Axioms of Real Numbers Essay

AXIOMS OF REAL NUMBERS Field Axioms: there exist notions of addition and multiplication, and additive and multiplicative identities and inverses, so that: • (P1) (Associative law for addition): a + (b + c) = (a + b) + c • (P2) (Existence of additive identity): 9 0 : a + 0 = 0 + a = a • (P3) (Existence of additive inverse): a + (? a) = (? a) + a = 0 • (P4) (Commutative law for addition): a + b = b + a • (P5) (Associative law for multiplication): a · (b · c) = (a · b) · c • (P6) (Existence of multiplicative identity): 9 1 6= 0 : a · 1 = 1 · a = a • (P7) (Existence of multiplicative inverse): a · a? = a? 1 · a = 1 for a 6= 0 • (P8) (Commutative law for multiplication): a · b = b · a • (P9) (Distributive law): a · (b + c) = a · b + a · c Order Axioms: there exists a subset of positive numbers P such that • (P10) (Trichotomy): exclusively either a 2 P or ? a 2 P or a = 0. • (P11) (Closure under addition): a, b 2 P ) a + b 2 P • (P12) (Closure under multiplication): a, b 2 P ) a · b 2 P Completeness Axiom: a least upper bound of a set A is a number x such that x _ y for all y 2 A, and such that if z is also an upper bound for A, then necessarily z _ x. (P13) (Existence of least upper bounds): Every nonempty set A of real numbers which is bounded above has a least upper bound. We will call properties (P1)–(P12), and anything that follows from them, elementary arithmetic. These properties imply, for example, that the real numbers contain the rational numbers as a subfield, and basic properties about the behavior of ‘>’ and ‘ on R. (That is, given any pair a, b then a > b is either true or false). It satisfies: a) Trichotomy: For any a R exactly one of a > 0, a = 0, 0 > a is true. ) If a, b > 0 then a + b > 0 and a. b > 0 c) If a > b then a + c > b + c for any c Something satisfying axioms I and II is called an ordered field. Examples 1. The field Q of rationals is an ordered field. Proof Define a/b > c/d provided that b, d > 0 and ad > bc in Z. One may easily verify the axioms. 2. The field C of complex numbers is not an ordered field under any ordering. Proof Suppose i > 0. Then -1 = i2 > 0 and adding 1 to both sides gives 0 > 1. But squaring both sides gives (-1)2 = 1 > 0 and so we get a contradiction.

A similar argument starting with i < 0 also gives a contradiction. The above two groups of axioms can be used to deduce any algebraic or order properties of R. Example The ordering > on R is transitive. That is, if a > b and b > c then a > c. Proof a > b if and only if a – b > b – b = 0 by Axiom II c) a > c if and only if a – c > c – c = 0 Hence (a – b) + (a – c) > 0 and so a – c > 0 and we have a > c. The thing which distinguishes R from Q (and from other subfields) is the Completeness Axiom. Definitions

We will write a custom essay sample on
Axioms of Real Numbers
specifically for you for only $13.9/page
Order now

More Essay Examples on Field Rubric

An upper bound of a non-empty subset A of R is an element b R with b a for all a A. An element M R is a least upper bound or supremum of A if M is an upper bound of A and if b is an upper bound of A then b M. That is, if M is a lub of A then (b R)(x A)(b x) b M A lower bound of a non-empty subset A of R is an element d R with d a for all a A. An element m R is a greatest lower bound or infimum of A if m is a lower bound of A and if d is an upper bound of A then m d. We can now state: III The Completeness Axiom If a non-empty set A has an upper bound, it has a least upper bound.

Something which satisfies Axioms I, II and III is called a complete ordered field. Remark In fact one can prove that up to “isomorphism of ordered fields”, R is the only complete ordered field. Note that the ordered field Q is not complete For example, the set {q Q | q2 < 2} is bounded but does not have a least upper bound in Q. We will see why in a little while. Some consequences of the completeness axiom. 1. A subset A which has a lower bound has a greatest lower bound. Proof Let B = {x R | -x A}. Then B is bounded above by -(the lower bound of A) and so has a least upper bound b say.

It is then easy to check that -b is a greatest lower bound of A. 2. The Archimedean property of the Reals If a > 0 in R, then for some n N we have 1/n < a. Equivalently: Given any x R, for some n N we have n > x. Proof This last statement is equivalent to saying that N is not bounded above. This seems like a very obvious fact, but we will prove it rigorously from the axioms. Suppose N were bounded above. Then it would have a least upper bound, M say. But then M – 1 is not an upper bound and so there is an integer n > M – 1.

But then n + 1 > M contradicting the fact that M is an upper bound. Remark This result has been attributed to the great Greek mathematician (born in Syracuse in Sicily) Archimedes (287BC to 212BC) and appears in Book V of The Elements of Euclid (325BC to 265BC). From this we can deduce : 3. Between any two real numbers is an rational number. Proof Let a b be real numbers with (say) a < b. Choose n so that 1/n < b – a. Then look at multiples of 1/n. Since these are unbounded, we may choose the first such multiple with m/n > a. We claim that m/n < b.

If not, then since (m-1)/n < a and m/n > b we would have 1/n > b – a. Remark A set A with the property that an element of A lies in every interval (a, b) of R is called dense in R. We have just proved that the rationals Q are dense in R. In fact, the irrationals are also dense in R. We can now prove the result we stated earlier. 4. The real number 2 exists. Proof We will get 2 as the least upper bound of the set A = {q Q | q2 < 2 }. We know that A is bounded above (by 2 say) and so its least upper bound b exists by Axiom III.

We now prove that b2 < 2 and b2 > 2 both lead to contradictions and so we must have b2 = 2 (by the Trichotomy rule). So suppose that b2 > 2. Look at (b – 1 /n )2 = b2 – 2b /n + 1 /n2 > b2 – 2b/n. When is this > 2 ? Answer: When b2 – 2b/n > 2 which happens if and only if b2 – 2 > 2b/n or 1/n < (b2 -2)/2b and we can choose such an n by the Archmedean property. Thus b – 1/n is an upper bound, contradicting the assumption that b was the least upper bound. Similarly, if b2 < 2 then (b + 1/n)2 = b2 + 2b/n + 1/n2 > b2 + 2b/n. Can this be < 2 ?

Answer: Yes, when b2 + 2b/n < 2 which happens if and only if 2 – b2 > 2 b/n or 1/n < (2 – b2)/2b and we can choose an n satisfying this, leading to the conclusion that b would not be an upper bound. 5. Real numbers can be defined by decimal expansions. Proof Given the decimal expansion (say) 0. a1a2a3… consider the set (of rationals) {0. a1 , 0. a1a2 , 0. a1a2a3 , … } = { a1/10 , (10 a1 + a2)/100 , (100 a1 + 10 a2 + a3)/1000 , … }. This is bounded above — say by (a1+ 1)/10 or by (10 a1+a2+ 1)/100 etc. and so it has a least upper bound. This is the real number defined by the decimal expansion.

Choose Type of service

Choose writer quality

Page count

1 page 275 words


Order Creative Sample Now

Haven’t Found A Paper?

Let us create the best one for you! What is your topic?

By clicking "SEND", you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy. We'll occasionally send you account related and promo emails.

Eric from Graduateway Hi there, would you like to get an essay? What is your topic? Let me help you


Haven't found the Essay You Want?

Get your custom essay sample

For Only $13.90/page