Skip to content
Closed
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions errata.tex
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -931,6 +931,10 @@
& 1270-g3f17b85
& In the proof, $n : \N$ should be $k : \N$. And the range of $i$ should be $0 \leq i \leq k$. Also in the last equation, $r(\lim x) = \ell$ should be $\lim x = \ell$.\\
%
\cref{defn:total-bounded-metric-space}
& % merge of acbd09c738a26937dc9be4452843ea29ad190a11
& In the definition of an $\epsilon$-net, the finite sequences $x_1, \dots, x_n$ should use zero-based indexing: $x_0, \dots, x_n$\\
%
\cref{sec:surreals}
& 1189-ga9c35f0
& The inductive case of $\iota_{\Q_D}$ should be defined as $\iota_{\Q_D}(a/2^n) \defeq \surr{\iota_{\Q_D}(a/2^n - 1/2^n)}{\iota_{\Q_D}(a/2^n + 1/2^n)}$.\\
Expand Down
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions reals.tex
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1963,11 +1963,11 @@ \section{Compactness of the interval}
d)$ is an element of
%
\begin{equation*}
\sm{n : \N}{x_1, \ldots, x_n : M}
\sm{n : \N}{x_0, \ldots, x_n : M}
\fall{y : M} \exis{k \leq n} d(x_k, y) < \epsilon.
\end{equation*}
%
In words, this is a finite sequence of points $x_1, \ldots, x_n$ such that every point
In words, this is a finite sequence of points $x_0, \ldots, x_n$ such that every point
in $M$ merely is within $\epsilon$ of some~$x_k$.

A metric space $(M, d)$ is \define{totally bounded}
Expand All @@ -1978,13 +1978,13 @@ \section{Compactness of the interval}
%
\begin{equation*}
\prd{\epsilon : \Qp}
\sm{n : \N}{x_1, \ldots, x_n : M}
\sm{n : \N}{x_0, \ldots, x_n : M}
\fall{y : M} \exis{k \leq n} d(x_k, y) < \epsilon.
\end{equation*}
\end{defn}

\begin{rmk}
In the definition of total boundedness we used sloppy notation $\sm{n : \N}{x_1, \ldots, x_n : M}$. Formally, we should have written $\sm{x : \lst{M}}$ instead,
In the definition of total boundedness we used sloppy notation $\sm{n : \N}{x_0, \ldots, x_n : M}$. Formally, we should have written $\sm{x : \lst{M}}$ instead,
where $\lst{M}$ is the inductive type of finite lists\index{type!of lists} from \cref{sec:bool-nat}.
However, that would make the rest of the statement a bit more cumbersome to express.
\end{rmk}
Expand Down