@DanielFischer It seems like a case-by-case analysis does the trick. We want to prove that $d'(x, y) < d'(x, z) + d'(z, y)$. Assume $d(x, z) < d(x, y)$, then $d'(x, z) > d'(x, y)$ by monotonicity. Hence $d'(x, y) < d'(x, z) < d'(x, z) + d'(z, y)$, done. This also holds true similarly for $d(x, z) < d(z, y)$. Thus WLOG $d(x, z) > d(x, y)$ and $d(x, z) > d(z, y)$, in which case just normal triangle ineq for $d$ does the trick.
I believe I need another redo at my module theory before I can claim I know any algebra, @Kaj
@TedShifrin OK, that's reasonable... it's the stuff after that (and the stuff that Brian Scott used to answer, say) that I find absolutely unfathomably dull.
@MikeMiller $\{x_n\}$ coverges in $(X, d)$ $\iff$ For every $\epsilon > 0$, there exists a positive int $n_0$ such that for all $n > n_0$, $d(x_n, x) < \epsilon$
@BalarkaSen Ok, by your inverse limit definition, we have an element $(1, 1+5, 1+5+25, \dots) \in \Bbb Z_5$. This is the $x$ to which your sequence should converge. Verify it.
OK, I am going to just stick to the inverse limit definition. Can you show me that $\mathbf{Z}_p$ (the algebraic object) and completion of $\Bbb Z$ under the $p$-adic metric coincides?
@BalarkaSen Yes, I can (where the "algebraic object" means "the algebraic object with the $p$-adic metric on it"), but I won't, because I think you should do it. All I'll say on the matter is that elements of the inverse limit look a lot like Cauchy sequences...
I am feeling all my ideas on p-adics are intuitive. Would it be a good idea to think on it and rigorify it or would it be better to just read up some text?