2.

Numbers

2.1 Number sets

Numbers are mathematical objects used to count, measure and label. There are several number
systems which were discovered throughout history. The most basic system is the set of natural
numbers which are followed by integers, rational numbers, irrational numbers, real numbers and
complex numbers.

2.1.1 Natural numbers

Natural numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, . . . are denoted by N. It is sometimes useful to include zero in the set of
natural numbers and in this case the notation N0 is used. Hence,

N0 = {0} ∪ N = {0, 1, 2, . . . }.

There are infinitely many natural numbers. Natural numbers are closed under addition and multipli-
cation, i.e. if we add or multiply natural numbers, we will get a natural number as a result.

2.1.2 Integers
One refers to the set which contains natural numbers, their negative counterparts and zero as the set
of integers. The set of integers is denoted by Z (from German die Zahlen meaning the numbers),
i.e.

Z = {. . . , −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, . . . }.

Sometimes natural numbers are called positive integers, natural numbers with zero are called
non-negative integers and the set Z \ N0 is referred to as negative integers. Note that the negative of
a positive integer is a number that produces 0 when it is added to the corresponding positive integer,
e.g. −1 is the negative of 1.
There are infinitely many integers, they are closed under addition, multiplication and subtraction.
 8 Chapter 2. Numbers

2.1.3 Rational numbers

A rational number is a number that can be expressed as a fraction with an integer numerator and a
natural number denominator. The set of all rational numbers is denoted by Q (from quotient) and it
is defined by
 
p
Q= p ∈ Z, q ∈ N .
q

Note that various fractions may represent the same rational number, e.g. 1/3, 2/6, 3/9 are all equal.
In particular, qp = rs if and only if p s = r q.
There are infinitely many rational numbers. To be more precise, we say that the set of rational
numbers is countably infinite which means that there are as many rational numbers as there are
natural numbers. In fact, the number of elements (or, more precisely, the cardinality) of the sets Q,
Z and N is the same. However, the next proposition demonstrates that this notion of infinity is not
as simple as one might initially think.
Proposition 2.1.1 There are infinitely many rational numbers between two arbitrary rational
numbers.
p1 p2 p1 p2
Proof. Let q1 and q2 be two arbitrary rational numbers such that q1 < q2 . For any n ∈ N define an
by
p2
p1 q2 − qp11 p1 p2 q1 − p1 q2 p1 q2 (2n − 1) + p2 q1
an := + = + = .
q1 2n q1 2n q1 q2 2n q1 q2

The numerator p1 q2 (2n − 1) + p2 q1 is an integer since p1 , p2 , q1 , q2 and 2n − 1 are integers and

integers are closed under multiplication and addition. Similarly, the denominator 2n q1 q2 is a natural
number. It follows that an ∈ Q and, moreover, we have that an lies between qp11 and qp22 . Since n is
used as the index of an and there are infinitely many of n’s in N, there are infinitely many an ’s such
that
p1 p2
< an < .
q1 q2


Rational numbers are closed under addition, multiplication, subtraction and division by non-zero
numbers.

2.1.4 Real numbers

Real numbers are used to measure continuous quantities; and they can be expressed by decimal
representations that have an infinite sequence of digits to the right of the decimal point. Each
consecutive digit in the decimal representation is measured in units one tenth the size of the previous
one, e.g.

73.621 = 7 · 101 + 3 · 100 + 6 · 10−1 + 2 · 10−2 + 1 · 10−3 .

The set of real numbers is denoted by R. In the same way as rational numbers, real numbers are
closed under addition, multiplication, subtraction and division by non-zero numbers.
One can represent the set R geometrically as points on an infinitely long line called the real
line, see Figure 2.1.
From the description above one may get the wrong impression that there is not much of a
difference between rational and real numbers. However, the difference is enormous as there are a
2.1 Number sets 9

Figure 2.1: Real line

lot more real numbers than rational numbers. More precisely, both the sets Q and R are infinite, but
the reals are uncountable. In fact, the cardinality of Q equals the cardinality of N, but the cardinality
of R equals that of the set of subsets of N, and the so-called Cantor’s diagonal argument states that
the cardinality of the latter set is strictly greater than the cardinality of N.

√Example 2.1 To demonstrate that not all real numbers are rational, let us show that the number


2 is not rational. √
Let us assume for a contradiction that 2 is rational. That means that it can be written as a
fraction of p ∈ Z and q ∈ N, i.e.
√ p
2= .
q
Without loss of generality, we may assume that p and q have no common factors. By taking the
square of both sides of the equation above, we obtain

p2
2= and thus p2 = 2q2 .
q2

The last equality means that p2 is even. The only way this can be true is that p itself is even which
means that p2 has to be divisible by 4. Hence, q2 and therefore q, must be even. So, p and q are
both even which is a contradiction to the assumption that they do not have common factors. 

Another differences between R and Q follow from more rigorous definitions of real numbers.
In particular, real numbers can be constructed by completion of rational numbers. Completing
rational numbers can be done in several ways, e.g. by adding new elements to Q so that
• the least upper bounds of all non-empty subsets in Q are included, see Section 2.2 for the
notion of an upper bound, or so that
• the limits of all rational sequences are included, see Section 4.0.1 for the notion of the limit
of a sequence.
 Example 2.2 The set Q does not have the least-upper-bound property. For Q to have this property
it is not enough for some sets in Q to have their least upper bounds in Q (e.g. the least upper bound
for the set {q ∈ Q|0 < q < 1} is 1 which is a rational number), but this has to be true for every set
in
√ Q. A√ good counterexample is given by the set {q ∈ Q | q2 < 2} which has the least upper bound
2 but 2 ∈ / Q. 

 Example 2.3 Let us construct a sequence of rational numbers which converges

√ to a number
which is not rational. In
√ particular, let us find a rational sequence converging to 2. Note that the
decimal expansion of 2 looks like
√
2 = 1.41421356237310 . . . .
√
A sequence that converges to 2 then can be chosen as

1, 1.4, 1.41, 1.414, 1.4142, 1.41421, . . .

Basically, one just adds a digit each time. This is clearly a sequence of rational numbers because
√
every decimal number with a finite decimal expansion is rational, and it clearly converges to 2.
 10 Chapter 2. Numbers

Note that one could formulate the same sequence as {an }∞

n=0 where

an := 10−n max{k ∈ Z | k2 ≤ 2 · 102n }.

2.1.5 Irrational numbers

Irrational numbers, denoted by I, are all real numbers which are not rational numbers, i.e.

I = R \ Q.
√
As an example of irrational numbers, one can list 2, e, π. Note that square root of any natural
number except the ones which are the so-called perfect squares (e.g. 1, 4, 9, 16, . . . ) is an irrational
number.
Since irrational numbers are special case of real numbers, they can be expressed by decimal
representations that have an infinite sequence of digits to the right of the decimal point. However,
their decimal representations are special in the sense that they do not contain a subsequence of digits
whose repetition makes up the tail of the representation. For example, the decimal representation of
the number π starts with 3.14159265358979 but no finite number of digits can represent π exactly.
Note that the decimal representation of a rational number is either finite (the number of digits after
the decimal point is finite) or infinite (it contains a subsequence of digits whose repetition makes
up the tail of the representation).
Irrational numbers are not closed under addition and subtraction; their sums and differences
could be both rational (e.g. π − π = 0 ∈ Q) and irrational (e.g. π + π = 2π ∈ I). Moreover, it is not
always possible to decide whether the answer is a rational or an irrational number as in the case of
e + π and e − π. Furthermore, irrational numbers are not closed under multiplication and division
by non-zero
√ √ numbers.
√ The products and quotients could be rational (e.g. e/e = 1 ∈ Q), irrational
(e.g. 2 3 = 6 ∈ I) or of a type which is not known yet (e.g. it is still an open problem to decide
whether eπ is a rational or an irrational number).
Recall that there are uncountably many real numbers and countably many rational numbers.
Therefore, there are uncountably many irrational numbers which makes almost all real numbers
irrational.

2.1.6 Complex numbers

Real numbers are not algebraically closed, that is, not all polynomials with real coefficients have
2
√roots of the polynomial x + 1 we have to solve the equation
real roots. For example,√to find the
2
x + 1 = 0. Then, x = ± −1, but −1 ∈ / R. Thus, this equation has no solution in R which means
√
2
that the polynomial x + 1 has no real roots. By introducing a new number system containing −1,
the so-called complex numbers, one obtains a number system which is algebraically closed (all
polynomials with complex coefficients √have complex roots). In fact, the idea to "extend" the real
numbers with a symbol representing −1 first appeared when mathematicians tried to find real
solutions to cubic equations with real coefficients.
A complex number is a number of the form a + b · i where a and b are real numbers and i is an
indeterminate satisfying i2 = −1. The indeterminate i is called the imaginary unit. The set of all
complex numbers is denoted by C,

C = {z = a + bi|a, b ∈ R}.

Hence, complex numbers may be defined as binomials in the single indeterminate i with the
relation i2 + 1 = 0 imposed. By this definition, complex numbers can be added, subtracted
2.1 Number sets 11

or multiplied using the rules for addition and multiplication of polynomials. In particular, for
z1 = a1 + b1 i, z2 = a2 + b2 i ∈ C, the following holds:

z1 ± z2 = (a1 ± a2 ) + (b1 ± b2 )i,

z1 · z2 = (a1 a2 − b1 b2 ) + (a1 b2 + b1 a2 )i.

 Example 2.4 Consider two complex numbers: 2 + 3i and 3 − 4i. Then

(2 + 3i) + (3 − 4i) = (2 + 3) + (3 − 4)i = 5 − i

and

(2 + 3i) · (3 − 4i) = 2 · (3 − 4i) + 3i · (3 − 4i) = 6 − 8i + 9i − 12i2 = 6 + 12 + (−8 + 9)i = 18 + i.

Furthermore, complex numbers can also be divided by nonzero complex numbers. The division
is based on the following computation:
z1 a1 + b1 i a2 − b2 i a1 a2 + b1 b2 + (b1 a2 − a1 b2 )i a1 a2 + b1 b2 b1 a2 − a1 b2
= · = = + i.
z2 a2 + b2 i a2 − b2 i a22 + b22 a22 + b22 a22 + b22
For z2 to be nonzero, a2 , b2 , or both a2 and b2 have to be nonzero. Let us point out that the "trick"
to divide two complex numbers a1 + b1 i and a2 + b2 i by multiplying their fraction aa12 +b 1i
+b2 i by one in
the specific form aa22 −b2i
−b2 i is based on the fact that the product (a2 + b2 i) (a2 − b2 i) is the real number
a22 + b22 .
 Example 2.5 To divide 2 + 3i by 3 − 4i one proceeds as follows:

2 + 3i 2 + 3i 3 + 4i 6 + 8i + 9i − 12 6 17
= · = = − + i.
3 − 4i 3 − 4i 3 + 4i 9 + 16 25 25


The real number a is called the real part of the complex number z = a + bi and it is denoted by
Re(z). The real number b is called the imaginary part of z = a + bi ∈ C and it is denoted by Im(z).
 Example 2.6 We have that

Re(3 − 4i) = 3 and Im(3 − 4i) = −4.

Note that a real number a can be regarded as a complex number a + 0i whose imaginary part is
0. A purely imaginary number bi is a complex number 0 + bi whose real part is zero. It is common
to write a for a + 0i and bi for 0 + bi.
We can visualize complex numbers pictorially in a similar way as we did real numbers. One-
dimensional real line is a geometric representation of real numbers. Geometrically, complex
numbers extend this concept to the two-dimensional complex plane by using the horizontal axis
for the real part and the vertical axis for the imaginary part. The complex number z = a + bi can
be identified with the point (a = Re(z), b = Im(z)) in the complex plane, see Figure 2.2. Such
representation of z is referred to as the Cartesian form of z. Hence, one can write

C = {z = (a, b) | a, b ∈ R}

with the respective rules for addition, multiplication and division. We can translate the Cartesian
form (a, b) of a complex number z = a + bi into polar coordinates. Then, the position (a, b) in
12 Chapter 2. Numbers
√
the complex plane is given by the magnitude r = a2 + b2 of z, i.e. the distance√of the point
(a, b) from the origin (0, 0) which also defines the absolute value |z| = |a + bi| := a2 + b2 of z,
and by the angle θ called the argument of z and denoted by arg z which is the angle subtended
between the positive real axis and the line segment bounded by the end points (0, 0) and (a, b) in a
counterclockwise direction, see Figure 2.2. The relation between (a, b) and (r, θ ) is given by
a = r cos θ ,
b = r sin θ .
Thus,
z = a + bi = r cos θ + ir sin θ .

Figure 2.2: Geometrical representation of complex numbers, complex plane

 Example 2.7 Let us list a few examples of complex numbers in polar coordinates:
π √ √ π
i = (1, ), −2 = (2, π), 3 + 3i = ( 12, ).
2 6


Note that by multiplying z = a + bi and a − bi one obtains

(a + bi) · (a − bi) = a2 + b2
which is a nonnegative real number and, by geometric interpretation of complex numbers, it
specifies the square of the magnitude of the complex number a + bi. Because of this feature, the
number a − bi received a special name: complex conjugate of a + bi. A complex conjugate of a
complex number z is denoted by z̄. Geometrically, one reflects z across the x axis to obtain z̄, see
Figure 2.3. Recall that complex conjugates are used to compute quotients of two complex numbers.

R To summarize, a new number set was always introduced to make a "simpler" number set
closed with respect to a certain operation. Namely, one obtains Z from N by adding new
elements to N to make it closed under subtraction. From Z one derived Q by making it closed
under the operation of division. By completing Q by the limits of all rational sequences, R
was derived. Finally, inclusion of all roots of real polynomials in R led to the definition of C.
Hence, there we have the following inclusions:
N ⊂ Z ⊂ Q ⊂ Q ∪ I = R ⊂ C.
 2.2 Bounds on number sets 13

Figure 2.3: Complex conjugate

2.2 Bounds on number sets

On the number sets N, Z, Q, I, R we have the standard ordering ≤. This is the relation which
specifies whether a is greater or smaller than b for a, b ∈ N, Z, Q, I or R. In the case when a is
smaller or equal to b, we write a ≤ b. For all these number sets with the standard ordering ≤, we
can define the concept of a lower and upper bound as well as of a minimum and maximum. Let us
state the definitions only in the case of R.
Definition 2.2.1 Let 0/ 6= M ⊂ R. We say that the set M is
(i) bounded from above if ∃ a ∈ R ∀ m ∈ M : m ≤ a (a is called an upper bound of M),
(ii) bounded from below if ∃ a ∈ R ∀ m ∈ M : m ≥ a (a is called a lower bound of M),
(iii) bounded if it is bounded from above and bounded from below.

Note that if a is an upper bound of a set S, then each b ∈ R such that b ≥ a is an upper bound of S
as well. Analogously, if a is a lower bound of a set S, then each b ∈ R such that b ≤ a is a lower
bound of S as well.
 Example 2.8
• The open interval (1, ∞) = {x ∈ R | x > 1} is bounded from below. Its lower bounds are e.g.
−10, 0.43, 1. The lower bound 1 is called the greatest lower bound or infimum.
• The interval (−∞, 0] is bounded from above. Its upper bounds are e.g. 123, 7, 0. The upper
bound 0 is called the least upper bound or supremum.
• The set Z is neither bounded from above nor bounded from below.
• The set {1, 2, 3, 9/2, 4} is bounded, i.e. both bounded from below and bounded from above.
Its infimum is 1 and its supremum is 9/2.


Definition 2.2.2 Let 0/ 6= M ⊂ R. We say that the number max M is the maximum of M if:
(i) ∀ m ∈ M : m ≤ max M,
 14 Chapter 2. Numbers

(ii) max M ∈ M.
We say that the number min M is the minimum of M if:
(i) ∀ m ∈ M : m ≥ min M,
(ii) min M ∈ M.
 Example 2.9
• The interval (1, ∞) has neither a maximum nor a minimum.
• The maximum of (−∞, 0] is 0. This interval does not have a minimum.
• The sets Z, Q, I, R have neither maxima nor minima.
• The set {1, 2, 3, 9/2, 4} has a minimum and it equals 1. The maximum of this set is 9/2.


2.3 Cartesian product

In what follows, we introduce the operation of Cartesian product which allows us to deal with
ordered pairs in concise way.
Definition 2.3.1 The Cartesian product M × N of sets M and N is the set

M × N = {(m, n) | m ∈ M ∧ n ∈ N},

that is, it is the set of all ordered pairs (m, n) where m ∈ M and n ∈ N.

 Example 2.10
• Let M = {1, 2} and N = {0, 3, 4}. Then M × N = {(1, 0), (1, 3), (1, 4), (2, 0), (2, 3), (2, 4)}.
• For M = [1, 2] and N = {3}, M × N = [1, 2] × {3} = {(x, 3) | x ∈ [1, 2]}.
• (−∞, 0) × (1, ∞) = {(x, y) | x < 0 ∧ 1 < y}


Note that, in general, M × N 6= N × M, i.e. the operation × is not commutative.

 Example 2.11 Consider M = {0} and N = (−1, 1). Then

M × N = {(0, x) | − 1 < x < 1} 6= {(x, 0) | − 1 < x < 1} = N × M.

This follows from the fact that

∃ (m, n) ∈ M × N : (m, n) ∈
/ N ×M (for example (m, n) = (0, 1))

and

∃ (n, m) ∈ N × M : (n, m) ∈
/ M×N (for example (m, n) = (−1, 0)).

Since both the x-axis and the y-axis represent the set of real numbers R, we can write the xy-
plane as R × R = R2 = {(x, y) | x, y ∈ R}. Similarly, the xyz-space can be written as R × R × R =
R3 = {(x, y, z) | x, y, z ∈ R}. Further, one can graphically represent the Cartesian product of two or
three subsets of R as a subset of R2 or R3 , respectively.
 Example 2.12 Consider the set M × N = ({−2} ∪ [1, ∞)) × ((−∞, −3) ∪ {2} ∪ [3, ∞)). The
graphical representation of M × N is the set of points in R2 such that the x-coordinates of these
points lie within {−2} ∪ [1, ∞) ⊂ R and y-coordinates are from (−∞, −3) ∪ {2} ∪ [3, ∞) ⊂ R, see
Figure 2.4. 
2.3 Cartesian product 15

Figure 2.4: ({−2} ∪ [1, ∞)) × ((−∞, −3) ∪ {2} ∪ [3, ∞))
 16 Chapter 2. Numbers

2.4 Exercises
Exercise 2.1 Prove that the following number are irrational:
1. log2 (3),
2. log√2 (3).


Exercise 2.2 Are there a, b ∈ I such that ab ∈ Q? 

Exercise 2.3 Determine the product of two complex numbers in polar coordinates. Namely,
calculate z1 · z2 for z1 = (r1 , θ1 ) and z2 = (r2 , θ2 ).

Hint: Use the trigonometric identities

cos(a) cos(b) − sin(a) sin(b) = cos(a + b)

and

cos(a) sin(b) + sin(a) cos(b) = sin(a + b).

Exercise 2.4 Decide whether the given set A is bounded from below and/or bounded from
above. Then decide whether A has a minimum and/or a maximum and if it does, find it.
1. A = (−3, 5]
2. A = N ∩ (−2, 4)
3. A = {1/x | x ∈ R \ {0}}
4. A = {x ∈ Q | 1 ≤ x2 < 2}


Exercise 2.5 Sketch the following sets in R2 :

1. (−3, 5] × N
2. (−2, 4) × ([0, 1) ∪ [2, 3])
3. {x ∈ R | x2 + 2x > 8} × {x ∈ R | log(x) ≤ 2}
4. {x ∈ R | 2 cos(x) = 1} × {x ∈ Z | 1 ≤ x2 < 20}


2.5 Answers

Exercise 2.1:
1. Assume for a contradiction that log2 (3) is rational. Then there are p ∈ Z and q ∈ N such
that log2 (3) = qp . Because log2 (3) > 0, let us choose p, q > 0, i.e. p, q ∈ N. The equality
p
log2 (3) = qp implies that 2 q = 3 and thus 2 p = 3q . However, the number 2 raised to any
positive integer power must be even (because it is divisible by 2) and the number 3 raised to
any positive integer power must be odd (since none of its prime factors will be 2). Because
an integer cannot be both odd and even at the same time, we have a contradiction and we can
conclude that log2 (3) is irrational.
2.5 Answers 17

2. This follows from the previous exercise and from the following computation:
log2 (3) log2 (3)
log√2 (3) = √ = 1
= 2 log2 (3).
log2 ( 2) 2
√
Exercise 2.2: Yes, consider, for example, a = 2 and b = log√2 (3). Then ab = 3.
Exercise 2.3: z1 · z2 = r1 · r2 (cos(θ1 + θ2 ) + i sin(θ1 + θ2 )) = (r1 r2 , θ1 + θ2 ).

R
• If z1 and z2 are negative real numbers, i.e. θ1 = θ2 = π, then the argument of the
product z1 · z2 equals θ1 + θ2 = 2π and thus z1 · z2 is a positive real number.
• By induction, it is possible to derive a general result for the product of n factors in polar
form:

(r1 , θ1 )(r2 , θ2 ) · · · (rn , θn ) = (r1 r2 · · · rn , θ1 + θ2 + · · · + θn ).

As a special case, one obtains the formula for computing the powers of complex
numbers in polar form:

(r, θ )n = (rn , nθ ).

Exercise 2.4:
1. A is bounded, A does not have a minimum, max A = 5.
2. A is bounded, min A = 1, max A = 3.
3. A is neither bounded from below nor bounded from above, A has neither a minimum nor a
maximum.
4. A is bounded, min A = 1, A does not have a maximum.
Exercise 2.5: See Figure 2.5

Figure 2.5: Answers to Exercise 2.5