## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**John Douglas Moore October 15, 2008
**

Our goal for this course is to study properties of subsets of the set R of real numbers. To start with, we want to formulate a collection of axioms which characterize the real numbers. These axioms fall into three groups, the axioms for ﬁelds, the order axioms and the completeness axiom.

1

Field axioms

Deﬁnition. A ﬁeld is a set F together with two operations (functions) f : F × F → F, and g : F × F → F, g(x, y) = xy, called addition and multiplication, respectively, which satisfy the following axioms: • F1. addition is commutative: x + y = y + x, for all x, y ∈ F . • F2. addition is associative: (x + y) + z = x + (y + z), for all x, y, z ∈ F . • F3. existence of additive identity: there is a unique element 0 ∈ F such that x + 0 = x, for all x ∈ F . • F4. existence of additive inverses: if x ∈ F , there is a unique element −x ∈ F such that x + (−x) = 0. • F5. multiplication is commutative: xy = yx, for all x, y ∈ F . • F6. multiplication is associative: (xy)z = x(yz), for all x, y, z ∈ F . • F7. existence of multliplicative identity: there is a unique element 1 ∈ F such that 1 = 0 and x1 = x, for all x ∈ F . • F8. existence of multliplicative inverses: if x ∈ F and x = 0, there is a unique element (1/x) ∈ F such that x · (1/x) = 1. • F9. distributivity: x(y + z) = xy + xz, for all x, y, z ∈ F . 1 f (x, y) = x + y

Z/5Z = {0. say √ √ x = a + b 2 and y = c + d 2. 4} and within Z/5Z. In these cases. consists of real numbers of the form a+b 2. √ are also elements of Q( 2). f and g are the usual addition and multiplication operations. Axioms F5-F8 state that F − {0} with the multiplication operation g is also an abelian group. Thus for example. Thus. This is often referred to as mod p addition and multiplication. One checks that if x. From these facts it is easy to check that Q( 2) is indeed √ a ﬁeld such that Q ⊂ Q( 2) ⊂ R. √ √ This ﬁeld. one can prove that the usual rules for addition and multiplication hold.Note the similarity between axioms F1-F4 and axioms F5-F8. 3 · 4 = 12 mod 5 = 2. to be denoted by Q( 2). . . 1. p − 1}. 3. which consists of the elements {0. 1. because integers do not always have multiplicative inverses. y ∈ Q( 2). . 2. The key examples of ﬁelds are the set of rational numbers Q. we might consider the ﬁeld generated by rationals √ and the roots x = ± 2 of the polynomial p(x) = x2 − 2. the set of real numbers R and the set of complex numbers C. Similarly. axioms F1-F4 state that F with the addition operation f is an abelian group. we check that √ √ 1 1 1 a−b 2 a b √ = √ √ = 2 = − 2 2 x a − 2b2 a − 2b2 a+b 2 a+b 2a−b 2 √ √ are elements of Q( 2). A more abstract example is the ﬁeld Z/pZ. In the language of algebra. then √ √ x · y = (ac + 2bd) + (ad + bc) 2 x + y = (a + c) + (b + d) 2. On the other hand. the set of integers Z is not a ﬁeld. for example. we deﬁne addition or multiplication by ﬁrst forming the sum or product in the usual sense and then taking the remainder after division by p. 2. Other examples arise when studying roots of polynomials with rational coeﬃcients. where p is a prime ≥ 2. Starting with the ﬁeld axioms. 3 + 4 = 7 mod 5 = 2. We could begin by giving a complete proof of the cancellation law: 2 √ − x = (−a) + (−b) 2. . √ where a and b are rational. Axiom F9 ties the two ﬁeld operations together. In this case. .

z ∈ F . then x < y implies x + z < y + z. if x. Proof: Suppose that x + z = y + z. z ∈ F . You should know how to prove the easiest of these directly from the axioms. Proof: By Axiom F3. y. y. Proposition. trichotomy: if x. By distributivity (Axiom F9). If F is a ﬁeld and x. Then by Axiom F4. x = y. which exists by Axiom F4. • O2. By associativity of addition (Axiom F2). Several similar propositions can be found in §11 of the text [1]. x + (z + (−z)) = y + (z + (−z)). and by Axiom F1.Proposition. If F is a ﬁeld and x ∈ F . then x < y implies x · z < y · z We agree that x > y means y < x. Let (−z) be an additive inverse to z. then x+z =y+z ⇒ x = y. transitivity: if x. y. • O4. Hence 0 = x · 0 by the preceding proposition. Then (x + z) + (−z) = (y + z) + (−z). y < x. z ∈ F and 0 < z. 3 . An ordered ﬁeld is a ﬁeld F together with a relation < which satisﬁes the axioms • O1. if x. x·(0+0) = x · 0 + x · 0. 0 + x · 0 = x · 0 + x · 0. then x < y and y < z implies x < z. x·0 = x·(0+0). By Axiom F3 again. • O3. z ∈ F . then x · 0 = 0. y ∈ F . then exactly one of the following is true: x < y. y. x · 0 + 0 = x · 0 + x · 0. x ≤ y means if x < y or x = y and x ≥ y means if x > y or x = y. x + 0 = y + 0 and by Axiom F3. x = y. 2 Ordered ﬁelds Deﬁnition.

b1 . . 4 . but the complex number i satisﬁes i2 + 1 = 0. . Thus p(x) = an xn + an−1 xn−1 + · · · + a1 x + a0 . An ordered ﬁeld F is Archimedean if for every x. as is Q( 2). a rational function is a quotient f (x) = p(x)/q(x) of two polynomials with real coeﬃcients. . as is the product of two rational functions. where q(x) is nonzero. x2 + 1 > 0. Proof: By Axiom O3. b0 are real numbers. by the axiom on the additive identity (Axiom F3). By deﬁnition. because if x is an element of an ordered ﬁeld. x + ((−x) + (−y)) < y + ((−y) + (−x)) and by associativity of addition (Axiom F2) (x + (−x)) + (−y) < (y + (−y)) + (−x). The complex numbers C is not an ordered ﬁeld. and bm = 0. Deﬁnition. . together with the usual addition and multiplication. For example. a0 and bm . there exists an n ∈ N such that n nx = x + x + · · · + x > y. Notice that the sum of two rational functions is a rational function. the rational numbers Q and the real numbers R are both √ ordered ﬁelds. There are several equivalent formulations of the the Archimedean property. Proposition. We could prove the basic rules for working with inequalities directly from the axioms.For example. y ∈ F with x > 0. there is an n ∈ N such that 1/n < x. A ﬁeld F is Archimedean if and only if the set N of natural numbers is unbounded. where the coeﬃcients an . Further proofs of this nature can be found in §11 of the text [1]. Finally. an ordered ﬁeld F is Archimedean if and only if for every x > 0 in F . . An important example of an ordered ﬁeld that does not satisfy the Archimedean property is the ﬁeld F of rational functions. . We say that the rational function f (x) = p(x) an xn + an−1 xn−1 + · · · + a1 x + a0 = . By commutativity of addition (Axiom F1). q(x) bm xn + bn−1 xm−1 + · · · + b1 x + b0 is positive if an /bm > 0. By the axiom on additive inverses (Axiom F4). . a1 . 0 + (−y) < 0 + (−x). For example. x + ((−x) + (−y)) < y + ((−x) + (−y)). −y < −x. q(x) = bm xn + bn−1 xm−1 + · · · + b1 x + b0 . and that f < g if g − f is positive. then −y < −x. It is easily checked that with this relation <. . We could prove several similar familiar rules for dealing with inequalities in the same way. If F is an ordered ﬁeld and x and y are elements of F such that x < y.

Thus we have inclusions Q⊂R⊂F In some sense. An upper bound for S is an element m ∈ F such that x∈S → x ≤ m. x > n. Pursuing this approach would lead to the subject nonstandard analysis. This is equivalent to requiring that if a nonempty subset S ⊂ F has a lower bound. A complete ordered ﬁeld is an ordered ﬁeld F such that if a nonempty subset S ⊂ F has an upper bound. while a lower bound for S is an element m ∈ F such that x∈S → x ≥ m. then S has a least upper bound or supremum which lies within F . n for all n ∈ N. it has a greatest lower bound in F . However. 3 Complete ordered ﬁelds Note that the ﬁeld F of rational functions contains a subﬁeld of constant functions. A least upper bound or supremum of S is an upper bound m for S such that whenever m is an upper bound for S. so this ordered ﬁeld is not Archimedean. numbers dx that satisfy the property that 0 < dx < 1 . Suppose that S is a subset of a ﬁeld F . developed by Abraham Robinson [2] and others. If F is a complete ordered ﬁeld. but rather give the foundations of calculus based upon the − δ arguments that we will see later. Proof: Suppose there exist nonzero elements x. Deﬁnition. One might try to develop calculus on the basis of inﬁnitesimal quantities. while F has too many. most most mathematicians do not do this. which we can identify with R. Moreover. A greatest lower bound or inﬁmum is a lower bound m for S such that whenever m is a lower bound for S. One way to do this would be to imbed the reals in a non-Archimedean ordered ﬁeld which contains an inﬁnitesimal element dx. for all n ∈ N. Q has too few elements. then m ≥ m . then m ≤ m . Deﬁnition.the set F of rational functions is an ordered ﬁeld. F is Archimedean. Then the set {nx : n ∈ N} has an upper bound and by the 5 . We need an additional axiom to rule out both possibilities. Proposition. y ∈ F such that x > 0 and nx ≤ y for all n ∈ N.

Putting the two parts together. If F is a complete ordered ﬁeld and p is a prime. we see that x2 = p. 2x + 1 Thus the real numbers is the unique complete ordered ﬁeld up to “order preserving isomorphism. δ≤ p − x2 . We claim that then m − x must also be an upper bound. We claim that x2 = p. then nx > m − x for some n ∈ N ⇒ (n + 1)x > m. contradicting the fact that x is the least upper bound.completeness axiom. x2 − p > 0. Let δ = min 1. it must have a least upper bound m.” 6 . so F contains a least upper bound x for A. Proof: We let A = {r ∈ F : r2 < p}. The preceding proposition shows that the ﬁeld Q of rational numbers is not a √ complete ordered ﬁeld because it does not contain p when p is a prime. I. This contradiction shows that x2 ≤ p. 2x p − x2 2x + 1 . But m − x < m and this contradicts the assertion that m is a least upper bound for {nx : n ∈ N}. Proposition. Thus F is not a complete ordered ﬁeld. so x+δ ∈ A and x is not an upper bound. Indeed if m − x is not an upper bound. Then (x + δ)2 = x2 + 2δx + δ 2 ≤ x2 + (2x + 1)δ ≤ x2 + p − x2 ≤ p. Thus x − δ is an upper bound for A. This contradiction shows that x2 ≥ p. then there is an element x of F such that x2 = p. as we needed to show. Suppose that x2 > p. x < y ⇔ ψ(x) < ψ(y). and hence x − δ > r whenever r ∈ A. Let δ= Then (x − δ)2 = x2 − 2δx + δ 2 ≥ x2 − 2δx = x2 − (x2 − p) = p. It can be proven that if F is any complete ordered ﬁeld. ψ(x · y) = ψ(x) · ψ(y). so δ ≤ 1. so (x − δ)2 > r2 whenever r ∈ A. so m is not an upper bound either. II. The set A is bounded above. as you saw in Math 8. there is a bijective function ψ : F → R such that ψ(x + y) = ψ(x) + ψ(y). Suppose that x2 < p and x ≥ 1. Thus F cannot be complete.

Pearson Prentice Hall. 1966. 7 . Upper Saddle Riven. Nonstandard analysis.References [1] Steven R. 2005. Lay. [2] Abraham Robinson. North-Holland. NJ. Analysis: with an introduction to proof . Amsterdam.

- SYBSC.pdf
- Admissibility Methods in Numerical Number Theory
- zeglami2014
- The Future of Computation
- alg1
- weyl.pdf
- Gs2012 Qp Mth
- MATH 3013 Course Outline.pdf
- Bounded Set Note
- A Spatial Theory of Rhythmic Resolution_Neil McLachlan.pdf
- Quotient Structures by J. Gallian
- Assignment 1(1)
- Unit 1
- Courses of Study - MAL
- Abstract Algebra
- AlgebraLectureNotes[1]
- parent handbook grade 3 module 1
- Weekly Notes
- 9865926-Year-3-Yearly-Plan[1]
- Hans Havlicek and Metod Saniga- Projective Ring Line of an Arbitrary Single Qudit
- Wild Berger Hyper Groups Harmonic Analysis
- mathgen-325094299
- Etale
- Ore Article on Groups
- Read Mental Com Pest
- As an F-Vector Space, An Infinite Direct Sum of F Has Strictly Smaller Dimension Than an Infinite Direct Power of F Over the Same Index Set _ Project Crazy Project
- Permutation
- Fun and Games Math Unit
- Groups
- Maths2

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading