Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Unlike in $R^n$, closed and bounded doesn't guarantee sequential compactness. Textbook examples includes sup metric and R^infinite metric. I am wondering what would be a example of closed and bounded doesn't imply sequential compactness in more general Metric space $(X,\rho)$?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 0 down vote accepted

Take the space $l_2$ (ie, $d(x,y) = \sqrt{\sum_n |[x]_n - [y]_n|^2}$) and the set $C = \{ e_n \}_n$, where $e_n$ is the $n$th unit vector (ie, zeros everywhere except for the $n$th position which is one).

Then $C$ is bounded, closed but not compact (or sequentially compact).

share|cite|improve this answer

Take any metric space $(X,\rho)$ which is not sequentially compact (= compact, for metric spaces), and replace $\rho$ with the standard bounded metric $\rho_1(x,y) = \min(\rho(x,y),1))$. Then $X$ itself is closed and $\rho_1$-bounded but not compact, despite the fact that the induced topology $\tau_{\rho_1}$ is the same as the induced topology $\tau_{\rho}$ of $(X,\rho)$.

I hope that this example drives home that the Heine-Borel Theorem is fundamentally a metric result and not a topological one.

share|cite|improve this answer

The closed unit ball in any infinite-dimensional normed space is not compact. This is an easy consequence of Riesz's lemma.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.