Chapter 1: The Real Numbers

Optional reading: Logic and Proofs, page 334 (Appendix A) of the textbook.

1.1. Set Operations. Given two sets A and B.

We write A B if x A = x B. In this case, we say that A is a subset
of B.
The union of A and B is defined by
A B = {x : x A or x B}.
The intersection of A and B is defined by
A B = {x : x A and x B}.
The complement of B relative to A is defined by
A\B = {x : x A and x < B}.

The set with no element is called the empty set, and is denoted by .

1.2. Number systems.

Starting with natural numbers N = {1, 2, 3, }, we obtain real numbers R by
adding more and more new numbers in the following steps:
Step 1. By adding 0 and negative numbers, we(have integers Z = {0, ) 1, 2, 3, }.
p 
Step 2. Then we have rational numbers Q =  p, q Z, q , 0 .
q
Step 3. Then, by adding irrational numbers, we have all real numbers.

N = {1, 2, 3, ...} = the set of all natural numbers

Z = {0, 1, 2, ...} = the set of all integers
n 
Q = : n, m Z, m , 0 = the set of all rational numbers
m
R = the set of all real numbers.

1
2

We have
N Z Q R.

The real line: It is convenient to identify real numbers with points on a line.

1/2 2

3 2 1 0 1 2 3

There are real numbers which are not rational. These numbers are called irra-
tional numbers. So R\Q is the set of all irrational numbers.

Theorem 1.2.1. 2 is irrational.

Definition An integer n is said to be

even if n = 2k for some integer k;
odd if n = 2k 1 some integer k.
What can say about the parity of n2 if n is even/odd?

Proof of Theorem 1.2.1: Suppose 2 is rational. Then
n
2=
m
where n and m are integers with no common factor other than 1. Then
n2
2= 2
m
and
2m2 = n2 .
This says that n2 is even. So n is also even, and n = 2k for some integer k.
Substituting this into the last equation, we get
2m2 = 4k2 .
So
m2 = 2k2 .
 3

But this says m2 is even. So m is also even. It follows that 2 isa common factor
for n and m. This contradicts our assumption on n and m. So 2 is not rational.


Exercise Prove that 3 is irrational.
A more general statement is as follows:
Exercise Show that if n is a natural number, and there is no natural number

whose square is n, then n is NOT a rational number.

1.3. The natural numbers. We shall assume that N has the following funda-
mental property:

Well-ordering principle for N: Every nonempty subset A of N has a least

(first) element, i.e. there exists p A such that p a for all a A

Example If A = {203, 206, 209, 212, ...}, then the least element in A is 203.
Note that A has no largest element.

Principle of mathematical induction. Let S N. If

(i) 1 S ; and
(ii) k S = k + 1 S ;
then S = N.

Proof: Suppose S , N. Let S c = N\S . Then S c , . So by the well-ordering

principle, S c has a least element p. Since 1 S , p > 1 and p 1 S . By (ii),
p = (p 1) + 1 S . But this contradicts p S c . 

Exercise Prove that the principle of mathematical induction also implies the
well-ordering principle. So these two statements are equivalent.
4

Proof. Let A be a nonempty subset of N. Suppose that A has NO least element.

Let

S = {k | {1, 2, . . . , k} N r A}.

Then 1 S because otherwise 1 is the least element of A. Assume that k S ,

i.e. 1, 2, . . . , k < A. Then k + 1 < A because otherwise k + 1 is the least
element of A. Thus k + 1 S because 1, 2, . . . , k + 1 N r A. By the principle
of mathematical induction, S = N. It follows that A is the empty set, which
contradicts to that A is nonempty. 

Principle of mathematical induction (application version): For each n

N, let P(n) be a statement about n. If
(i) P(1) is true; and
(ii) P(k) is true = P(k + 1) is true;
then P(n) is true for all n N.

Proof: Apply the principle of mathematical induction to the set S = {n N :

P(n) is true}. 

Example Prove that 2n1 n! for all n N.

Solution: Let P(n) be the statement 2n1 n!.

When n = 1, we have 211 = 20 = 1 1!. So P(1) is true.
Suppose P(k) is true, i.e. 2k1 k!. (This is called the induction hypothesis.)
Then since 2 k + 1,

2(k+1)1 = 2 2k1 (k + 1)k! = (k + 1)!.

So P(k + 1) is true.
By the principle of mathematical induction, P(n) is true for all n N.
 5

Principle of mathematical induction (second version): Let n0 N and let

P(n) be a statement about n for n n0 . Assume that
(i) P(n0 ) is true; and
(ii) For all k n0 , P(k) is true = P(k + 1) is true;
then P(n) is true for all n N.

1.4. The algebraic properties of R. R is a complete ordered field.

R is a field because it has the following algebraic properties:

1. a + b = b + a, a, b R.
2. (a + b) + c = a + (b + c), a, b, c R.
3. 0 R such that 0 + a = a + 0 = a, a R.
4. For each a R, a R such that
a + (a) = (a) + a = 0.

5. ab = ba, a, b R.
6. (ab)c = a(bc), a, b, c R.
7. 1 R such that 1 , 0 and 1a = a1 = a a R.
8. If a R and a , 0, then a1 R such that
a a1 = a1 a = 1.

9. a(b + c) = ab + ac, a, b, c R.

Notation
means for every;
means there exists.

Remark
6

Any nonempty set F together with two operations called addition and multipli-
cation satisfying the conditions 1-9 is called a field. So Q and C are fields, but
Z and N are not.

1.5. The ordered properties of R. There is a relation < on R R which has

the following properties:

(a) (The trichotomy property) If a, b R, then exactly one of the following

holds:
a < b, b < a or a = b.
(b) a < b and b < c = a < c.
(c) a < b = a + c < b + c, c R.
(d) a < b and c > 0 = ac < bc, and
a < b and c < 0 = ac > bc.

Notation
We write a b if a < b or a = b.

Definition We call a real number a

(i) positive if a > 0,
(ii) nonnegative if a 0,
(iii) negative if a < 0,
(iv) nonpositive if a 0.

Theorem 1.5.1. For any nonzero real number a, a2 > 0.

Proof: Since a , 0, either a > 0 or a < 0 by the trichotomy property.

 7

If a > 0, then a a > a 0. So a2 > 0.

If a < 0, then we need to switch the sign when multiplying a to both side of
a < 0, i.e. a a > a 0. Again we obtain a2 > 0. 

Theorem 1.5.2. If a R is such that 0 a < for every positive number ,

then a = 0.

Proof: Since a 0, either a > 0 or a = 0. Suppose to the contrary that a > 0.

Take 0 = a/2. Then 0 is positive and 0 < a. But this contradicts the assump-
tion on a. So we must have a = 0. .

Exercise Let a, b R. Prove that if a < b for every > 0, then a b.

1.6. Intervals.

(a, b) = {x R : a < x < b} (open interval).

[a, b] = {x R : a x b} (closed interval).
[a, b) = {x R : a x < b}.
(a, b] = {x R : a < x b}.
[a, ) = {x R : x a}.
(a, ) = {x R : x > a}.
(, b] = {x R : x b}.
(, b) = {x R : x < b}.
(, ) = R.

1.7. Solving inequalities. Two important rules used in solving inequalities:

Rule 1: If ab > 0, then either
8

(i) a > 0 and b > 0, or

(ii) a < 0 and b < 0.
Rule 2: If ab < 0, then either
(i) a < 0 and b > 0, or
(ii) a > 0 and b < 0.
Proof: Exercise, or see page 27 of the textbook. 

Example Solve 2x2 + 3x > 2.

Solution: We have

2x2 + 3x > 2 2x2 + 3x 2 > 0

(2x 1)(x + 2) > 0.

So by Rule 1, either (i) 2x 1 > 0 and x + 2 > 0, or (ii) 2x 1 < 0 and x + 2 < 0.
1 1
For (i) x > and x > 2 x > .
2 2
1
For (ii) x < and x < 2 x < 2.
2
1
So the solution set is {x R : x > } {x R : x < 2}, that is, (, 2)
2
1
( , ).
2

3x + 1 1
Example Solve < .
2x + 3 2
Solution:
 9

Solution: We have
3x + 1 1 3x + 1 1
< <0
2x + 3 2 2x + 3 2
4x 1
<0
2(2x + 3)
4x 1
2(2x + 3)2 < 2(2x + 3)2 0
2(2x + 3)
(2x + 3)(4x 1) < 0.

By Rule 2, we either have (i) 2x + 3 > 0 and 4x 1 < 0, or (i) 2x + 3 < 0 and
4x 1 > 0.
3 1 3 1
For (i), x > and x < < x < .
2 4 2 4
3 1
For (ii), x < and x > . But this is impossible.
2 4
3 1 3 1
So the solution set is {x : < x < } = ( , ).
2 4 2 4

1.8. Arithmetic mean and geometric mean. Definition Let a > 0 and b >
0. Then
a+b
the arithmetic mean of a and b is .
2
the geometric mean of a and b is ab.

The arithmetic-geometric mean inequality: If a > 0 and b > 0, then

a+b
ab ,
2
that is, the geometric mean is always less than or equal to the arithmetic
mean.
Equality holds if and only if a = b.
10

Proof: We consider two cases.

Case 1: a ,b.
Then a , b, i.e. a b , 0. By Theorem 1.5.1, ( a b)2 > 0, that is,

( a b)2 = ( a)2 2 a b + ( b)2 = a + b 2 a b > 0.
a+b
So we obtain ab < .
2
Case 2: a = b.
a+a
In this case, a a = = a. So equality holds.
2
a+b
On the other hand, if ab = , then
2
!2
a+b a2 + 2ab + b2
ab = = ,
2 4
which gives
a2 2ab + b2 = 0
(a b)2 = 0.
So a = b. 

Bernoullis inequality. If x > 1, then

(1 + x)n 1 + nx, n N.

Proof: Use induction (Tutorial 1). 

1.9. Absolute value. Definition Let a R. The absolute value of a is de-

fined by


a if a > 0

|a| =
a if a < 0

0 if a = 0.

Example |3| = 3, | 2| = 2, |0| = 0.

 11

Theorem 1.9.1. (Properties of absolute value)

: (i) |a| 0, a |a| and a |a|, a R.
: (ii) |a| = 0 a = 0.
: (iii) | a| = |a|, a R.
: (iv) |ab| = |a||b|, a, b R.
: (v) |a|2 = a2 , a R.
: (vi) If c 0, then |a| c c a c.
: (vii) |a| a |a|, a R.

Proof: (iv) If either a = 0 or b = 0, then |ab| = 0 = |a||b|. If both a and b are

nonzero, there are four cases to consider:
a b |a||b| ab |ab|
+ + ab + ab
+ a(b) ab
+ (a)b ab
(a)(b) + ab
We see that |ab| = |a||b| in all the cases.
(vi) (=) Assume that |a| c. Since a |a| and a |a|, by transitivity,
a c and a c.
So we have
a c and a c.
Combining these inequalities, c a c.
(=) Assume that c a c. Then
a c and a c.
The second inequality is equivalent to a c. Since a c and a c, |a| c.
The proofs for the remaining parts are left as exercise. 

Example Solve |x| + |x + 1| < 2.

Solution. Consider three cases: (i) x > 0, (ii) 1 x 0 and (iii) x < 1.
Case I. x > 0.
12

1
|x| + |x + 1| < 2 = x + x + 1 < 2 = x <
2
1
= 0 < x < .
2
Case II. 1 x 0.
|x| + |x + 1| < 2 = x + x + 1 < 2 = 1 < 2
= 1 x 0.
Case III. x < 1.
3
|x| + |x + 1| < 2 = x x 1 < 2 = 2x < 3 = x >
2
3
= < x < 1.
2
3 1
Answer: < x < .
2 2


Triangle inequality: For a, b R, |a + b| |a| + |b|.

Proof: We have
|a| a |a|
|b| b |b|.
Adding the inequalities gives
(|a| + |b|) a + b |a| + |b|.
 13

By part (vi) of Theorem 1.9.1, we obtain

|a + b| |a| + |b|. 

Corollary 1.9.2. For a, b R, we have

: (a) ||a| |b|| |a b|,
: (b) |a b| |a| + |b|.

Proof: (a) By the triangle inequality,

|a| = |(a b) + b| |a b| + |b|,

so
|a| |b| |a b| (1)
Interchanging the roles of a and b, we obtain

|b| |a| |b a|,

which can be written as

(|a| |b|) |a b| (2)

(1) and (2) gives ||a| |b|| |a b|.

(b) By the triangle inequality,

|a b| = |a + (b)| |a| + | b| = |a| + |b|. 

Corollary 1.9.3. For a1 , a2 , ..., an R,

|a1 + a2 + + an | |a1 | + |a2 | + + |an |.

Proof: Induction. 
14

1.10. The completeness property of R. .

Definition Let S R be nonempty. A number u is called
: (i) an upper bound of S if x u for all x S .
: (ii) a lower bound of S if x u for all x S .

Example Let S = (0, 1].

1, 1.5 and 10 are upper bounds.

0, 0.7 and 2 are lower bounds.

Definition We say that a nonempty set S R is

: (i) bounded above if S has an upper bound.
: (ii) bounded below if S has a lower bound.
: (iii) bounded if S has an upper bound and a lower bound.
: (iv) unbounded if S is not bounded, that is, either it does not have any
upper bound or it does not have any lower bound.

Example Let S 1 = (0, 1], S 2 = (, 0) and S 3 = [72, ). Then

S 1 and S 2 are bounded above.
S 1 and S 3 are bounded below.
S 1 is bounded.
S 2 and S 3 are unbounded.

Definition Let S be a nonempty subset of R.

: (a) A real number M is called the supremum (or least upper bound) of S
if
: (i) M is an upper bound of S ;
: (ii) M u for every upper bound u of S .
In this case, we write M = sup S .
 15

: (b) A real number L is called the infimum (or greatest lower bound) of S
if
: (i) L is a lower bound of S ;
: (ii) L v for every lower bound v of S .
In this case, we write L = inf S .

The supremum and infimum of of a set may or may not be elements of the set.

Example
(a) If S 1 = {1, 2, 3, 4}, then sup S 1 = 4 and inf S 1 = 1. Both 4 and 1 are
elements of S 1 .
(b) If S 2 = (0, 1), then sup S 2 = 1 and inf S 2 = 0. Both 0 and 1 are not
elements of S 2 .
(c) If S 3 = (0, 2) [3, 5]. Then sup S 3 = 5 and inf S 3 = 0. Note that 5 is an
element of S 3 but 0 is not.
(d) If S 4 = [72, ), then inf S 4 = 72 but sup S 4 does not exist.
(e) R = (, ) has no supremum and no infimum.

Definition Let S be a nonempty subset of R.

(i) If u = sup S and u S , then u is also called the maximum of S . In this
case, we write u = max S .
(ii) If v = inf S and v S , then v is also called the minimum of S . In this
case, we write v = min S .

In the example above, max S 1 = 4 and min S 1 = 1, but the set S 2 has no
maximum and no minimum.
16

Lemma 1.10.1. Let u be an upper bound of S R. Then u = sup S if and

only if > 0, x S such that u < x .

Proof: (=) Suppose u = sup S . Let > 0. Then u < u, so u cannot be

an upper bound for S . Hence x S such that x > u .
(=) Suppose > 0, x S such that u < x . Assume that u , sup S .
Then there is an upper bound v of S such that v < u.
We now take = u v > 0. Then x S such that u < x . But
u = u (u v) = v. So v < x . This contradicts the fact that v is an upper
bound for S . 

Our final assumption on R is the following:

The supremum property of R (or the completeness property/axiom)

Every nonempty subset of R which is bounded above has a supremum.

This means that

S has an upper bound = sup S exists.

The supremum property implies the following:

The infimum property of R: Every nonempty subset of R which is bounded

below has a infimum.

Proof: Let S be a nonempty subset of R and it has a lower bound b. Let

A = {x : x S }. We have
x b x S .
 17

So
x b x S ,
and this says b is an upper bound for A. Since A is bounded above, by the
supremum property of R, A has a supremum u.

Claim: inf S = u.
u is an upper bound for A, so
x u, x A, or equivalently x S .
This gives
x u x S .
Hence u is a lower bound for S .
Let v be another lower bound for S . Then v is an upper bound for A. Since
u = sup A, u v. So u v. Hence inf S = u. 

Example Let S be a nonempty subset of R and a R. Let

a + S = {a + x : x S }.
Prove that if S is bounded above, then sup(a + S ) = a + sup S .
Solution: We have x sup S , x S . So
a + x a + sup S x S .
This says that a + sup S is an upper bound for a + S .
Next suppose v is any upper bound of a + S . Then
a + x v, x S .
So
x v a x S ,
and v a is an upper bound for S . Thus
sup S v a,
a + sup S v.
We have shown that a + sup S is an upper bound for a + S and is less than or
equal to any other upper bound for a + S . Thus sup(a + S ) = a + sup S . 
18

Archimedean property: If x R, then n x N such that x < n x .

(This says that N is not bounded above.)

Proof: Suppose the statement is not true. Then there is a real number x such
that x n for all n N. So x is an upper bound for N. By the supremum
property, u = sup N exists.
By taking = 1 and applying Lemma 1.10.1, m N such that
u 1 < m.
So
u < m + 1.
Since m + 1 N, this says that u is not an upper bound for N. But u = sup S ,
so we have obtained a contradiction. 

Corollary 1.10.2. For any > 0, n N such that

1
< .
n

Proof: Let x = 1/. Then by the Archimedean property, n N such that

1
x = < n.

Mulitplying /n to the inequality gives
1  
= x< n = . 
n n n
 19

Example Let
( ) ( )
1 1 1
S = : n N = 1, , , ... .
n 2 3
Prove that inf S = 0.
Solution: Since 0 is a lower bound for S , inf S 0.
If inf S > 0, then by Corollary 1.10.2, n0 N such that
1
< inf S .
n0
But this contradicts the definition of inf S . 

Corollary 1.10.3. If x > 0, then n N such that

n 1 x < n.

Proof: Let S = {m N : x < m}. By the Archimedean property, S , . By the

well-ordering principle, S has a least element n, that is,
n S , and n m m S .
It follows that n 1 < S , that is, n 1 x. So n 1 x < n. 

Notation: For any real number x, [x] denotes the greatest integer less than or
equal to x. In the above corollary, [x] = n 1.

1.11. The existence of square root.

Theorem 1.11.1. There exists a unique positive real number b with b2 = 2.
Proof: : Let S = {x R : x 0, x2 < 2}. Then S , because 1 S . On the
other hand, if y > 2, then y2 > 4 so that y < S . Thus if x S , then x 2. So 2
is an upper bound of S . Since S is bounded above, b = sup S exists.

We claim that b2 = 2. We shall prove this by showing that it is impossible to

have b2 < 2 or b2 > 2.
20

Suppose that b2 < 2. Then

2b + 1
> 0.
2 b2
By the Archimedean Property, n N such that
2b + 1
n> .
2 b2
Then
!2
1 2b 1 2b + 1
b+ = b2 + + 2 < b2 + < b2 + (2 b2 ) = 2.
n n n n
Hence b + 1/n S . But b + 1/n > b. This contradicts the fact that b = sup S .

Next assume that b2 > 2. By the Archimedean Property, m N such that

2b
m> .
b2 2
Then !2
1 2b 1 2b
b = b2 + 2 > b2 > b2 (b2 2) = 2.
m m m m
If x S , then x2 < 2 < (b 1/m)2 , so that x < b 1/m. Hence b 1/m is an
upper bound of S . But b 1/m < b, which again contradicts the fact b = sup S .

Since the statements b2 < 2 and b2 > 2 are both false, we must have b2 = 2.
Uniqueness: Is it possible to have a positive number a such that a , b and
a2 = 2?

Using similar reasoning, we can prove that for any positive real number c, there
exists a unique positive real number b such that b2 = c. We call b the positive
square root of c and write

b = c.

Remark: The reasoning used in the proof for Theorem 1.11.1 can also be
used to show that the supremum property does not hold for Q. In fact, the set
A = {r Q : r 0, r2 < 2} does not have a supremum in Q.
 21

1.12. Density of Q. .

The Density Theorem. If a, b R is such that a < b, then there exists r Q

such that a < r < b.

Proof: There are three cases to consider.

Case 1: 0 < a < b.
In this case, b a > 0. By Lemma 1.10.2, k N such that
1
< b a.
k
n
Let A = {n N : > a}. By the Archimedean property, n1 N such that
k
n1
n1 > ak. So > a and n1 A. Thus A , .
k
By the well-ordering principle, A has a least element n0 . So
n0 n0 1
> a and a.
k k
Then
n0 n0 1 1 1
a< = + a + < a + (b a) = b.
k k k k
So r = n0 /k is a rational number satisfying a < r < b.
1
Case 2: a 0 < b. By Corollary 1.10.2, there exists n N such that < b. So
n
1
take r = .
n
Case 3: a < b 0. Then 0 b a. By case 1 and 2, there is a rational
number r0 satisfying b < r0 < a. Take r = r0 . 

Corollary 1.12.1. If a, b R is such that a < b, then there exists an irrational

number x such that a < x < b.
22

a b
Proof: By the density theorem, r Q such that < r < . So a < r 2 <
2 2
b and r 2 is irrational. 

Corollary 1.12.2. Every interval I R contains infinitely many rational

numbers and infinitely many irrational numbers.

1.13. Nested intervals. .

Definition A sequence I1 , I2 , I3 , ... of intervals is said to be nested if

I1 I2 I3 In In+1

\

The intersection of all the intervals I1 , I2 , ... is denoted by In , that is,
n=1

\

In = {x R : x In n N}.
n=1

Example For each n N, let In = [0, 1/n]. Then I1 , I2 , ... is a nested sequence
\

of closed intervals. What is In ?
n=1

\
\
\

What about (0, 1/n), (0, 1/n] and [n, ) ?
n=1 n=1 n=1
 23

Nested Interval Theorem. Let In = [an , bn ], n N be a nested sequence of

closed bounded intervals such that
inf{bn an : n N} = 0.
\

Then the intersection In contains exactly one point.
n=1

Proof: Let A = {an : n N} and B = {bm : m N}. Then both A and B are
bounded. (Why?)
Let a = sup A and b = inf B.

Claim: an bm for all n, m N.

Case 1: If n m, then In = [an , bn ] Im = [am , bm ], so that
an am bm bn .
In particular, we have an bm .

Case 2: If n > m, then In = [an , bn ] Im = [am , bm ], so that

am an bn bm .
We also have an bm .

By the claim, for each m, bm is an upper bound of A. Since a = sup S is the

smallest upper bound of A, bm a.

Now bm a for all m N, so a is a lower bound of B. Since b = inf B is the

largest lower bound of B, we must have a b.

Next we let C = {bn an : n N}. We are given that inf C = 0.

We note that for each n N,
0 b a bn an .
So b a is a lower bound of C.
24

We now see that a = b. Otherwise, b a > 0 and b a is a lower bound of C

which is greater than inf C.
\

Claim: In = {a}.
n=1
For each n N,
an sup A = a = inf B bn ,
\
that is, a In = [an , bn ]. Hence a In .
n=1
\

Next we let x In . Then
n=1
an x bn
for all n N. This says that x is an upper bound of A and a lower bound of B.
So x a = sup A and x a = inf B. Consequently x = a. 
1.14. Binary Representations. Let x [0, 1]. We want to find a sequence
(a1 , a2 , a3 , ...) of 0s and 1s such that
a1 a2 a3
x= + + +
2 22 23
In this case, we write
x = (0.a1 a2 a3 )2
and call this expression a binary representation of x.

Example The number 5/8 can be written as

5 1 0 1 0 0
= + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 .
8 2 2 2 2 2
So
5
= (0.101000 )2 .
8

Procedure to find the sequence (a1 , a2 , ...) for x:

(1) Let I = [0, 1]. We divide I into two halves and choose a1 according to
which halve it belongs to.
 25

If x [0, 1/2), take a1 = 0.

If x (1/2, 1], take a1 = 1.
If x = 1/2, take a1 to be either 0 or 1.
We now let " #
a1 a1 + 1
I1 = , .
2 2
Then x I2 .
(2) Next we divide the interval I1 into two halves, that is,
" # " #
a1 a 1 1 a1 1 a1 + 1
the left halve , + and the right halve + , .
2 2 22 2 22 2
If x is in the left halve, take a2 = 0.
If x is in the right halve, take a2 = 1.
If x is the mid-point, take a2 to be either 0 or 1.
We now let " #
a1 a2 a1 a2 + 1
I2 = + , + .
2 22 2 22
Then x I3 .
(3) We repeat this process to obtain a sequence (a1 , a2 , a3 , ...) such that for
each n N,
" #
a1 a2 an a1 a2 an + 1
x In = + + + n, + 2 + + .
2 22 2 2 2 2n

Uniqueness:
(i) Given x [0, 1], is the sequence (a1 , a2 , ...) constructed above unique?

(ii) Given a sequence (a1 , a2 , ...) of 0s and 1s, does it uniquely determine a
real number x in [0, 1]?
1.15. Decimal Representations. Let x [0, 1]. Then there is a sequence
(b1 , b2 , b3 , ...) of integers in {0, 1, 2, ..., 9} such that for all n N,
b1 b2 bn b1 b2 bn + 1
(1.15.1) + 2 + + n x + 2 + + .
10 10 10 10 10 10n
In this case, we say that x has a decimal representation given by
x = 0.b1 b2 b3
26

To obtain the sequence (b1 , b2 , ...) for x, we follow the process for obtaining a
binary representation except that we now divide the interval at each stage into
10 equal subintervals.

Conversely, every sequence (b1 , b2 , b3 , ...) of integers in {0, 1, 2, ..., 9} uniquely

determines a real number x in [0, 1]: it is the number x which satisfies Condition
(1.15.1) for all n N.

Example Consider the decimal representation of the number 1/28:

1
= 0.035714285714285714285
28
Note that the block of digits 714285 repeats indefinitely. In this case, we say
the decimal is repeating or periodic.

Definition
(i) We say that the decimal 0.b1 b2 is repeating (or periodic) if there ex-
ists k and m such that
bn+m = bn n k.

(ii) If bn = 0 for all n k, then we say the decimal 0.b1 b2 is terminating.

Example The decimal 1/2 = 0.5000 is terminating. We usually write

1/2 = 0.5.

It turns out that a real number is rational if and only if its decimal representation
is repeating! So irrational numbers have nonrepeating decimals, for example,

2 = 1.414213562373095

Question: Do you think that there are more rational numbers than irrational
numbers, more irrational numbers than rational numbers or about the same
numbers of each?

Answer: Read Section 1.3 on finite and infinite sets, Proposition 2.5.4 and The-
orem 2.5.5 of the textbook.