Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2. Integers
We dened addition in N by saying that given some elements m, k N, there is a unique n = m + k
satisfying certain properties. Suppose now we ask the question, given m and n, is there a k N such that
n = m + k? The answer to this question in general is no; we must have n > m for such a k to exist. The
integers arise when we try to enforce that the answer to this question be yes. What we want to do is subtract;
to do so, we need to extend N to include negative numbers.
Denition 2.1. Let Z be the set composed of the following elements:
The natural numbers N,
For each natural number n, a (unique) element n,
An element 0 (zero).
Theorem 2.2. There is a unique way to dene a commutative and associative addition law + on the integers
Z such that
if m, n N Z, then m + n in Z is the same as m + n N Z,
for any a Z, a + 0 = a,
n + (n) = 0
if n, m N, (n + m) = (n) + (m).
Proof. First lets dene the law. Let m, n N
m + 0 = 0 + m = m
(m) + 0 = 0 + (m) = (m)
m + n = m + n N Z
(m) + (n) = (m + n)
m + (n) = (n) + m =
+ m then u = u
7
4. Real numbers
We postulated the natural numbers, and from them we constructed the integers by adjoining additive
inverses and zero; from the integers, we constructed the rational numbers by adjoining multiplicative inverses.
The construction of the real numbers from the rationals follows a somewhat dierent pattern. What we want
to adjoin now are so-called limits of rational numbers. We will come back to this point later.
4.1. Dedekind cuts.
Denition 4.1. A set of rational numbers is called a Dedekind cut if
(1) is nonempty,
(2) The complement Q\ is nonempty,
(3) If x then every y Q such that y < x is also in , and
(4) does not contain a greatest element.
Exercise 1. Show that any rational number x Q denes a Dedekind cut, denoted x
, by x
=
{y Q|y < x}.
Show that the set {y Q|y
2
< 2} is a Dedekind cut.
Show that the set Q\ is innite.
Remark 4.2. To aid your intuition, think of a Dedekind cut as representing the least upper bound of the
set , whatever that means. (We will learn what it means in just a little bit).
Denition 4.3 (Ordering). Let and be cuts. We say < if is a strict subset of , and = if they
are equal as sets.
Theorem 4.4 (Trichotomy). Given two cuts , , exactly one of the following holds:
= , < , or > .
Proof. Suppose there exists an element x \ (i.e. x and x / ). Let y be any element of . If y > x,
then x < y, so x would need to be an element of by the denition of a cut. But x / , from which we
deduce that every element y of is strictly less than x, which in turn implies that y . In other words,
, i.e. < .
In case there exists no element x \, either = or y \. If the latter is true, the above argument
shows (by symmetry) that < .
Theorem 4.5. If < and < , then < .
Proof. Follows from transitivity for the subset relation.
Theorem 4.6 (Addition of Dedekind cuts). Let and be cuts, and let + denote the set of rational
numbers of the form x +y, where x and y . Then + is itself a cut. Moreover, no element of +
can be written as z + w, where z / and w / .
Proof. (1) Since is a cut, it is nonempty, so there is an element x . Likewise, there is a y .
Therefore, + is nonempty, as it contains the sum x + y.
(2) Suppose z / and w / . Then z > x for all x , and w > y for all y . Therefore z +w > x+y
for all x and y , so it cannot be that z +w = x +y for some such x, y. In particular, z +w is
an element of the complement of + .
(3) Suppose x +y +, with x and y . Let z < x +y be an arbitrary rational number smaller
than x+y. Then z+(y) < x, so z+(y) . But then, by construction, (z+(y))+y = z +.
(4) Let x+y +, with x and y , be an arbitrary element. Since is a cut, it doesnt contain a
greatest element, so in particular, x is not greatest, and there exists z , z > x. Then z +y > x+y
is also an element of +. For every element of + , we showed there is a greater element also in
+ , so it doesnt contain a greatest element.
Therefore, + satises the properties for being a Dedekind cut. (The proof of (2) contains the proof
that no element of + can be written as z + w, where z / and w / .)
Theorem 4.7 (Properties of addition of Dedekind cuts).
(1) Commutativity. + = +
(2) Associativity. ( + ) + = + ( + )
8
(3) < if and only if + < +
(4) If , are cuts, there is a unique cut such that + = .
(5) 0
+ = .
Proof. Homework.
Denition 4.8. The negative of a cut is dened to be the unique cut such that +() = 0
. We will
denote by the cut + ().
Theorem 4.9. We can nd the negative of a cut by
= {x Q|y x, y 0
, x / }.
Moreover, () = , and for a rational number x, (x)
= (x
).
Proof. Homework.
Denition 4.10. A cut is positive if > 0
. The cut 0
contains all negative rationals. If x > 0, we are done. Otherwise, x = 0. But is a cut, so
it has no greatest element, and in particular, 0 is not greatest. Therefore, there is an element x
, with
x
< .
Theorem 4.12 (Multiplication of Dedekind cuts). Let and be cuts. Dene a set as follows:
If , are both positive, then = {xy|0 x , 0 y } 0
,
If at least one of , equals 0
, then = 0
,
If is negative and positive, then = (()()),
If is positive and negative, then = (()()),
If , are both negative, then = ()().
Then is a Dedekind cut itself.
Proof. Homework.
Theorem 4.13 (Properties of multiplication of Dedekind cuts).
(1) Commutativity. =
(2) Associativity. () = ()
(3) Distributivity. ( + ) = +
(4) = 0
= for all = 0
.
Proof. (4) By denition, if at least one of , equals 0
.
(b) For all other cases, it suces to show that if = 0
, then = 0
\. Since 0
is a cut, y
is not a greatest element of 0
. Then z y is an element of
by Theorem 4.9, which is positive since z > y. Hence, by Theorem 4.11, > 0
. Show that if
> 0
then < 0
.
(5) First we will show that there is at most one such , and then we will show that at least one exists
to complete the proof. Suppose
1
and
2
were two cuts such that
1
= =
2
. Then
0
=
1
2
= (
1
2
).
9
By (4), at least one of or (
1
2
) must be 0
. We assumed = 0
, so
1
2
= 0
. Therefore,
1
=
2
, i.e. we established uniqueness.
Now we need to show that such a exists. First, suppose is positive. Let
=
x
y
x , y /
.
This set is a Dedekind cut:
is nonempty: there exists an x , and y Q\ since and are cuts. For those x, y,
x
y
, so is nonempty.
Q\ is nonempty: Proof left as an exercise.
is closed under <: Suppose
x
y
, where x and y Q\. Let z Q be an
arbitrary rational number such that z <
x
y
. This means that zy < x, so zy , by the
corresponding cut property of . Therefore, z =
zy
y
by our denition of .
does not contain a maximal element: Let
x
y
, with x and y Q\ be an arbitrary
element of . We need to nd a larger element in . Now because is a cut, it has no
maximal element, so there is an element x
such that x
> x. Then
x
y
is an element
of which is larger than
x
y
.
Now we need to show that = , which amounts to showing that and . Suppose,
for now, that is also positive.
: Then , as we constructed it, is positive, as it contains a positive rational number.
For positive cuts, we dened the product to be the set
{wz|0 w , 0 z } 0
.
The elements of are all of the form
x
y
, where x and y / . Hence, the positive
elements of are of the form w
x
y
, where y , w / , and x . In particular, y < w,
so that
y
w
< 1, which implies that
wx
y
< x, so that w
x
y
.
: Let x be arbitrary. We need to show that x is also an element of . For this,
it suces to nd rational numbers x
y
and x
, y / , w .
Let x
be any element larger than our given x (it exists, because is a cut). Let
r =
x
x
. We use the following lemma, proved below, to nd suitable y, w.
Lemma 4.14. Let r > 1 be a rational number, and let be a Dedekind cut. Then there
exist w and y / , such that
y
w
r.
Complete the proof for the cases where and are not positive!
Proof of the lemma. Suppose otherwise, i.e. suppose for all w and y / , we have that
y
w
> r. We ask,
is rw an element of or not? If rw / , then we can take y = rw and get that
y
w
=
rw
w
= r > r, which
is impossible. Therefore, it must be that rw is not an element of for every w . Consequently, the set
R = {r
n
w|n N} is a subset of . But by Theorem 3.7, this set is unbounded, which implies that is
unbounded. This is impossible since is a Dedekind cut. Hence our assumption must be wrong, so there
must exist w and y / such that
y
w
r.
Denition 4.15. A real number is a Dedekind cut. R is the set of all real numbers. By the above theorems
it follows that R is a eld, i.e. it has two operations + and , satisfying the conditions (eld axioms) of
Theorem 3.4. Moreover, R has an ordering < which is preserved by addition (Theorem 4.7 (3)).
Remark 4.16. Note that the way we dened things, R is a set whose elements are sets of rational numbers.
Let this not confuse you: remember that even the integers can be constructed as sets just by starting with the
empty set.
5. Dedekinds main theorem
Theorem 5.1. Let A, B be subsets of R, such that
(1) R = A B,
(2) Neither A nor B is empty, and
(3) Every element of A is strictly less than every element of B.
10
Then, there exists a unique real number , such that every element of A is , and every element of B is
.
Remark 5.2. Conversely, any real number gives such sets A, B, by letting A = { R| < }, and
B = { R | }.
Proof. First, let us show that there can be at most one such . For if there were two, say
1
<
2
, then
1
<
1+2
1+1
<
2
(Why?), which means that
1+2
1+1
is both in A and in B, which is impossible because (3)
implies that A B = .
Now we need to show that a exists. Let =
A
. We will show that is a real number (i.e. a
Dedekind cut) satisfying the requirement.
(1) = : A is not empty, so there is an element A, which is a Dedekind cut by denition, so is
not empty. Hence there exists a rational number y which is an element of . By the denition of
union of sets, it follows that y .
(2) Q\ = : Since B is not empty, there is a cut B. By property (3), > , for every A. This
means that there exists a rational number z such that z / for all A. Therefore, z cannot
be an element of the union
A
= , so z Q\.
(3) is closed under <: Let x be arbitrary, and let y Q be such that y < x. We need to show
that y . Since x , it follows that x for some cut in A (again, by the denition of union
of sets). But then y , which in turn implies that y
A
= .
(4) has no maximal element: Let x ; we need to nd x
> x, x
> x, x
.
But then x
.
Therefore, as dened is a Dedekind cut. It remains to show that every element of A is less than or equal
to , and every element of B is greater than or equal to . The rst is clear since is the union of A.
For the second, let B be a cut. Suppose < =
A
. Then there exists a rational number x
which is not in . But x must be an element of some A, so x \, which contradicts our assumption
that < . Therefore .
We end this theoretical fun with one last important fact, that the real numbers constructed this way
satisfy the so-called completeness axiom (Axiom 10, I 3.9 in Apostols book). First we need a denition.
Denition 5.3. A number b is called a least upper bound or a supremum for a set of numbers S if
(1) b is an upper bound for S, i.e. for all x S, x S, and
(2) if a < b, then a is not an upper bound for S.
Remark 5.4. If S has a maximal element, than that element is also a supremum for S. However, S does
not need to contain its supremum: if it does, then it is a maximal element.
Exercise 2. Show that least upper bounds are unique.
Theorem 5.5. Every non-empty set S of real numbers which has an upper bound has a supremum.
Sketch of proof. Complete the details by yourself ! We will use Dedekinds main theorem. Let A be the subset
of real numbers which contains all x R such that x y for some element y S. In other words, A contains
all elements of S as well as those less then some element of A. Let B = R\A. Show that these A and
B satisfy the assumptions for Dedekinds main theorem. Then there exists a unique number such that
a b for all a A and b B. The claim is that this is a supremum for S.
(1) is an upper bound for S directly from Dedekinds main theorem.
(2) Suppose