1

numbers.

. Oswald Veblen

The axiomatic foundation of real

theorems derived from the axioms of the system

....... Oswald Veblen.

www.

The test of a good axiomatic system is the

mpantes.gr

George Mpantes www.mpantes.gr

Axiomatic base, ordered field

()

metamathematics

Axiom of Completeness (continuity)

Decimal expansions of numbers

sequences Cauchy

Upper bound, least upper bound

Properties of continuity in the R

Archimedean law of real numbers

Death of infinitesimals

As was the case in geometry, where the

axiomatic method of Euclid produced the

theorems of geometry of the line and the circle,

now the same happened with algebra, where an

axiomatic basis produces all theorems of number

system, which installs algebra and analysis: this

of the real numbers.

It seems that the axiomatic basis falls from

. . Klein the sky. "But not so. Klein says that "the

axiomatic basis is the final result (the crowning)

of an already preceding evolutionary process."

even

The math does not start as a priori axiomatic

systems. There are first very specific problems,

priori

sought practical solutions, there are constantly

'to and fro' inconsistencies and paradoxes are

detected, etc. All these are pointing to genetics

of a posteriori science. (E. Geronikolos PhD

Philosophy University Boston)

a
posteriori .1

,
,

),

The axiomatic construction is itself a

mathematical operation with high standards.
There are qualities necessary which should satisfy
the axioms (equivalence principles, consistency,
independence, completeness, categoricalness),
otherwise the axiomatic basis is invalid.

.
The test of the properties of axiom
1

. ,

. .

systems are now known technically as

metamathematics, but we will not expand. Their

, . history began with the book of Hilbert

"Foundations of Geometry" (in Greek translation

Stratis Papadopoulos Publications ).

,
).

Ordered field .

We call ordered field , a set R equipped

with two binary operations on 'Additon'and

,

, 0
1 < ,

A. ( ,+,. ) .

, x + (y + z) = (x

+ y) + z x(yz) = (xy)z.
x y

, x + y = y + x xy = yx.

x, y, z

, x(y + z) = (xy)

+ (xz).
x

, 0,

x + 0 = x = 0 + x 1

0,

x1 = x = 1x.
x

, x

R, x + (x) = 0 = (-x) + x.
x 0

which satisfies the following two axioms:

Analytically:
For all x, y, and z on, is x + (y + z) = (x + y) + z and

x, y, z

binary relation the <

A The Set (R,+,.) is a field.

'multiplication', two special elements 0 and 1 and a

, x1

x (yz) = (xy) z.
For all x and y in, x + y = y + x and xy = yx.
For all x, y, and z on, force x (y + z) = (xy) + (xz).
For all x in, there is an element 0 such that x + 0 =
x = 0 + x and a point 1 0 such that x1 = x = 1x.
For all x in, there is a -x element in R, such that x
+ (-x) = 0 = (-x) + x.
For all x 0 in, there is an element x-1 in R, such
that xx-1 = 1 = x-1 x.

4
R, xx

=1=x

x.
B. The field R is ordered . Analytically for x, y,
and z on R

B.

apply just one of: x <y, x = y, x> y (trichotomy)

x, y, z

Even if x <y then x + z <y + z

: x<y, x=y, x>y And if x> 0 and y> 0 then xy> 0.

()
x<y x+z<y+z
The axioms underlying the ordered field

x>0 y>0 xy>0.

constitute an axiomatic system for the

elementary school algebra as that the axioms of

Euclid for the school geometry. The development

of elementary algebra of these axioms would be

fruitfull although tedious (labor and joy!). It

, ,

woulb be too abstract for employment in high

school level, where is the first taught of

elementary algebra, but the understanding of

this development shows the trend of modern

!).

mathematics.

,

.

Two important examples of ordered body is

the set of rational numbers and the set of real
numbers, with the usual operations of addition and

,
.
( ) .

multiplication. (for the reader). Even the complex

numbers is a field , and similarly the set of
numbers of the form a + v2 wherein a, b
rationals . It is a subset of the real numbers and
superset of rationals.

5
,
+2 , .

E v e r y t h e o r e m the algebra of rational

numbers, is derived from the axioms of an
ordered field. Even the ordered field covers all

the algebraic properties of real numbers. But

when we move to analysis, there by displaying of

infinite procedures, limits, convergent sequences,

etc. the ordered field is not enough. The

properties of rationals need to be supplemented

to cover operations with infinity.

,
, .
.

You need an additional axiom, the axiom of

completeness (continuity):
The ordered complete is complete if

every non-empty, upper bounded subset, has a

,

minimum upper bound (suprimum). (axiom of

():

completeness or continuity).

The

complete

ordered

field

can

be

, ,

"interpreted" as the set of real numbers. Such an

(suprimum). (

interpretation is the construction of real numbers

).

by rationals, and the proof that the new set

satisfies the axioms. eg the construction of

Dedekind (article on Scribd, the continuity of the

numbers and irrational, Dedekind cuts). Here we

will not construct the real numbers but we will

investigate in them -with which we are familiar-

the importance of the axioms and especially the

Dedekind ( Scribd, axiom of continuity,

6
, Dedekind) .

In order

to understand this

p h e n o m e n o n o f c o n t i n u i t y We will

refer to known from arithmetic numerical

decimal expansions of numbers ..

What does a number with finite decimal terms

mean?We all know that it is a rational number. Ie
2,3=23/10, 1,456 = 1456/1000 etc..

..

But there rational that are not expressed with

finite decimal digits. The number 1/3 is rational

but expressed as known 0,3333333 ... decimals

2,3=23/10,

are infinite, repeated with period 3, and the

1,456=1456/1000 .

problem is what this writing means for the

. 1/3

number: It means limit the number is not

0,3333333

calculated but approached. Even the 5 =

2,236067977499789696 ...... .. has infinite

3,

decimals not repeated, and that means again limit.

: ,
.
5=2,236067977499789696..
,
.

relationship of real numbers with infinite decimal

expansions.

1. all numbers with infinite decimal terms,

The next three statements are decisive of the

repeated or not define a Cauchy sequence,

1.

2. In every rational number that can not be

,(

written with finite decimal, corresponds a

decimal number with a repeating infinite

decimal (period), which in the known procedure

2.

of Caucy sequence converges to this rational.

(),

3. no other infinite decimal, repeated or not,

will converge to the same rational.

.
3.

, ,
.

. 1/3
,

0,3 0,33 0,333 0,3333.

, 1/3
( ) .
1/3
1/3

We can for example to create for the

rational 1/3
0.333

a sequence of rationals, 0.3

0.33

0.3333 ...... . which is a Cauchy sequence

to the limit of 1/3 (known from previous article).

We say that the above sequence converges to 1/3
or 1/3 is limit of a Cauchy sequence of rational
numbers (of this). This in turn means that we can
find a fraction arbitrarily close to 1/3 as long to
get the appropriate term from the types of
convergence of Cauchy.

( ) .

1/3

.

one that converges to 1/3, but is the only one

produced by infinite decimal ..
Even for 5 a Cauchy sequence is 2.2

:
1/3,
..
5 2,2 2,23
2,236

Caution: the previous sequence is not the only

2,2360 2,23606 2,236067

2.236

2.2360

2.23606

2.23

2.236067 .........

What happens when we have (like 5) infinite

decimal terms but not repetitive? What do they
represent?

8
Since the decimal digits are infinite, hence are

( 5)

amenable of an interpretation of convergent

sequence. From the above propositions we have

that the corresponding Cauchy sequences do not

converge to any rational. Where converge? It

seems that the rational numbers have gaps. To fill

the gaps of rational we discover the real

numbers.

. ;

So what is a real number? Every real takes the

form of an infinite decimal expansion. If it is

repetitive the number is rational if no the

number is irrational. So we understood the real

numbers in high school with basic intuitive picture

; of the real line. But now through the axiomatic

basis will understand this distinction in relation to

indefinitely numerical procedures of analysis.

,
.

,
.
,

The problem is that people with a finite life,

can not be reconciled with infinite acts. And
indeed we can not do arithmetic with real
numbers, or compute. But through the processes
of the limits mentioned, we do not exact
calculations but as accurately as patience we have
to get closer.

9
.

This is the utility of real numbers:

remember that some sequences of rationals do

not converge to rational number, but converge in

real. This means that between rationals , the

limits not exist anywhere in the request, that is e

the cause we use real numbers is that they

contain all limits.

,
. ,

And Now we can talk about

axiom of continuity in R .

starting from the bounds. The subset of R,

interval A = [-2, 5) has upper bounds, i.e. there

are numbers greater than or equal all elements of

A are e.g. 5, 6, 100, etc. To an ordered field the

bounds up and down) is nothing remarkable.

R, = [-2, 5) ,

But from all previous upper bounds there is a

minimum the number 5 and the existence of the

. 5 , 6 , 100 .

least upper bound is featuring the real numbers.

If there is least upper bound for each non-empty,

) .

upper bounded subset of an ordered field R, then

that R is the real numbers.

,

R, R .

This is the axiom of completeness or

continuity of real numbers.

Let's see it in the picture of decimal

expansions:
Let A subset of positive rational r that satisfy

10
the r2 <5. i.e., A = (0, 5). A has several upper

bounds for example, 3, the 2.24 by 2.23607, but

:

beware that for any number you recommend for

upper bound of A we can always find another

rational less than that, which is also an upper

2<5. =(0,5) .

bound of A .

, 3, 2,24
2,23607 ,

We can understand why: these numbers

converge in

5 = 2,236067977499789696 ...... ..which is not

rational and through the image the sequence of

Cauchy which tends to 5, the terms never reach

the limit which is not rational, they approach it

indefinitely, being always upper bounds of the

5=2,236067977499789696..

interval A, so there is no minimum rational upper

bound for A.

5 ,

But if A is a subset of the real numbers, the

, ,

least upper bound will be 5, the limit of the

previous sequence belongs to the real numbers, no

gap is present, the set is complete.

The existence of the least upper bound for a set

, of numbers, is equivalent to the existence in this

5,

set, the limit of every Cauchy sequence of rational

terms.

, .

Of course not every subset of the real numbers

has a least upper bound, for example a set

without upper bound is [1, ) but what really

characterizes real numbers is that if a non-empty

11
.

set of real has an upper bound, will have a least

upper bound.

,
[1,)

I will help the reader even a bit with the

observation that in mathematics, what matters is

how behave the "objects" rather than what they

are. But the axiomatic structure is a marked pack

of cards. All the properties of real numbers

(which we learned in high school without having

rigorously define real,) are coming from the

axiomatic properties and are known and familiar

to the reader when not based on the principle of

continuity. Such are the

a a a

,)

0 2 0

Other properties based on least upper bound are:

.
if (0, ) then there is unique

a a a

0 0
2

(0, ) that 2
ifthere is not integra p
that

q p2

:

:
(0, )
(0, ) 2

q Q


q p2

and others.

then

q Q

12
.

Now we fully understand the axiomatic basis of

the real numbers. It can show a theorem derived

from it, which is the death certificate of

infinitesimals in the analysis.

Archimedean

law

The principle of

of

real

numbers:

continuity will ensure the

R ,

Archimedean structure of R, so it will banish the

infinitesimals

from

calculus:

Let a and b two positive real numbers, then there

is a positive integer n such that

na > b

.>
Proof: Howard Eves p. 182

Howard Eves . 182

In the calculus of infinitesimals we have that

. ,

if a then an infinitesimal then n.a likewise would

be infinitesimal, that is contrary to the

Archimedean principle. So in real numbers there a

. ( ) .

r e n o t i n f i n i t e s i m a l s . (old belief of

Howard Eves, Archimedes).

The proof is to Howard Eves, but there are other

proofs

which however are produced from axiomatic base,

, .

in

a0

0)

based on

combination
a0

properties of real numbers

with

others,

for every

e.g.,

by

0 (To reader)

13
)

Sources .
Foundation and fundamental concepts of

Foundation and fundamental concepts of

mathematics, Howard Eves

How mathematics explain the world (James Stein,

mathematics, Howard Eves

Egg)

(Rousse Ball, Dover)

( , )
A short account of the history of

numbers and real analysis

The teal numbers and real analysis Ethan D.Bloch

Springer

mathematics (Rousse Ball, Dover)

The teal

A short account of the history of mathematics

Ethan What are the real numbers really? (Eric

Schechter, Internet)

D.Bloch Springer

What are the real numbers really? (Eric Karl's Calculus Tutor: Number system (internet)
Schechter, )
Karls

Calculus

Tutor:

Number

system

()

mpantes on scribd .

George mpantes

mpantes on scribd.