Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 1 of 10

REAL ANALYSIS - CHAPTER ONE NUMBER SYSTEMS 1.1 Number Systems denotes the set of natural numbers. There are two conventions in use, either or . We shall use the latter, and use the notation

Notice that has a least member, i.e. 0, whereas it has no greatest member. If I tell you n is a natural number, no matter how big it is, you can find the next natural number n+1. The set of natural numbers is infinite. is the set of integers. (Obviously the study of and is called number theory.) We use the notation and which is the positive integers. has no greatest member, and no least member. The number of integers is also infinite, and in a very important mathematical sense, it has the same type of infinity as . We see this as follows. If the set of natural numbers has the same number of elements as then we should be able to set up a one-to-one correspondence between them. This is easy to do. First we map 0 in to 0 in , for each where . When we map to , and when we map to . So odd numbers in are mapped to the positive integers, and even non-zero numbers in are mapped to the negative integers. In this sense they have the same type of infinity, which is called (aleph-zero or aleph-null), which is called the cardinality of the set. We also say that the set is countable. (Once again there are two conventions. Sometimes countable is reserved for infinite sets, sometimes countable can also refer to finite sets. You will also come across the term countably infinite.) is the set of rational numbers, i.e. lists rationals more than one, e.g. }. (A slight complication is that this , but this is not a problem in practice.) Its not into a one-to-one

immediately obvious but its possible to put the elements of correspondence to those of , so is countable. The above number systems are ordered, i.e. if .

lies to the left of

on the number line, then

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 2 of 10

Theorem 1.1 Between every two distinct rationals on the number line there is another rational. Proof If are two distinct rationals, then is also a rational and .

This is actually an extraordinary result. There is an infinite set of numbers on the number line to the right of zero. We are also saying that between 0 and 1, for example, there is an infinite set of numbers (with the same cardinality). And if we pick two rationals, no matter how close they are together, we can find an infinite set of numbers between them. We say that the rational numbers are dense on the number line. However if you draw an isosceles right angled triangle (one right angle, two other equal angles, with the opposite and adjacent to each of the smaller angles being the same length), then if the length of the smaller sides are 1 unit, the hypotenuse is by Pythagoras' theorem. This is a well-defined number with an exact value, and it lies on the number line. But it is not rational.

Theorem 1.2 is not rational. Proof We use proof by contradiction. Assume integers with no common factor. So even. If is rational. Then , i.e. . As where are positive

has a factor 2, then it is

is even then so is So let where is an integer. Then so so is also even, and so is . So both and have a factor 2, which contradicts the is not rational.

original assumption. Hence

We call the numbers on the real number line which are not rational, irrationals. is the set of rational and irrational numbers, and real analysis is the study of this set.

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 3 of 10

1.2 Properties of the real number set. The set of real numbers obeys the following; Addition: A1 Closure: If A2 Identity: If A3 Inverse: If A4 Associativity: If A5 Commutativity: If Multiplication: M1 Closure: If M2 Identity: If M3 Inverse: If M4 Associativity: If M5 Commutativity: If Addition and multiplication D1 Distributivity: If then then then then there is a number then then such that then then then there is a number then then such that

Any set which has two operations (here addition and multiplication) which satisfy the above axioms, is called a field.

1.3 Ordering of the real numbers and inequalities. The binary operation < satisfies the following axioms: O1 Well defined: If O2 Transitive: If If O3 If then if then either then if then and or then

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 4 of 10

O4 If

then if

and

then

The above say that inequalities, where E1. E2. E3. If E4. If E5. If and then and

is an ordered field. We can use them to derive the following related :

(O3 with an if and only if) then , (from O4), but if then

then

1.4 Some Inequalities If If and the modulus of x is defined as then is the usual form of the triangle inequality, is the backwards form of the triangle inequality. then

We can easily extend this to say that if

If .

then

for

, and

for

1.5 Reminder of interval notation Let . An open interval is defined as . An closed interval is defined as . An interval half-open to the right is defined as . An interval half-open to the left is defined as .

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 5 of 10

1.6 Least Upper Bounds and Greatest Lower Bounds. Let the set . We say is bounded above if there is a real number M such that all . M is called an upper bound of S. Example . for

For example, consider the set . M=10 is an upper bound. M=a million is an upper bound. M=2 is an upper bound. But M=1 is not an upper bound, for example but 1.5>M. We say is bounded below if there is a real number m such that called a lower bound of S. If for all . Then m is

is bounded above and bounded below, it is bounded. Otherwise it is unbounded.

Example As another example, consider the set Clearly is not bounded above, however is it bounded below. For example 0, -10, -1,000 are all lower bounds. The examples show (in an intuitive manner) that for any set which is bounded above, there must be a least upper bound. This is also called a supremum of S, and common notation includes and . We say that is a least upper bound of if (a) is an upper bound, and (b) each is not an upper bound. Similarly for any set which is bounded below, there must be a greatest lower bound. This is also called an infimum of S, and common notation includes and . We say that is a greatest lower bound of if (a) is an lower bound, and (b) each is not a lower bound. The supremum and infimum may or may not belong to . For example if but . However if , then but now . Example . , then

Another example is the set . This set just consists of 3 numbers but according to the definition we can still find the infimum and supremum, i.e. and . Example .

As another example, consider the set . We can prove this is bounded above, because for example if , then for all . We can also say that the set does not have a maximum element, because for each we have and is a

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 6 of 10

rational number. Then there is a rational number isnt a maximum element.

such that

, but then

and so

We can say that because if M=5, then M is an upper bound as for all . If and is rational, then either which means it cannot be an upper bound, or , in which case it cannot be a maximum element, hence cannot be an upper bound. For if is irrational we can find a rational number such that . Now hence cannot be a maximum element, and cannot be an upper bound, so neither can . (In the above we have used a fact that we havent yet proved. We know that between every two distinct rationals on the number line there is another rational. Its also a fact that between ever two irrationals we can find another irrational. Indeed between any two distinct numbers on the real number line we can find an infinity of rationals and irrationals.) The set is also bounded below, e.g. if minimum element, i.e. 4, and so The minimum element of a set denoted . then . and the maximum element for all . The set has a

is sometimes denoted

1.7 The epsilon notation Most standard courses in real analysis use the epsilon-delta notation ( is the following proposition, which we will state without proving. Let be a non-empty set and two conditions are satisfied. (a) for all (b) For every . Then is the supremum of An example of this

if and only if the following

there is some all

such that

We havent proved that this is equivalent to the earlier definition, but well use this in the next section. In the meantime heres an example. Example Here . Call this . Now suppose . Clearly , and we can find a number in between 8 and 10, e.g. 9. However the power of the notation is that we can make as small as we like, and no matter how small we make it, we can always find an element in which lies between and . This is because we can approach arbitrarily close to 10 from the left on the number line.

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 7 of 10

1.8 Completeness of the real numbers The completeness axiom states that every non-empty set of real numbers which is bounded above has a supremum. Using this, we can prove the following theorem.

Theorem 1.3 Every non-empty set of real numbers which is bounded below has an infimum. Proof Suppose is a non-empty set which is bounded below. Let below, we can find a lower bound m such that for all . Then . Hence is an upper bound for . So by the completeness axiom, say. Then Now as of for all . , we know that given any . So that we can find an element for some . This As is bounded

for all has a supremum,

is the supremum for such that is the infimum of

proves that

Theorem 1.4 (Archimedean Property) Given any real number Proof Suppose the result is false. Then we can find some real number such that for all . Hence is an upper bound for , so by the completeness axiom has an supremum say. So for all integers. But if is an integer, then so is and so so , so as this is true for all integers, is an upper bound for , which contradicts the fact that is the least upper bound or supremum. So our original assumption is false and we have proved the original assertion, i.e. given any real number there is an integer such that . The completeness axiom ensures there are no gaps on the real line, in other words the real line is composed of the rationals and the irrationals. Earlier we proved that and now we prove it is a real number. was not rational, there is an integer such that

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 8 of 10

Theorem 1.5 There is a positive real number such that Proof Let . The set is clearly non-empty (e.g. 1 is in the set). Also the set is bounded above, e.g. if choose then so and for all . By the completeness axiom has a supremum, say. (a) We prove Now . Suppose . Let . So as so then is false and so . So and . So . But .

which contradicts the fact that is the supremum, so (b) We prove so Now So as then for any we have Hence is an upper bound for . But supremum (least upper bound), hence our assertion that Hence . We c is the number we call . . Suppose . . Let

, so . contradicts the fact the is the is false, and so .

Any real number which is not a rational is called an irrational, and the real numbers are composed of the rationals and irrationals, which complete the number line. The set of real numbers is a complete ordered field. It is non-countable.

Theorem Between every two real numbers there is a rational.

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 9 of 10

Proof Let where . We wish to find an such that such that , so .

By the Archimedean Property there exists an integer Now and such that integers between and

are real numbers, so by the Archimedean Property there exists integers . So . So we can consider . Now there are a finite number of . If such that . So setting we have we can consider , and

we continue in this way until we find an integer So which completes the proof.

1.9 Decimal representation of real numbers We can represent real numbers by decimals, which are expressions of the form where is a non-negative integer, and are digits, i.e. numbers from the set {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}. If there are a finite number of non-zero digits, then the decimal is called terminating, or finite. If there are an infinite number of non-zero digits the decimal is called non-terminating, or infinite. A recurring decimal is a decimal with a recurring block of digits. A rational number is represented by either a finite or a recurring decimal. An irrational number is represented by an infinite non-recurring decimal expansion. For example The number is irrational, and there is never a recurring block of degits which repeat. We never find a digit after which all remaining digits are zero. The number is rational, and the digit 3 repeats.

Real Analysis Chapter One - Autumn Term 2009

Lecturer: Breen Sweeney

Page 10 of 10

1.10 Notes on approaches to real analysis There are different ways to approach real analysis, although naturally the mathematical concepts are the same. For example it is possible to use decimal expansions to define the real numbers. Another approach is to use Dedekind Cuts (or Dedekind Sections). For each number we define two infinite sets. For example for the rational number we use the following sets.

For the irrational

we use the following sets.