Sohrab ex. 2.1.12 part (1): ordering on the real numbers

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
2 replies · 2K views
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48

Homework Statement



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:

sohrab-exercse-2-1-12-png.png


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

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:

sohrab-definition-2-1-4-subtraction-division-and-exponentiation-of-real-numbers-png.png



Sohrab'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 ... ) ...

sohrab-1-ordering-of-the-real-numbers-png.png

sohrab-2-ordering-of-the-real-numbers-part-2-png-png.png

*** 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 ...

?temp_hash=e79a9f9b500d20b39337ce75755efe40.png

?temp_hash=e79a9f9b500d20b39337ce75755efe40.png


3. The Attempt at a Solution

I am unable to make a meaningful start on this problem ... can someone help me to get started ...

Peter
 
Attachments
  • Sohrab - Exercse 2.1.12 ....png
    Sohrab - Exercse 2.1.12 ....png
    11.8 KB · Views: 603
  • Sohrab - Definition 2.1.4 - Subtraction, Division and Exponentiation of Real Numbers.png
    Sohrab - Definition 2.1.4 - Subtraction, Division and Exponentiation of Real Numbers.png
    38.3 KB · Views: 649
  • Sohrab - 1 - Ordering of the Real Numbers .. ....png
    Sohrab - 1 - Ordering of the Real Numbers .. ....png
    14.9 KB · Views: 712
  • Sohrab - 2 - Ordering of the Real Numbers .. .... PART 2 ... ... png.png
    Sohrab - 2 - Ordering of the Real Numbers .. .... PART 2 ... ... png.png
    38 KB · Views: 635
  • Sohrab - 1 - Real Numbers as an Ordered Field ... PART 1 ... ....png
    Sohrab - 1 - Real Numbers as an Ordered Field ... PART 1 ... ....png
    18.4 KB · Views: 564
  • Sohrab - 2 - Real Numbers as an Ordered Field ... PART 2 ... ....png
    Sohrab - 2 - Real Numbers as an Ordered Field ... PART 2 ... ....png
    35.7 KB · Views: 596
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? why is it valid?)

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## (definition of a as greater than 0 )

##\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
 
Math Amateur 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? why is it valid?)
This is exercise 2.1.10 (c).
and so ##2^{-1} \gt 0## by Exercise 2.1.11 (5) (see scanned text in above post)
You can also use exercise 2.1.10 (c) again and show, that ##\frac{1}{2}<0## is impossible by ##(O_2)## and ##(O_3)\,##.
So we now have
##a, 2^{-1} \in P## (definition of a as greater than 0 )
##\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?
Yes.
If it is a valid and good proof ... then we still need to show ##\frac{a}{2} \lt a## ... but how ...?
You can use exercise 2.1.11 (1) and what you just have proven here.