Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Purpose of
of Section Starting with the non negative integers, we construct, in
order, the integers, rational numbers and the real numbers, using equivalence
relations.
Introduction
The path from the natural numbers 1,2,3,… to the real numbers was a
journey that took several thousands years. The natural (or counting) numbers
probably arose from counting; counting goats, sheep, or whatever possessions
early humans possessed. Fractions, or rational numbers, are simply a
refinement of counting finer units, like 1/2 bushel of wheat, 1/3 of a mile, and
were well-known numbers to Greek geometers. Although Greek
mathematicians routinely used rational1 numbers, they did not accept zero2, or
negative numbers as legitimate numbers. To them, numbers represented
something and 0 and negative numbers didn’t represent something. Believe it
or not, Columbus discovered America before mathematicians discovered
negative numbers, or maybe we should say accepted them as numbers to
1
The word rational is the adjective form of ratio.
22
The first occurrence of a symbol used to represent 0 goes back to Hindu writings in India in the
9th century.
Section 5.1 453 Construction of the Reals
There are two basic ways to define the real numbers. First, we can play
God and bring the “laws” down from the mountaintop, so to speak, where we
lay down the rules of the game and say, Here they are, these are the real
numbers.” This approach would be called the synthetic approach, whereby we
list a series of axioms, which we feel are the embodiment of what we think a
“continuum” should be. On the other hand, we can “construct” the real
numbers, much like a carpenter does in building a house. In this approach, we
begin with a foundation of the simplest numbers, like the natural numbers
1, 2,3,... , then doing some “mathematical construction” one builds the real
numbers step by step, passing through the integers and rational numbers on
the way to the reals. It is this “construction” approach we carry out in this
section. The synthetic axiomatic approach will be carried out in the next
section.
= {1, 2,3,...}
= { p / q : p, q ∈ , q ≠ 0}
So how does one “construct” the integers 0, ±1, ±2,... from the natural
numbers 1, 2,3,... ? The idea is define integers as pairs of nonnegative
integers, where we “think” of each pair ( m, n ) as representing the difference
m − n , and thus a pair like ( 2,5 ) would represent −3 . If we then define
addition, subtraction, and multiplication of the pairs ( m, n ) in a way that is
consistent with the arithmetic of the nonnegative integers, we have
successfully defined the integers in terms of the nonnegative integers. To
carry out this program, we start with the set
× = {( m, n ) : m, n = 1, 2,...}
3
The idea behind the equivalence relation is that ( m, n ) ≡ ( m′, n′) if and only if m − n = m′ − n ′
except we are not allowed to use negative numbers as of now. Hence, we get by this and say the
equivalent statement ( m, n ) ≡ ( m′, n′) if and only if m + n ′ = m′ + n
Section 5.1 456 Construction of the Reals
{
= ... (1, 4 ), (1, 3), (1, 2 ) , (1,1), ( 2,1), ( 3,1), ( 4,1) ,... }
= {... − 3, −2, −1, 0,1, 2,3,...}
or in general
( k ,1) = k (positive integers)
(1,1) = 0 (zero)
(1, k ) = −k (negative integers)
Addition: ( p, r ) ⊕ ( q, s ) = ( p + q, r + s )
Subtraction: ( p, q ) ( r , s ) = ( p + s, q + r )
Multiplication ( p, q ) ⊗ ( r , s ) = ( pr + qs, ps + qr )
Multiplication:
For example
______________________________________
p
= ( p, q ) , p , q ∈ , q ≠ 0 .
q
Addition: ( p, q ) ⊕ ( r , s ) = ( ps + qr , qs )
Subtraction: ( p, q ) ( r , s ) = ( ps − qr , qs ) ps ≥ rq
Multiplication: ( p, q ) ⊗ ( r , s ) = ( pr , qs )
For example
14 7
Addition: (1, 2 ) ⊕ ( 2,10 ) = (14, 20 ) =or
20 10
6 1
Subtraction: ( 3, 6 ) (1, 4 ) = ( 6, 24 ) or =
24 4
3 1
Multiplication ( 3, 6 ) ⊗ (1, 4 ) = ( 3, 24 ) or
Multiplication: =
24 8
_______________________________________________________
Construction of Reals: →
There are different ways to define the real numbers and each has its
advantages and disadvantages. It is well known (See Problem 1) that for
decimal representations of rational numbers, there will always be repeating
blocks of digits. For example 1/3 = 0.333333… repeats in blocks of 1,
Section 5.1 459 Construction of the Reals
But this approach, while having an intuitive appeal, leads us into the study of
sequences, convergence, null sequences, and other ideas from real analysis
we have not introduced, hence we follow the approach of Dedekind.
4
In order that decimal expansions be unique, one agrees to represent all non-terminating blocks of
9s, like 0.2399999… by 0.2400000… .
5
The word rational is the adjective form of the word “ratio.”
Section 5.1 460 Construction of the Reals
Dedekind’s idea appeals to our intuitive grasp of the rational numbers all
aligned on a line. Dedekind’s basic idea was to partition the rational numbers
into two (disjoint) sets L, U where every rational number x in the lower set
L is less than every rational number U of the upper set U . That is
L ∪ U = , L ∩ U = ∅, x ∈ L ∧ y ∈ U ⇒ x < y
1. (max, no min) The lower set L has a largest member x * ∈ L but the upper
set U has no smallest member. An example of such a cut would be when
L consists of all rational numbers less than or equal to 1, and U all
rational numbers strictly greater than 1.
2. (min, no max) The upper set U has a smallest member y * ∈U but the
lower set L has no largest member. An example of such a cut would be
when L consists of all rational numbers strictly less than 1 , and U all
rational numbers greater than or equal to 1.
3. (no max, no min) The lower set L has no largest member and the upper
set U has no smallest member. An example of such a cut would be when
L consists of all rational numbers less than or equal to 0 and positive
rational numbers r satisfying r 2 < 2 while the upper set U consists of all
positive rational numbers r satisfying 2 < r 2 . (The reader can think
r < 2, 2 < r but we are not allowed to talk about irrational numbers 2
at this stage).
At this point we make the observation that it is impossible for the lower set to
have a maximum x * and the upper set to have a minimum y * since then the
average (x *
)
+ y * / 2 , which lies between x * and y * would be larger than the
largest member of L and smaller than y * the smallest member of U , which of
course violates how the Dedekind cut is made.
Case 2 (Irrational Numbers): In case neither the lower set has a maximum or
the upper set has a minimum, Dedekind simply calls such cuts an irrational
number α = ( Lα ,U α ) .
numbers denoted by , is
Dedekind’s Definition of the Real Numbers: The real numbers,
the collection of all Dedekind cuts ( L, U ) on the rational numbers, with each
real number being associated with a specific Dedekind cut. If the lower set L
has a largest rational number r , or if the upper set U has a smallest rational
number r , we associate such cuts with the rational number r = ( Lr ,U r ) . If the
upper set U does not have a minimum rational number and the upper has has
no minimum rational number, we associate such cuts with an irrational number,
say α = ( Lα ,U ∂ ) .
Our task is not yet complete. We must define the many properties we
desire of the real numbers, like how to add, subtract, multiply and divide as
well as well as how they are ordered such as a < b, a ≤ b, a > b, a ≥ b .
Associating real numbers a, b to their Dedekind cuts
a = ( La , U a ) , b = ( Lb , U b )
just as well construct the upper Dedekind set) and then “associate” with the
arithmetic operation the (real) number where the cut occurs.
Operation6 Example
a + b ∼ La +b = { x + y : x ∈ La , y ∈ Lb } 2 + 3 = { x + y : x ∈ L2 , y ∈ L3 } = {rational numbers < 5} or 5
a − b ∼ La −b = { x − y : x ∈ La , y ∈ U b } 3 − 2 = { x − y : x ∈ L3 , y ∈U 2 } = {rational numbers < 1} or 1
a, b > 0 ⇒ ab ∼ Lab = { xy : x ∈ La , y ∈ Lb } 2 ⋅ 3 = { xy : x ∈ L2 , y ∈ L3 } = {rational numbers < 6} or 6
a ≤ b ⇔ La ⊆ Lb 2 ≤ 3 ⇔ L2 ⊆ L3
6
The values of x, y in the following definitions are taken as rational numbers.
Section 5.1 463 Construction of the Reals
Problems:
Problems: Section 5.1, Construction
Construction of the Real Numbers
Ans: reflexive:
reflexive ( m, n ) ≡ ( m, n ) since m + n = m + n . Hence ≡ is reflexive.
symmetric If ( m, n ) ≡ ( m′, n′ ) ⇔ m + n′ = m′ + n ⇔ ( m′, n′ ) ≡ ( m, n )
symmetric:
transitive: Let ( m, n ) ≡ ( m′, n′) and ( m′, n′ ) ≡ ( m′′, n′′ ) . Hence
m + n′ = m′ + n, m′ + n′′ = m′′ + n′ . Adding these two equations and subtracting the
common factors we get m + n′′ = m′′ + n which says ( m, n ) ≡ ( m′′, n′′ ) . Hence, the
relation is transitive.
Ans: reflexive:
reflexive ( m, n ) ≡ ( m, n ) since mn = mn . Hence ≡ is reflexive.
symmetric If ( m, n ) ≡ ( m′, n′ ) ⇔ mn′ = m′n ⇔ ( m′, n′ ) ≡ ( m, n )
symmetric:
transitive: Let ( m, n ) ≡ ( m′, n′) and ( m′, n′ ) ≡ ( m′′, n′′ ) . Hence
mn′ = m′n, m′n′′ = m′′n′ . Multiplying these equations and canceling the common
factor m′n′ we get mn′m′n′′ = m′nm′′n′ ⇒ mn′′ = m′′n . Hence ( m, n ) ≡ ( m′′, n′′ ) and so
the relation is transitive.
17
a) (1,5) ⊕ ( 3, 2 ) Ans: (1, 5) ⊕ ( 3, 2 ) = (17,10 ) or
10
1
b) (1, 2 ) ( 3, 2) Ans: (1, 2 ) ( 4, 9 ) = (1,18) or 18
3
c) (1, 5) ⊗ ( 3, 2 ) Ans: (1, 5) ⊗ ( 3, 2 ) = ( 3,10) or 10
7. (Decimal to Fractions) Find the fraction for each of the following numbers
in decimal form.
a) 0.9999…. ( 0.9 )
Ans:
b) 0.23232323…. ( 0.23)
Ans:
Section 5.1 465 Construction of the Reals
c) 0.0123123123… ( 0.0123)
Ans:
125 ∞
∑
k
0.0125125 =
1000 k =0
( 0.001)
125 1
=
1000 1 − 0.001
125
=
9990
d) 0.001111… ( 0.001)
Ans:
1 1 1
0.0011111 = 1+ + +
1000 10 100
1 1
=
1000 1 − (1 / 10 )
1 10
=
1000 9
1
=
900
d1d 2 ...d k
0. 000000
dd ...d k d1d 2 ...d k =
1 2
999...999 ...0
n zeros k repeats k repeats
000
k nines n zeros