|
|
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| In [[mathematics]], there are several ways of defining the [[real number]] system as an [[ordered field]]. The ''synthetic'' approach gives a list of [[axiom]]s for the real numbers as a ''complete ordered [[field (mathematics)|field]]''. Under the usual axioms of [[axiomatic set theory|set theory]], one can show that these axioms are categorical, in the sense that there is a [[structure (mathematical logic)|model]] for the axioms, and any two such models are [[isomorphic]]. Any one of these models must be explicitly constructed, and most of these models are built using the basic properties of the [[rational number]] system as an ordered field.
| | To augment its action, mix this with lemon juice in order to create a paste. For most people, initial results with Meladerm are seen very quickly within just a few weeks � with more significant results after approximately 2-3 months of regular use. To avoid this problem, choose cotton clothing and keep tight shirts to a minimum because this aggravates friction. Depigmenting agents are commonly prescribed to treat disorders of hyperpigmentation. A great skin lightening cream is the solution you need for your skin. <br><br>As a result, we should pay great attention to eat more fruits in spring, so as to make the skin moist and healthy. Bean sprouts can prevent freckle, shading, whiten skins. Hydrogen Peroxide: Hydrogen peroxide has recently been researched to show that it can cause damage to your health and your teeth. However, it would usually take at least six months before results are seen. Europe has banned skin bleaching creams that contain hydroquinone. <br><br>Cystic acne is a form of acne that nobody wants to deal with. A product that can be called the ultimate “Anti aging skin care product”. The fastest way to whiten your teeth and In the age of wanting everything in mega fast time the teeth whitening industry can offer a one hour teeth whitening solution that is fast, effective and safe and can remove the staining on the teeth by up to 10 shades. Many of these natural skin whitening products are easily obtainable in our surroundings. If you would like a cheap natural whitening agent, lemons (or calamansi for us Filipinos) are your best bet. <br><br>Sugar with honey applied to our skin can exfoliate them just as well as the salons can. Doing this assures that the clay won't sink to the bottom of the soap. The cytotoxic effects of hydroquinone are not limited to melanocytes, but the dose required to inhibit cellular metabolism is much higher for nonmelanotic cells than for melanocytes. Keep reading if you want to go darker or try red tints. You can make mint toothpaste by mixing half of a teaspoon of baking soda, half of a teaspoon of sea salt, a drop of clove oil and two drops of mint oil. <br><br>When I have a sensitive oral condition, could I use this paste. But don't hold your breadth; even if it's diagnosed as strongyloides stercoralis, doctors are very unfamiliar with its treatment. Always rinse the mouth thoroughly to remove any lemon juice residue. The best cream to whiten skin has to be a cream made of all natural products. The epicuren after bath is one of the most popular products which are beneficial for most of the people including men and women.<br><br>If you have any type of concerns concerning where and ways to use [http://stylax.info/sitemap/ south beach skin lightening gel], you can contact us at our web page. |
| | |
| ==Synthetic approach==
| |
| The synthetic approach axiomatically defines the real number system as a complete ordered field. Precisely, this means the following. A ''model for the real number system'' consists of a set '''R''', two distinct elements 0 and 1 of '''R''', two [[binary operation]]s + and × on '''R''' (called ''addition'' and ''multiplication'', respectively), a [[binary relation]] ≤ on '''R''', satisfying the following properties.
| |
| | |
| # ('''R''', +, ×) forms a [[field (mathematics)|field]]. In other words,
| |
| #* For all ''x'', ''y'', and ''z'' in '''R''', ''x'' + (''y'' + ''z'') = (''x'' + ''y'') + ''z'' and ''x'' × (''y'' × ''z'') = (''x'' × ''y'') × ''z''. ([[associativity]] of addition and multiplication)
| |
| #* For all ''x'' and ''y'' in '''R''', ''x'' + ''y'' = ''y'' + ''x'' and ''x'' × ''y'' = ''y'' × ''x''. ([[commutative operation|commutativity]] of addition and multiplication)
| |
| #* For all ''x'', ''y'', and ''z'' in '''R''', ''x'' × (''y'' + ''z'') = (''x'' × ''y'') + (''x'' × ''z''). ([[distributivity]] of multiplication over addition)
| |
| #* For all ''x'' in '''R''', ''x'' + 0 = ''x''. (existence of additive [[identity element|identity]])
| |
| #* 0 is not equal to 1, and for all ''x'' in '''R''', ''x'' × 1 = ''x''. (existence of multiplicative identity)
| |
| #* For every ''x'' in '''R''', there exists an element −''x'' in '''R''', such that ''x'' + (−''x'') = 0. (existence of additive [[inverse element|inverses]])
| |
| #* For every ''x'' ≠ 0 in '''R''', there exists an element ''x''<sup>−1</sup> in '''R''', such that ''x'' × ''x''<sup>−1</sup> = 1. (existence of multiplicative inverses)
| |
| # ('''R''', ≤) forms a [[totally ordered set]]. In other words,
| |
| #* For all ''x'' in '''R''', ''x'' ≤ ''x''. ([[reflexive relation|reflexivity]])
| |
| #* For all ''x'' and ''y'' in '''R''', if ''x'' ≤ ''y'' and ''y'' ≤ ''x'', then ''x'' = ''y''. ([[antisymmetric relation|antisymmetry]])
| |
| #* For all ''x'', ''y'', and ''z'' in '''R''', if ''x'' ≤ ''y'' and ''y'' ≤ ''z'', then ''x'' ≤ ''z''. ([[transitive relation|transitivity]])
| |
| #* For all ''x'' and ''y'' in '''R''', ''x'' ≤ ''y'' or ''y'' ≤ ''x''. ([[total order|totalness]])
| |
| # The field operations + and × on '''R''' are compatible with the order ≤. In other words,
| |
| #* For all ''x'', ''y'' and ''z'' in '''R''', if ''x'' ≤ ''y'', then ''x'' + ''z'' ≤ ''y'' + ''z''. (preservation of order under addition)
| |
| #* For all ''x'' and ''y'' in '''R''', if 0 ≤ ''x'' and 0 ≤ ''y'', then 0 ≤ ''x'' × ''y'' (preservation of order under multiplication)
| |
| # The order ≤ is ''complete'' in the following sense: every non-empty subset of '''R''' [[upper bound|bounded above]] has a [[least upper bound]]. In other words,
| |
| #* If ''A'' is a non-empty subset of '''R''', and if ''A'' has an [[upper bound]], then ''A'' has a least upper bound ''u'', such that for every upper bound ''v'' of ''A'', ''u'' ≤ ''v''.
| |
| | |
| The final axiom, defining the order as [[Dedekind-complete]], is most crucial. Without this axiom, we simply have the axioms which define a totally [[ordered field]], and there are many non-isomorphic models which satisfy these axioms. This axiom implies that the [[Archimedean property]] applies for this field. Therefore, when the completeness axiom is added, it can be proved that any two models must be isomorphic, and so in this sense, there is only one complete ordered Archimedean field.
| |
| | |
| When we say that any two models of the above axioms are isomorphic, we mean that for any two models (''R'', 0<sub>''R''</sub>, 1<sub>''R''</sub>, +<sub>''R''</sub>, ×<sub>''R''</sub>, ≤<sub>''R''</sub>) and (''S'', 0<sub>''S''</sub>, 1<sub>''S''</sub>, +<sub>''S''</sub>, ×<sub>''S''</sub>, ≤<sub>''S''</sub>), there is a [[bijection]] ''f'' : ''R'' → ''S'' preserving both the field operations and the order. Explicitly,
| |
| *''f'' is both [[injective]] and [[surjective]].
| |
| *''f''(0<sub>''R''</sub>) = 0<sub>''S''</sub> and ''f''(1<sub>''R''</sub>) = 1<sub>''S''</sub>.
| |
| *For all ''x'' and ''y'' in ''R'', ''f''(''x'' +<sub>''R''</sub> ''y'') = ''f''(''x'') +<sub>''S''</sub> ''f''(''y'') and ''f''(''x'' ×<sub>''R''</sub> ''y'') = ''f''(''x'') ×<sub>''S''</sub> ''f''(''y'').
| |
| *For all ''x'' and ''y'' in ''R'', ''x'' ≤<sub>''R''</sub> ''y'' [[if and only if]] ''f''(''x'') ≤<sub>''S''</sub> ''f''(''y'').
| |
| | |
| ==Explicit constructions of models==
| |
| We shall not prove that any models of the axioms are isomorphic. Such a proof can be found in any number of modern analysis or set theory textbooks. We will sketch the basic definitions and properties of a number of constructions, however, because each of these is important for both mathematical and historical reasons. The first three, due to [[Georg Cantor]]/[[Charles Méray]], [[Richard Dedekind]] and [[Karl Weierstrass]]/[[Otto Stolz]] all occurred within a few years of each other. Each has advantages and disadvantages. A major motivation in all three cases was the instruction of mathematics students.
| |
| | |
| ===Construction from Cauchy sequences===
| |
| If we have a space where [[Cauchy sequence]]s are meaningful (such as a `rational' [[metric space]], i.e., a space in which distance is defined and takes rational values, or more generally a [[uniform space]]), a standard procedure to force all Cauchy sequences to converge is adding new points to the space (a process called [[completeness (topology)|completion]]). By starting with rational numbers and the metric {{nowrap|1= ''d''(''x'',''y'') = |''x'' − ''y''|}}, we can construct the real numbers, as will be detailed below. (A different metric on the rationals could result in the [[p-adic numbers|''p''-adic numbers]] instead.)
| |
| | |
| Let ''R'' be the [[Set (mathematics)|set]] of Cauchy sequences of rational numbers. That is, sequences
| |
| : ''x''<sub>''1''</sub>, ''x''<sub>''2''</sub>, ''x''<sub>''3''</sub>,...
| |
| of rational numbers such that for every rational {{nowrap|''ε'' > 0}}, there exists an integer ''N'' such that for all natural numbers {{nowrap|''m'',''n'' > ''N''}}, {{nowrap| {{!}}''x''<sub>''m''</sub> − ''x''<sub>''n''</sub>{{!}} < ''ε''}}. Here the vertical bars denote the absolute value.
| |
| | |
| Cauchy sequences (''x'') and (''y'') can be added and multiplied as follows:
| |
| : (''x''<sub>''n''</sub>) + (''y''<sub>''n''</sub>) = (''x''<sub>''n''</sub> + ''y''<sub>''n''</sub>)
| |
| : (''x''<sub>''n''</sub>) × (''y''<sub>''n''</sub>) = (''x''<sub>''n''</sub> × ''y''<sub>''n''</sub>).
| |
| | |
| Two Cauchy sequences are called ''equivalent'' if and only if the difference between them tends to zero.
| |
| | |
| Comparison between two cauchy sequences is possible as such : {{nowrap|(''x''<sub>''n''</sub>) ≥ (''y''<sub>''n''</sub>)}} if and only if ''x'' is equivalent to ''y'' or there exists an integer ''N'' such that {{nowrap|''x''<sub>''n''</sub> ≥ ''y''<sub>''n''</sub>}} for all {{nowrap|''n'' > ''N''}}.
| |
|
| |
| This does indeed define an [[equivalence relation]], it is compatible with the operations defined above, and the set '''R''' of all [[equivalence class]]es can be shown to satisfy all the usual axioms of the real numbers. This is remarkable because not all of these axioms necessarily apply to the rational numbers, which are being used to construct the sequences themselves. We can [[Embedding|embed]] the rational numbers into the reals by identifying the rational number ''r'' with the equivalence class of the sequence {{nowrap| (''r'',''r'',''r'', …)}}.
| |
| | |
| The only real number axiom that does not follow easily from the definitions is the completeness of ≤, i.e. the [[least upper bound property]]. It can be proved as follows: Let ''S'' be a non-empty subset of '''R''' and ''U'' be an upper bound for ''S''. Substituting a larger value if necessary, we may assume ''U'' is rational. Since ''S'' is non-empty, there is a rational number ''L'' such that {{nowrap|''L'' < ''s''}} for some ''s'' in ''S''. Now define sequences of rationals (''u''<sub>''n''</sub>) and (''l''<sub>''n''</sub>) as follows:
| |
| | |
| :Set ''u''<sub>0</sub> = ''U'' and ''l''<sub>0</sub> = ''L''.
| |
| | |
| For each ''n'' consider the number:
| |
| | |
| :''m''<sub>''n''</sub> = (''u''<sub>''n''</sub> + ''l''<sub>''n''</sub>)/2
| |
| | |
| If ''m''<sub>''n''</sub> is an upper bound for ''S'' set:
| |
| | |
| : ''u''<sub>''n''+1</sub> = ''m''<sub>''n''</sub> and ''l''<sub>''n''+1</sub> = ''l''<sub>''n''</sub>
| |
| | |
| Otherwise set:
| |
| | |
| : ''l''<sub>''n''+1</sub> = ''m''<sub>''n''</sub> and ''u''<sub>''n''+1</sub> = ''u''<sub>''n''</sub>
| |
| | |
| This obviously defines two Cauchy sequences of rationals, and so we have real numbers {{nowrap|1= ''l'' = (''l''<sub>''n''</sub>)}} and {{nowrap|1= ''u'' = (''u''<sub>''n''</sub>)}}. It is easy to prove, by induction on ''n'' that:
| |
| | |
| : ''u''<sub>''n''</sub> is an upper bound for ''S'' for all ''n''
| |
| | |
| and:
| |
| | |
| : ''l''<sub>''n''</sub> is never an upper bound for ''S'' for any ''n''
| |
| | |
| Thus ''u'' is an upper bound for ''S''. To see that it is a least upper bound, notice that the limit of (''u''<sub>''n''</sub> − ''l''<sub>''n''</sub>) is 0, and so ''l'' = ''u''. Now suppose {{nowrap|1= ''b'' < ''u'' = ''l''}} is a smaller upper bound for ''S''. Since (''l''<sub>''n''</sub>) is monotonic increasing it is easy to see that {{nowrap| ''b'' < ''l''<sub>''n''</sub>}} for some ''n''. But ''l''<sub>''n''</sub> is not an upper bound for S and so neither is ''b''. Hence ''u'' is a least upper bound for ''S'' and ≤ is complete.
| |
| | |
| A practical and concrete representative for an equivalence class representing a real number is provided by the representation to base ''b'' – in practice, ''b'' is usually 2 ([[binary numeral system|binary]]), 8 ([[octal]]), 10 ([[decimal]]) or 16 ([[hexadecimal]]).
| |
| For example, the number π = 3.14159... corresponds to the Cauchy sequence (3,3.1,3.14,3.141,3.1415,...). Notice that the sequence (0,0.9,0.99,0.999,0.9999,...) is equivalent to the sequence (1,1,1,1,1,...) because their difference (1,0.1,0.01,0.001,0.0001,...) tends to zero; this shows that [[0.999...]] = 1.
| |
| | |
| An advantage of this approach is that it does not use the linear order of the rationals, only the metric. Hence it generalizes to other metric spaces.
| |
| | |
| ===Construction by Dedekind cuts===
| |
| A [[Dedekind cut]] in an ordered field is a partition of it, (''A'', ''B''), such that ''A'' is nonempty and closed downwards, ''B'' is nonempty and closed upwards, and ''A'' contains no [[greatest element]]. Real numbers can be constructed as Dedekind cuts of rational numbers. | |
| | |
| For convenience we may take the lower set <math>A\,</math> as the representative of any given Dedekind cut <math>(A, B)\,</math>, since <math>A</math> completely determines <math>B</math>. By doing this we may think intuitively of a real number as being represented by the set of all smaller rational numbers. In more detail, a real number <math>r</math> is any subset of the set <math>\textbf{Q}</math> of rational numbers that fulfills the following conditions:<ref name="pugh">{{cite book
| |
| |title=Real Mathematical Analysis
| |
| |first=Charles Chapman
| |
| |last=Pugh
| |
| |location=New York
| |
| |publisher=Springer
| |
| |year=2002
| |
| |isbn=0-387-95297-7
| |
| |pages=11–15
| |
| |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=R_ZetzxFHVwC
| |
| }}</ref>
| |
| # <math>r</math> is not empty
| |
| # <math>r \neq \textbf{Q}</math>
| |
| # ''r'' is closed downwards. In other words, for all <math>x, y \in \textbf{Q}</math> such that <math>x < y</math>, if <math>y \in r</math> then <math>x \in r</math>
| |
| # ''r'' contains no greatest element. In other words, there is no <math>x \in r</math> such that for all <math>y \in r</math>, <math>y \leq x</math>
| |
| | |
| * We form the set <math> \textbf{R} </math> of real numbers as the set of all Dedekind cuts <math>A</math> of <math> \textbf{Q} </math>, and define a [[total ordering]] on the real numbers as follows: <math>x \leq y\Leftrightarrow x \subseteq y</math>
| |
| | |
| * We [[embedding|embed]] the rational numbers into the reals by identifying the rational number <math>q</math> with the set of all smaller rational numbers <math> \{ x \in \textbf{Q} : x < q \} </math>.<ref name="pugh"/> Since the rational numbers are [[dense order|dense]], such a set can have no greatest element and thus fulfills the conditions for being a real number laid out above.
| |
| | |
| * [[Addition]]. <math>A + B := \{a + b: a \in A \and b \in B\}</math><ref name="pugh"/>
| |
| | |
| * [[Subtraction]]. <math>A - B := \{a - b: a \in A \and b \in ( \textbf{Q} \setminus B ) \}</math> where <math> \textbf{Q} \setminus B </math> denotes the [[complement (set theory)|relative complement]] of <math>B</math> in <math>\textbf{Q}</math>, <math> \{ x : x \in \textbf{Q} \and x \notin B \} </math>
| |
| | |
| * [[Negation]] is a special case of subtraction: <math>-B := \{a - b: a < 0 \and b \in ( \textbf{Q} \setminus B ) \}</math>
| |
| | |
| * Defining [[multiplication]] is less straightforward.<ref name="pugh"/>
| |
| ** if <math>A, B \geq 0</math> then <math> A \times B := \{ a \times b : a \geq 0 \and a \in A \and b \geq 0 \and b \in B \} \cup \{ x \in \mathrm{Q} : x < 0 \}</math>
| |
| ** if either <math>A\,</math> or <math>B\,</math> is negative, we use the identities <math> A \times B = -(A \times -B) = -(-A \times B) = (-A \times -B) \,</math> to convert <math>A\,</math> and/or <math>B\,</math> to positive numbers and then apply the definition above.
| |
| | |
| * We define [[division (mathematics)|division]] in a similar manner:
| |
| ** if <math> A \geq 0 \mbox{ and } B > 0 </math> then <math> A / B := \{ a / b : a \in A \and b \in ( \textbf{Q} \setminus B ) \}</math>
| |
| ** if either <math>A\,</math> or <math>B\,</math> is negative, we use the identities <math> A / B = -(A / {-B}) = -(-A / B)= -A / {-B} \, </math> to convert <math>A\, </math> to a non-negative number and/or <math>B\, </math> to a positive number and then apply the definition above.
| |
| | |
| * [[Supremum]]. If a nonempty set <math>S</math> of real numbers has any upper bound in <math>\textbf{R}</math>, then it has a least upper bound in <math>\textbf{R}</math> that is equal to <math>\bigcup S</math>.<ref name="pugh"/>
| |
| | |
| As an example of a Dedekind cut representing an [[irrational number]], we may take the [[Square root of 2|positive square root of 2]]. This can be defined by the set <math>A = \{ x \in \textbf{Q} : x < 0 \or x \times x < 2 \}</math>.<ref>
| |
| {{cite book
| |
| |title=What is Mathematics, Really?
| |
| |first=Reuben
| |
| |last= Hersh
| |
| |location=New York
| |
| |publisher=Oxford University Press US
| |
| |year=1997
| |
| |isbn=0-19-513087-1
| |
| |pages=274
| |
| |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=R-qgdx2A5b0C
| |
| }}
| |
| </ref> It can be seen from the definitions above that <math>A</math> is a real number, and that <math>A \times A = 2\,</math>. However, neither claim is immediate. Showing that <math>A\,</math> is real requires showing that for any positive rational <math>x\,</math> with <math>x \times x < 2\,</math>, there is a rational <math>y\,</math> with <math>x<y\,</math> and <math>y \times y <2\,.</math> The choice <math>y=\frac{2x+2}{x+2}\,</math> works. Then <math>A \times A \le 2</math> but to show equality requires showing that if <math>r\,</math> is any rational number less than 2, then there is positive <math>x\,</math> in <math>A</math> with <math>r<x \times x\,</math>.
| |
| | |
| An advantage of this construction is that each real number corresponds to a unique cut.
| |
| | |
| ===Stevin's construction===
| |
| It has been known since [[Simon Stevin]]<ref>Karin Usadi Katz and [[Mikhail Katz|Mikhail G. Katz]] (2011) Stevin Numbers and Reality. [[Foundations of Science]]. {{doi|10.1007/s10699-011-9228-9}} Online First. [http://www.springerlink.com/content/14365870k67308l6/]</ref> that real numbers can be represented by decimals. We can take the infinite decimal expansion to be the definition of a real number, '''defining''' expansions like [[0.9999...]] and 1.0000... to be equivalent, and define the arithmetical operations formally. This is equivalent to the constructions by Cauchy sequences or Dedekind cuts and incorporates an explicit [[modulus of convergence]]. Similarly, another [[radix]] can be used. Weierstrass attempted to construct the reals but did not entirely succeed. He pointed out that they need only be thought of as complete aggregates (sets) of units and [[unit fractions]].<ref>V. Dantscher, "Vorlesungen über die Weierstrass'sche Theorie der irrationalen Zahlen" , Teubner (1908)</ref>
| |
| | |
| This construction has the advantage that it is close to the way we are used to thinking of real numbers and suggests series expansions for functions. A standard approach to show that all models of a complete ordered field are isomorphic is to show that any model is isomorphic to this one because we can systematically build a decimal expansion for each element.
| |
| | |
| ===Construction using hyperreal numbers===
| |
| As in the [[hyperreal number]]s, one constructs the hyperrationals <sup>*</sup>'''Q''' from the rational numbers by means of an [[ultrafilter]]. Here a hyperrational is by definition a ratio of two [[hyperinteger]]s. Consider the [[Ring (mathematics)|ring]] ''B'' of all limited (i.e. finite) elements in <sup>*</sup>'''Q'''. Then ''B'' has a unique [[maximal ideal]] ''I'', the [[infinitesimal]] numbers. The quotient ring ''B/I'' gives the [[field (mathematics)|field]] '''R''' of real numbers. Note that ''B'' is not an [[internal set]] in <sup>*</sup>'''Q'''.
| |
| Note that this construction uses a non-principal ultrafilter over the set of natural numbers, the existence of which is guaranteed by the [[axiom of choice]].
| |
| | |
| It turns out that the maximal ideal respects the order on <sup>*</sup>'''Q'''. Hence the resulting field is an ordered field. Completeness can be proved in a similar way to the construction from the Cauchy sequences.
| |
| | |
| ===Construction from surreal numbers===
| |
| Every ordered field can be embedded in the [[surreal number]]s. The real numbers form a maximal subfield that is [[Archimedean group|Archimedean]] (meaning that no real number is infinitely large). This embedding is not unique, though it can be chosen in a canonical way.
| |
| | |
| === Construction from Z (Eudoxus reals)===<!--Linked from 'Eudoxus of Cnidus'-->
| |
| A relatively less known construction allows to define real numbers using only the additive group of integers <math>\mathbb{Z}</math> with different versions.<ref>{{cite arxiv|eprint=math/0405454|title=The Eudoxus Real Numbers|author=R.D. Arthan}}</ref><ref>{{cite arxiv|eprint=math/0301015|author=[[Norbert A'Campo]]|title=A natural construction for the real numbers}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.maths.mq.edu.au/~street/reals.pdf|title=Update on the efficient reals|author=Ross Street|date=September 2003|accessdate=2010-10-23}}</ref> The construction has been [[Automated theorem proving|formally verified]] by the IsarMathLib project.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nongnu.org/isarmathlib/|title=IsarMathLib}}</ref> Shenitzer<ref>Shenitzer, A. (1987) A topics course in mathematics. The Mathematical Intelligencer 9, no. 3, 44--52.</ref> and Arthan refer to this construction as the ''[[Eudoxus of Cnidus|Eudoxus]] reals''.
| |
| | |
| Let an '''almost homomorphism''' be a map <math>f:\mathbb{Z}\to\mathbb{Z}</math> such that the set <math>\{f(n+m)-f(m)-f(n): n,m\in\mathbb{Z}\}</math> is finite. We say that two almost homomorphisms <math>f,g</math> are '''almost equal''' if the set <math>\{f(n)-g(n): n\in \mathbb{Z}\}</math> is finite. This defines an equivalence relation on the set of almost homomorphisms. Real numbers are defined as the equivalence classes of this relation. To add real numbers defined this way we add the almost homomorphisms that represent them. Multiplication of real numbers corresponds to composition of almost homomorphisms. If <math>[f]</math> denotes the real number represented by an almost homomorphism <math>f</math> we say that <math>0\leq [f]</math> if <math>f</math> is bounded or <math>f</math> takes an infinite number of positive values on <math>\mathbb{Z}^+</math>. This defines the [[total order|linear order]] relation on the set of real numbers constructed this way.
| |
| | |
| === Other constructions ===
| |
| {{cquote|Few mathematical structures have undergone as many revisions or have been presented in as many guises as the real numbers. Every generation reexamines the reals in the light of its values and mathematical objectives.<ref>F. Faltin, N. Metropolis, B. Ross and G.-C. Rota, ''[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8708(75)90115-2 The real numbers as a wreath product]'' Advances in Math., 16(1975), 278–304.</ref>}}
| |
| | |
| A number of constructions have been given.<ref>N.G. de Bruijn, N. G. Construction of the system of real numbers. (Dutch) Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Verslag Afd. Natuurk. 86 (1977), no. 9, 121–125.</ref>
| |
| <ref>N. G. de Bruijn,Defining reals without the use of rationals.
| |
| Nederl. Akad.Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A 79 = Indag. Math. 38 (1976), no. 2, 100–108
| |
| :also at http://alexandria.tue.nl/repository/freearticles/597556.pdf</ref>
| |
| <ref>Rieger, G. J. A new approach to the real numbers (motivated by continued fractions). Abh. Braunschweig.Wiss. Ges. 33 (1982), 205–217</ref><ref>Knopfmacher, Arnold; Knopfmacher, John Two concrete new constructions of the real numbers. Rocky Mountain J. Math. 18 (1988), no. 4, 813–824.</ref>
| |
| <ref>Knopfmacher, Arnold; Knopfmacher, John A new construction of the real numbers (via infinite products). Nieuw Arch. Wisk. (4) 5 (1987), no. 1, 19–31.</ref>
| |
| | |
| As a reviewer of one noted: "The details are all included, but as usual they are tedious and not too instructive."<ref>MR693180 (84j:26002) review of A new approach to the real numbers (motivated by continued fractions) by Rieger, G. J.</ref>
| |
| | |
| == See also ==
| |
| * [[Constructivism (mathematics)#Example from real analysis]]
| |
| | |
| ==References==
| |
| {{reflist}}
| |
| | |
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Construction Of The Real Numbers}}
| |
| [[Category:Real numbers]]
| |
| [[Category:Constructivism]]
| |
| | |
| [[pl:Aksjomaty i konstrukcje liczb#Liczby rzeczywiste]]
| |