x_i, x_j)$ is a member of $V$.

  2. From Planetmath, the definition for a Cauchy sequence in a uniform space is

    A Cauchy sequence $x_i$ in a uniform space $X$ is a sequence in $X$ whose section filter is a Cauchy filter,

    where the section filter of a sequence is defined to be the maximal proper filter containing the filter base generated by the sequence, if I understand its definition correctly.

  3. This definition of Cauchy sequence surprises me, because I was thinking instead

    A Cauchy sequence $x_i$ in a uniform space $X$ is a sequence in $X$ whose filter is a Cauchy filter,

    where the filter of a sequence is the minimal filter containing the filter base generated by the sequence.

So I wonder if the three definitions are equivalent?

Thanks and regards!

  • 0
    I am not familiar with the notion of "entourage"; could you provide the definition?2012-02-20
  • 0
    @ArturoMagidin: An entourage is a member of uniformity structure on a set for it to be a uniform space. Wiki has the description [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_space#Entourage_definition). It is easier to understand for a metric space, which is an example of uniform space. Intuitively, an entourage is a relation on a set, such that it specifies those pairs of points, the "distance" for each is within some "value".2012-02-20
  • 0
    Please put relevant definitions in the body of the post; don't force people, like myself, who are unfamiliar with the term to wade into the comments to find out what the words mean.2012-02-20
  • 0
    @Arturo: For the record, I would expect anyone with a basic knowledge of uniform spaces to be familiar with the term *entourage*, just as I’d expect anyone with a basic knowledge of topological spaces to be familiar with the term *neighborhood*.2012-02-20
  • 0
    @Brian: Fair enough; I'm not familiar with either...2012-02-20
  • 0
    @ArturoMagidin: Still there is no doubt you are very knowledgeable and an expert in many areas. I wish I could match up 1/10 of your knowledge.2012-02-20
  • 0
    @BrianM.Scott: I would think entourage to uniformity is more similar to open subset to topology.2012-02-20
  • 0
    @Tim: I wasn’t trying for a close analogy; I was just trying to indicate that it wasn’t surprising that you omitted the definition.2012-02-20
  • 0
    @BrianM.Scott: I was just kidding. Thanks for your understanding!2012-02-20

1 Answers 1

2

The equivalence of (1) and (3) is standard. The PlanetMath definition of section filter is simply wrong: it doesn’t define a unique object, since the filter generated by the sections (or tails, as I prefer to call them) may have many maximal extensions.