Let $\overline{\rho}$ be the uniform metric on $\Bbb{R}^\omega$. Given $x=(x_1, x_2,….)\in \Bbb{R}^\omega$ and given $0\lt \epsilon \lt 1$, let $U(x,\epsilon)=(x_1 -\epsilon ,x_2 +\epsilon )\times \dotsb \times (x_n -\epsilon ,x_n +\epsilon) \times \dotsb$. (a) show that $U(x,\epsilon)$ is not equal to the $\epsilon$ ball $B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,\epsilon)$. (b) show that $U(x,\epsilon)$ is not even open in the uniform topology. (c) show that $B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,\epsilon)=\bigcup_{\delta \lt \epsilon}U(x,\delta)$.
My attempt: (a) let $y\in B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,\epsilon)$. Then $\overline{\rho}(x,y)\lt \epsilon \lt 1$, last inequality follows from hypothesis of exercise. So $\overline{d}(x_i,y_i)= d(x_i,y_i)\lt \epsilon ,\forall i\in \Bbb{N}$. So $y_i \in (x_i -\epsilon ,x_i +\epsilon), \forall i\in \Bbb{N}$. Thus $y=(y_n)\in \prod_{i\in \Bbb{N}}(x_i -\epsilon, x_i +\epsilon)=U(x,\epsilon)$. Hence $B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,\epsilon) \subseteq U(x, \epsilon)$, if $0\lt \epsilon \lt 1$.
Conversely, let $y\in U(x,\epsilon)$. $y_i \in (x_i -\epsilon ,x_i +\epsilon), \forall i\in \Bbb{N}$. So $d(x_i,y_i) \lt \epsilon \lt 1$. By definition, $\overline{d}(x_i,y_i)=d(x_i,y_i) \lt \epsilon ,\forall i\in \Bbb{N}$. Thus $\overline{\rho} (x,y)\leq \epsilon$. There is a possibility that $\overline{\rho}(x,y)=\epsilon$, in that case $y\notin B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,\epsilon)$. Hence $U(x, \epsilon)\nsubseteq B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,\epsilon)$. Is this proof correct?
(b) I don’t see a general way to prove this part.
(c) we first prove a general result. If $0\lt r \lt r’$, then $U(x,r)\subseteq B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,r’)$. Proof: let $y\in U(x,r)$. Then $d(x_i,y_i)\lt r, \forall i\in \Bbb{N}$. So $\overline{d}(x_i,y_i)\leq d(x_i,y_i)\lt r ,\forall i$. Thus $\overline{\rho}(x,y)\leq r\lt r’$. Hence $y\in B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,r’)$. Proof is similar to theorem 20.4 proof, $\mathcal{T}_{\overline{\rho}}\subseteq \mathcal{T}_b$ part.
Let $y\in \bigcup_{\delta \lt \epsilon} U(x,\delta)$. Then $y\in U(x,\delta’)$, for some $\delta’ \lt \epsilon$. Thus $y\in U(x,\delta’)\subseteq B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,\epsilon)$, by above claim.
Conversely, let $y\in B_{\overline{\rho}}(x,\epsilon)$. Then $\overline{\rho}(x,y) \lt \epsilon \lt 1$. $\exists \delta \in \Bbb{R}$ such that $\overline{\rho}(x,y)\lt \delta \lt \epsilon$. Thus $\overline{d}(x_i,y_i)=d(x_i,y_i) \lt \delta ,\forall i \in \Bbb{N}$. Hence $y \in U(x,\delta)\subseteq \bigcup_{\delta \lt \epsilon} U(x, \delta)$. Is this proof correct?