Slick Proof: No Finite Paired Sets with Containing an Irrational"

  • Thread starter snoble
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses a solution to a problem involving the proof of no finite paired sets containing an irrational number. The proposed solution involves assuming the existence of a finite paired set and using a "basis" set to map elements of the set to a vector in the real plane. The conversation then goes on to explain how this mapping can lead to a contradiction, proving that the set cannot be paired. The speaker also mentions that there are other proofs for this problem and apologizes for posting a difficult problem.
  • #1
snoble
127
0
This is a solution to a problem I posed in the Q&A thread

I can't seem to get to sleep and I promised a proof of no finite paired sets with containing an irrational. So I might as well be semi-productive and type one up. There are several proofs but in my mind the following is the slickest.

Assume for contradiction that P is a finite paired set and [tex]x\in P[/tex] where x is irrational. Take [tex]B=\{b_0, b_1, \ldots , b_n\} [/tex] to be a [tex]\mathbb{Q}[/tex]-linearly independent set that spans P and such that [tex]b_0=1, b_1=x[/tex]. In other words if [tex]\sum_{i=0}^n q_ib_i = 0[/tex] and all the q_i's are rational then all the q_i's equal 0. And the fact that it spans P means for [tex]y\in P[/tex] there exists [tex]y_0,\ldots ,y_n \in \mathbb{Q}[/tex] such that [tex]\sum_{i=0}^n y_ib_i =y[/tex]. For any finite set of reals such a "basis" is always constructible. The important thing to notice is that because of the linear independence of the base the choice of coefficients is unique.

Now you are going to map all the [tex]y\in P[/tex] to [tex]\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}[/tex] where the first coordinate is [tex]y_1[/tex] and the second is [tex]y-y_1b_1[/tex]. Let's call this map f. For example x gets mapped to [tex]f(x) =(1,x-1\times b_1)= (1,x-x) = (1,0)[/tex] and 1 gets mapped to [tex]f(1)=(0,1)[/tex]. In general [tex]f(\sum y_ib_i) = (y_1, y-y_1b_1)[/tex]. Notice that for any [tex]p,q \in P[/tex] that p-q is also in the span of B. But more importantly
[tex]f(p-q) = f(\sum p_ib_i - \sum q_ib_i) = f(\sum (p_i-q_i)b_i) = (p_1-q_1, p-q-(p_1-q_1)b_1) = (p_1, p-p_1b_1) - (q_1, q-q_1b_1)= f(p)-f(q)[/tex]

So the difference between two elements, p and q, gets mapped to the difference vector f(p)-f(q). And it is pretty clear f is one to one since it is invertible. Now I claim that a difference vector of longest length in [tex]\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}[/tex] is only the difference vector for one pair of elements and it is longer than f(1-0) (which is the difference vector that is allowed only exist once).

First to show it is longer than f(1-0) I just need to show that there is a difference vector longer than f(1-0). |f(1-0)|=|(0,1)|=1. Remember that x is in P so we have difference vector
|f(1-x)| = |f(1) -f(x)| = |(0,1)-(1,0)| = |(-1,1)| >1.

Now to show that a difference vector of longest length is only the difference vector for one pair of elements. Take a difference vector of longest length. Say it does appear for another pair of elements. Then you have the same difference vector in two different places on the graph. same vector means same length and same direction, ie parallel. If you connect the end points you get a parallelogram. Well any parallelogram has at least one diagonal that is longer than all of the sides. So you have a new difference vector that is longer so the original wasn't the longest.

So since a difference vector of longest length only occurs once, and that vector isn't f(1-0), then P cannot be paired which is our contradiction.

(note there may be several difference vectors with the longest length in [tex]\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}[/tex] but that does not mean they are the same difference in P. for example
[tex]|f( (1+b_1) - (1 +b_2))|= |f(b_1-b_2)| = |(1,-b_2)| = |(1,b_2)| = |f(b_1+b_2)|=|f( (1+b_1) - (1 -b_2))| [/tex]
but [tex](1+b_1) - (1 +b_2)\ne (1+b_1) - (1 -b_2)[/tex]
)

Perhaps this problem was a little too hard to post but don't get thrown off by the length of the proof. I'm being much more verbose than necessary since I can't sketch a graph in this medium. Also the arguments used don't use any math that is really too fancy. And the argument may seem hard to come up with but that's just because it is in cleaned up form. The crux of the argument is really finding some measure for the differences such that any pair with the same measure induces a difference with a longer measure. This is a natural thing to do when trying to show things are not paired.

Again I apologize for posting such a silly problem.

Steven
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2


so you know the other proofs on the spot?
 

1. What is the purpose of a Q&A problem?

The purpose of a Q&A problem is to pose a question or problem and receive a response or solution from an expert or knowledgeable individual. It allows for the exchange of information and knowledge in a structured and organized manner.

2. How do I effectively ask a question in a Q&A problem?

To effectively ask a question in a Q&A problem, it is important to be specific and clear about the problem or information you are seeking. Provide enough context and details to help the responder understand the issue and provide a relevant answer.

3. Can I ask multiple questions in a Q&A problem?

Yes, you can ask multiple questions in a Q&A problem. However, it is best to keep them related to the same topic or problem to avoid confusion and to increase the chances of getting a comprehensive answer.

4. How do I choose the best answer to my Q&A problem?

When choosing the best answer to your Q&A problem, consider the credibility and expertise of the responder, as well as the relevance and accuracy of their answer. You can also compare multiple answers to determine the most comprehensive and helpful one.

5. What should I do if I receive an inaccurate or unhelpful answer to my Q&A problem?

If you receive an inaccurate or unhelpful answer to your Q&A problem, you can politely ask for clarification or for additional information. If the responder is unable to provide a satisfactory answer, you can also reach out to other experts or sources for a more accurate response.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
482
Replies
4
Views
909
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
34
Views
1K
  • Math POTW for Graduate Students
Replies
2
Views
590
Replies
6
Views
945
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
24
Views
617
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
440
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
15
Views
2K
Back
Top