Date: Feb 2, 2013 9:52 PM
Author: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
Subject: Re: closed but not complete

In <Pine.NEB.4.64.1302011852290.7448@panix3.panix.com>, on 02/01/2013
at 07:14 PM, William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> said:

>No. Assume K is a closed subset of the complete space (S,d).

You're answering a different question. The answer to the question he
asked is yes.

>Conclusion. K subset complete S implies (K closed iff K complete).

The question "does someone know of any example that demonstrates that
closed --> complete is *not* true?" does not assume completeness. If
(Y,d) is a closed subspace of the metric space (X,d), it need not be
complete. In fact, if (X,d) is not complete then (X,d) is a closed
subspace of (X,d) that is not complete.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org