solutionS MANUAL FOR

Real Analysis and

Foundations
Third Edition

by

Steven G. Krantz
solutionS MANUAL FOR
Real Analysis and
Foundations
Third Edition

by

Steven G. Krantz

Boca Raton London New York

CRC Press is an imprint of the

Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742
© 2014 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business

No claim to original U.S. Government works

Printed on acid-free paper

Version Date: 20130820

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-4665-8734-2 (Ancillary)

This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable efforts have been made to publish reliable data and
information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the validity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and
publishers have attempted to trace the copyright holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission
to publish in this form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know so we may rectify in any
future reprint.

Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any form by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers.

For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.com (http://www.copyright.com/) or contact
the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides
licenses and registration for a variety of users. For organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment
has been arranged.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at
http://www.taylorandfrancis.com
and the CRC Press Web site at
http://www.crcpress.com
 1

Solutions Manual
for

Real Analysis and Foundations

by Steven G. Krantz
 3

Preface

This Manual contains the solutions to selected exercises in the book Real
Analysis and Foundations by Steven G. Krantz, hereinafter referred to as
“the text.”
The problems solved here have been chosen with the intent of covering the
most significant ones, the ones that might require techniques not explicitly
presented in the text, or the ones that are not easily found elsewhere.
The solutions are usually presented in detail, following the pattern in
the text. Where appropriate, only a sketch of a solution may be presented.
Our goal is to illustrate the underlying ideas in order to help the student to
develop his or her own mathematical intuition.
Notation and references as well as the results used to solve the problems
are taken directly from the text.
Chapter 1

Number Systems

1.1 The Real Numbers

1. Since α is an upper bound for A, −α is a lower bound bound for B. If
there were a number α0 > −α that is a lower bound for B, then −α0
would be an upper bound for A that is less than α. That would be a
contradiction. Hence −α is the infimum (or greatest lower bound) for
B.
Now assume that A is bounded below and let β be the greatest lower
bound. Define B as before to be B = {−a : a ∈ A}. Then −β is an
upper bound for B. If there were a number β 0 < β that is an upper
bound for B, then −β 0 would be a lower bound for A that exceeds β.
That would be a contradiction. Hence −β is the supremum (or least
upper bound) for B.
√
3. The least upper bound is 2. As we know from Theorem 1.7, this
statement makes sense in the context of the real√numbers (in fact, in
the proof of that theorem, we essentially define 2 √
to be supremeum
of S). But we know from Pythagoras’s result that 2 does not exist
in the rational numbers.

4. Suppose that α and α0 are both least upper bounds for the set S. Since
α is the least upper bound, α0 ≥ α. Since α0 is the least upper bound,
α ≥ α0 . We conclude that α0 = α.
A similar argument applies to the case of greatest lower bounds.

5
6 CHAPTER 1. NUMBER SYSTEMS

5. The set S is certainly bounded above by the number that is the cir-
cumference of C. The least upper bound p is the irrational number
that we call π. All irrational numbers exists and are well defined in the
real number system. But not in the rational number system.
6. The set (0, 1] contains its least upper bound (namely 1) but not its
greatest lower bound (namely 0)¿ The set [0, 1) contains its greatest
lower bound (namely 0) but not its least upper bound (namely 1).
7. The set S = {0, 1, 2, 3, . . . } is not bounded above and does not have a
least upper bound. The set T = {0, −1, −2, −3, . . . } is not bounded
below and does not have a greatest lower bound.
8. In order to prove that
|x + y| ≤ |x| + |y|
we should square both sides. So the inequality becomes
(x + y) · (x + y) ≤ |x|2 + 2|x||y| + |y|2 .
This reduces to
x2 + 2xy + y 2 ≤ |x|2 + 2|x||y| + |y|2 .
or
xy ≤ |x||y| .
That is certainly true.
10. Any real number x is vacuously an upper bound for ∅. Thus no par-
ticular real number x can be the least upper bound (since x − 1 would
also be an upper bound). Thus −∞ is the least upper bound (i.e., it
is less than or equal to all other upper bounds).
Any real number is vacuously a lower bound for ∅. Thus no particular
real number can be the greatest lower bound (since x + 1 would also
be a lower bound). Thus +∞ is the greatest lower bound (i.e., it is
greater than or equal to all other lower bounds).
11. Let α be a point in the image, with α = f(a). Then a is a local
minimum for f, so there is an interval containing a on which f is a
minumum. We may assume that that interval has rational endpoints.
Thus we assign to each point in the image a pair of rational numbers.
We conclude that the image is countable.
1.2. THE COMPLEX NUMBERS 7

1.2 The Complex Numbers

1. If z = x + iy and w = u + iv are complex numbers then
z + w = (x + iy) + (u + iv) = (x + u) + i(y + v)
= (u + x) + i(v + y) = w + z .

Here we used commutativity of real addition in the third equality.

If z = x + iy, w = u + iv, r = m + in are complex numbers then
z + [w + r] = (x + iy) + [(u + iv) + (m + in)]
= (x + iy) + [(u + m) + i(v + n)] = [x + (u + m)] + i[y + (v + n)]
= [(x + u) + m] + i[(y + v) + n] = [((x + u) + i(y + v)] + (m + in)
= [(x + iy) + (u + iv)] + (m + in) = [z + w] + r .
Here we used associativity of the reals in the fourth equality.
The proof of the distributive law is similar.
2. We have
φ(x + x0 ) = (x + x0) + i · 0 = (x + i0) + (x0 + i · 0) = φ(x) + φ(x0).
Also
φ(x · x0 ) = (x · x0) + i · 0 = (x + i · 0) · (x0 + i · 0) = φ(x) · φ(x0) .

3. Let z = x + iy and w = u + iv. We see that

z/w = (x + iy)/(u + iv) = (x + iy) · (u − iv)/[(u + iv)(u − iv)]
= [(xu + yv) + i(−xv + yu)]/(u2 + v 2) = [(xu+yv)−i(−xv+yu)]/(u2+v 2)
= (x − iy)(u + iv)/(u2 + v 2 ) = (x − iy)/(u − iv) = z/w .
4. The mapping
R → C
x 7→ x + i0

is one-to-one. Hence card(R) ≤ card(C). Thus the complex numbers

are uncountable.
8 CHAPTER 1. NUMBER SYSTEMS

5. Let S be the set of all complex numbers with rational real part. The
mapping

R → S
y 7→ 0 + iy

is one-to-one. Hence card(R) ≤ card(S). Thus S is uncountable.

6. Let
Q = {z ∈ C : z = x + iy with x, y ∈ Q} .
The mapping
φ : Q −→ Q × Q
is a bijection. Since Q is countable, then Q is also.

7. Let
S = {z ∈ C : |z| = 1} .
Consider the function
ϕ : [0, 2π) → S
given by
ϕ(t) = eit .
Then ϕ is one-to-one and onto. So S has the same cardinality as the
interval [0, 2π). We conclude that S is uncountable.

8. Consider the complex number i. It is not zero. If i were positive then

i · i would be positive. But i · i = −1 so that is impossible.
If instead i < 0 then −i is positive. So (−i) · (−i) would be positive.
But (−i) · (−i) = −1 and that is a contradiction.
We conclude that the complex numbers cannot be ordered.
√
9. Write 1 + i = 2eiπ/4 . Then the equation
√
r3 e3iθ = 2eiπ/4

leads to
reiθ = 21/6 eiπ/12 .
1.2. THE COMPLEX NUMBERS 9

Next, the equation √ i9π/4

r3 e3iθ = 2e
leads to
reiθ = 21/6ei9π/12 .
Finally, the equation √ 17iπ/4
r3 e3iθ = 2e
leads to
reiθ = 21/6ei17π/12 .
Those are all the cube roots.

10. Let p be a polynomial of degree k > 1 and let α1 be a root. Use the
Euclidean algorithm to divide p by (z − α1 ). We find that

p(z) = (z − α1 ) · p1 (z) + r(z) .

Letting z = α1 gives that r(α1 ) = 0. Hence (z −α1 ) divides p(z) evenly.

If p1 has positive degree k − 1 then it has a root α2. Arguing as before,
we find that (z − α2) evenly divides p1 (z). Continuing in this fashion
we find a full set of roots α1 , α2, . . . , αk (with possible repetitions in
this list).

11. Let p(z) = a0 +a1z +a2z 2 +· · · ak z k be a polynomial with all coefficients

aj real. Let α be a complex root of p. Then

p(α) = a0+a1α+a2α2 +· · · ak αk = a0 + a1α + a2α2 + · · · + ak αk = 0 = 0 .

Hence α is a root of p.

13. Squaring both sides, we see that the curve is equivalent to

|z 2 | + |z 2 − 1| = 1 .

So z 2 lies on an ellipse with major axis stretching from 0 to 1. The

picture then is as in the figure.

15. Refer to the solution of Exercise 10. The kth roots of a complex number
α are the roots of the polynomial equation z k − α = 0. There are k
such roots.
Chapter 2

Sequences

2.1 Convergence of Sequences

2. If not then there is an  > 0 such that the interval (t − , t] contains
no element of S. But then t − /2 is an upper bound for S, and that
contradicts the hypothesis that t is the least upper bound of S.
3. If the sequence does not converge to α then, for some  > 0, it is the
case that no element of the sequence enters the interval (α − , α + ).
But that would imply that no subsequence has a subsequence that
converges to α. Contradiction.
4. First of all notice that the Cauchy criterion can be stated as
lim |aN − aM | = 0. (∗)
N,M →∞

Indeed, (∗) is equivalent to saying that, for any  > 0, there exists N
such that if N, M > N then
|aN − aM | < .
Seeking a contradiction suppose that (∗) does not hold for the sequence
in the statement of the exercise. Then there exist {Nj , Mj }∞
j=1 such that

|aNj − aMj | > δ

for some δ > 0. We can arrange for this double sequence to satisfy
Nj+1 > Mj

11