17 Axioms of the Real Numbers

The set of real numbers can be described as a “complete ordered field” [12]. In this section and in the following, we shall discuss

  1. What a field is
  2. What an ordered field is
  3. What completeness is, and thus what a complete ordered field is

To begin with, we first need to define a field.

Definition. (Field)
A field is a commutative division ring. [9]

However, we have not introduced what a ring is. Therefore, we formally define a ring as follows:

Definition. (Ring)
A ring \langle R,+,\cdot \rangle is a set R, on which two binary operations, addition (+) and multiplication (\cdot), are defined, with the following properties:

1. For all a,b,c\in R,
(a) Closure

    \[ (a+b),(a\cdot b)\in R\]

(b)Associativity

    \[ (a+b)+c=a+(b+c) \text{ and } (a\cdot b)\cdot c=a \cdot (b \cdot c)\]

(c) The existence of an identity element
0\in R such that 0+a=a+0=a
1\in R such that 1\cdot a=a\cdot 1=a

(d) The existence of an inverse
a^{-1}=-a\in R such that a+(-a)=(-a)+a=0
a^{-1}=\frac{1}{a}\in R such that a\cdot \frac{1}{a}=\frac{1}{a}\cdot a=1, except when a=0

2. Addition (+) is commutative, i.e. a+b=b+a

3. The left and right distributive law holds, i.e.

    \[a\cdot (b+c)=(a\cdot b)+(a\cdot c)\text{ and }(a+b)\cdot c=(a\cdot c)+(b\cdot c)\]

Therefore, a field, a commutative division ring, refers to a ring, where multiplication (\cdot) is also commutative.

Now we turn our focus to orderedness. To begin with, let us formally define well-ordering.

Definition. (Well-Ordering Property of \mathbb{N})
Let S\subseteq \mathbb{N}. Then, there exists m\in S such that m \leq k for all k\in S.

In other words, this can be restated as every nonempty subset of \mathbb{N} has a smallest element. Also, note that this well-ordering property is in fact equivalent to the principles of mathematical induction. That is, one implies the other, and vice versa.

Let us illustrate with an example.

Example. Show that \mathbb{Q}^c defined by \mathbb{Q}^c=\mathbb{R}\setminus\mathbb{Q} is not an ordered field.

Let us first examine whether \mathbb{Q}^c is a field.

In fact, showing one counterexample for any of the axioms that have to be satisfied for \mathbb{Q}^c to be a field would suffice to prove \mathbb{Q}^c is not a field.

Such counterexample is \sqrt{2}\in \mathbb{Q}^c.

    \[\sqrt{2}\cdot \sqrt{2} = 2 \notin \mathbb{Q}^c\]

One of important properties of a field, of any binary operation, is a closure property, and we can see \mathbb{Q}^c is not closed under multiplication.

Therefore, \mathbb{Q}^c is not a field.

For a field to become an ordered field, we need 4 more conditions or axioms as follows:

Let us define a relation “<” on \mathbb{R}. Then, for all x,y,z\in \mathbb{R},

  1. Trichotomy Law. It is only one of the cases

        \[ x=y,x>y,\text{ or }x<y\]

  2. x<y,y<z \Rightarrow x<z
  3. x<y \Rightarrow x+z<y+z
  4. x<y,z>0 \Rightarrow xz<yz

In fact, based on the 4 axioms mentioned above, we can reach a few useful theorems as follows:

Theorem.
For x,y,z\in \mathbb{R},
x\cdot 0=0
(-1)\cdot x=-x

Proof.

    \begin{align*} x\cdot 0 &= x\cdot (0+0)\\ x\cdot 0 &= x\cdot 0 + x\cdot 0\\ 0+x\cdot 0 &= x\cdot 0 + x\cdot 0\\ 0 &= x\cdot 0 \end{align*}

    \begin{align*} (-1)\cdot x +x &= (-1+1)\cdot x\\ &= 0\cdot x\\ &= 0\\ (-1)\cdot x +x+(-x) &= 0+(-x)\\ (-1)\cdot x &= -x \end{align*}

Now, let us have a look at how the absolute value is defined.

Definition. (Absolute Value)
The absolute value |x| of x is defined as

    \[ |x|= \begin{cases} x, &\text{if } x \geq 0 \\ -x, &\text{if } x<0 \end{cases} \]

Again, a few useful theorems can be yielded as follows:

Theorem.
For x,y\in \mathbb{R} and a\geq 0

  1. |x|\geq 0
  2. x \leq a \Leftrightarrow -a\leq x \leq a
  3. |xy|=|x|\cdot |y|
  4. Triangle Inequality

        \[ |x+y| \leq |x|+|y|\]

Reflecting the importance and utility of triangle inequality, the proof is provided here.

Proof. (Triangle Inequality)
By definition,

    \[-|x|\leq x \leq |x| \text{ and } -|y|\leq y \leq |y|\]

By summation, we obtain

    \[-\left( |x|+|y|\right) \leq x+y \leq |x|+|y|\]

Therefore,

    \[|x+y| \leq |x|+|y|\]

Let us utilize the triangle inequality in an example.

Example. Prove \left\vert |x|-|y|\right\vert \leq |x-y| for all x,y\in \mathbb{R}.

By triangle inequality,

    \begin{align*} |x-y|+|y| &\geq \left\vert (x-y)+y\right\vert\\ &= |x| \end{align*}

Therefore,

    \[ |x-y| \geq |x|-|y|\]

Likewise,

    \begin{align*} |y-x| &\geq |y|-|x|\\ &= -\left( |x|-|y|\right) \end{align*}

In fact,

    \[|y-x|=|x-y|\]

Therefore,

    \[ -\left( |x|-|y|\right) \leq |x|-|y| \leq |x-y|\]

Therefore,

    \[ \left\vert |x|-|y|\right\vert \leq |x-y|\]

License

Portfolio for Bachelor of Science in Mathematics Copyright © by Donovan D Chang. All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book