Proving √2 Irrational - Explanation & Solution

In summary, in this conversation, the task was to show that √2 is irrational. The first step was to assume that √2 = a/b, where both a and b are natural numbers. Then, it was shown that 2q1q1q2q2q3q3...qmqm = p1p1p2p2p3p3...pnpn, and that there cannot be the same amount of 2-factors on the left and the right. This was proven using two different methods - one by showing that a and b are both even, and the other by using the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. Both methods led to a contradiction, proving that √2 is irrational.
  • #1
johann1301
217
1

Homework Statement


In this task we will show that √2 is irrational. Assume that √2 = a/b where both a and b are natural numbers. Let a = p1p2p3...pn, and b = q1q2q3...qm be the prime factors

a) explain why 2q1q1q2q2q3q3...qmqm = p1p1p2p2p3p3...pnpn

√2=a/b

b√2=a

√2q1q2q3...qm=p1p2p3...pn

(√2(q1q2q3...qm))2=(p1p2p3...pn)2

2q1q1q2q2q3q3...qmqm = p1p1p2p2p3p3...pnpn

b) explain why there can't be the same amount of 2-factors on the left and the right

Im stuck on this one...

Is it because then a and b could be further shortened/divided?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
johann1301 said:

Homework Statement


In this task we will show that √2 is irrational. Assume that √2 = a/b where both a and b are natural numbers. Let a = p1p2p3...pn, and b = q1q2q3...qm be the prime factors

a) explain why 2q1q1q2q2q3q3...qmqm = p1p1p2p2p3p3...pnpn

Is there some reason why you didn't write that as [tex]
2q_1^2 \dots q_m^2 = p_1^2 \dots p_n^2?[/tex]

√2=a/b

b√2=a

√2q1q2q3...qm=p1p2p3...pn

(√2(q1q2q3...qm))2=(p1p2p3...pn)2

2q1q1q2q2q3q3...qmqm = p1p1p2p2p3p3...pnpn

b) explain why there can't be the same amount of 2-factors on the left and the right

Im stuck on this one...

Is it because then a and b could be further shortened/divided?

The left hand side is even. Therefore the right hand side is also. But the right hand side is the square of an integer, [itex]a[/itex]. Either [itex]a[/itex] is even or [itex]a[/itex] is odd. Only one of these is possible if [itex]a^2[/itex] must be even. What does that say about the minimum number of times [itex]a^2[/itex] can be divided by 2? What can you then say about the integer [itex]b^2 = a^2/2[/itex]?
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #3
pasmith said:
Is there some reason why you didn't write that as [tex]
2q_1^2 \dots q_m^2 = p_1^2 \dots p_n^2?[/tex]

No, the book wrote it that way. So i did to.

pasmith said:
The left hand side is even. Therefore the right hand side is also. But the right hand side is the square of an integer, [itex]a[/itex]. Either [itex]a[/itex] is even or [itex]a[/itex] is odd. Only one of these is possible if [itex]a^2[/itex] must be even. What does that say about the minimum number of times [itex]a^2[/itex] can be divided by 2? What can you then say about the integer [itex]b^2 = a^2/2[/itex]?

I don't know how to prove it, but i remember that if a2 is even, then a is even also(given that a2 is a square number which we know it is, because a was a whole number). So a is even and that would imply that i could write a=(2k) where k is a natural number 1, 2, 3, 4... If i square this i get that a2=(2k)2=4k2. I see from this that a2 could be divided by 2 two times and still be a natural number. If i know look at b2=a2/2 i can see that a2/2 can be written as 2k2.

We get that:
b2=2k2

b2/k2=2

b/k=√2

This last result goes against what what we assumed. That a and b had no common factors? (the task doesn't really assume this, i assume this)

(Or maybe we don't have to assume that a and b had no common factors. We can rather argue that since we originally had √2=a/b and got that this could be rewritten to √2=b/k, we could just repeat the process an infinite amount of times, and thus removing an infinite amount of 2-factors from the fraction. And this is absurd. So there can't be the same amount of 2-factors on the left and the right.)
 
Last edited:
  • #4
You seem to be mixing up two different proofs. The simplest, which I think you've almost got above, is:

Assume a, b have no common factors, then show that a and b are both even. You don't need prime factorisations for this.

There is another proof using the unique prime factorisation of a and b. This can be used to show that if a and b have no common factors, then ##a^2## and ##b^2## have no common factors. Therefore, the square root of any whole number is either a whole number or irrational; it's never a/b with b ≠ 1.
 
  • #5
there is also a (last) task c)

Use the fundamental theorem of arithmetic to derive a contradiction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wouldn't i be doing task c if i do what you say?

PeroK said:
Assume a, b have no common factors, then show that a and b are both even.

I think I'm just supposed to - at least for now - explain why there can't be the same amount of 2-factors on the left and the right...
 
  • #6
johann1301 said:
there is also a (last) task c)

Use the fundamental theorem of arithmetic to derive a contradiction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wouldn't i be doing task c if i do what you say?



I think I'm just supposed to - at least for now - explain why there can't be the same amount of 2-factors on the left and the right...

Is the number of factors of 2 on the left even or odd?
Is the number of factors of 2 on the right even or odd?
 

Related to Proving √2 Irrational - Explanation & Solution

1. What is the definition of an irrational number?

An irrational number is a real number that cannot be expressed as a ratio of two integers. This means that it cannot be written in the form of a/b, where a and b are integers and b is not equal to 0.

2. Why is √2 considered an irrational number?

√2 is considered an irrational number because it cannot be expressed as a ratio of two integers. When it is written in decimal form, it is a non-terminating and non-repeating decimal, meaning that the digits after the decimal point go on forever without repeating in a pattern.

3. How can you prove that √2 is irrational?

The proof for the irrationality of √2 is known as the "Proof by Contradiction." It involves assuming that √2 is a rational number, and then using logical steps to prove that this assumption leads to a contradiction. This contradiction then proves that our initial assumption was wrong, and therefore, √2 must be irrational.

4. Can you explain the "Proof by Contradiction" method?

The "Proof by Contradiction" method involves assuming the opposite of what you are trying to prove and then showing that this assumption leads to a contradiction. This contradiction then proves that the original statement must be true. In the case of √2, we assume that it is a rational number, and then use logical steps to show that this assumption leads to a contradiction, thereby proving that √2 is irrational.

5. Are there other ways to prove that √2 is irrational?

Yes, there are other ways to prove that √2 is irrational, such as the "Proof by Infinite Descent" or the "Proof by Unique Factorization Theorem." However, the "Proof by Contradiction" method is the most commonly used and most straightforward way to prove the irrationality of √2.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
802
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
819
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
643
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Back
Top