4
$\begingroup$

Can we find a set other the $\mathbb{R}$ satisfying all the field axioms, order properties and completeness axiom?

By another set I mean, it differs from $\mathbb{R}$ may be in terms of topology, cardinality, etc,.

Edit

I am just curious to see some structure which evidently differ from $\mathbb{R}$, yeah topologically we can find, but topological difference doesn't quit a apparent difference in some sense for me. Yeah I understand my question is vague... but I think I let the reader to get the point.

$\endgroup$
13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You can just define another topology on $\Bbb R$... topology is not inherent in a set. $\endgroup$
    – Kenny Lau
    Commented May 11, 2017 at 6:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Related: isomorphism of Dedekind complete ordered fields. $\endgroup$
    – dxiv
    Commented May 11, 2017 at 6:24
  • $\begingroup$ @KennyLau Yeah fine nice, I think I have to edit my question. I am just curious to see some structure which evidently differ from $\mathbb{R}$, yeah topologically we can find, but topological difference doesn't quit a apparent difference in some sense for me. Yeah I understand my question is vague... but you get the point $\endgroup$
    – Saravanan
    Commented May 11, 2017 at 6:36
  • $\begingroup$ @dxiv so we can't find a set which differs in cardinality $\endgroup$
    – Saravanan
    Commented May 11, 2017 at 6:44
  • $\begingroup$ We speak of "the" reals because if $(R,+,0,\times, 1,<)$ and $(R',+',0',\times',1',<')$ are order-complete ordered fields then they are isomorphic: There will be a (unique) field-isomorphism between them, and it will also be an order-isomorphism. $\endgroup$ Commented May 11, 2017 at 8:55

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

We can find a set that is not $\mathbb{R}$ which satisfies the field axioms and is a totally ordered set, however we cannot find one that is Dedekind complete. Up to isomorphism $\mathbb{R}$ is the only Dedekind complete ordered field, and this is actually its defining property in a significant sense.

The study of real-closed fields may be of some interest to you; it is the first widely recognized generalization of the study of $\mathbb{R}$, looking at totally ordered fields with the same first order theory as the real numbers. This means that any statement $\phi$ which is true about elements of the real numbers must also be true for the elements of this other field, $\mathbb{F}$.

Completeness is a topological property of $\mathbb{R}$ and consequently part of its second order theory, the theory of subsets of $\mathbb{R}$. There are many real-closed fields which are not $\mathbb{R}$ -- the smallest among them is $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$, the algebraic closure of the rational numbers, and the largest real-closed field is the Surreal numbers $N_0$. We also have that $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}\subset\mathbb{R}\subset N_0$, in the sense that there is a strict subfield of $N_0$ which is isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}$ and a strict subfield of $\mathbb{R}$ which is isomorphic to $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$.

If you would like to see more examples I construct a proper class of non-isomorphic real-closed fields in this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.08908, the smallest one appearing in here being $\mathbb{R}$ and the largest being $N_0$ -- this part of the construction begins on page $53$.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .