ΘρϵηΠατπ

Converges in Rn
A sequence (xn):1n is said to converge to an if for every ϵ+ there is an integer N such that for all kN we have xka<ϵ and in this case we write limkxk=a
Convergence iff Limit gets arbitrarily Close to a Point
limkxk=alimkxka=0
A Sequence in Rn Converges to a Point iff Each Component Converges
Suppose that we have the sequence (xk):1n, then limkxk=alimkxk,i=ai for i[1,,n]
Cauchy in Rn
We say that a sequence (xk):1n is cauchy if for every ϵ+ there is an N1 such that for all k,ln we have xlxk<ϵ
Complete Set in n
Given Sn is complete if every cauchy sequence of points in S converges to a point in S.
Less Than or Equal to Iff Less Than Or Equal to With Epsilon
For any x,y the statement xy is equivalent to ϵ+,x<y+ϵ

Suppose that xy then let ϵ+ thus we know that xy<y+ϵ so then x<y+ϵ.

Suppose the latter, we'll prove the former, but for the sake of contradiction, assume that x>y, but then we know that yy+(xy2)x but on the other hand by considering ϵ=xy2 we see that x<y+(xy2) this is a contradiction because we cannot have αx and α>x at the same time. Thus we must have xy

Note that the same holds for strict inequalities because x<yxy

Closed Balls are Complete
Show that for any pn and r+, that B(p,r) is complete.

Suppose that (an):1B(p,r) converges to some point c, we'll prove that cB(p,r). To show that cB(p,r) one has to prove that pcr.

Since (an)c, we know: ϵ+,N1, st n1,nNanc<ϵ

Focusing on the last inequality we also have that pcpc+anc<ϵ+r Thus we can conclude that for any ϵ+ we have pc<ϵ+r, therefore we have pc<r as needed.

n is Complete
Every cauchy sequence in n converges to a point in n
If a Sequence in n Converges, Then their Norms Converge
limnxn=alimnxn=a
Suppose the former, let ϵ+ therefore we obtain an N1 such that xna<ϵ for any nN, take N=N recall that we need to show that for any kN we have that |xna|<ϵ, but due to the reverse triangle inequality we have |xna|xna<ϵ we get exactly what we needed.

We can observe that the converse is false, simply by taking xn=ei for all n1 and then for any ek where ik we have that limnei=ek simply because the norm of the one-hot vectors is always one, but clearly eiek.