Ordering on the Set of Real Numbers .... Sohrab, Exercise 2.1.12 ....

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Exercise 2.1.12 from Houshang H. Sohrab's "Basic Real Analysis" (Second Edition), specifically regarding the ordering of real numbers. Participants analyze the properties of the field of real numbers, particularly focusing on proving that $$\frac{a}{2} > 0$$ and $$\frac{a}{2} < a$$ using axioms and previous exercises. Key concepts include the definitions of addition, multiplication, and the order axioms as outlined in Exercises 2.1.1 through 2.1.11. The conversation concludes with a valid proof for both inequalities, emphasizing the importance of foundational definitions and axioms in real analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of real number fields and their properties
  • Familiarity with axioms of order and operations in real analysis
  • Knowledge of basic proofs in mathematical analysis
  • Ability to interpret and apply definitions from "Basic Real Analysis" by Houshang H. Sohrab
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of real numbers as a field in detail
  • Learn about order axioms and their applications in proofs
  • Review Exercises 2.1.1 to 2.1.11 from Sohrab's book for foundational concepts
  • Practice proving inequalities in real analysis using axiomatic definitions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone studying real analysis who seeks to deepen their understanding of the ordering of real numbers and proof techniques.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Houshang H. Sohrab's book: "Basic Real Analysis" (Second Edition).

I am focused on Chapter 2: Sequences and Series of Real Numbers ... ...

I need help with Exercise 2.1.12 Part (1) ... ...

Exercise 2.1.12 Part (1) reads as follows:

View attachment 7195

I am unable to make a meaningful start on Exercise 2.1.12 (1) ... can someone please help ...

PeterNOTE: Sohrab defines $$\mathbb{R}$$ as a field with binary operations of addition and multiplication ... he then goes on to define subtraction, division and exponentiation as follows:View attachment 7196Sohrab's definition of the usual ordering on $$\mathbb{R}$$ plus some of the properties following are as follows ... (but note that Exercises 2.1.10 and 2.1.11 precede Exercise 2.1.12 and so, I think, must be taken as given properties for the purposes of Exercise 2.1.12 ... ) ...View attachment 7197
View attachment 7198

Hope someone can help ...

Peter
*** EDIT *** I am concerned that Exercises 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 contain properties of addition, multiplication and inverses that flow directly form the properties of $$\mathbb{R}$$ as a field, ... ... and these properties could possibly be useful in the exercise ... so I am providing Sohrab's description of the field of real numbers and the exercises that follow it, namely Exercises 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 ... https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/7209
https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/7210
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I have made some progress with showing that $$\frac{a}{2} \gt 0$$ ...We have $$2 \gt 0$$ (can we say this? How is this justified?)

and so $$2^{-1} \gt 0$$ by Exercise 2.1.11 (5) (see scanned text in above post)

So we now have

$$a, 2^{-1} \in P$$ ... (by definition of a as greater than zero)

$$\Longrightarrow a \cdot 2^{-1} \in P $$ (Order axiom $$O_2$$ ... see scanned text in above post)

$$\Longrightarrow \frac{a}{2} \gt 0$$ (by definition of division ... see scanned text in above post )Is that correct?

If it is a valid and good proof ... then we still need to show $$\frac{a}{2} \lt a$$ ... but how ...?Peter
 
Last edited:
Peter said:
I think I have made some progress with showing that $$\frac{a}{2} \gt 0$$ ...We have $$2 \gt 0$$ (can we say this? How is this justified?)

and so $$2^{-1} \gt 0$$ by Exercise 2.1.11 (5) (see scanned text in above post)

So we now have

$$a, 2^{-1} \in P$$ ... (by definition of a as greater than zero)

$$\Longrightarrow a \cdot 2^{-1} \in P $$ (Order axiom $$O_2$$ ... see scanned text in above post)

$$\Longrightarrow \frac{a}{2} \gt 0$$ (by definition of division ... see scanned text in above post )Is that correct?

If it is a valid and good proof ... then we still need to show $$\frac{a}{2} \lt a$$ ... but how ...?Peter

To prove 2>0 ,you need the definition : 1+1=2

Then having the above definition and that 1>0 we have:

0<1 and 0<1 => 0+0<1+1.........by exercise 2.1.11 (2)

0<2........... by the above definition and axiom (A3)

The rest of your proof is correct

Now to prove a/2<a

proof:

1) 0<a...............assumption

2) 0<a => 0+a<a+a...........by exercise 2.1.11(1)

3) a<a.1+a.1.............axioms (A3) and (M3)

4) a<a(1+1)..............by axiom (D)

5) a<a.2 ..............by above definition

Can you prove the rest of the exercise ??
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K