1
$\begingroup$

I need to give an example of two metrics on a set that induce the same topology, but where a sequence is Cauchy relative to one of the metrics and not the other.

Any help would be appreciated! Thanks!

  • 0
    Please make the bodies of your posts self-contained, not relying on the title for content.2011-04-06
  • 0
    Closely related: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/7578/two-metrics-induce-the-same-topology-but-one-is-complete-and-the-other-isnt2011-04-06

1 Answers 1

4

Hint: What is the topology induced on $\left.\left\{\frac{1}{n}\;\right|\; n\in\mathbb{Z}, n\gt 0\right\}$ by the standard metric?


Alternative example. Take $\mathbb{R}$ with the usual metric, and the metric $$d(x,y) = \Bigl|\arctan(x) - \arctan(y)\Bigr|.$$ Then consider the sequence $a_n = n$.

  • 0
    This would be incomplete since the limit of 1/n= zero which is not in the set. So the sequence (sn)=1/n would not be Cauchy since it doesn't converge with this metric. If you use the discrete metric d(x,y)=1 x doesn't equal y d(x,y)=0 x=y then (sn) would be Cauchy with this metric. Is this correct? Thanks!2011-04-06
  • 3
    You have it the wrong way around. The sequence *is* Cauchy (but not convergent) in the standard metric, and not Cauchy (so definitely not convergent) in the discrete metric.2011-04-06
  • 1
    @caligurl11: "Cauchy" is **not** a synonym for "convergent." In any metric space, convergent implies Cauchy, but the converse is only true when the space is *complete*. The sequence $(1/n)$ *is* Cauchy in that space under the usual metric, but because the space is not complete, being Cauchy does not necessarily imply convergent.2011-04-06
  • 0
    Thank you I showed that (sn) is Cauchy with the regular metric by using the definition with N=1/epsilon. I was wondering how to show that it is not Cauchy with the discrete metric.2011-04-06
  • 0
    @caligirl11: Set $\epsilon=1/2$. Can you find an $N\gt 0$ such that for all $m,n\geq N$, $|a_n - a_m|\lt 1/2$?2011-04-06
  • 0
    No because d(an,am)=1 so (an) is not Cauchy2011-04-06
  • 1
    @caligirl11: Correction: $d(a_n,a_m)=0$ if $n=m$; but for any $N\gt 0$, you can find $n,m\gt N$ with $n\neq m$, and in *that* case you will have $d(a_n,a_m)=1\gt 1/2$. Otherwise, fine.2011-04-06