Chapter 1

The Real Numbers

1.1 The Completeness Property of R
Example 1.1.1 (Bartle 2.3.5 (a) Page 39). A nonempty set S
1
with a nite number of elements will
have a least element, say u, and a largest element, say w. Then, u = inf S
1
and w = sup S
1
. Both the
innimum and supremum, that is u and v, are members of S
1
.
Example 1.1.2 (Bartle 2.3.5 (b) Page 39). Given S
2
= {x : 0 x 1}. Since 0 x 1 for all x S
2
,
we have a lower bound 0, and an upper bound 1.
If v < 1 then there exists some s

S
2
such that v < s

, for example s

= 1. Thus, v is not an upper

bound of S
2
, and since v < 1 is arbitrary, we conclude that sup S
2
= 1.
If w > 0 then there exists some s

S
2
such that s

< w, for example s

= w/2 < w. Thus, w is not a

lower bound of S
2
, and since w > 0 is arbitrary, we conclude that inf S
2
= 0.
Note that the inmum and supremum are members of S
2
.
Example 1.1.3 (Bartle 2.3.5 (c) Page 39). Given S
3
= {x : 0 < x < 1}. Since 0 < x < 1 for all x S
3
,
we have a lower bound 0, and an upper bound 1.
If v < 1 there exists some s

S
3
such that v < s

. Thus, v is not an upper bound of S

3
, and since v < 1
is arbitrary, we conclude that supS
3
= 1.
If w > 0 then there exists some s

S
3
such that s

< w, for example s

= w/2 < w. Thus, w is not a

lower bound of S
3
, and since w > 0 is arbitrary, we conclude that inf S
3
= 0.
Note that the inmum and supremum are not members of S
3
.
Problem 1 (Bartle Exercise 1 for Section 2.3). Let S
1
:= {x R : x 0}. Show in detail that the set has
lower bounds, but no upper bounds. Show that inf S
1
= 0.
Since x 0 for all x S
1
, u = 0 is a lower bound of S
1
, while S
1
has no upper bounds.
If v > 0 then there exists some s

S
1
such that 0 < s

< v, for example s

= v/2 < v. Thus, v is not a

lower bound of S
1
, and since v is arbitrary inf S
1
= 0. Also, inf S
1
S
1
.
Since S
1
has no upper bounds sup S
1
does not exist.
Problem 2 (Bartle Exercise 2 for Section 2.3). Let S
2
:= {x R : x > 0}. Does S
2
have lower bounds?
Does S
2
have upper bounds? Does inf S
2
exist? Does supS
2
exist? Prove your statements.
Since S
2
= and x > 0, the set S
2
is bounded below by 0. Then, from the Completeness Property S
2
also has an inmum. For every > 0, there exists some s

S
2
such that 0 < s

< 0 + ; for example

1
s

= /2 < . Thus, 0 + is not a lower bound, and since is arbitrary, inf S

2
= 0.
Since x > 0, the set S
2
has no upper bounds, and by denition sup S
2
does not exist.
Problem 3 (Bartle Exercise 3 for Section 2.3). Let S
3
:= {1/n : n N}. Show that sup S
3
= 1 and
inf S
3
0.
Since 0 < 1/n 1 for all n N, the set S
3
has a lower bound 0 and an upper bound 1, and by the
Completeness Property has both an inmum and a supremum.
For every > 0 there exists some s

S
3
such that 1 < s

1; for example s

= 1. Thus, 1 is not
an upper bound of S
3
, and since is arbitrary, sup S
3
= 1.
Also, for every > 0 there exists some s

S
3
such that 0 s

0 +, say s

= 0 or s

= /2. Thus, 0 +
is not a lower bound of S
3
, and since > 0 is arbitrary, inf S
3
= 0
1
.
Problem 4 (Bartle Exercise 4 for Section 2.3). Let S
4
:= {1 (1)
n
/n : nN}. Find inf S
4
and sup S
4
.
Since 1/2 1 (1)
n
/n 2, the set S
4
has a lower bound 1/2 and an upper bound 2, and by the
Completeness Property has an inmum and supremum.
For every > 0, there exists some s

S
4
such that 1/2 s

< 1/2 + ; for example s

= 1/2 + /2. Thus,

1/2 + is not a lower bound, and since > 0 is arbitrary inf S
4
= 1/2.
For every > 0 there exists s

S
4
such that 2 < s

2, say s

= 2. Thus, 2 is not an upper bound

of S
4
, and since > 0 is arbitrary, sup S
4
= 2.
Problem 5 (Bartle Exercise 5(a) for Section 2.3). Let A := {x R : 2x + 5 > 0}. Find the inmum and
supremum, if they exist.
Since 2x + 5 > 0 we have x > 5/2, and so A has a lower bound 5/2, but no upper bounds. Thus, by
the Completeness Property, A also has an inmum, but the supremum does not exist. For every > 0 there
exists a

A such that 5/2 a

< 5/2 + , say a

= 5/2 + /2. Thus, 5/2 + is not a lower bound

of A, and since is arbitrary, inf A = 5/2.
Problem 6 (Bartle Exercise 5(b) for Section 2.3). Todo...
Problem 7 (Bartle Exercise 5(c) for Section 2.3). Todo...
Problem 8 (Bartle Exercise 5(d) for Section 2.3). Todo...
Problem 9 (Bartle Exercise 6 for Section 2.3). Let S be a nonempty subset of R that is bounded below.
Prove that inf S = sup{s : s S}.
Let S be a nonempty subset of R that is bounded below. Then, by the Completeness Property of R an
inmum of S exists, say w := inf S. Thus w s for each s S. But this implies that s w for all
s S, so that if we dene

S := {s : s S}, then w is an upper bound for

S. We must show that u is
the supremum of

S. Let v < w for all v

S. Then w < v, and since w = inf S there must exist some
t S such that w < t < v. But this implies that there exists some t

S such that v < t < w. Thus
v is not an upper bound of

S, and since v is arbitrary, w = sup

S. Hence, inf S = sup{s : s S}.
Problem 10 (Bartle Exercise 7 for Section 2.3). If a set S R contains one of its upper bounds, show that
this upper bound is the supremum of S.
Let u S be an upper bound of S. If v is any upper bound of S, then s v for all s S. But u S, so
u v, and since u is an upper bound then it must be the least upper bound; that is, u := sup S.
Problem 11 (Bartle Exercise 8 for Section 2.3). Let S R be nonempty. Show that u R is an upper
bound of S if and only if the conditions t R and t > u imply that t / S.
1
The question asks to show that inf S
3
0. The inmum inf S
3
= 0 is for the case of n . If n = 2, then inf S
3
= 1/2.
Perhaps ask lecturer to just elaborate a little more on this problem at consultation.
2
Let S R be nonempty. The proof proceeds as follows:
Assume u R is an upper bound of S. Then s u for all s S. Thus, if t > u for all t R, then t > s for
all s S. Hence t / S.
Conversely, assume that t > u t / S, and suppose, to the contrary, that u is not an upper bound of S.
Then, since S is nonempty there must exist some s S such that s > u. But s > u s / S, which is a
contradiction. Hence, u is an upper bound of S.
Problem 12 (Bartle Exercise 9 for Section 2.3). Let S R be nonempty. Show that if u = sup S, then for
every n N the number u 1/n is not an upper bound of S, but the number u + 1/n is an upper bound of
S
2
.
Let S R be a nonempty set, and let u := supS. For all n N we have 1/n > 0, so that u 1/n < u
for all n N. Thus, there must exist some s S such that u 1/n < s < u and so u 1/n is not an upper
bound of S. However, u < u + 1/n for all n N, and since u := sup S, we have that s u < u + 1/n for all
s S. Hence, u + 1/n is an upper bound of S for all n N.
Problem 13 (Bartle Exercise 10 for Section 2.3). Show that if A and B are bounded subsets of R, then
A B is a bounded set. Show that sup(A B) = sup{supA, sup B}.
Let A R and B R. Let u := sup A and v := sup B. Also, let w := sup{u, v}.
For all a A and all b B we have a u w and b v w respectively. Thus w is an upper
bound for A B. We need to show that w is the supremum (least upper bound) of A B. If z is any
upper bound of A B, then z is also an upper bound of A and B; that is, u z and v z. Hence
w z, and since z is any upper bound of A B, w must be the least upper bound, and we conclude that
sup(A B) = sup{supA, sup B}.
Problem 14 (Bartle Exercise 11 for Section 2.3). Let S be a bounded set in R and let S
0
be a nonempty
subset of S. Show that inf S inf S
0
sup S.
Since the set S is bounded, the Completeness Property of R ensures that S has an inmum and a
supremum. If s
0
S
0
, then s
0
S, so that s
0
sup S for all s
0
S
0
. This implies that sup S
0
sup S.
Similarly, inf S s
0
for all s
0
S
0
, so that inf S inf S
0
. Hence, inf S inf S
0
sup S
0
supS.
Problem 15 (Bartle Exercise 12 for Section 2.3). Let S R and suppose that s

:= sup S belongs to S. If
u / S, show that sup (S {u}) = sup{s

, u}.
Since u / S and s

S we have that u = s

. Thus we consider only the two cases that u < s

and
s

< u.
Now, if u < s

then s

= sup{s

, u} since s

is an upper bound which is contained in the set {s

, u}. Also,
for all s S we have that s u < s

so that s

is an upper bound of the set S {u}, and since s

is
contained in this set, s

= sup (S {u}).
Similarly, if s

< u, then u = sup{s

, u} and consequently u = sup (S {u}).

Problem 16 (Bartle Exercise 13 for Section 2.3). Todo...
Problem 17 (Bartle Exercise 14 for Section 2.3). Todo...
1.2 Applications of the Supremum Property
Example 1.2.1 (Bartle 2.4.1 (a) Page 40). Let S be a nonempty subset of R that is bounded above, and
let a be any number in R. Dene the set a + S := {a + s : s S}. Show that sup(a + S) = a + sup S.
Solution: Let u := sup S. Then for all s S we have a + s a + u, and so a + u is an upper bound of
2
The converse is also true. See Exercise 2.4.3 in Bartle
3
the set a + S. Consequently, sup(a + S) a + u.
Now, if v is any upper bound of a + S, then a + s v for all s S. Thus s v a for all s S, and so
v a is an upper bound for S. But since u := sup S, we have that u v a, and so a + u v. Since
v is any upper bound of a + S we have a + u sup(a + S). Now we have that sup(a + S) a + u and
a + u sup(a + S), which means that sup(a + S) = a + sup S.
Example 1.2.2 (Bartle 2.4.1 (b) Page 41). Suppose A and B are nonempty subsets of R that satisfy the
property
a b for all a A, b B
Prove that
sup A sup B
Solution: For any given b B we have that a b for all a A. Thus b is an upper bound of A, and so
sup A b, where sup A is the least upper bound of A. Since supA b holds for all b B, we have that
sup A is a lower bound of the set B. Hence, we conclude that sup A supB.
Example 1.2.3 (Bartle 2.4.2 Page 41). Suppose that f and g are real-valued functions with common
domain D R. We assume that f and g are bounded.
1. Show that if f(x) g(x) for all x D, then sup(D) sup g(D). Solution: Firstly, f(x) g(x)
sup g(D). This implies that sup g(D) is an upper bound for f(D). Hence, sup f(D) sup g(D).
Example 1.2.4 (Bartle 2.4.2 (b) Page 41). Todo...
Example 1.2.5 (Bartle 2.4.2 (c) Page 41). Todo...
Problem 18 (Bartle Exercise 1 for Section 2.4). Show that sup{1 1/n : n N} = 1.
Let S = {1 1/n : n N}. Since 1 1/n < 1 for all n N we have an upper bound of 1 for S. Thus the
Completeness Property ensures that a supremum of S exists. For every > 0, the Archimedean Property
implies that there exists some n

N such that 1/ < n

. Thus 1/n

< so that 1 < 1 1/n

< 1.
Since 1 1/n

S we know that 1 is not an upper bound of S, and since > 0 is arbitrary, sup S = 1.
Problem 19 (Bartle Exercise 2 for Section 2.4). If S := {1/n 1/m : n, m N}, nd inf S and sup S.
Since 1 1/n1/m 1, the set S has a lower bound 1 and an upper bound 1. By the Completenes
Property the set S has an inmum and a supremum.
Inmum: We have that 1/n 1/m 1/n 1 > 1. Then 1 is indeed a lower bound. For every > 0
there exists an n N such that 0 < 1/n < . Thus 1 < 1/n1 < 1 = 1 +. But 1/n1 S. Hence,
1 + is not a lower bound of S, and since > 0 is arbitrary, inf S = 1.
Supremum: The set S has the property S = S. Thus, we can invoke the earlier result inf S = sup{s :
s S}. Since inf S = 1 we have 1 = sup{s : s S} = sup(S) = supS. This implies that
sup S = 1.
Problem 20 (Bartle Exercise 3 for Section 2.4). Let S R be nonempty. Prove that if a number u in R
has the properties: (i) for every n N the number u 1/n is not an upper bound of S, and (ii) for every
number n N the number u + 1/n is an upper bound of S, then u = sup S.
3
3
This is the converse of Exercise 2.3.9 in Bartle
4
Todo...
Problem 21 (Bartle Exercise 4 (a) for Section 2.4). Let S be a nonempty bounded set in R. Let a > 0, and
let aS := {as : s S}. Prove that
inf(aS) = a inf S, sup(aS) = a sup S
Supremum: Let u := sup S. Then s u for all s S, so that as au; that is, au is an upper bound for
the set aS. Consequently, sup(aS) au. If v is any upper bound of aS, then as v for all s S, and so
s v/a for all s S; that is, v/a is an upper bound for S. Thus, u v/a, so that au v, and since v is any
upper bound of aS, we have au sup(aS). Combining the inequalities sup(aS) au and au sup(aS), we
have
sup(aS) = a supS
Inmum: Todo...
Problem 22 (Bartle Exercise 4 (b) for Section 2.4). Let S be a nonempty bounded set in R. Let b < 0, and
let bS := {bs : s S}. Prove that
inf(bS) = b sup S, sup(bS) = b inf S
Since b < 0, we consider b > 0 and apply the results of the previous exercise (Exercise 2.4.4 (a) Bartle).
Dene

S := {s : s S}. Then inf(bS) = inf(b

S). But inf(b

S) = b inf

S, so that inf(bS) = b inf

S.
Also from an earlier result (Exercise 2.3.6 Bartle) inf

S = supS. Thus, inf(bS) = b(supS) and we
have our nal result inf(bS) = b supS.
Todo sup(bS) = b inf S...
Problem 23 (Bartle Exercise 5 for Section 2.4). Let S be a set of nonnegative real numbers that is bounded
above and let T := {x
2
: x S}. Prove that if u = sup S, then u
2
= sup T. Give an example that shows that
the conclusion may be false if the restriction against negative numbers is removed.
Todo...
Problem 24 (Bartle Exercise 6 for Section 2.4). Let X be a nonempty set and let f : X R have bounded
range in R. If a R, show that Example 2.4.1(a) (in Bartle) implies that
sup{a + f(x) : x X} = a + sup{f(x) : x X}
Show that we also have
inf{a + f(x) : x X} = a + inf{f(x) : x X}
Supremum: Let u := supX. Then f(x) u for all x X, so that a + f(x) a + u for all x X; that
is, a + u is an upper bound of a + f(x) for all x X. Thus sup{a + f(x) : x X} a + u.
Todo: Finish...
Problem 25 (Bartle Exercise 7 for Section 2.4). Let A and B be bounded nonempty subsets of R, and let
A + B := {a + b : a A, b B}. Prove that
sup(A + B) = sup A + supB, inf(A + B) = inf A + inf B
Supremum: Let u := supA and v := supB. The a u for all a A and b v for all b B. Thus,
a + b u + v for all a A, b B so that u + v is an upper bound for the set A + B. Hence, from the
Completeness Property, a supremum for A + B exists, and sup(A + B) u + v = sup A + supB. It needs
to be shown that u + v is the supremum (least upper bound) of A + B. We can do so by showing that for
every > 0 we can nd a s

A + B such that (u + v) < s

u + v. If we choose a

A such that
u/2 < a

u and b

B such that v /2 < b

v then we have (u/2) +(v /2) < a

+b

u+v,
or simplied
(u + v) < a

+ b

u + v
5
But a

+b

A+B, and since > 0 is arbitrary we know that (u +v) is not an upper bound of A+B,
so that u + v is the supremum and
sup(A + B) = sup A + sup B
Problem 26 (Bartle Exercise 8 for Section 2.4). Let X be a nonempty set, and let f and g be dened on X
and have bounded ranges in R. Show that
sup{f(x) + g(x) : x X} sup{f(x) : x X} + sup{g(X) : x X}
and that
inf{f(x) : x X} + inf{g(X) : x X} inf{f(x) + g(x) : x X}
Give examples to show that each of these inequalities can be either equalities or strict inequalitles.
Supremum: Let u := sup f(X) and v := sup g(X). Then f(x) u and g(x) v for all x X. Thus
f(x) + g(x) u + v for all x X, so that u + v is an upper bound of the set {f(x) + g(x) : x X}. This
implies that {f(x) + g(x) : g X} sup{f(x) + g(x) : x X} u + v. Hence,
sup{f(x) + g(x) : x X} sup{f(x) : x X} + sup{g(X) : x X}
Inmum: Let u := inf f(X) and v := inf g(X). Then u f(x) and v g(x) for all x X, and consequently
u + v f(x) + g(x) for all x X. Then u + v is a lower bound of the set {f(x) + g(x) : x X}, which
implies that u + v inf{f(x) + g(x) : x X} {f(x) + g(x) : g X}. Hence,
inf{f(x) : x X} + inf{g(X) : x X} inf{f(x) + g(x) : x X}
Problem 27 (Bartle Exercise 9 for Section 2.4). Todo...
Problem 28 (Bartle Exercise 10 for Section 2.4). Todo...
Problem 29 (Bartle Exercise 11 for Section 2.4). Todo...
Problem 30 (Bartle Exercise 12 for Section 2.4). Todo...
Problem 31 (Bartle Exercise 13 for Section 2.4). Given any x R, show that there exists a unique Z such
that n 1 x < n.
In the trivial case where x = 0 then n = 1 is the unique element of Z. If x > 0, then by an earlier result
(Corollary 2.4.5 in Bartle), there exists an n
x
N such that n
x
1 < x < n
x
. If x < 0, then we can apply
the same argument to x > 0. Thus, we know that given an arbitrary x R, there exists some n
x
Z such
that n
x
n < n
x
.
We must show that such an n
x
Z is unique. Suppose, without loss of generality, that m
x
< n
x
also
satises m
x
1 x < m
x
. Also, we know that m
x
n
x
1 since n
x
, m
x
Z. We now have the inequality
m
x
1 x < m
x
n
x
1 x < n
x
, which is a contradiction as it implies x < x. Hence, the assumption
that there also exists m
x
< n
x
satisfying m
x
1 x < m
x
is false, and so we have uniqueness.
Problem 32 (Bartle Exercise 14 for Section 2.4). If y > 0, show that there exists n N such that 1/2
n
< y.
For each n N we have that n < 2
n
. Thus we also have that 1/2
n
< 1/n. But from an earlier result
(Corollary 2.4.5 Bartle), we know that given y > 0 there exists some n
y
N such that 0 < 1/n
y
< y. Hence,
for each y > 0 we have that 0 < 1/2
n
< 1/n < y; that is, 1/2
n
< y.
Problem 33 (Bartle Exercise 15 for Section 2.4). Todo...
Problem 34 (Bartle Exercise 16 for Section 2.4). Todo...
Problem 35 (Bartle Exercise 17 for Section 2.4). Todo...
Problem 36 (Bartle Exercise 18 for Section 2.4). Todo...
Problem 37 (Bartle Exercise 19 for Section 2.4). Since x < y and u > 0, we know that x/u < y/u. Then,
by the Density Theorem, there exists some r Q such that x/u < r < y/u. But this implies that x < ru < y.
Hence the set {ru : r Q} is dense in R.
6
1.3 Intervals
Problem 38 (Bartle Exercise 1 for Section 2.5). If I := [a, b] and I

:= [a

, b

] are closed intervals in R,

show that I I

if and only if a

a and b b

.
Let I I

. Then a, b I

so that a

a, b b

, or a a

and b b

.
Conversely, suppose a

lea and b b

. Then for any x I we have a x b, so that a

x b

. Thus
x I

for all x I, and hence, I I

.
Problem 39 (Bartle Exercise 2 for Section 2.5). If S R is nonempty, show that S is bounded if and only
if there exists a closed bounded interval I such that S I.
Let S be bounded by a lower bound a and an upper bound b. Then for any s S we have a s b.
Hence s [a, b], and so S I where I := [a, b].
Conversely, let S I where I is the closed bound interval I := [a, b]. But then a s b for all s S.
Hence, S is bounded.
Problem 40 (Bartle Exercise 3 for Section 2.5). If S R is a nonempty bounded set, and I
S
:= [inf S, sup S],
show that S I
s
. Moreover, if J is any closed bounded interval containing S, show that I
S
J.
The set S is nonempty and bounded, so the Completeness Property ensures that the inmum and
supremum of S exist. Since inf S s sup S for all s S, we know that s I
S
= [inf S, supS] for all
s S. Hence, S I
S
.
Since J is any closed bounded interval, let J := [a, b]. If S J then a s b for all s S. Thus a is a lower
bound of S and b is an upper bound of S, and by the Completeness Property, the inmum and supremum
of S exist. Thus a inf S and sup S b. But I
S
= [inf S, sup S], so by Exercise 2.5.1 Bartle, I
S
J.
Problem 41 (Bartle Exercise 4 for Section 2.5). Leave.
Problem 42 (Bartle Exercise 5 for Section 2.5). Leave.
Problem 43 (Bartle Exercise 6 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 44 (Bartle Exercise 7 for Section 2.5). Let I
n
:= [0, 1/n] for n N. Prove that

n=1
I
n
= {0}.
Since 0 [0, 1/n] for all n N, we know that {0}

n=1
I
n
. Thus we know that

n=1
I
n
is nonempty
and contains {0}. Let x

n=1
(x is arbitrary). But this is only true if x [0, 1/n], so that 0 x 1/n
for all n N. We must show that x = 0. From the Archimedean Property implies that for every > 0 there
exists some n

N such that 0 < 1/n

< . Thus we now have that 0 x 1/n

< . But since > 0 is

arbitrary, we can make it as small as we like, and hence, x = 0.
Problem 45 (Bartle Exercise 8 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 46 (Bartle Exercise 9 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 47 (Bartle Exercise 10 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 48 (Bartle Exercise 11 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 49 (Bartle Exercise 12 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 50 (Bartle Exercise 13 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 51 (Bartle Exercise 14 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 52 (Bartle Exercise 15 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 53 (Bartle Exercise 16 for Section 2.5). Todo...
Problem 54 (Bartle Exercise 17 for Section 2.5). Todo...
7