Construction of R

Mathematics :

::

Introduction
Given prior establishment of N natural numbers, Z integers, and Q rationals with some basic set theoretic knowledge, we endeavor to construct the real 1 number eld R which includes such numbers as 1, 1, 2 , 2, ln 2, , etc.

Cuts

We rst dene cuts (Dedekind) as a subset Q such that it meets the following criteria: ( Q) = & = Q ( Q). ( <) p , q Q, q < p = q . (< ) p , r : p < r. It may help to think of Q in the following way: p i Q -

Therefore, we can visualize the latter two criteria ( <) and (< ) using the following diagrams: ( <) p , q Q, q < p = q q p i Q -

which implies p , q Q, q = q > p p i q Q -

and also implies r , s Q, r < s = s i r (< ) p , r : p < r p r Q s Q -

Order

Dene the order relation < on R by < := . We can verify the two properties of an order relation, transitivity (T) and the trichotomy (): (T) If < and < , then = by the properties of set theory, hence < . Q -

() By the linearity of the cut, only one of the following can hold: (<) < ( , thus = ),   (>) < ( , thus = ), or   (=) = . =  i  Q i Q i Q -

Hence, (R, <) is an ordered set.

L.U.B. Property

Next, we can demonstrate that (R, <) has the Least Upper Bound Property by demonstrating that for any nonempty subset of R, there is a supremum or L.U.B. on that subset. In this argument, well use Greek letters (, , , . . .) to indicate elements of R (whose elements are themselves subsets of Q) and English letters (p, q, r, s, . . .) to indicate elements of Q. Let = A R, let R be an upper bound of A, let R such that =
A

, thus p , A : p ; we will show that = sup A. n 0  i  A Q -

Since A = , 0 A : 0 = ; since 0 , = . Next, A, = and so = Q; hence satises ( Q). 3

Let p , then 1 A : p 1 . Therefore, q Q, q < p = q A and thereby q ; hence satises ( <). Lastly, r 1 such that r > p, 1 = r ; hence satises (< ) and so R and A, . 1 q p r k 0  i  A Q -

Suppose R : < , then it follows that s : s . Since s , A : s , hence < and so is not an upper bound on A. i s k  i  A Q -

This proves that = sup A and so R has the L.U.B. Property.

Field Axioms: Addition

The additive (+) axioms for a eld (F ) and for all of its elements (a, b, c F ) are: (+ Cl) a + b F (+ As) (a + b) + c = a + (b + c) (+ Co) a + b = b + a (+ Id) 0 F : a + 0 = a (+ In) (a) F : a + (a) = 0 Before we can start proving that the additive eld axioms hold in R, we must rst dene addition: , R, + := {r + s : r , s }. r i s k r+s + i Q -

We now being proving the additive eld axioms hold for (R, +, <): 4

(+ Cl) It suces to show for all , R that + is a cut to prove that R is closed under addition; to do this, we will show that + satises ( Q), ( <), and (< ). Since , R, it follows from the denition that , = , therefore r , s : r + s + and therefore + = . Furthermore, + Q by its denition. Suppose r , s Q : r , s , then r , s , r + s < r + s (since r > r and s > s in Q) and so r + s + = + Q; hence, + satises ( Q). r i s r k r+s s + i Q -

r +s

Next, let p + , then r , s : p = r + s. Thus q Q, q < p = q s < r = q s . Therefore, q = (q s) + s + ; hence + satises ( <). qs r s + i p Q -

k q

Again, let p + such that p = r + s for r , s , then t , t > r = p < t + s, but since t , s , we have t + s + ; hence + satises (< ) and so + is therefore a cut. r t s + i p t+s Q -

Hence R is closed under addition. (+ As) To show addition in R is associative, we remember that ( + ) + = {(q + r) + s : q , r , s } and by the associativity of Q, we have ( + ) + = {q + (r + s) : q , r , s } = + ( + ); hence addition is associative in R.

(+ Co) To show addition in R is commutative, we remember that + = {r + s : r , s } and by the commutativity of Q, we have + = {s + r : r , s } = + ; hence addition is commutative in R. (+ Id) To show the existence of an additive identity in R, we dene 0 = Q and notice that it is a cut since 1 0 = , 1 0 = Q, and has no largest or smallest element. 0 s   p 0 r Q -

Thus, r , s 0 , r + s < r (since s < 0) and so r + s . Thus, we have + 0 . To show that + 0 , we let p so that r , r > p, and thus p r 0 . It follows that p = r + (p r) + 0 and so + 0 , and we have shown that + 0 = . Hence 0 is the additive identity in R. (+ In) To show R has additive inverses, we rst dene the additive inverse of in R to be the set () = {p Q : r Q+ : p r }. We rst must show that () is a cut, that it satises properties ( Q), ( <), and ( >). Note, s , p = s 1 = p 1 and so p (); therefore, () = . However, q , q () = () = Q; hence () satises ( Q). () k p s 0 q i Q s = p 1

Let p () and r Q+ such that p r . If q < p for some q Q, then q r > p r by the reversal of order in Q and so q r , thus q (); hence () satises ( <). () k q p 0 r Q q r

i p r

r , then t > p and Again, let p (), let r Q+ , and let t = p + 2

r 2

= p r , thus t (); hence () satises (< ).

r 2

() k p t=p+ 0 r

Q r 2

p r = t

Therefore, () is a cut and so () R. We must now show that () is the additive inverse of , that is + () = 0 . Since + () = {r + s : r , s ()}, notice that r , s (), s = r < s = r + s < 0; hence we have shown that

+ ( ) 0 . To show the converse, let v 0 and let w = v 2 > 0, then n Z such that nw and (n + 1)w (given by the archimedean property of Q). If we let p = (n + 2)w, then p w = p () and so v = nw (n + 2)w = nw + p + (); hence we have shown that + () 0 and we can conclude + () = 0 . Therefore, R has additive inverses and satises each of the ve additive eld properties.

Consequences of Addition

Even though we have not yet dealt with the properties of multiplication in a eld, we note two interesting properties about elds given only that addition holds for some elements (a, b, c) of a eld F :

(+1) a, b, c F, b < c = a + b < a + c. (+2) a F , a > 0 (a) < 0, a < 0 (a) > 0, and a = 0 (a) = 0. We can show (+1) is true by assuming b < c, then assuming for contradiction that a + b a + c. By (+ In), we can then add (a) to both sides and so (a) + a + b (a) + a + c, and by (+ As) and (+ Id) we have 0 + b 0 + c and therefore b c which contradicts our assumption that b < c. Therefore, b < c = a + b < a + c. By breaking (+2) into cases, we see that it follows quite easily from (+1): (a = 0) Obviously, if a = 0, then it follows that 0 = a + (a) = 0 + (a) = (a) and so (a) = 0. Similarly, if (a) = 0, then 0 = a + (a) = a + 0 = a and so a = 0; hence a = 0 (a) = 0. (a > 0) If a > 0, then it follows from (+1) that 0 = (a) + a > (a) + 0 = (a) and therefore 0 > (a). Similarly, if (a) < 0, then adding a to both sides yields a > 0; hence a > 0 (a) < 0. (a < 0) As before, if a < 0, then it follows from (+1) that 0 = (a) + a < (a) + 0 = (a) and therefore 0 < (a). Similarly, if (a) > 0, then adding a to both sides yields a < 0; hence a < 0 (a) > 0. Since R is a eld, R satises these properties by default.

Field Axioms: Multiplication (R+ )

The multiplicative () properties and distributive property for a eld (F ) and for all of its elements (a, b, c F ) are: ( Cl) a b F ( As) (a b) c = a (b c) ( Co) a b = b a ( Id) 1 F : a 1 = a ( In) a = 0, a1 F : a a1 = 1 Before we can establish the multiplicative eld properties in R, we must rst dene multiplication in R+ = { R : > 0 }: , R+ , := {p rs : r , s , (r, s > 0)}.

0 r

i s

k p rs

Q -

( Cl) To show multiplicative closure in R+ , we must show that is a cut, that is, it satises ( Q), ( <), and (< ). Since , R+ , it follows from the denition that , = , therefore r , s : r, s 0 and thus there is a p = 1 2 (rs) < rs. This means p , thus = . Furthermore, Q by its denition. Suppose r , s Q : r , r > 0 and s , s > 0, then r , s , rs < r s (since r > r and s > s in Q) and so r s and therefore Q; hence, satises ( Q). 0 r i s r 9 k rs s i Q rs

Next, let p , then r , s : p = rs where r > 0 and s > 0. Thus q Q, q < p = q (s1 ) < r = q (s1 ) . Therefore, q = q (s1 ) s ; hence satises ( <). q (s1 ) r s i p Q -

k q

Again, let p such that p = rs for r , s and r > 0, s > 0, then t , t > r = p < ts, but since t , s , we have ts ; hence satises (< ) and so is therefore a cut. r t s i p ts Q -

Hence R+ is closed under multiplication. ( As) To show multiplication in R+ is associative, we remember that ( ) = {p (qr)s : q , r , s , (q, r, s > 0)} and by the associativity of Q, ( ) = {p q (rs) : q , r , s , (q, r, s > 0)} = ( ); hence multiplication is associative in R+ . ( Co) To show multiplication in R+ is commutative, we remember that = {p rs : r , s , (r, s > 0)} and by the commutativity of Q, we have = {p sr : r , s , (r, s > 0)} = ; hence multiplication is commutative in R+ . ( Id) To show the existence of an multiplicative identity in R+ , we dene 1 = {q Q : q < 1} and notice that it is a cut since 0 1 = , 2 1 = Q, and has no largest element (1 1 s p(r1 )
1 n

1 for all n N) or smallest element. r i Q -

  p 1

Thus, for 1 = {p rs : r , s 1 , (r, s > 0)}, let p 1 , then since p rs < r (because s < 1), p . Thus, we have 1 . 10

To show that 1 , we let p so that r , r > p, and thus p(r1 ) < 1 or more explicitly, p(r1 ) 1 . It follows that p = r p(r1 ) 1 and so 1 , and we have shown that 1 = . Hence 1 is the multiplicative identity in R+ . ( In) To show R+ has multiplicative inverses, we rst dene the multiplicative
1 inverse of in R+ to be the set (1 ) = {p Q+ : r Q+ : 1 ) }. r (p

We rst must show that (1 ) is a cut, that it satises properties ( Q), ( <), and ( >). Note, s , (s > 0), p =
1 1 ) 2 (s

1 1 ) 2 (p

and so p (1 );

therefore, (1 ) = . However, q , (q 1 ) (1 ) = (1 ) = Q; hence (1 ) satises ( Q). (1 ) k p (s1 ) (q 1 ) 1 q i Q 1 s= 1 ) 2 (p

1 Let p (1 ) and r Q+ such that 1 ) . If q < p for some q Q+ , r (p 1 1 1 then 1 )> 1 ) by the reversal of order in Q+ and so 1 ) , r (q r (p r (q

thus q (1 ); hence (1 ) satises ( <). (1 ) k q p 1 r Q 1 1 ) r (q 1 1 ) r (p

i
1 1 ) r (p

Again, let p (1 ), let r Q+ , (r < 1) such that t=

1 r

, and let

p, then t > p and

1 1 ) r 2 (t

1 1 ) r (p

, thus t (1 ); hence

() satises (< ). (1 ) k p k
1 1 ) r (p

r 1
1 r

i
1 1 ) r (p

Q =
1 1 ) r 2 (t

t=

1 r

( 1 ) =
1 1 ) r 2 (t

i1 r

1 r

t=

11

Therefore, (1 ) is a cut and so (1 ) R+ . We must now show that (1 ) is the multiplicative inverse of , that is (1 ) = 1 . Since (1 ) = {rs : r , s (1 ), (r, s > 0)}, notice that r , s (), (r, s > 0), we have shown that (
1 1 s

= r <

1 s

= rs < 1; hence

)1 .
1 v

To show the converse, let v 1 , (v > 0) and let w = such that w

n1 n

> 1, then n Z

and w (given by the archimedean property of

1 1 ) w (p

Q). If we let p = w(n+1) , then wn =

= p (1 )

and so v = wn w(n+1) = wn p (1 ); hence we have shown that (1 ) 1 and we can conclude (1 ) = 1 . Therefore, R+ has multiplicative inverses and satises each of the ve multiplicative eld properties. The last point to check is that multiplication and addition in R+ satises the distributive property of elds: (D) a, b, c F, a (b + c) = (a b) + (a c). To show this, let , , R+ , by the denitions of addition and multiplication we have for any p ( + ) that q , r , s , p qr + qs given by ( + ) = {r + s : r , s , (r, s > 0)} = {p q (r + s) : q , r , s , (q, r, s > 0)} ( + ) = {p qr + qs : q , r , s , (q, r, s > 0)}. since Q is a eld with distributivity. Similarly, ( ) + ( ) = {p1 qr : q , r , (q, r > 0)} + {p2 qs : q , s , (q, s > 0)} = {p1 + p2 qr + qs : q , r , s , (q, r, s > 0)} ( ) + ( ) = {p qr + qs : q , r , s , (q, r, s > 0)}.

12

Hence, p ( ) + ( ) and so ( + ) ( ) + ( ). It follows from the exact reverse procedure that ( + ) ( ) + ( ), and so ( + ) = ( ) + ( ) and the distributive property holds in R+ .

Field Axioms: Multiplication (R)

We have thus shown that R+ satises all of the multiplicative and distributive eld axioms; however, we must extend our denition to all cuts in R by using the following denition: {p rs : r , s , (p, r, s > 0)} () ( ) (() ) ( ( )) if > 0 , > 0 if < 0 , < 0 if < 0 , > 0 if > 0 , < 0

, R, :=

and worth noting is that 0 = 0 (and by commutativity, 0 = 0 ). From these denitions, we can extend the previous eld axioms since the additive inverse of a cut < 0 satises () > 0 , given by (+2) of the consequences of the additive eld properties. Hence in each case () or ( ) will be an element of R+ and so the previous eld properties of multiplication and distributivity hold. Rather than repeat the instances for multiplication, I will show how distributivity (D) holds given that distributivity has already been shown to hold in R+ (when > 0 , > 0 , and + > 0 ). (i) Let > 0 , < 0 , and + > 0 , then = ( + ) + ( ) > 0 and since (D) holds in R+ , = ( + ) + ( ). Since ( ) = , we have + = ( + ). (ii) Similarly, we can prove the case > 0 , > 0 , and + < 0 in the exact same way, instead ( ) > 0 and since + (( + )) = ( ) > 0 ,

13

we have + (( + )) = ( ); hence + = ( + ) as before. (iii) Let > 0 , < 0 , and + < 0 , then ( ) + ( ) = ( + ) > 0 and since (D) holds in R+ , ( ) + ( ) = (( + )). Since ( ) = , we can rewrite this as ( + ) = + . (iv) Let < 0 , > 0 , and + > 0 , then () > 0 and since (D) holds in R+ , we can multiply () ( + ) = () + () and since () = , we can rewrite this as + = ( + ). (v) Similarly, if < 0 , < 0 , and + > 0 , then as with case (i), = ( + ) + ( ) > 0 and since (D) holds in R+ and () > 0 , () = () ( + ) + () ( ). Since () ( ) = and as before () = , we have + = ( + ). (vi) If < 0 , > 0 , and + < 0 , then as with case (ii), ( ) > 0 and so ( ) = ( + ) + > 0 ; since (D) holds in R+ and () > 0 , we have () ( ) = () (( + )) + () . Since () ( ) = and since () = , we nd + = ( + ). (vii) Let < 0 , < 0 , and + < 0 , then () > 0 and as with case (iii), ( ) + ( ) = ( + ) > 0 . Thus, since (D) holds in R+ , () ( ) + () ( ) = () (( + )). Since () ( ) = , we have shown + = ( + ). This exhausts all possible cases, hence (D) holds for all of R given the extended denition of multiplication. This completes the proof that (R, +, , <) is an ordered eld with the least upper bound property since R has order (by section 2), the least upper bound property (by section 3), and is a eld (by sections 4, 5, 6, and 7).

14

Attributing Q to R

While we have dened R as an ordered eld with the least upper bound property, it is still a collection of sets, whereas Q is a set of numbers (or ratios of numbers) - we need some way to relate the two so that we can understand how these two sets more closely relate. Therefore, for all r Q we attribute r = {p Q : p < r}, the cut at r. r R p i rQ Q -

These r are cuts in R, since they meet each of the three qualications: ( Q) For any r Q, r 1 < r and so r 1 r , and so r = . Similarly, for any r Q, r + 1 > r and so r + 1 r and so r = Q; hence r satises ( Q). ( <) For any r Q, we notice that r r (since r < r). However, we notice that p r and q Q, if q < p, then since p < r, by transitivity of order in Q, q < r and so q Q. Hence r satises ( <). r q p i r Q -

(< ) Lastly, p r we can nd an s = 1 2 (r + p) Q which satises s < r (or equivalently, s r ). Since p < r, it follows that r p > 0 and so
1 2 (r 1 p) > 0 and therefore p < s. Simultaneously, since 2 (r p) > 0 we 1 2 (r

must notice that r s =

p) > 0 and so r s > 0, thus s < r, or

more explicitly s r ; hence r satises (< ) and so is a cut. r p s Q -

i r

15

Also worth noting is that the association between Q and rational cuts in R satises the following properties: (+ ) r , s R, r + s = (r + s) ( ) r , s R, r s = (r s) (< ) r , s R, r < s r < s The proof of these are as follows: (+ ) Let p r + s , then p = u + v for some u, v Q such that u < r and v < s. Thus, p < r + s and so p (r + s) . Hence r + s (r + s) . Conversely, let p (r + s) , then p < r + s. Next, let t Q+ such that
1 (r + s p) and let r = r t, s = s t. Then r r and s s t= 2

(since t > 0) and so p = r + s (because p = r + s 2t) and therefore p r + s ; hence (r + s) r + r and so r + s = (r + s) . ( ) Using an analogous proof to (+ ) and the denition of multiplication for R+ , we can rst notice that for r, s Q+ we can dene the product of their cuts more simply as r s := {p < rs} since rs is eectively an upper bound on the original product {p r s : we rst let p r s for r, s Q+ , thus p = uv for some u, v Q+ such that u < r and v < s. Thus, 0 < p < rs and so p (r s) . Hence, r s (r s) in R+ . Conversely, let p (r s) for r, s Q+ such that p > 0; then p < rs and so we have p r s , by the denition of multiplication in R+ . Hence, (r s) r s and so r s = (r s) in R+ . We can similarly assign multiplication by zero for any r Q as with R to 0 r = r 0 = 0 .

16

For negative rational numbers, we simply repeat the principles of multiplication for R:

r, s Q, r s =

{p < rs : r r , s s , (p, r, s > 0)} if > 0 , > 0 () ( ) if < 0 , < 0 (() ) ( ( )) if < 0 , > 0 if > 0 , < 0

(< )

17