Axioms for the Real numbers

We saw before that the Real numbers R have some rather unexpected properties. In fact, there are
many things which it is difficult to prove rigorously.
Examples
How do we know that 2 exists? In other words how can we be sure that there is some real
number whose square is 2?
It is easy to convince yourself that (say) 2 + 3 = 3 + 2. How about 2 + 3 = 3 + 2 or e +
= + e?
One's intuition about what should be true works pretty well for N or Z or even for Q. Things don't
get hard until we are forced (like the Pythagoreans) to admit the existence of irrationals.
There are constructive methods for making the full set R from Q and hence starting with N. The
first rigorous construction was given by Richard Dedekind (1831 to 1916) in 1872.
You can see more about Dedekind's construction.
However, for the moment we will simply give a set of axioms for the Reals and leave it to intuition
that there is something that satisfies these axioms.
We start with a set, which we'll call R and a pair + . of binary operations.
The Axioms
These are divided into three groups.
I The algebraic axioms
R is a field under + and .
This means that (R, +) and (R, .) are both abelian groups and the distributive law
(a + b)c = ab + ac holds.
II The order axioms
There is a relation > 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.
b) 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
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 -bis 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.

Axioms for the Real Number System

Math 361
Fall 2003

The Real Number System

The real number system consists of four parts:
1. A set (R). We will call the elements of this set real numbers, or reals.
2. A relation < on R. This is the order relation.
3. A function + : R R ! R. This is the addition operation.
4. A function : R R ! R. This is the multipliation operation.
We will state 12 axioms that describe how the real number system behaves.
The first eleven will say that the real number system forms an ordered field.
The final axiom will require a little discussion.

Operation Axioms

For all x, y, and z

1. Associative laws:
8x8y8z [(x + y) + z = x + (y + z) and (x y) z = x (y z)]
2. Commutative laws:
8x8y [x + y = y + x and x y = y x]
3. Distributive law:
8x8y8z [x (y + z) = x y + x z]

Identity and Inverse Axioms

4. Additive identity:
There is an element (called 0) such that 8x [0 + x = x]. [Uniqueness can
be proved.]
5. Additive inverse:
8x9y [x + y = 0]. [We write y = x; uniqueness can be proved.]
6. Multiplicative identity:
There is an element (called 1) such that 0 6= 1 and 8x 1 x = x. [Uniqueness
can be proved.]
7. Multiplicative inverse:
8x [x 6= 0 =) 9y (x y = 1)]. [We write y = 1
x . Uniqueness can be
proved.]

Order Axioms

8. Translation invariance of order:

8x8y [x < y =) x + z < y + z].
9. Transitivity of order:
8x8y [(x < y and y < z) =) x < z].
10. Trichotomy:
8x8y exactly one of the following is true: x < y, y < x, or x = y.
11. Scaling and order:
8x8y8z [(x < y and z > 0) =) xy < yz]
Any number system that satisfies Axioms 111 is called an ordered field.
Examples: Q and R are both ordered fields.

The Completeness Axiom

12. Every non-empty subset that is bounded above has a least upper boun

Basic Results about R

Theorem 0.19: Let x, y, and z be real numbers. Then

(a) If x < y, then y < x.
(b) (1) (1) = 1
(c) If 0 < 1.
(d) If 0 < x < y, then 0 < 1
y< 1
z.
(e) If x < y and z < 0, then yz < xz.
(f) If x2 _ 0.
5. Additive inverse:
8x9y [x + y = 0]. [We write y = x; uniqueness can be proved.]
6. Multiplicative identity:
There is an element (called 1) such that 0 6= 1 and 8x 1 x = x. [Uniqueness
can be proved.]
7. Multiplicative inverse:
8x [x 6= 0 =) 9y (x y = 1)]. [We write y = 1
x . Uniqueness can be

proved.]

Order Axioms
8. Translation invariance of order:
8x8y [x < y =) x + z < y + z].
9. Transitivity of order:
8x8y [(x < y and y < z) =) x < z].
10. Trichotomy:
8x8y exactly one of the following is true: x < y, y < x, or x = y.
11. Scaling and order:
8x8y8z [(x < y and z > 0) =) xy < yz]
Any number system that satisfies Axioms 111 is called an ordered field.
Examples: Q and R are both ordered fields.

The Completeness Axiom

12. Every non-empty subset that is bounded above has a least upper bound.

Basic Results about R

Theorem 0.19: Let x, y, and z be real numbers. Then

(a) If x < y, then y < x.
(b) (1) (1) = 1
(c) If 0 < 1.
(d) If 0 < x < y, then 0 < 1
y< 1
z.
(e) If x < y and z < 0, then yz < xz.
(f) If x2 _ 0.
Theorem 0.20: If S is a nonempty set of reals that is bounded from below,
then S has a greatest lower bound.

The axioms of equality are strictly speaking not axiomatic at all, as they can be deduced from still more basic
axioms, in particular Leibniz's law:

x=yP(x)P(y)
where P(x) and P(y) are propositional functions on the elements x and y of the universe of discourse.

Equality is Reflexive
a:a=a

Equality is Symmetric
a,b:a=bb=a

Equality is Transitive
a,b,c:(a=b)(b=c)a=c