-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
- Loading branch information
1 parent
21dc186
commit 42021d9
Showing
3 changed files
with
42 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ | ||
\subsection*{Exercise 08 (Cecilia)} | ||
After definition 1.26, Rudin identifies the complex number $ (a, 0) $ as the real number $ a $ on the basis that arithmetic of $ (a, 0) $ and $ a $ are compatible. However, that does not say anything about the ordering of the complex numbers. | ||
In fact, suppose an ordering exist, it might be the case that the ordering of $ (a, 0) $ is not compatible with the ordering of $ a $, so identification could be confusing. In the sequel, we will not use the identification, and use the ordered pair representation instead. | ||
|
||
Suppose (for contradiction) that an ordering of complex number can be defined. | ||
|
||
First, we show that $ (-1, 0) > (0, 0) $ is false. Suppose $ (-1, 0) > (0, 0) $, we have: | ||
|
||
\begin{eqnarray*} | ||
(-1, 0) &>& (0, 0) \\ | ||
(-1, 0) + (1, 0) &>& (0, 0) + (1, 0) \\ | ||
(0, 0) &>& (1, 0) | ||
\end{eqnarray*} | ||
|
||
\begin{eqnarray*} | ||
(-1, 0) &>& (0, 0) \\ | ||
(-1, 0)(-1, 0) &>& (0, 0)(-1, 0) \\ | ||
(1, 0) &>& (0, 0) | ||
\end{eqnarray*} | ||
|
||
Apparently these two facts contradict each other. Therefore, $ (-1, 0) > (0, 0) $ is false. | ||
|
||
With that result, suppose the complex number can be assigned an order so that it becomes an ordered field. Then we know that either $ i > (0, 0) $ or $ i < (0, 0) $. | ||
|
||
Suppose $ i > (0, 0) $, then $ i^2 > (0, 0) $, which means $ (-1, 0) > (0, 0) $, which is false. | ||
|
||
Otherwise suppose $ i < (0, 0) $, then $ (0, 0) = i - i < -i $, which means $ (0, 0) < (-i)^2 $, which means $ (0, 0) < (-1, 0) $, which is false. | ||
|
||
Therefore we have a contradiction and it is impossible to impose an order on the complex numbers so that it becomes an ordered field. |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | ||
\subsection*{Exercise 08 (Gapry)} | ||
Let $c_1 = i = (0,\ 1)$ are the ordered pair in the complex field $\mathbb{C}$ | ||
|
||
\begin{enumerate} | ||
\item{$1 > 0$ (by 1.18d) } | ||
\item{$-1 < 0$ (by 1.18a applied on (1))} | ||
\item{$c_1^2 = i^2 = -1 \implies i \neq 0 \implies i^2 > 0 \implies -1 > 0$ (by 1.18d)} | ||
\end{enumerate} | ||
|
||
Obviously, 2. and 3. are contradictory. | ||
|