MATHEMATICS 320, FALL 2016, PROBLEM SET 2

SOLUTIONS
√ √ √ √
1. We will take for granted that 2, 3, 6 are irrational. The proof for 6 is identical
to # 3 on Assignment 1.
√
(a) [8] Let F = {a + b 3 : a, b ∈ Q}. Prove that F is a field.
The axioms (A2), (A3), (M2), (M3), and (D) follow from the analogous properties
of real numbers. We also have (A4) and (M4) since 0 ∈ F and 1 ∈ F . The main
issue is to check that F is closed under addition and multiplication, and that
(A5), (M5) hold.
√ √
(A1), (M1): let x, y ∈ F , then x = a + b 3 and y = c + d 3 with a, b, c, d ∈ Q.
Then √ √
x + y = (a + c) + (b + d) 3, xy = (ac + 3bd) + (ad + bc) 3
are both in F .
√ √
(A5): let x ∈ F , then x = a + b 3. If −x = (−a) + (−b) 3 then clearly
x + (−x) = 0, so (A5) holds.
√
(M5): let x ∈ F , so that x = a + b 3. If x 6= 0, then at least one of a, b is 6= 0.
We claim that
1 a b √
= 2 2
− 2 2
3,
x a + 3b a + 3b
which is in F . Indeed,
√ √
√ √
 
a b (a + b 3)(a − b 3)
(a + b 3) − 3 = = 1.
a2 + 3b2 a2 + 3b2 a2 + 3b2
√ √
(b) [10] Let F 0 = {a + b 2 + c 3 : a, b, c ∈ Q}. Prove that F 0 is not a field.
√ √
Suppose
√ √ for
√ contradiction that
√ F is a field.
√ Since
√ 2, 3 ∈ F , we must also have
2 √3= √ 6 ∈ F√ √ √6 = a + b 2 + c 3 for√some a, b, c ∈ Q. If so,
, so that √ then
a + c 3 = 6 − b 2 = 2( 3 − b). We can’t have 3 − b = 0, since then 3 = b
would be rational. Therefore
√
√ a+c 3
2= √ .
3−b
√ √
But
√ by part
√ (a), this means that 2 = A + B 3 for some A, B ∈ Q. Therefore
2 − B 3 = A. Squaring this, we get
√ √
2 − 2B 6 + 3B = A, 2B 6 = A − 2 − 3B ∈ Q.
√
If B 6= 0, we√can divide by 2B and get that 6 is rational, a contradiction. If
B = 0, then 2 = A would have to be rational, again a contradiction.

2. Find the supremum and infimum of each of the following sets of real numbers, or prove
that they do not exist.

1
  
m
(a) [8] A = : m, n ∈ N : We have sup A = 1 and inf A = 0. For the
m+n
m
infimum, we have m+n > 0 since m, m + n > 0, so 0 is a lower bound. Let α > 0,
1
then we can choose n ∈ N such that n > 1/α. Then 1+n < n1 < α, so that α
cannot be a lower bound of A. Hence inf A = 0.
m
For the supremum, we first note that 1 is an upper bound since m+n ≤ 1. We will
prove that 1 = sup A. Suppose to the contrary that some smaller number 1 − 
1
with  > 0 is also an upper bound of A. Let m > 1/, then m+1 < m1 < , so that
m
m+1
= 1 − m1 > 1 − , which contradicts 1 −  being an upper bound.
 
mn
(b) [8] B = : m, n ∈ N : We have inf B = 1/4, and the supremum
1 + m + 2n
does not exist since the set is not bounded from above. For the infimum, we first
mn
note that when m = n = 1, we have 1+m+2n = 14 . Suppose that we had 1+m+2n
mn
< 14
for some m, n ∈ N. Then 4mn < 1 + m + 2n, so that 4mn − 2n < 1 + m and
4m − 2 < 1+m n
≤ 1 + m. Therefore 3m < 3, m < 1, which is not possible for
m ∈ N.
m2 m2
To see that the set is not bounded from above, let m = n, then 1+3m > 4m = m4 .
If α is any real number, we can find m ∈ N such that m4 > α, so α cannot be an
upper bound of B.

3. [8] Prove that for any two numbers x, y ∈ R such that 0 < x < y, there are positive
2
integers m, n such that x < mn2
< y.
√ √ √ √
Since√0 < x < y, we know that x, y exist. √ We also know that 0 < x < y (if we
√ √
had x ≥ y, then we would also have x = ( x)2 ≥ ( y)2 = √ y, a contradiction). By
√
Theorem 1.20, there is a rational number p = mn
such that x < p < y. Squaring
m2
this, we get x < n2 < y, as required.

4. [8] Prove that for any α > 0, and for any complex numbers a1 , a2 , . . . , an and b1 , b2 , . . . , bn ,
we have  
n n n
X  1X 2 αX
a b ≤ |a | + |bj |2 .
 
j j j
 α 4 j=1


j=1 j=1

Pn 2
Pn 2
Pn
Let A = j=1 |aj | , B = j=1 |bj | , C = j=1 aj bj . Then A, B ≥ 0. We have
√ !2 r √
A αB √
r
A αB A αB A αB
0≤ − = + −2 = + − AB.
α 2 α 4 α 2 α 4
√
Hence Aα + αB
4
≥ AB. By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality (Theorem 1.35), we have
p
AB ≥ |C| . It follows that Aα + αB
2
4
≥ |C|2 = |C|, as required.
OR: For any real numbers x, y, one has α−1 (x − αy/2)2 ≥ 0. Upon rearranging this
gives xy ≤ x2 /α + (α/4)y 2 . Now take x = |aj | and y = |bj | to see that for all j,

2
 |a |2
|aj b̄j | = |aj ||bj | ≤ αj + α4 |bj |2 . Now sum over j and use the triangle inequality to
conclude that  n 
n n n
X  X 1X 2 αX
aj b̄j  ≤ |aj b̄j | ≤ |aj | + |bj |2 .
 
α 4

 
j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1