Discrete Math irrational and rational numbers proof

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving by contradiction that if a and b are rational numbers (with b ≠ 0) and r is an irrational number, then the expression a + br is irrational. The proof provided demonstrates that assuming a + br is rational leads to a contradiction, as it implies r must also be rational. Key steps include expressing a and b as ratios of integers and manipulating these expressions to arrive at the conclusion that r cannot be rational, thereby validating the original statement.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of rational and irrational numbers
  • Familiarity with proof by contradiction
  • Basic algebraic manipulation of equations
  • Knowledge of properties of integers and their operations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of rational and irrational numbers in depth
  • Learn more about proof techniques, specifically proof by contradiction
  • Explore algebraic manipulation techniques for solving equations
  • Investigate the implications of the zero product property in proofs
USEFUL FOR

Students of discrete mathematics, educators teaching proof techniques, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of number theory.

abjf9299
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove by contradiction. Your proof should be based only on properties of the integers, simple algebra, and the definition of rational and irrational.

If a and b are rational numbers, b does not equal 0, and r is an irrational number, then a+br is irrational.

Homework Equations



rational numbers are equal to the ratio of two other numbers

The Attempt at a Solution



I wrote a proof but am not sure it is correct. Please tell me what I did wrong and show me the way to do it right if this is not correct. My teacher indicated that we need to make use of the fact that b does not equal 0 (from a+br). Did I do that sufficiently as well?:

Proof: Suppose not. That is suppose that there exists rational numbers a and b, b does not equal zero, and irrational number r such that a+br is rational [We must deduce a contradiction].
By definition of rational, a = c/d, b= e/f , a+br = g/h for some integers c,d,e,f,g,and h with h,f,d, and b not equal to 0.
By substitution, a+b(r) = c/d +(r)( e/f) = g/h.
Solving for r gives: r = (fgd-chf) / (ehd)
Now fgd and chf are integers (being products of integers) and ehd does not equal 0 (by zero product property). Thus by definition of rational, r is rational which contradicts the supposition that r is irrational [ Hence the supposition is false and the statement is true].
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks pretty solid. A few minor things I found:

1) You want to state when you're defining b that e is also not equal to 0.

2) You probably want to list your steps for solving for r, so your teacher doesn't need to go do extra work and check if it's right.
 
Thanks for the help! I'll correct those things ASAP before handing it in...
 
abjf9299 said:

Homework Statement



Prove by contradiction. Your proof should be based only on properties of the integers, simple algebra, and the definition of rational and irrational.

If a and b are rational numbers, b does not equal 0, and r is an irrational number, then a+br is irrational.

Homework Equations



rational numbers are equal to the ratio of two other numbers

The Attempt at a Solution



I wrote a proof but am not sure it is correct. Please tell me what I did wrong and show me the way to do it right if this is not correct. My teacher indicated that we need to make use of the fact that b does not equal 0 (from a+br). Did I do that sufficiently as well?:

Proof: Suppose not. That is suppose that there exists rational numbers a and b, b does not equal zero, and irrational number r such that a+br is rational [We must deduce a contradiction].
By definition of rational, a = c/d, b= e/f , a+br = g/h for some integers c,d,e,f,g,and h with h,f,d, and b not equal to 0.
By substitution, a+b(r) = c/d +(r)( e/f) = g/h.
Solving for r gives: r = (fgd-chf) / (ehd)
Now fgd and chf are integers (being products of integers) and ehd does not equal 0 (by zero product property). Thus by definition of rational, r is rational which contradicts the supposition that r is irrational [ Hence the supposition is false and the statement is true].

Since you have already answered the question, I don't mind pointing out some shortcuts. Let c = a + br, and assume a, b and c are rational, and that b =/= 0. Then we can solve for r: r = (c-a)/b (legal because b is not zero). The numerator c-a is rational and the denominator b is rational, so their ratio is rational. This contradicts the assumption that r is irrational. Thus, c must also be irrational.

RGV
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
13K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K