∗

Introduction to Numbers

In our quest to build up the real number system, we start with natural numbers or positive
integers. We don’t define natural numbers. We treat them as “undefined objects” that satisfy
certain axioms. We then use them to construct integers, rational numbers, irrational numbers,
algebraic numbers and finally real numbers. In this course, we are going to ignore another important
component of the number system: imaginary numbers.

1 The Set of Natural Numbers

The set {1, 2, 3, . . .} is the set of natural numbers. It is denoted by the symbol N. Each natural
number n has a successor, namely n + 1. Natural numbers have the following properties which are
called the Peano Axioms or Peano Postulates:

N1. 1 belongs to N
N2. If n belongs to N, then its successor n + 1 belongs to N.
N3. 1 is not a successor to any element in N
N4. If n and m in N have the same successor, then n = m.
N5. A subset of N which contains 1, and which contains n+1 whenever it contains n, must equal N.

Most familiar properties of the set of natural numbers can be proved using these axioms. In
particular, axiom N5 provides the motivation behind mathematical induction.

Lets discuss axiom N5 in a bit more detail. Since its an axiom, we cannot prove it. However
we will try to understand its meaning. Let S be a subset of N, ie. S ⊆ N. Suppose it satisfies the
following properties:

• 1∈S

• If n ∈ S, then (n + 1) ∈ S.

Since 1 ∈ S, using the second property we can say that 2 ∈ S.

Since 2 ∈ S, using the second property we can say that 3 ∈ S.
∗
Notes prepared by Ashokankur Datta for the course ECO108: Logic and Scientific Methods of the undergraduate
program of Shiv Nadar University. Typeset using LATEX. Large sections of the notes are based on materials drawn
from Elementary Analysis : The Theory of Calculas by Kenneth A. Ross. I have also used materials from Calculus
(Vol.1) by Tom M. Apostol and IGCSE mathematics by Karen Morrison.

1
Since 3 ∈ S, using the second property we can say that 4 ∈ S.
Using this line of reasoning, we can conclude that S contains any number in N. Thus N ⊆ S. Since
N ⊆ S and S ⊆ N, therefore
S=N
.

Suppose the axiom N 5 is false. Thus, ∃S such that

• S⊆N

• 1∈S

• If n ∈ S, then (n + 1) ∈ S.

but

• S 6= N

Consider the smallest member of the set {n n ∈ N it n ∈ / S}, call it n0 .

We know that n0 6= 1 as 1 ∈ S.
Since n0 6= 1, it is the sucessor to some number in N, namely (n0 − 1).
Now, (n0 − 1) ∈ S as n0 is the smallest member of the set {n n ∈ N it n ∈ / S}.
However if (n0 −1) ∈ S, the second property of S ensures that n0 ∈ S. Thus we have a contradiction.

We should keep in mind that it is not the case that we have proved axiom N 5. using the the
notion of successor and the other axioms. In the explanation given above, we have used to unproven
facts:
1. Every non-empty subset of natural numbers has a smallest element, and
2. If n0 6= 1, it is the successor to some natural number.

1.1 Principle of Mathematical Induction:

Axiom N 5. is the basis of Mathematical Induction.It is a special method of proof used to prove
statements about all natural numbers.
Let P1 , P2 , P3 , . . . be a list of statements that may or may not be true. The Principle of Mathematical
Induction asserts that all the statements P1 , P2 , P3 , . . . are true provided:
I1 . P1 is true.
I2 . Pn+1 is true whenever Pn is true
The first step is called the basis of induction, while the second step is called the induction step.

Example 1 Prove 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n = 21 n(n + 1) for all natural numbers n

Proof : Let Pn denote the nth proposition.

ie. Pn : 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n = 21 n(n + 1)

2
 Now P1 is a true assertion as 1 = 12 1(1 + 1).

Let us assume that

1
Pn : 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n = n(n + 1)
2
is true. Adding (n + 1) to both sides of the equation gives us:
1
1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n + (n + 1) = n(n + 1) + (n + 1)
2
1
= n(n + 1) + 2(n + 1)]
2
1
= n + 1)(n + 2)
2
1
= n + 1)((n + 1) + 1)
2
Thus Pn+1 holds, if Pn holds. By invoking the principle of mathematical induction, we conclude
that Pn is true for all n 

It should be kept in mind that prior to the last line of the proof, we have not proven that Pn+1 is
true. We proved an conditional statement: If Pn is true, then Pn+1 is true. Thus we infact proved
an infinite number of conditional statements: If P1 is true, then P2 is true ; If P2 is true, then P3
is true; and so on..

Example 2 Prove that 11n − 4n is divisible by 7 when n is a natural number.

Proof : Let Pn denote the nth proposition.

ie. Pn : 11n − 4n is divisible by 7.

P1 : 11 − 4 is divisible by 7. So P1 is true. Now let us suppose Pn is true.

To verify Pn+1 , we write,

11n+1 − 4n+1 = 11n .11 − 4n .4

= 11n (7 + 4) − 4n .4
= 11n .7 + 4(11n − 4n )

Since 11n − 4n is a multiple of 7, 11n+ − 4n+1 is a multiple of 7.

Thus Pn+1 holds, if Pn holds. By invoking the principle of mathematical induction, we conclude
that Pn is true for all n. 

Example 3 Prove that 7n − 6n − 1 is divisible by 36 for all positive integers.

Proof : Let Pn denote the nth proposition.

ie. Pn : 7n − 6n − 1 is divisible by 36.

3
We can easily check that P1 and P2 are true.
Let us assume that Pn is true. So, 7n − 6n − 1 is divisible by 36.

7n+1 − 6(n + 1) − 1 = 7.7n − 6n − 6 − 1

= 7(7n − 6n − 1) + 36n

The first term of the RHS expression is divisible by 36 since Pn is true. The second term 36n is
divisible by 36. Thus the sum of the two terms ie. 7n+1 − 6(n + 1) − 1 is divisible by 36. So Pn+1
is true. By invoking the principle of mathematical induction, we conclude that Pn is true for all n.


1.2 Questions:

• Prove 12 + 22 + 32 + . . . + n2 = 61 n(n + 1)(2n + 1) for all natural numbers n.

• Prove that 3 + 11 + . . . + (8n − 5) = 4n2 − n for all natural numbers.

A great disadvantage of the method of mathematical induction is that the formula to be proved
must be known or conjectured. Formulas like the ones above are easier to prove than to derive.

2 The Set of Integers

We now expand the world of numbers to include the set Z off all integers. Thus we have
Z = {0, ±1, ±2, ±3, . . .}. In addition to natural numbers, the set Z includes another “undefined”
object 0 and negative integers {-1, -2, -3, -4,. . . }.1 2

3 The Set of Rational Numbers

p
Rational numbers are numbers that can be expressed in the form q where p and q are integers
that are co-prime 3 and q 6= 0.

The set of rational numbers is denoted by Q. It might be noted that all terminating decimals
are contained in Q.

However in real life we often encounter numbers that does not belong to any of the sets discussed
above. For example: Consider a square that has sides of length 1 cm each. What is the length of
√
the diameter? Using Pythagoras Theorem, AD2 + CD2 = AC 2 =⇒ AC = 2cm. Thus we find
√
a number 2. This is the same number that solves the equation x2 − 2 = 0.

1
Negative integers can be obtained by subtracting positive integers from 0
2
W is the set of whole numbers. W = {0, +1, +2, +3, . . .}.
3
Two integers are said to be co-prime is they have no common factor other than 1. p and q being co-prime means
Greatest Common Factor of p and q is 1

4
 √ √
Now is 2 a rational number? Let us try to prove or disprove that 2 is a rational number.
√
Claim 1 2 is not a rational number.
√ √
Proof : Let us assume that 2 is a rational number. Then 2 can be expressed in the form pq .
Let √ p
2=
q
=⇒ p2 = 2q 2 (1)
Thus p2 is an even number4 . This implies that p is also even ie. 2 is a factor of p.5 As p is even,
we express it as p = 2m where m is an integer. Substituting p = 2m in equation (1), we have
4m2 = 2q 2 =⇒ q 2 = 2m2 . Using the logic used earlier, this means q is also a even number ie. 2
is a factor of q. Thus, 2 is a common factor of p and q. p and q are not co-prime. Thus we get a
√
contradiction. Thus we have proved that 2 is not a rational number. 
√
However 2 can be approximated by rational numbers. There are many rational numbers whose
squares are close to 2, though not exactly equal to 2, for example: (1.4142)2 = 1.99996164, (1.4143)2 =
2.00024449.

There are many such numbers like π and e that are not rational numbers but are extremely
useful in applied mathematics. For example, π is used while calculating the area of a circle or vol-
ume of a sphere, and e is used in defining and calculating growth rates (of share price or biomass).
Such numbers are called irrational numbers.

In this context, we define another kind of numbers called algebraic numbers.

A number is called an algebraic number if it satisfies a polynomial equation

an xn + an−1 xn−1 + . . . + a1 x + a0 = 0
4
An even integer is one that can be expressed in the form 2m where m is another integer. An integer that can
cannot be expressed in this form is called an odd integer
5
Claim: If p2 is even, then p is even.
Proof: Suppose Not. Let p=2n+1 where n is some integer. Then p2 = 4n(n + 1) + 1. Since 4n(n + 1) is even, p2 is
odd. Contradiction.

5
where the coefficients a0 , a1 , . . . , an are integers, an 6= 0 and n ≥ 1.
It is obvious that all rational numbers are algebraic numbers. A rational number pq (p,q co-prime
integers and q 6= 0) is a solution to the polynomial equation q.x − p = 0. Some natural numbers
√
like 2 are also also algebraic numbers as they are solutions to polynomial equations like x2 −2 = 0.

However there are many irrational numbers like π and e that are not algebraic numbers. These
are called transcendental numbers. A detailed discussion on transcendental numbers is beyond the
scope of this course. It should only be kept in mind that the set of transcendental numbers is not
of small cardinality, not even finite.6

4 The Set of Real Numbers

It should be obvious by now that inspite of the fact that there are lots of rational numbers (In-
fact, there is a rational number between any two rational number), there are gaps in Q. Irrational
numbers fill this gaps. The set of rational and irrational number constitute the set of real numbers.
It is denoted by R. The concept of real numbers is at the heart of calculus that we will learn later
in the course.

The set of real numbers can be expressed as points on a line , one point of which is chosen as
the origin. Points on the left of the origin are negative real numbers while points on the right are
positive real numbers. We have discussed this breifly in the lecture notes on set theory.

4.1 Real, Rational and Decimal Expansions:

Every rational number can be expressed either through a complete decimal expansion or through
a repeating decimal expansion.
1
= 0.25
4
1
= 0.3333333 . . .
3
1
= 0.142857142857142857....
7
√
The same is not true for all real numbers. Consider the irrational number 2
√
2 = 1.414213562373095048801688724209 . . .

6
√ 1
Students interested in proving why some number like 17 or 6 3 is not rational, will need to know the Rational
Zeros Theorem. The proof of which is not simple. If interested, refer to Ross’s book or do a google search. Theorems
proving the irrationality of π, e are even more complex.