Talk:Spherically complete field

Latest comment: 4 years ago by MFH in topic why only fields?

open balls? edit

The topological field of real numbers is locally compact, but the decreasing sequence of balls given by the open intervals (0, 1/n) has empty intersection.

Therefore, while in the non-archimedean case, open and closed balls can be interchangeably used, is this still true in the archimedean case, or might it be necessary to stipulate open balls? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.235.134.104 (talk) 23:57, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Unless I'm wrong, on the contrary, this example shows that one should stipulate closed balls! (As you say, R is spherically complete since locally compact.) — MFH:Talk 16:39, 20 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

why only fields? edit

Why has Wikipedia "spherically complete" only for fields? This notion makes sense in any metric space, doesn't it? — MFH:Talk 16:42, 20 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Can you create a spherical completion of any normed field? edit

The article does not mention circumstances when one may create a spherical completion of a field that is not already spherically complete.

That would be a very useful addition to this article.