55
$\begingroup$

What is the difference between a complete metric space and a closed set?

Can a set be closed but not complete?

  • 10
    Completeness and closure are not properties of sets; they are properties of metric spaces and of subsets of topological spaces (which include metric spaces), respectively. Context is everything in mathematics.2010-10-14

3 Answers 3

72

A metric space is complete if every Cauchy sequence converges. A subset $F$ of a metric space $X$ is closed if $F$ contains all of its limit points; this can be characterized by saying that if a sequence in $F$ converges to a point $x$ in $X$, then $x$ must be in $F$. It also makes sense to ask whether a subset of $X$ is complete, because every subset of a metric space is a metric space with the restricted metric.

It turns out that a complete subspace must be closed, which essentially results from the fact that convergent sequences are Cauchy sequences. However, closed subspaces need not be complete. For a trivial example, start with any incomplete metric space, like the rational numbers $\mathbb{Q}$ with the usual absolute value distance. Like every metric space, $\mathbb{Q}$ is closed in itself, so there you have a subset that is closed but not complete. If taking the whole space seems like cheating, just take the rationals in $[0,1]$, which will be closed in $\mathbb{Q}$ but not complete.

If $X$ is a complete metric space, then a subset of $X$ is closed if and only if it is complete.

  • 0
    @JonasMeyer So when [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_set) writes "a set is closed if and only if it contains all of its limit points", then this is under the assumption that the space is a complete metric space? I'm asking because then the Wikipedia entry would be wrong.2012-01-12
  • 4
    @Matt: No. If $X$ is a topological space and $A\subseteq X$, then a limit point of $A$ is an element $x$ of $X$ such that for every open subset $U$ of $X$ containing $x$, $(U\setminus\{x\})\cap A\neq \emptyset$, and $A$ is closed if and only if it contains all of its limit points if and only if $X\setminus A$ is open in $X$. This specializes to the case where $X$ is an arbitrary metric space, except that there (or in other first countable spaces) limit points can be characterized in terms of sequences: $x$ is a limit point of $A$ iff there exists a sequence $(x_n)$ in $A$ such that....2012-01-12
  • 1
    ...$\lim_n x_n=x$ and $x_n\neq x$ for all $n$. Without assuming completeness it can be shown using this characterization of limit points in metric spaces that the statement appearing in Wikipedia is equivalent to the statement that if $A\subseteq X$, then $A$ is closed iff for every sequence $(x_n)$ in $A$ converging to some $x\in X$, it must be the case that $x\in A$. (For one direction, note that if the terms are all different from $x$, then $x$ is a limit point. If not, then $x\in A$ because $(x_n)$ is a sequence in $A$.) Completeness ensures that closed subspaces are the same as...2012-01-12
  • 0
    ...subspaces that are complete in the restricted metric.2012-01-12
  • 0
    @JonasMeyer Thank you! My confusion arose from the fact that I considered $\sqrt{2}$ a limit point of $\mathbb{Q}$ in $\mathbb{Q}$ I think. And as anon stated concisely. "A limit point of X in Y has to actually exist in Y.".2012-01-12
  • 1
    @Matt: Completeness is not a relative property, and $\mathbb Q$ is not complete, because it has Cauchy sequences that don't converge, e.g. $x_1=1$, $x_n=\frac{1}{2}\left(x_{n-1}+\frac{2}{x_{n_1}}\right)$ for $n>1$. If you are considering the metric space $\mathbb Q$, there is no such thing as $\sqrt 2$; i.e., there is no missing limit point. However, since $\mathbb Q$ is not complete, it can be imbedded as a proper subspace of its completion, which is generally identified with $\mathbb R$. Then we know that $\mathbb Q$ is not closed in $\mathbb R$, because for example the sequence...2012-01-12
  • 0
    ...$(x_n)$ defined above converges to $\sqrt 2\not\in \mathbb Q$. But, every metric space is a closed subset of itself. And yes, the quote of anon you gave is the point.2012-01-12
  • 0
    Prof. Meyer would you care to explain what you mean by "A metric space is complete if every Cauchy sequence converges." I thought Cauchy sequences always converged from their definition...2013-03-14
  • 0
    You should read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_sequence2013-03-14
  • 0
    Consider a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers converging to $\pi$. Now consider this sequence in $\Bbb Q$.2013-03-14
  • 0
    @user65165: No, that is not the definition. My second to last comment gave an example of a Cauchy sequence in $\mathbb Q$ that does not converge in the metric space $\mathbb Q$. Alternatively, in the metric space $\mathbb R\setminus\{0\}$ with the usual absolute value distance, the sequence $(1,1/2,1/3,1/4,\ldots)$ is a Cauchy sequence that does not converge.2013-03-14
  • 0
    @JonasMeyer: is there an example of an incomplete but closed subspace of an incomplete vector space over $\mathbb R$?2013-05-15
  • 1
    @mathusiast: You mean a topological vector space? Every topological space is a closed subset of itself, so every incomplete space is an example. E.g., the real vector space of polynomials $\mathbb R[x]$ is a metric space with the distance between $p$ and $q$ being the maximum of the absolute values of the coefficients of $p-q$. This space, as a subspace of itself, provides an example of what you ask.2013-05-16
  • 0
    @JonasMeyer: thank you for the response and sorry for being imprecise. I meant a proper subspace. So an example of an incomplete but closed proper subspace of an incomplete vector space over $\mathbb R$? Could this work: direct product of $\mathbb R^2$ and $(C^1(\mathbb R), ||·||_\infty)$. Then the resulting vector space is incomplete. And a proper subspace (say, direct product of the $y$-axis and the whole $C^1$) is closed yet incomplete. Right?2013-05-16
  • 1
    @mathusiast: What is $\|\cdot\|_\infty$ supposed to mean on $C^1(\mathbb R)$? Perhaps you intended to restrict to bounded functions? Or if you don't mind thinking again of polynomials, just take the subspace $x\mathbb R[x]$, or $\mathbb R[x^2]$, etc. In the case of function spaces, you could take say $C[0,1]$ with $d(f,g)=\int_0^1|f(x)-g(x)|dx$, and consider the subspace of functions that vanish at $0$. (Direct products also give easy examples, but I wasn't sure quite what your example means.)2013-05-16
  • 0
    @JonasMeyer: you are perfectly right, I intended to say $(C^1([a,b],\mathbb R), ||·||_\infty)$. Would my example work then? I wanted to construct a simple one for my studies of Analysis. Since I didn't have Functional Analysis yet, your examples are too advanced for me.2013-05-16
  • 1
    @mathusiast: I don't see how polynomials are more advanced than $C^1$ functions in this context. Yes, your example would work, perhaps more simply as $\{0\}\times C^1[a,b]\subset \mathbb R\times C^1[a,b]$. Or you could take $\{f\in C^1[a,b]: f(a)=0\}\subset C^1[a,b]$ (with sup norm).2013-05-16
9

In some sense, a complete metric space is "universally closed": A metric space $X$ is complete iff its image by any isometry $i : X \to Y$ is closed.

Indeed, if $X$ is complete, $i(X)$ is a complete subspace of $Y$ so $i(X)$ is closed in $Y$; moreover, if $X$ is closed in its completion then $X$ is complete itself.

1

Completeness asks for a space: does every Cauchy sequence converge to a limit in that space? This is the case for R.

A subset of a space is closed if it contains its limit points. It should be intuitive that if you are a subset of R, then any sequence in your subset that converges must converge in R. Now the question is: will that point still be in my set? If so, it is closed. That's why, by definition, a closed interval in a complete space must be complete.

Steps towards showing that any closed interval in R is complete.