The Real Numbers as Decimal Expansions Even though dening the real numbers as innite decimal expansions makes

proving that they are a complete ordered eld dicult, most people think of them that way. So lets dene a real number to be + or an integer, followed by a decimal point, followed by an unending string of numbers chosen from {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9} which is not unbroken string of 9s after some point. We also need to agree that all of these expansions are dierent real numbers with the exception that +0.0 = 0.0. If you think about constructing rules for adding and multiplying these expansions so that the result is a complete ordered eld, you will see why mathematicians wanted a dierent denition for the real numbers. However, one can give rules which reect the way that one manipulates explicit real numbers. I think that it worthwhile to do this. For reals beginning with a plus sign (positive reals) I will dene x > y to mean that in the rst decimal place where the entry for x is dierent from the entry for y , the entry for x is greater than the entry for y . This denition works only because decimal expansions for real numbers are not allowed to end in innite sequences of 9s. Dening multiplication by 1 on real numbers to just exchange the initial pluses and minuses, and requiring addition to have the property (1) (x + y ) = (1) x + (1) y, the problem of dening addition and multiplication can be reduced to the following three cases. 1. Products of two nonnegative reals. For this just consider the sequence of products of rational numbers that you get by replacing the entries after the nth decimal place by zeros. For instance, since 2 = 1.4142...., for 2 2 this would give the sequence 1 1 = 1, 1.4 1.4 = 1.96, 1.41 1.41 = 1.9881, ...

1.414 1.414 = 1.999396,

1.4142 1.4142 = 1.99996164,

This will give an increasing sequence of rationals such that the entry in each decimal place becomes constant after some point in the sequence. Dene the product to be the real number whose entry in the nth decimal place is given by that constant value. If the entries are an unbroken sequence of 9s after some point, go back to the last decimal place that was not a 9 increase it by one and replace all the nines after it by zeroes. For example, for 2 2 you will get 1.9, and that should be replaced by 2.0.

2. Sums of two nonnegative reals. For this just consider the sequence of sums of rational numbers that you get after the nth decimal by replacing the entries place by zeros. For instance, since 2 = 1.4142.... and 3 = 1.7320..., for 2 + 3 this would give the sequence 1 + 1 = 2, 1.4 + 1.7 = 3.1, 1.41 + 1.73 = 3.14, 2+ 1.414 + 1.732 = 3.146, 3 = 3.1462643...

1.4142 + 1.7320 = 3.1462, ... actually

Again this gives an increasing sequence of rationals such that the entry in each decimal place becomes constant after some point in the sequence, and one denes that sum to be the real number whose entry in the nth decimal place is that constant value. Also one again replaces sums that are given be expansions ending in an unbroken sequence of 9s by sequences ending in a sequence of zeroes as was done for products. 3. Sums of a positive real and a negative real. Unless the sum is just zero, one of the numbers will have absolute value greater than the absolute value of the other. Hence, using multiplication by 1, it is enough to consider the case where the sum is the dierence of two positive reals, x y , where x > y . Here again we dene x y by replacing the the entries after the nth decimal place by zeros. For 3 2 this gives the sequence 1 1 = 0, 1.7 1.4 = 0.3, 1.73 1.41 = 0.32, ... actually 3 1.732 1.414 = 0.318, 2 = 0.317837245...

1.7320 1.4142 = 0.3178,

Dening dierences this way the sequence of rationals that one gets is not necessarily increasing. Nonetheless, it will consist of nonnegative rationals, and the entry in each decimal place becomes constant after some point in the sequence. As before one denes the dierence to be the real number whose entry in the nth decimal place is that constant value. If you have dened real numbers, addition and multiplication this way, you still have to show that the result is a complete ordered eld. Even though the rational numbers are an ordered eld, and one can show that the real numbers dened this way inherit that from the rationals, this is still a good bit of work. After that you still have to show that the least upper bound property holds. Oof!