Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

At the top of the page 20 of Rudin's book ''Principles of Mathematical Analysis'' he writes: ''The proofs (of the multiplication axioms) are so similar to the ones given in detail in Step 4 (proof of the addition axioms) that we omit them''. I tried to prove them but I got stuck in the proof of \begin{equation}\alpha \cdot {\alpha }^{-1}=1^*\end{equation} where $\alpha$ is positive cut and ${\alpha }^{-1}=\mathbb{Q}_{-}\bigcup\left\{0\right\}\bigcup\left\{t\in \mathbb{Q}:0<t<r\text{ for some }r\in \mathbb{Q}:\frac{1}{r}\notin \alpha\right\}$ is the candidate for the multiplicative inverse of $\alpha$. I have already proved that ${\alpha }^{-1}$ is a cut and $\alpha \cdot {\alpha }^{-1}\le 1^*$.

My question is how do we prove the opposite direction similarly to the proof Rudin gives for $\alpha +(-\alpha) \le 0^*$. A proof completely different to that one can be found here: Dedekind cut multiplicative inverse

Here is what I have tried thus far:

Let $p\in 1^*$. If $p\le 0$ then obviously $p\in \alpha\cdot \alpha^{-1}$.

Suppose $0<p<1$ and $q=q(p)\in \mathbb{Q}_{+}$. By the Archimedean Property of Rational numbers \begin{equation}\exists n\in \mathbb{N}:nq\in \alpha\text{ and }(n+1)q\notin \alpha\end{equation} We must find a $u \in \alpha^{-1}$ such as that $p=(nq)\cdot u$ or equivalenty, $u=\frac{p}{nq}$

In order for $u \in \alpha^{-1}$ we must have that $0<u<r$ and $\frac{1}{r}\notin \alpha$ for some rational $r$. The only reasonable choice for $r$ would be $\frac{1}{(n+1)q}$. But then, \begin{equation}u<r\Leftrightarrow \frac{p}{nq}<\frac{1}{(n+1)q}\Leftrightarrow p<\frac{n}{n+1}\end{equation} which may not be true for some values of $n$ (like $0$). Where can we derive a restriction for these values of $n$?

EDIT: Found another proof here: http://mypage.iu.edu/~sgautam/m413.33418.11f/Dedekind.pdf STill nothing similar to Rudin's...

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 4 down vote accepted

Let $p\in 1^*$, $0 < p < 1$, it exists $n\in \mathbb N$ such that $$ p < 1 - \frac 1 {m + 1} = \frac m {m + 1} \tag{1} $$ for each $m\in \mathbb N$, $m \geq n$.

Let $r\in \alpha, r >0$ and $0 < q < r/n$. There exists a $m$ such that $m q\in \alpha$ and $(m + 1)q\notin \alpha$. Evidently we have $m \geq n$.

Inequality (1) implies $$ \frac p {mq} < \frac m {m + 1}\cdot \frac 1 {mq} = \frac 1 {(m + 1) q} $$ so $\frac p {mq} \in \alpha^{-1}$ and $$ p = (mq)\cdot \frac p {mq} $$

share|improve this answer
    
Very very nice proof! Not exactly what I was looking for but still, this is fantastic! You made my day! Note: In the beggining you must let $0<p<1$, but that won't affect proof at all as the other case is obvious –  Nameless Jul 27 '12 at 13:29
1  
I assumed $0 < p < 1$, because that was the only case you had difficulties with. Anyway, now, I explicitly mentioned that condition. –  AlbertH Jul 28 '12 at 11:22
    
Sorry to reopen a question decided two years ago, but precisely why is it evident that $m \geq n$? Otherwise I agree completely... –  Eppo Aug 31 at 23:52
1  
Since $p < 1$, there exists an integer $n$ great enough to satisfy $p < 1 - (n + 1)^{-1}$. Then for each $m$ greater than $n$ inequality (1) holds. –  AlbertH Sep 1 at 8:34

suppose $m<n$, then $m\le n-1$ and $m+1 \le n$. As a result,$(m+1)q\le nq<r$ and hence $(m+1)q$ belongs to $\alpha$, which contradicts the choice of $m$.

share|improve this answer
    
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post - you can always comment on your own posts, and once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post. –  Joonas Ilmavirta Sep 19 at 8:02
    
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post - you can always comment on your own posts, and once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post. –  Joonas Ilmavirta Sep 19 at 8:02

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.