DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS

TECHNICAL REPORT

A PRESENTATION ON A CONSTRUCTION OF REAL NUMBERS

Courtney Riggs
December 2018
No. 2018-3

TENNESSEE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

Cookeville, TN 38505
 A PRESENTATION ON A CONSTRUCTION OF REAL NUMBERS

COURTNEY RIGGS

Abstract. The goal of this paper is to present a construction of the set of real numbers
based on set theory. We will do this by starting with the Peano Postulates to construct
the set of natural numbers. Then, we will use an equivalence relation on the set of natural
numbers to construct the set of integers. In a similar method, we will construct the set of
rational numbers with an equivalence relation on the set of integers. Then, we will define
Dedekind cuts, which will allow us to define the set of real numbers. We will also define
arithmetic operations (addition and multiplication) as well as the order relations on each
of these sets, which will yield properties we expect to see.

1. Introduction
Numbers have been used at least since the ancient world. The need to count objects
prompted many ancient cultures to use the set of natural numbers along with addition
and multiplication. Some cultures, including ancient China and India, also made use of
the negative integers and zero, as well, with the negative numbers appearing before zero.
In China, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and India, there were rational approximations for certain
irrational numbers, though they did not realize that irrational numbers exist. In ancient
Greece, it was discovered that pairs of certain line segment lengths could not be represented
as rational numbers, but they did not recognize irrational numbers as ”numbers” because
of the separation between geometry and arithmetic. Through time and the sharing of
information among cultures, the sets of numbers we use today were constructed. Although
numbers might be represented by different symbols in varying cultures, we are all using
the same sets of numbers and mathematical operations. When studying mathematics, it
is essential to understand what the concept of a ”number” means. In this paper, we will
detail the construction of the real numbers by building up from the set of natural numbers,
using [1] as a source for definitions, theorems, etc. and resource for proofs not given here.
For more details on the history of mathematics, see [2].

2. The construction of the Natural Numbers

A natural place to start when constructing sets of numbers is with those numbers which
are used for counting. If there are no objects, there is nothing to count and no collection;
but if there is at least one object, the quantity of objects in a collection can be described
in some way. Of course, with any collection of objects, we can always add another object
to the collection, which means it is then represented by a new quantity. This action of
1
adding an object to a collection of objects is what we will define the function s : A → A
to mean, where A is the set to which we are referring in this example.
Although thinking about collections of objects is useful for understanding the concept
of numbers, we want to formally define them so that we can use them in other ways than
just counting objects.
The following axiom provides us with a foundation for constructing a unique set which
is more general than, but equivalent to, the set A referred to above.
Axiom 2.1 (Peano Postulates). There exists a set N with an element a ∈ N and a function
s : N → N that satisfy the following three properties.
a) There is no n ∈ N such that s(n) = a.
b) The function s is injective.
c) For an arbitrary subset G ⊆ N with a ∈ G the following implication holds true. If
s(g) ∈ G for all g ∈ G then G = N .
A proof of the following theorem can be found on page 87 of [1]. Parts (a) and (b) of
Axiom 2.1 are used to prove the existence of f and part (c) is used to prove uniqueness.
Theorem 2.2 (Definition by Recursion). Let N , a and s be as in Axiom 2.1. Let H be a
set, let e ∈ H and let k : H → H be a function. Then there is a unique function f : N → H
such that f (a) = e, and that f ◦ s = k ◦ f .
This theorem states that the below diagram is commutative, and f (a) = e.
s
N N
f f

H k
H
In other words, it guarantees that given a set with a distinguished element, e, and a function
k as defined above, there is a unique mapping from N to H such that a maps to e and the
function s is preserved by this mapping. We will use Theorem 2.2 to prove the following
lemma.
Lemma 2.3. The set given by the Peano Postulates is (essentially) unique.
Proof. Let N , a and s be as in Axiom 2.1. Also, suppose N 0 , a0 and s0 satisfy Axiom 2.1.
By Theorem 2.2 there exists a unique function f : N → N 0 such that f (a) = a0 and
(1) f ◦ s = s0 ◦ f.

s
N N
f f

N0 N0
s0
Also, there exists a unique function g : N 0 → N such that g(a0 ) = a and
(2) g ◦ s0 = s ◦ g.
2
 s0
N0 N0
g g

N s N
Let G = {m ∈ N : g(f (m)) = m} and let G0 = {m0 ∈ N 0 : f (g(m0 )) = m0 }. Notice that
f (g(a0 )) = f (a) = a0
and
g(f (a)) = g(a0 ) = a,
so a ∈ G and a0 ∈ G0 .
Moreover by (1) and (2), for all n ∈ N , if n ∈ G, then
g(f (s(n))) = g(s0 (f (n))) = s(g(f (n))) = s(n).
So s(n) ∈ G for all n ∈ N . By Axiom 2.1(c), G = N .
Similarly, for all n0 ∈ N 0 , the condition n0 ∈ G0 implies
f (g(s0 (n0 ))) = f (s(g(n0 ))) = s0 (f (g(n0 ))) = s0 (n0 ).
Thus, s0 (n0 ) ∈ G0 for all n0 ∈ N 0 . By Axiom 2.1(c), G0 = N 0 . Therefore, f and g are
inverses of each other, in particular f is bijective.
s
N N
f g=f −1

N0 N0
s0

In fact, f preserves the function s, that is s = f −1 ◦ s0 ◦ f . This proves N is essentially

unique. 

Now that we’ve shown that the set N given in Axiom 2.1 is essentially unique, we will
define all sets satisfying Axiom 2.1 as follows.
Definition 2.4 (Natural Numbers). The set of natural numbers, denoted N, is a set of
existence which is given in the Peano Postulates. That is, for (N, a, s) satisfying Axiom
2.1, we define
N=N
1=a
2 = s(a)
3 = s(s(a))
..
.
Therefore, N = {1, 2, 3, ...}.
3
 Observe that the set N together with the distinguished element 1 and the injective
function s is well defined up to bijective mapping f obtained in Theorem 2.1.
We will write n + 1 in place of s(n) for n ∈ N. Then given another set N 0 , along with
an element a0 ∈ N 0 and a function s0 : N 0 → N 0 , which satisfies Axiom 2.1 we have a
unique bijective function f : N → N 0 that maps every element of N to an element of N 0
and preserves 1 and the function s in the sense that f (1) = a and s(n) = f −1 (f (n + 1))
for all n ∈ N.
A proof for the following lemma can be found on page 4 of [1]. For reader’s convenience,
we will also prove it here.
Lemma 2.5. Let a ∈ N. Suppose that a 6= 1. Then there is a unique b ∈ N such that
a = b + 1.
Proof. To prove uniqueness, suppose that both a = b + 1 and a = c + 1 for some b, c ∈ N.
By Axiom 2.1(b), b = c.
Now we will prove existence. Let
G = {1} ∪ {c ∈ N : there is some b ∈ N such that b + 1 = c}.
Clearly, G ⊆ N and 1 ∈ G. Suppose that n ∈ G. Let m = n + 1. Clearly, m ∈ G. By
Axiom 2.1(c), G = N. This implies the existence of b. 
The notation n + 1 might remind some readers of the Principle of Weak Mathematical
Induction. In fact, we can prove that it is equivalent to the Peano Postulates. We will
state the Principle of Weak Mathematical Induction here for completeness.
Definition 2.6 (The Principle of Weak Mathematical Induction). Let P (n) be a proposi-
tion defined for each n ∈ N. If
(1) P (1) holds true
(2) for every n ∈ N, P (n) holds true implies P (n + 1) holds true,
then P (n) holds true for every n ∈ N
Theorem 2.7. The Principle of Weak Mathematical Induction is equivalent to The Peano
Postulates.
Proof. (Forward direction) Let P (n) be a proposition and let G ⊂ N be defined by
G = {n ∈ N | P (n) holds true}.
If P (1) holds true, then 1 ∈ G. Assume P (n) implies P (n + 1) for all n ∈ N. Then, n ∈ G
implies n + 1 ∈ G, whence G = N.
(Reverse direction) Assume that the Peano Postulates hold true. Let, for n ∈ N, P (n)
be a proposition such that P (1) holds true and P (n) implies P (n + 1) for all n ∈ N. Let
G = {n ∈ N : P (n) holds true}.
Clearly, 1 ∈ G and n ∈ G implies n + 1 ∈ G, for all n ∈ N. By Axiom 2.1(c), G = N, that
is P (n) holds true for all n ∈ N. 
4
 Proceeding, we will use the more familiar Weak Induction rather than The Peano Pos-
tulates in proofs.
Definition 2.8. Let A be a set. A subset R ⊂ A × A is said to be a binary relation on A.
Now, we are ready to define the binary relation of addition on the natural numbers. A
proof of the following theorem can be found on page 5 of [1].
Theorem 2.9. There is a unique binary relation + : N × N, for which +(n, m) is denoted
n + m, that satisfies the following two properties for all n, m ∈ N.
(a) n + 1 = s(n)
(b) n + s(m) = s(n + m)
The theorem below shows that the binary relation + on the set of natural numbers has
the properties we expect, such as associativity, commutativity, and a cancellation law.
Theorem 2.10. For all a, b, c ∈ N the following conditions hold true.
(1) (a + b) + c = a + (b + c) (Associative Law for Addition).
(2) 1 + a = s(a) = a + 1.
(3) a + b = b + a (Commutative Law for Addition).
(4) If a + c = b + c, then a = b (Cancellation Law for Addition).
(5) a + b 6= 1.
(6) a + b 6= a.
Proof. (1) Fix a, b ∈ N. Let G = {c ∈ N : (a + b) + c = a + (b + c)}. Consider c = 1.
Then,
2.9(a) 2.9(b) 2.9(a)
(a + b) + 1 = s(a + b) = a + s(b) = a + (b + 1)).
So, 1 ∈ G. Suppose that c ∈ G. We will show that s(c) ∈ G
2.9(b) c∈G
(a + b) + s(c) = s((a + b) + c) = s(a + (b + c))
2.9(b) 2.9(b)
= a + s(b + c) = a + (b + s(c))

Therefore s(c) ∈ G,whence G = N.

(2) Let G = {a ∈ N : 1 + a = a + 1}. Clearly, G ⊂ N. Since 1 + 1 = 1 + 1, 1 ∈ G.
Assume n ∈ G. We will show that s(n) ∈ G.
2.9(b) n∈G
1 + s(n) = s(1 + n) = s(n + 1)
2.9(b) 2.9(a)
= n + s(1) = n + (1 + 1)
(1) 2.9(a)
= (n + 1) + 1 = s(n) + 1

Since s(n) ∈ G, then G = N.

5
 (3) Let G = {a ∈ N : a + b = b + a}. Clearly, G ⊂ N. From 1 ∈ G. Assume n ∈ G. We
will prove that s(n) ∈ G.
2.9(a) (1)
s(n) + b = (n + 1) + b = n + (1 + b)
(2) 2.9(b)
= n + s(b) = s(n + b)
n∈G 2.9(b)
= s(b + n) = b + s(n)
Thus, s(n) ∈ G, so G = N.
For proofs of (4), (5), and (6) refer to page 7 of [1]. 
Intuitively, we know that we can multiply natural numbers as well. The proof of the
following theorem shows that multiplication on the natural numbers exists and is unique.
Theorem 2.11. There is a unique binary relation · : N × N that satisfies the following two
properties for all n, m ∈ N
(a) n · 1 = n.
(b) n · (m + 1) = (n · m) + n
Proof. A proof that · exists is given on page 6 of [1]. To prove uniqueness:
Suppose there is another binary operation  : N × N such that
(1) n  1 = n.
(2) n  (m + 1) = (n  m) + n.
Let n ∈ N and let P (m) be the proposition that n · m = n  m. Since n · 1 = n = n  1,
P (1) is true. Suppose P (m) is true. Then n · m = n  m. From (b) and (1),
n · (m + 1) = (n · m) + n = (n  m) + n = n  (m + 1).
Hence P (m + 1) holds true. Therefore by weak induction, P (m) is true for all m ∈ N and
· is unique. 
We will now show that multiplication on the natural numbers behaves as we expect it
to.
Theorem 2.12. Let a, b, c ∈ N.
(1) a · 1 = a = 1 · a (Identity Law for Multiplication).
(2) (a + b)c = ac + bc (Distributive Law).
(3) ab = ba (Commutative Law for Multiplication).
(4) c(a + b) = ca + cb (Distributive Law).
(5) (ab)c = a(bc) (Associative Law for Multiplication).
(6) If ac = bc then a = b (Cancellation Law for Multiplication).
(7) ab = 1 if and only if a = 1 = b.
Proof. (1) By definition, a · 1 = a. We will show that the proposition P (a) : 1 · a = a
holds true for all a ∈ N.
Let a = 1. By Theorem 2.11(a), 1 · 1 = 1, hence P (1) holds true.
6
 Assume P (n) holds true, that is 1 · n = n, for some n ∈ N . Consider P (n + 1).
2.11(b)
1 · (n + 1) = (1 · n) + 1 = n + 1
Therefore P (a) holds true for all a ∈ N.
(2) Fix a, b ∈ N. Let P (c) be the proposition that (a + b)c = ac + bc. We will show
that P (c) holds true for all c ∈ N.
2.12(1) 2.12(1)
Let c = 1. Then, (a + b) · 1 = a + b = a · 1 + b · 1, so P (1) holds true.
Assume P (n) holds true for some n ∈ N. Consider P (n + 1).
2.11(b) P (n)
(a + b)(n + 1) = ((a + b)n) + (a + b) = an + bn + a + b
2.10(3) 2.11(b)
= (an + a) + (bn + b) = a(n + 1) + b(n + 1)
Thus P (c) holds true for all c ∈ N.
(3) Fix a ∈ N. Let P (b) be the proposition that ab = ba. We will show that P (b) holds
true for all b ∈ N.
Let b = 1. By (1), P (1) holds true.
Assume P (n) holds true for some n ∈ N. Consider P (n + 1).
2.11(b) 2.11(a) P (1),P (n) 2.12(2)
a(n + 1) = an + a = an + a · 1 = na + 1 · a = (n + 1)a
Thus, P (b) holds true for all b ∈ N.
(4)
2.12(3) 2.12(2) 2.12(3)
c(a + b) = (a + b)c = ac + bc = ca + cb
(5) Fix a, b ∈ N. Let P (c) be the proposition that (ab)c = a(bc). We will show P (c)
holds true for all c ∈ N.
2.11(a) 2.11(a)
Let c = 1. Since (ab) · 1 = ab = a(b · 1), P (1) holds true.
Assume P (n) holds true for some n ∈ N, that is (ab)n = a(bn). Consider
P (n + 1).
2.11(b) P (n) 2.12(4) 2.11(b)
(ab)(n + 1) = (ab)n + ab = a(bn) + ab = a(bn + b) = a(b(n + 1))
Thus, P (c) holds true for all c ∈ N.
(6) This proof can be found on page 7 of [1].
(7) (Forward direction) Proceed by contradiction. Assume ab = 1. First suppose at
least one of a or b does not equal 1. Without loss of generality, let a = 1 and b 6= 1.
Then,
ab = 1 · b = b 6= 1
Now let a 6= 1 and b 6= 1. Then by Lemma 2.5 there is some unique c ∈ N such
that c + 1 = b. So,
2.12(4) 2.10(5)
ab = a(c + 1) = ac + a 6= 1
(Reverse direction) Assume a = 1 = b. Then ab = 1 · 1 = 1.

7
 At this point, we can add or multiply two natural numbers, but we cannot compare
them to one another. Since we know intuitively that there is an order to the set of natural
numbers, we would like to have a way to define that order.
The following definitions characterize types of binary relations on a set. We are partic-
ularly interested in the definition of a partial order.
Definition 2.13. A binary relation, R, on a set A is said to be an equivalence relation on
A if the following conditions hold
(1) (a, a) ∈ R for all a ∈ A (R is reflexive)
(2) (a, b) ∈ R and (b, c) ∈ R implies (a, c) ∈ R for all a, b, c ∈ A (R is transitive)
(3) (a, b) ∈ R if and only if (b, a) ∈ R for all a, b ∈ A (R is symmetric)
Definition 2.14. A binary relation, R, on a set A is said to be a partial order if
(1) (a, a) ∈ R for all a ∈ A (R is reflexive)
(2) (a, b) ∈ R and (b, c) ∈ R implies (a, c) ∈ R for all a, b, c ∈ A (R is transitive)
(3) (a, b) ∈ R and (b, a) ∈ R implies a = b for all a, b ∈ A (R is antisymmetric)
We will now define a method for comparison of two natural numbers.
Definition 2.15. The relation < on N is defined by a < b (a, b ∈ N) if and only if there
is some p ∈ N such that a + p = b. The relation ≤ on N is defined by a ≤ b (a, b ∈ N) if
and only if a < b or a = b.
We can write b < a as a > b and b ≤ a as a ≥ b.
The following theorem gives useful properties for the relations < and ≤. Proofs for (2),
(4), (5), (7), (11), and (13) can be found on page 8 of [1].
Theorem 2.16. For all a, b, c, d ∈ N the following statements hold true.
(1) a ≤ a.
(2) If a ≤ b and b ≤ a, then a = b.
(3) If a ≤ b and b ≤ c, then a ≤ c.
(4) a ≤ b or b ≤ a.
(5) 1 ≤ a.
(6) If a < b and b < c, then a < c.
(7) Precisely one of a < b or a = b or a > b holds (Trichotomy Law).
(8) a ≮ a and a < a + 1.
(9) a < b if and only if a + c < b + c.
(10) a < b if and only if ac < bc.
(11) It cannot be that b < a < b + 1.
(12) If a ≤ b and b < c, then a < c; if a < b and b ≤ c, then a < c.
(13) a ≤ b if and only if a < b + 1.
(14) a < b if and only if a + 1 ≤ b.
By Theorem 2.16 (1), (2), and (3), the relation ≤ is a partial order on N. In addition,
a partially ordered set along with Theorem 2.16 (4) (a comparability condition) is a total
order.
8
 Now that we have the relation ≤, we can define two more important principles that can
be used to prove that a set is equivalent to the set of natural numbers.
Definition 2.17 (Principle of Strong Mathematical Induction). Let P (n) be a proposition
defined for each n ∈ N. If
(1) P (1) holds true
(2) For all k ∈ N, P (n) holds true for all n ≤ k implies P (k + 1) holds true,
then P (n) holds true for all n ∈ N.
A proof for the following theorem can be found on page 9 of [1]. It uses Axiom 2.1 rather
than weak induction, but since we know that they are equivalent, either can be used.
Theorem 2.18 (Well-Ordering Principle). Let G ⊆ N be a non-empty set. Then there is
some m ∈ G such that m ≤ g for all g ∈ G.
This theorem states that every non-empty subset of N has a smallest element. In fact,
Theorem 2.16 implies that a smallest element is unique. The smallest element in the set
of natural numbers is 1, which is essentially stated in Axiom 2.1(a). Since both the Well-
Ordering Principle and the Peano Postulates ensure that the smallest element of the set of
natural numbers is 1, we suspect that those statements might be equivalent. In fact, the
following theorem holds true.
Theorem 2.19. The following are equivalent
(1) The Well-Ordering Principle
(2) The Principle of Strong Mathematical Induction
(3) The Principle of Weak Mathematical Induction
Proof. ((W O) ⇒ (SI)) Let P (n) be a proposition defined for each n ∈ N. Assume condi-
tions (1) and (2) of Definition 2.17 hold true. Let
S = {n ∈ N : P (n) does not hold true}.
Suppose that S 6= ∅. By (WO), S has a smallest element, say n0 . By (1) of Definition
2.17, 1 ∈
/ S. Therefore, n0 6= 1. By Theorem 2.5, there is a k ∈ N such that n0 = k + 1.
We have 1, 2, 3, ..., k ∈
/ S. By definition of S, P (1), P (2), . . . , P (k) holds true. By (2) of
Definition 2.17 we get P (n0 ) holds true. That is n0 ∈ / S. This is a contradiction with the
statement that n0 is the smallest element in S. Whence S 6= ∅ is impossible. Therefore
S = ∅, which is equivalent to P (n) holds true for all n ∈ N.
((SI) ⇒ (W I)) Suppose that P (1) holds true and that P (n) implies P (n + 1) for all
n ∈ N. For k ∈ N, we get
P (1) ⇒ P (2) ⇒ · · · ⇒ P (k).
Therefore the assumptions for (SI) are satisfied, which implies P (n) holds true for all n ∈ N.
((W I) ⇒ (W O)) Let S 6= ∅, S ⊂ N. Let B ⊂ N be defined by
n ∈ B if and only if for all m ∈ N, m ≤ n ⇒ m ∈
/ S.
Define P (n) = ”n ∈ B”.
We have that P (1) = ”1 ∈ B”, which is equivalent to for all m ∈ N, m ≤ 1 ⇒ m ∈
/ S.
9
 If 1 ∈ S, then 1 is the smallest element of S. Suppose that 1 ∈ / S, then 1 ∈ B, that is
P (1) holds true.
Let n ∈ N. Suppose that P (n) holds true. We want to show that P (n + 1) holds true.
Since P (n) holds true, n ∈ B, which is equivalent to 1, 2, 3, . . . , n ∈
/ S. If n + 1 ∈ S, then
n + 1 is the smallest element of S. Suppose that n + 1 ∈ / S. Then P (n + 1) holds true.
By (WI), P (n) holds true for all n ∈ N, that is B = N. Therefore S = ∅, a contradiction.
Therefore, it must be the case that either 1 ∈ S or for some n ∈ N, n + 1 ∈ S while
1, 2, 3, . . . , n ∈
/ S. In any case, it must be that (WO) holds true.


3. The construction of the Integers

In the previous section, we constructed a set of numbers on which addition, multiplica-
tion, and order were defined. However, we want to do more than just add, multiply, and
compare numbers. In particular, we would like to be able to solve all equations of the type
(3) x+n=m
where n, m ∈ N are given and x is unknown. It is easy to see that (3) has a solution
x ∈ N if and only if m > n. In order to have (3) solvable, for all n, m ∈ N, we need
a ”larger” set of numbers which ”contains” N as a subset and on which operations of
addition, multiplication, and order are defined extending the corresponding operations on
N. Intuitively, we know that if m < n, then x will be a ”negative number”, and if m = n,
then x will be ”zero”. In this section, we will construct a ”larger” set of numbers from the
set of natural numbers on which ”negative numbers” and ”zero” are defined.
First, we will introduce a new relation on N × N that will help in constructing the set
we are interested in. By constructing this set from the natural numbers, we will be able to
use the properties of the natural numbers from the previous section for the proofs in this
section.
Definition 3.1. The relation ∼ on N × N is defined by (a, b) ∼ (c, d) if and only if
a + d = b + c, for all (a, b), (c, d) ∈ N × N.
A proof of the following lemma can be found on page 12 of [1].
Lemma 3.2. The relation ∼ is an equivalence relation on N × N.
Definition 3.3 (Integers). The set of integers, denoted Z, is the set of equivalence classes
of N × N with respect to the equivalence relation ∼. That is,
Z = {[(a, b)] : a, b ∈ N}.
The elements 0̂, 1̂ ∈ Z are defined by
2.10(4)
0̂ := [(1, 1)] = {(a, b) ∈ N × N : 1 + b = 1 + a} = {(a, b) ∈ N × N : a = b}
and
2.10(1),(4)
1̂ := [(1 + 1, 1)] = {(a, b) ∈ N × N : (1 + 1) + b = 1 + a} = {(a, b) ∈ N × N : 1 + b = a}.
10
 This set differs from the natural numbers in that the elements of the integers are equiv-
alence classes rather than single elements. In other words, in the set of natural numbers, 1
can only be expressed by the element 1, but in the integers, the element 1̂ can be expressed
as [(2, 1)], [(3, 2)], or any [(a, b)] such that 1 + b = a where a, b ∈ N.
We define addition on the set of integers component-wise.
Definition 3.4. The binary operation + on Z is defined by (a, b, c, d ∈ N),
[(a, b)] + [(c, d)] = [(a + c, b + d)].
A proof that + is well defined on Z is on page 13 of [1].
Now, we define ”negative integers” in the following way.
Definition 3.5. The unary operation − on Z is defined by
−[(a, b)] = [(b, a)], [(a, b)] ∈ Z.
It can be shown that − is well defined.
As an example, the negative of 1̂ is given by
2.10(4)
−1̂ = −[(2, 1)] = [(1, 2)] = {(a, b) ∈ N × N : 1 + b = 2 + a} = {(a, b) ∈ N × N : b = 1 + a}.
We will now look at some of the properties of addition on Z. The following theorem
states that (Z, +) is an abelian group.
Theorem 3.6. Let x, y, z ∈ Z
(1) (x + y) + z = x + (y + z) (Associative Law for Addition)
(2) x + y = y + x (Commutative Law for Addition)
(3) x + 0̂ = x (Identity Law for Addition)
(4) x + (−x) = 0̂ (Inverses Law for Addition)
Proof. (1) This proof can be found on page 13 of [1].
(2) This proof can be found on page 13 of [1].
(3) Let x ∈ Z. Suppose x = [(a, b)] for some a, b ∈ N. Then,
x + 0̂ = [(a, b)] + [(1, 1)] = [(a + 1, b + 1)]
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : (a + 1) + d = (b + 1) + c}
2.10(4)
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : a + d = b + c}
= [(a, b)] = x
Therefore, x + 0̂ = x.
(4) Let x ∈ Z. Suppose x = [(a, b)] for some a, b ∈ N. By the definition of −,
(−x) = [(b, a)]. Then,
x + (−x) = [(a, b)] + [(b, a)] = [(a + b, b + a)]
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : (a + b) + d = (b + a) + c}
2.10(3)(4)
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : d = c}
= [(1, 1)] = 0̂
11
 Therefore, x + (−x) = 0̂.

Next, we will define multiplication on the integers.
Definition 3.7. The binary operation · on Z is defined by
[(a, b)] · [(c, d)] = [(ac + bd, ad + bc)].
It can be shown that · is well defined. Now, we can show that multiplication on the set
of integers has the properties we expect.
Theorem 3.8. Let x, y, z ∈ Z
(1) (xy)z = x(yz) (Associative Law for Multiplication)
(2) x · 1̂ = x (Identity Law for Multiplication)
(3) xy = yx (Commutative Law for Multiplication)
(4) x(y + z) = xy + xz (Distributive Law)
(5) If xy = 0̂, then x = 0̂ or y = 0̂ (No Zero Divisors Law)
Proof. A proof for (5) can be found on page 13 of [1]. We will only prove (2) here, but the
rest can be proved in a similar way.
Let x ∈ Z. Suppose x = [(a, b)] for some a, b ∈ N. Then,
x · 1̂ = [(a, b)] · [(2, 1)]
= [(2a + b, a + 2b)]
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : 2a + b + d = a + 2b + c}
2.10(4)
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : a + d = b + c}
= [(a, b)] = x
Therefore, x · 1̂ = x 
Theorem 3.8 (1), (2), and (3) give that (Z, ·) is a commutative monoid.
The standard orders on Z can be defined in the following way.
Definition 3.9. The relation < on Z is defined by [(a, b)] < [(c, d)] if and only if a+d < b+c
([(a, b)], [(c, d)] ∈ Z).
The relation ≤ on Z is defined by [(a, b)] ≤ [(c, d)] if and only if [(a, b)] < [(c, d)] or
[(a, b)] = [(c, d)] ([(a, b)], [(c, d)] ∈ Z).
A proof that < is well defined on Z is on page 13 of [1]. Since the relation ≤ is defined
in terms of <, it follows that ≤ is also well defined.
Some important properties of the relation < are given below. A proof for (3) in the
following theorem can be found on page 13 of [1], and a proof for (5) can be found on page
16.
Theorem 3.10. Let x, y, z ∈ Z
(1) Precisely one of x < y or x = y or x > y holds (Trichotomy Law)
12
 (2) If x < y and y < z, then x < z (Transitive Law)
(3) If x < y then x + z < y + z (Addition Law for Order)
(4) If x < y and z > 0̂, then xz < yz (Multiplication Law for Order)
(5) 0̂ < 1̂ (Non-Triviality)

The properties in the following theorem can be proved from the properties we already
have. Parts (2), (6), and (8) are proved on page 16 of [1].

Theorem 3.11. Let x, y, z ∈ Z

(1) If x + z = y + z, then x = y. (Cancellation Law for Addition).
(2) −(−x) = x.
(3) −(x + y) = (−x) + (−y).
(4) x · 0̂ = 0̂.
(5) If z 6= 0̂ and if xz = yz, then x = y (Cancellation Law for Multiplication).
(6) (−x)y = −xy = x(−y).
(7) xy = 1̂ if and only if x = 1̂ = y or x = −1̂ = y.
(8) x > 0̂ if and only if −x < 0̂, and x < 0̂ if and only if −x > 0̂.
(9) If x ≤ y and y ≤ x, then x = y.
(10) If x > 0̂ and y > 0̂, then xy > 0̂. If x > 0̂ and y < 0̂, then xy < 0̂.

Though the natural numbers and the integers are disjoint sets, we can find a copy of the
set of natural numbers in the set of integers by defining the following mapping.

Theorem 3.12. Let i : N → Z be defined by

i(n) = [(n + 1, 1)].

(1) The function i is injective.

(2) i(N) = {x ∈ Z : x > 0̂}.
(3) i(1) = 1̂
(4) Let a, b ∈ N. Then
a) i(a + b) = i(a) + i(b);
b) i(ab) = i(a)i(b);
c) a < b if and only if i(a) < i(b).

Proof. (1) Let a, b ∈ N be distinct elements such that i(a) = i(b). Then, by the way we
defined i,
i(a) = [(a + 1, 1)] = [(b + 1, 1)] = i(b).
So, (a + 1, 1) ∼ (b + 1, 1). Then,

(a + 1) + 1 = 1 + (b + 1).

By cancellation, a = b, hence i : N → Z is injective.

(3) It is clear that i(1) = [(1 + 1, 1)] = 1̂.
13
 (4b) Let a, b ∈ N. By the way we defined i and the properties of N,

i(ab) = [(ab + 1, 1)] = {(c, d) ∈ N × N : (ab + 1) + d = 1 + c}

2.10(4)
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : (ab + 1) + d + a + b + 1 = 1 + c + a + b + 1}
2.10(1)
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : ab + a + b + 1 + 1 + d = a + 1 + b + 1 + c}
2.12(2)
= {(c, d) ∈ N × N : (a + 1)(b + 1) + 1 · 1 + d = (a + 1) · 1 + (b + 1) · 1 + c}
= [((a + 1)(b + 1) + 1 · 1, (a + 1) · 1 + (b + 1) · 1)]
3.7
= [(a + 1, 1)] · [(b + 1, 1)]
= i(a)i(b)

(4c) (⇒) Let a, b ∈ N. Suppose a < b. Then by the properties of N,

(a + 1) + 1 < 1 + (b + 1).

By Definition 3.9, [(a + 1, 1)] < [(b + 1, 1)], which is equivalent to i(a) < i(b).
(⇐) Let a, b ∈ N. Suppose i(a) < i(b). Then, [(a + 1, 1)] < [(b + 1, 1)] and by Definition
3.9,

(a + 1) + 1 < 1 + (b + 1).

By the properties of N, a < b.

Proofs for (2) and (4a) are on page 14 of [1]. 

Note that 2̂ = [(1 + 1 + 1, 1)] = [(3, 1)], 3̂ = [(4, 1)], and so on.
The following theorem shows that (Z, ≤) is a total order.

Theorem 3.13. Let x, y, z ∈ Z.

(1) x ≤ x.
(2) If x ≤ y and y ≤ x, then x = y.
(3) If x ≤ y and y ≤ z, then x ≤ z.
(4) Precisely one of x < y or x = y or x > y holds. (Trichotomy Law)

Observe that all equations of the type x + n = m where n, m ∈ Z are solvable in Z.

Namely, x = m + (−n) ∈ Z.
The integers can be represented in terms of sets by using Kuratowski’s definition of an
ordered pair given below.

Definition 3.14. Let A be a set and a, b ∈ A. The ordered pair (a, b) is defined by
(a, b) = {{a}, {a, b}}
14
 Using this definition, the elements of Z are represented as follows.
..
.
−1̂ = [(1, 2)] = [{{1}, {1, 2}}] = {{{a}, {a, a + 1}} : a ∈ N}
0̂ = [(1, 1)] = [{{1}}] = {{{a}} : a ∈ N}
1̂ = [(2, 1)] = [{{2}, {2, 1}}] = {{{1 + a}, {1 + a, 1}} : a ∈ N}
2̂ = [(3, 1)] = [{{3}, {3, 1}}] = {{{1 + 1 + a}, {1 + 1 + a, 1}} : a ∈ N}
..
.
For the remainder of this paper, when referring to the integers, we will write 0 in place
of 0̂, 1 in place of 1̂, and so on.

4. The construction of the Rational Numbers

So far, we have a set, the integers, which contains a copy of the natural numbers within
it and has the operations +, − and · as well as the relations < and ≤. We see that an
equation of the type
(4) cx = d
where c, d ∈ Z is solvable in Z if and only if d = kc for some k ∈ Z. Again, we would like
to find a ”larger” set of numbers with compatible operations +, ·, and < such that every
equation of the type (4), with c 6= 0, is solvable in this new set.
To define this ”larger” set, we will need a new relation that will allow us to find multi-
plicative inverses in this set, similar to the way the relation ∼ allowed us to find additive
inverses in Z.
Definition 4.1. Let Z∗ = Z − {0}. The relation  on Z × Z∗ is defined by (x, y)  (z, w)
if and only if xw = yz, for all (x, y), (z, w) ∈ Z × Z∗ .
This relation being based on multiplication is what will allow us to define multiplicative
inverses and division.
A proof for the following lemma is on page 27 of [1].
Lemma 4.2. The relation  is an equivalence relation.
Definition 4.3 (Rational Numbers). The set of rational numbers, denoted Q, is the set
of equivalence classes of Z × Z∗ with respect to the equivalence relation . That is,
Q = {[(x, y)] : x ∈ Z and y ∈ Z∗ }.
The elements 0̄, 1̄ ∈ Q are defined by
3.8(2),3.11(4)
0̄ := [(0, 1)] = {(x, y) ∈ Z × Z∗ : 0 · y = 1 · x} = {(0, y) ∈ Z × Z∗ }
and
3.8(2)
1̄ := [(1, 1)] = {(x, y) ∈ Z × Z∗ : 1 · y = 1 · x} = {(x, x) ∈ Z × Z∗ }.
15
 Notice that the elements of the set of rational numbers, similar to the integers, are
equivalence classes. The difference here is that, for Q, the set of equivalence classes is
obtained from the relation  on Z × Z∗ , whereas for Z, the set of equivalence classes is
obtained from the relation ∼ on N × N.
The following two theorems describe which ordered pairs represent the rational numbers
0̄ and 1̄, respectively.
Theorem 4.4. Let x ∈ Z and y ∈ Z∗ . Then [(x, y)] = 0̄ if and only if x = 0.
Proof. (⇒) Suppose [(x, y)] = 0̄. Then,
(x, y) ∈ [(0, 1)] = {(z, w) ∈ Z × Z∗ : 0 · w = 1 · z}.
Thus, z = 0 for all (z, w) ∈ [(0, 1)]. Therefore, x = 0.
(⇐) Suppose x = 0. Then,
[(x, y)] = [(0, y)] = {(z, w) ∈ Z × Z : 0 · w = y · z}.
It is clear that (0, 1) ∈ [(x, y)],whence [(x, y)] = [(0, 1)] = 0̄. 
Theorem 4.5. Let x ∈ Z and y ∈ Z∗ . Then [(x, y)] = 1̄ if and only if x = y.
Proof. (⇒) Suppose [(x, y)] = 1̄. Then,
(x, y) = [(1, 1)] = {(z, w) ∈ Z × Z∗ : 1 · w = 1 · z}
= {(z, w) ∈ Z × Z∗ : w = z}.
Thus, x = y.
(⇐) Suppose x = y. Then,
[(x, y)] = [(x, x)] = {(z, w) ∈ Z × Z∗ : x · w = x · z}
3.11(5)
= {(z, w) ∈ Z × Z∗ : w = z}.
Clearly, (1, 1) ∈ [(x, y)], so [(x, y)] = [(1, 1)] = 1̄. 
Addition on Q is defined as follows.
Definition 4.6. The binary operation + on Q is defined by
[(x, y)] + [(z, w)] = [(xw + yz, yw)]
for all [(x, y)], [(z, w)] ∈ Q.
It can be shown that + on Q is well-defined.
Definition 4.7. The unary operation − on Q is defined by
−[(x, y)] = [(−x, y)], [(x, y)] ∈ Q.
A proof that − on Q is well-defined can be found on page 28 of [1].
The below theorem shows that (Q, +) is an abelian group. A proof for (3) below can be
found on page 29 of [1].
Theorem 4.8. Let r, s, t ∈ Q.
16
 (1) (r + s) + t = r + (s + t) (Associative Law for Addition)
(2) r + 0̄ = r (Identity Law for Addition)
(3) r + (−r) = 0̄ (Inverses Law for Addition)
(4) r + s = s + r (Commutative Law for Addition)
Proof. (2) Let r = [(x, y)] where (x, y) ∈ Z × Z∗ . By Definition 4.6,
r + 0̄ = [(x, y)] + [(0, 1)] = [(x · 1 + y · 0, y · 1)] = [(x, y)] = r.
(4) Let r = [(x, y)] and s = [(z, w)] where (x, y), (z, w) ∈ Z × Z∗ . Then,
4.6 3.6(2)
r + s = [(x, y)] + [(z, w)] = [(xw + yz, yw)] = [(yz + xw, yw)]
3.8(3)
= [(zy + wx, wy)] = [(z, w)] · [(x, y)] = s + r.

Multiplication on Q is defined component-wise.
Definition 4.9. The binary operation · on Q is defined by
[(x, y)] · [(z, w)] = [(xz, yw)]
for all [(x, y)], [(z, w)] ∈ Q.
A proof that · on Q is well-defined can be found on page 28 of [1].
Our next goal is to show that (Q∗ , ·) is an abelian group (recall that (Z, ·) is just a
commutative monoid). We will start by defining a new unary operation on Q.
Definition 4.10. Let Q∗ = Q − {0̄}. The unary operation −1 on Q∗ is defined by
[(x, y)]−1 = [(y, x)] for all [(x, y)] ∈ Q∗ .
A proof for (2) in the following theorem is given on page 29 of [1]. Properties (1), (2),
(3), and (4) show that (Q, ·) an abelian group.
Theorem 4.11. Let r, s, t ∈ Q.
(1) (rs)t = r(st) (Associative Law for Multiplication)
(2) r · 1̄ = r (Identity Law for Multiplication)
(3) If r 6= 0̄, then r · r−1 = 1̄ (Inverses Law for Multiplication)
(4) rs = sr (Commutative Law for Multiplication)
(5) r(s + t) = rs + rt (Distributive Law)
Theorem 4.11 along with Theorem 4.8 makes (Q, +, ·) a field. In fact, we will soon see
that (Q, +, ·, <) is an ordered field.
Definition 4.12. The relation < on Q is defined by ([(x, y)], [(z, w)] ∈ Q),
(
xw < yz whenever y, w > 0 or y, w < 0
[(x, y)] < [(z, w)] if and only if
xw > yz whenever y > 0, w < 0 or y < 0, w > 0.
The relation ≤ on Q is defined by [(x, y)] ≤ [(z, w)] if and only if either [(x, y)] < [(z, w)]
or [(x, y)] = [(z, w)], for all [(x, y)], [(z, w)] ∈ Q.
17
 It can be shown that < is well-defined, and the fact that ≤ is well-defined follows.
Theorem 4.13. Let x ∈ Z and y ∈ Z∗ . 0̄ < [(x, y)] if and only if 0 < xy.
Proof. (⇒) Suppose 0̄ = [(0, 1)] < [(x, y)]. By Definition 4.14, since 1 > 0, either
0 · y < 1 · x if y > 0
or
0 · y > 1 · x if y < 0.
Thus, if y > 0, then x > 0, and if y < 0, then x < 0. In either case, 0 < xy.
(⇐) Suppose 0 < xy. There are two cases.
Case 1: x > 0 and y > 0. Then, 0 · y < 1 · x, which implies 0̄ = [(0, 1)] < [(x, y)].
Case 2: x < 0 and y < 0. Then, 0 · y > 1 · x, which implies 0̄ = [(0, 1)] < [(x, y)]. 
Similarly, by applying Definition 4.7, we can see that 0̄ > [(x, y)] if and only if 0 > xy.
The following theorem gives the remaining properties that make (Q, +, ·, <) an ordered
field. Parts (1) and (4) of the following theorem are proved on page 29 of [1].
Theorem 4.14. Let r, s, t ∈ Q.
(1) Precisely one of r < s or r = s or r > s holds (Trichotomy Law)
(2) If r < s and s < t, then r < t (Transitive Law)
(3) If r < s then r + t < s + t (Addition Law for Order)
(4) If r < s and t > 0̄, then rt < st (Multiplication Law for Order)
(5) 0̄ < 1̄ (Non-Triviality)
(6) Let s ∈ Q. Then s · s ≥ 0̄.
Proof. (6) If s = 0̄, then s · s = 0̄ · 0̄ = 0̄.
If s > 0̄, then by Theorem 4.14(4), s · s > 0̄ · s = 0̄.
If s < 0̄, then −s > 0̄. By Theorem 4.14(4), s · (−s) = −(s · s) < 0̄ · (−s) = 0̄. Thus,
s · s > 0̄. 
Once again, we can find a copy of the set of integers inside the set of rational numbers.
Part (4) of the following theorem is proved on page 30 of [1].
Theorem 4.15. Let i : Z → Q be defined by
i(x) = [(x, 1)].
(1) The function i is injective.
(2) i(0) = 0̄ and i(1) = 1̄.
(3) Let x, y ∈ Z. Then
a) i(x + y) = i(x) + i(y);
b) i(−x) = −i(x);
c) i(xy) = i(x)i(y);
d) x < y if and only if i(x) < i(y).
This mapping preserves additive and multiplicative identities as well as the operations
+, −, ·, and the relation <. It also preserves the relation ≤ since ≤ was defined in terms
of <. Below are some properties of the relation ≤.
18
Theorem 4.16. Let r, s, t ∈ Q.
(1) r ≤ r.
(2) If r ≤ s and s ≤ r, then r = s.
(3) If r ≤ s and s ≤ t, then r ≤ t.
(4) Precisely one of r < s or r = s or r > s holds. (Trichotomy Law)
Theorem 4.16 shows that (Q, ≤) is a total order.
The binary operations of subtraction and division are defined in terms of addition with
additive inverses and multiplication with multiplicative inverses, respectively.
Definition 4.17. The binary operation − on Q is defined by r − s = r + (−s) for all
r, s ∈ Q. The binary operation ÷ on Q∗ is defined by r ÷ s = rs−1 for all r, s ∈ Q∗ ; we
also let 0̄ ÷ s = 0̄ · s−1 = 0̄ for all s ∈ Q∗ . The number r ÷ s is also denoted rs .
The following lemma is a restatement of previous properties using this new notation.
Lemma 4.18. Let a, c ∈ Z and b, d ∈ Z∗ .
(1) ab = dc if and only if ad = bc.
(2) ab + dc = ad+bcbd .
a −a
(3) − b = b .
(4) ab · dc = ac
bd .
(5) If a 6= 0, then ( ab )−1 = ab .
a
(6) If b > 0 and d > 0, or if b < 0 and d < 0, then b < dc if and only if ad < bc; if
b > 0 and d < 0, or if b < 0 and d > 0, then ab < c
d if and only if ad > bc.
Notice that an equation cx = d with c ∈ Q∗ and d ∈ Q is solvable in Q. Namely,
x = dc ∈ Q.
Just as we did for the integers, we can write the elements of Q in terms of sets. We
only express 0̄ and 1̄ in terms of sets below, but other r ∈ Q can be expressed in a similar
manner.
0̄ = [(0, 1)] = [{{0}, {0, 1}}] = {{{{{{a}}}}, {{{{a}}}, {{{1 + a}, {1 + a, 1}}}}} : a ∈ N}
1̄ = [(1, 1)] = [{{1}}] = {{{{{1 + a}, {1 + a, 1}}}} : a ∈ N}

5. The construction of the Real Numbers

We will now switch to writing 0 instead of 0̄, 1 instead of 1̄, and so on.
Observe that an equation of the type
(5) x·x=r
where r ∈ Q is solvable in Q if and only if r = s · s for some s ∈ Q. We can see that r = 2
has no solution to (5) in Q. Since s · s ≥ 0 for all s ∈ Q, we would like to construct a set
of numbers which is ”larger” than Q (with compatible operations +, ·, and <) such that
every equation of the type (5) is solvable for r ∈ Q with r ≥ 0.
In order to construct the set we desire, we will first need to introduce a new type of set.
19
Definition 5.1. Let A ⊂ Q be a set. The set A is a Dedekind cut if the following three
properties hold.
a) A 6= ∅ and A 6= Q.
b) Let x ∈ A. If y ∈ Q and y ≥ x, then y ∈ A.
c) Let x ∈ A. Then there is some y ∈ A such that y < x.
So a Dedekind cut is a non-empty proper subset of Q containing all elements greater
than some value, but it does not have a smallest element. Since the construction of the
real numbers is quite different than the previous set constructions, we will first discuss
Dedekind cuts in more detail to aid in understanding the real numbers.
A proof for the following lemma can be found on page 35 of [1].
Lemma 5.2. Let r ∈ Q. Then the set
{x ∈ Q : x > r}
is a Dedekind cut.
The following definition will describe the two types of Dedekind cuts.
Definition 5.3. Let r ∈ Q. The rational cut at r, denoted Dr , is the Dedekind cut
Dr = {x ∈ Q : x > r}.
An irrational cut is a Dedekind cut that is not a rational cut at any rational number.
This classification of cuts is how we will distinguish between rational and irrational
numbers.
The complement of a Dedekind cut will also be useful.
Lemma 5.4. Let A ⊆ Q be a Dedekind cut.
(1) Q − A = {x ∈ Q : x < a for all a ∈ A}
(2) Let x ∈ Q − A. If y ∈ Q and y ≤ x, then y ∈ Q − A.
Proof. (1) This proof can be found on page 36 of [1].
(2) Let x ∈ Q − A. Then, x < a. Suppose y ∈ Q and y ≤ x. By transitivity, y < a,
hence y ∈ Q − A.

The following lemma will help us to define order on the set of real numbers. A proof
can be found on page 37 of [1].
Lemma 5.5. Let A, B ⊂ Q be Dedekind cuts. Then precisely one of A ( B or A = B or
B ( A holds.
We can also consider the union of Dedekind cuts. A proof for the following lemma can
be found on page 37 of [1].
S
Lemma
S 5.6. Let A be a non-empty family of Dedekind cuts of Q. If A∈A A 6= Q, then
A∈A A is a Dedekind cut.
20
Example 1. Suppose that a0 > 0 and let An = Dan = {x ∈ Q : x > an } where
 
1 2
(6) an = + an−1
2 an−1
∞
S ∞
S
The sequence (an ) is strictly decreasing. Since 0 ∈
/ An , we can see that An 6= Q ,
n=0 n=0
∞
S ∞
S
which implies An is a Dedekind cut. Because (6) does not converge in Q, An is an
n=0 n=0
irrational cut.
Since we are interested in arithmetic operations on the set of real numbers, we would
like to see that those operations on Dedekind cuts produce another Dedekind cut. That is
the case, as we can see in the following lemma.
Lemma 5.7. Let A, B ⊂ Q be Dedekind cuts.
(1) The set
{r ∈ Q : r = a + b for some a ∈ A and b ∈ B}
is a Dedekind cut.
(2) The set
{r ∈ Q : −r < c for some c ∈ Q − A}
is a Dedekind cut.
(3) Suppose that 0 ∈ Q − A and 0 ∈ Q − B. The set
{r ∈ Q : r = ab for some a ∈ A and b ∈ B}
is a Dedekind cut.
(4) Suppose that there is some q ∈ Q − A such that q > 0. The set
1
{r ∈ Q : r > 0 and < c for some c ∈ Q − A}
r
is a Dedekind cut.
Proof. Proofs for parts (1), (2), and (4) can be found on page 38 of [1].
(3) Suppose that 0 ∈ Q − A and 0 ∈ Q − B where A and B are Dedekind cuts. Let
C = {r ∈ Q : r = ab for some a ∈ A and b ∈ B}.
Clearly, C 6= ∅. Since 0 ∈
/ C, then C 6= Q.
Now, let x ∈ C. So, x = ab for some a ∈ A and b ∈ B. Suppose y ∈ Q and y ≥ x. If
y = x, then y = ab ∈ C. Suppose y > x. Since y ∈ Q, then y = a1 b1 for some a1 , b1 ∈ Q.
Take a1 = a. Then,
y = ab1 > ab = x.
−1
Since a > 0 (0 ∈ Q − A), then a > 0. By Theorem 4.14(4),
a−1 ab1 > a−1 ab.
Thus, b1 > b, which implies b1 ∈ B. Therefore, y = ab1 ∈ C.
21
 Suppose x = a1 b1 ∈ C is the smallest element in C. Since a1 ∈ A and A is a Dedekind
cut, there exists some a0 ∈ A such that a0 < a1 . Let y = a0 b1 . Then y ∈ C. Since b1 > 0
(0 ∈ Q − B), then a0 b1 < a1 b1 .
Therefore, by Definition 5.1, C is a Dedekind cut. 

A proof for the following lemma can be found on page 39 of [1].

Lemma 5.8. Let A ⊂ Q be a Dedekind cut. Let y ∈ Q.
(1) Suppose that y > 0. Then there are u ∈ A and v ∈ Q − A such that y = u − v, and
v < c for some c ∈ Q − A.
(2) Suppose that y > 1, and that there is some q ∈ Q − A such that q > 0. Then there
are r ∈ A and s ∈ Q−A such that s > 0, and y > rs , and s < g for some g ∈ Q−A.
We are now ready to define the set of real numbers.
Definition 5.9. The set of real numbers, denoted R, is defined by
R = {A ⊂ Q : A is a Dedekind cut }.
Using Lemma 5.7(1), we define addition on R in the following way.
Definition 5.10. The binary operation + on R is defined by
A + B = {r ∈ Q : r = a + b for some a ∈ A and b ∈ B}
for all A, B ∈ R. The unary operation − on R is defined by
−A = {r ∈ Q : −r < c for some c ∈ Q − A}
for all A ∈ R.
By Lemma 5.7, A + B and −A are Dedekind cuts.
We define
0̃ := D0 = {x ∈ Q : x > 0},

1̃ := D1 = {x ∈ Q : x > 1}.
Now, we will show that addition on R has the properties we expect. Proofs for (1), (3),
and (4) below can be found on page 44 of [1].
Lemma 5.11. Let A, B, C ∈ R.
(1) (A + B) + C = A + (B + C) (Associative Law for Addition).
(2) A + B = B + A (Commutative Law for Addition).
(3) A + 0̃ = A (Identity Law for Addition).
(4) A + (−A) = 0̃ (Inverses Law for Addition).
We see that (R, +) is an abelian group.
Multiplication on R is defined in the following way.
22
Definition 5.12. The binary operation · on R is defined by


 {r ∈ Q : r = ab for some a ∈ A and b ∈ B}, if A ≥ 0̃ and B ≥ 0̃

−[(−A) · B], if A < 0̃ and B ≥ 0̃
A·B =

 −[A · (−B)], if A ≥ 0̃ and B < 0̃

(−A) · (−B), if A < 0̃ and B < 0̃.


The unary operation −1 is defined by

(
1
−1 {r ∈ Q : r > 0 and r < c for some c ∈ Q − A}, if A > 0̃
A =
−(−A)−1 , if A < 0̃.

Again, from Lemma 5.7, we know that A · B and A−1 are Dedekind cuts.
We define R∗ by R∗ = R − {0̃}. We can see from the following lemma that multiplication
on R has the properties that make (R∗ , ·) an abelian group. Parts (2), (4), and (5) of the
following lemma are proved on page 44 of [1].
Lemma 5.13. Let A, B, C ∈ R.
(1) (AB)C = A(BC) (Associative Law for Multiplication).
(2) AB = BA (Commutative Law for Multiplication).
(3) A · 1̃ = A (Identity Law for Multiplication).
(4) If A 6= 0̃, then AA−1 = 1̃ (Inverses Law for Multiplication).
(5) A(B + C) = AB + AC (Distributative Law).
By Lemma 5.11 and Lemma 5.13, we can see that (R, +, ·) is a field.
Next, we will define order on R.
Definition 5.14. The relation < on R is defined by A < B if and only if A ) B, for all
A, B ∈ R. The relation ≤ on R is defined by A ≤ B if and only if A ⊇ B, for all A, B ∈ R.
A proof for (3) in the following lemma can be found on page 43 of [1].
Lemma 5.15. Let A ∈ R, and let r ∈ Q.
(1) A > Dr if and only if there is some q ∈ Q − A such that q > r.
(2) A ≥ Dr if and only if r ∈ Q − A if and only if a > r for all a ∈ A.
(3) If A < 0̃ then −A ≥ 0̃.
Proof. (1) (⇒) Let A be a Dedekind cut and let Dr = {x ∈ Q : x > r}. Suppose A > Dr .
Then by Definition 5.14, Dr ) A. Then there is some s ∈ Dr such that s ∈ / A, that is
r < s < a for all a ∈ A. By Lemma 5.4(1), s ∈ Q − A.
(⇐) Let A be a Dedekind cut and let Dr = {x ∈ Q : x > r}. Suppose there is some
q ∈ Q − A such that q > r. Since q ∈
/ A, it is the case that q < a. Because q > r, q ∈ Dr .
This implies Dr ) A. By Definition 5.14, A > Dr .
(2) (⇒) Let A be a Dedekind cut and let Dr = {x ∈ Q : x > r}. Suppose A ≥ Dr . Then
by Definition 5.14, Dr ⊇ A. If A = Dr , then their complements are equal as well. Since
r∈/ Dr , then r ∈ Q − Dr = Q − A. Since r ∈
/ A, then a > r for all a ∈ A. Suppose Dr ) A.
23
Then there is s ∈ Dr such s ∈/ A, that is r < s < a for all a ∈ A. By Lemma 5.4(1), since
r < a, then r ∈ Q − A.
(⇐) Let A be a Dedekind cut and let Dr = {x ∈ Q : x > r}. Suppose r ∈ Q − A. Then
by Lemma 5.4(1), r < a for all a ∈ A. This implies a ∈ Dr for all a ∈ A. Thus Dr ⊇ A. 
For the following lemma, a proof for (2) can be found on page 44 of [1], a proof for (4)
is on page 45, and a proof for (5) appears on page 46.
Lemma 5.16. Let A, B, C ∈ R.
(1) Precisely one of A < B or A = B or A > B holds (Trichotomy Law).
(2) If A < B and B < C, then A < C (Transitive Law).
(3) 0̃ < 1̃.
(4) If A < B then A + C < B + C (Addition Law for Order).
(5) If A < B and C > 0̃, then AC < BC (Multiplication Law for Order).
We have a copy of the set of rational numbers inside the set of real numbers.
Theorem 5.17. Let i : Q → R be defined by
i(r) = Dr .
(1) The function i is injective.
(2) i(0) = 0̃ and i(1) = 1̃.
(3) Let r, s ∈ Q. Then
a) i(r + s) = i(r) + i(s);
b) i(−r) = −i(r);
c) i(rs) = i(r)i(s);
d) if r 6= 0 then i(r−1 ) = [i(r)]−1 ;
e) r < s if and only if i(r) < i(s).
The following theorem along with 5.16(1) show that (R, +, ·, ≤) is a total order.
Theorem 5.18. Let A, B, C ∈ R.
(1) A ≤ A.
(2) If A ≤ B and B ≤ A, then A = B.
(3) If A ≤ B and B ≤ C, then A ≤ C.
We can define the elements of R, in terms of sets only, like we did for the integers and
rational numbers. We will only show 0̃ here, but the other elements of R can be represented
in a similar manner.
4.13
0̃ = {x ∈ Q : x > 0̄} = {[(x, y)] ∈ Q : xy > 0̂}
3.7
= {[([(a, b)], [(c, d)])] ∈ Q : [(ac + bd, ad + bc)] > [(1, 1)]}
= {[([(a, b)], [(c, d)])] ∈ Q : ac + bd + 1 > ad + bc + 1 where a, b, c, d ∈ N}
= {{[([(a, b)], [(c, d)])] ∈ Q : ac + bd > ad + bc where a, b, c, d ∈ N}
= {{{{{{{a}, {a, b}}}}, {{{{a}, {a, b}}}, {{{c}, {c, d}}}}}} : ac + bd > ad + bc where a, b, c, d ∈ N}
24
 At this point, we have seen that the properties for +, ·, and < that we had with previous
sets still hold for the real numbers. Now, we will discuss the properties that are unique to
the real numbers.
Definition 5.19. Let A ⊆ R be a set.
(1) The set A is bounded above if there is some M ∈ R such that X ≤ M for all X ∈ A.
The number M is called an upper bound of A.
(2) The set A is bounded below if there is some P ∈ R such that X ≥ P for all X ∈ A.
The number P is called a lower bound of A.
(3) The set A is bounded if it is bounded above and bounded below.
(4) Let M ∈ R. The number M is a least upper bound (also called a supremum) of A
if M is an upper bound of A, and if M ≤ T for all upper bounds T of A.
(5) Let P ∈ R. The number P is a greatest lower bound (also called a infimum) of A
if P is a lower bound of A, and if P ≥ V for all lower bounds V of A.
A proof for the following theorem is given on page 47 of [1].
Theorem 5.20. Let A ⊆ R be a set. If A is non-empty and bounded below, then A has a
greatest lower bound.
A proof of the following theorem can be found on page 48 of [1].
Theorem 5.21. Let A ⊆ R be a set. If A is non-empty and bounded above, then A has a
least upper bound.
Theorem 5.21 is called a completeness axiom of R. Based on it, one can prove that for
every x ∈ R, x ≥ 0̃, there is a y ∈ R, y ≥ 0̃ such that x · x = y. That is, every non-negative
real number has a square root.
Another method of constructing R from Q is to use equivalence classes (with respect to
a certain equivalence relation) of Cauchy sequences in the metric space (Q, | · |), where | · |
is the standard distance between rational numbers.
Observe that the equation
(7) x·x+1=0
is not solvable in R. It turns out that we can construct another ”larger” set of numbers,
called the complex numbers (denoted C), which ”contains” R and has appropriate oper-
ations + and · defined, so that (7) is solvable. Then, by the Fundamental Theorem of
Algebra, every equation of the type
an xn + · · · + a2 x2 + a1 x + a0 = 0
where ai ∈ C with i = 1, 2, . . . , n ∈ N is solvable in C.

Acknowledgment
This paper was written under the supervision of Dr. Damian Kubiak. I would like to
thank him for all of his help and time spent.
25
 References
[1] E. D. Bloch, The real numbers and real analysis, First, Springer, New York, NY, 2011.
[2] M. Kline, Mathematical thought from ancient to modern times. Vol. 1, Second, The Clarendon Press,
Oxford University Press, New York, 1990. MR1039322

26