In proof of SQRT(2) is irrational, why can't a,b both be even

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Thecla
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    even Irrational Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the classic proof of the irrationality of √2, specifically addressing the assumption that both integers a and b can be even in the representation of √2 as a rational number a/b. Participants explore the implications of this assumption and the resulting contradictions that arise in the proof.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the proof assumes a and b cannot both be even, as this leads to a contradiction.
  • One participant describes a method where if a and b are both even, the argument can be repeated indefinitely, suggesting that they would continue to have a common factor of 2, which is impossible for positive integers.
  • Another participant presents a proof that starts with the assumption that a and b have no common factors, leading to the conclusion that both must be even, which contradicts the initial assumption.
  • A different approach is proposed using the representation of a and b in terms of powers of 2, leading to a contradiction between an even and an odd number.
  • Some participants reference the classic proof and its steps, emphasizing the importance of the assumption regarding the lowest terms of the fraction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the contradiction that arises when assuming both a and b are even, but multiple competing views and methods for demonstrating this contradiction remain. The discussion does not reach a consensus on a single approach or explanation.

Contextual Notes

Some arguments depend on the definitions of integers and their properties, such as the concept of lowest terms and the nature of even and odd numbers. Limitations in the proofs presented may arise from assumptions about the integers involved and the steps taken in the reasoning.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for those interested in mathematical proofs, particularly in understanding the nuances of irrational numbers and the logical structures involved in proof techniques.

Thecla
Messages
137
Reaction score
10
In the classic proof of irrationality of SQRT(2) we assume that it can be represented by a rational number,a/b where a, b are integers. This assumption after a few mathematical steps leads to a contradiction, namely that both a, b are even numbers.
Why is that a contradiction?
Well you can say that the rational fraction has to be in its lowest terms;therefore either a or b or both must be odd.
However, that wasn't in the assumption(lowest terms). The assumption was just two integers a,b.
Why can't they both be even?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the correct version of the classic proof, it is assumed that a and b are not both even.
 
And the reason you want to make the assumption that both are even right at the start is...
 
The proof I use starts by assuming a and b are integers with no common factors i.e. a/b is in its lowest terms. Then you end up with a loop in which a and b always have a common factor of 2 - but this is impossible as the numerator and denominator would get smaller without limit. An impossibility for positive integers.
 
Thecla said:
In the classic proof of irrationality of SQRT(2) we assume that it can be represented by a rational number,a/b where a, b are integers. This assumption after a few mathematical steps leads to a contradiction, namely that both a, b are even numbers.
Why is that a contradiction?
Well you can say that the rational fraction has to be in its lowest terms;therefore either a or b or both must be odd.
However, that wasn't in the assumption(lowest terms). The assumption was just two integers a,b.
Why can't they both be even?

If a and b are both even, then let ##a=2c## and ##b=2d##. Repeat the argument on c and d, so we conclude they too are even. Let ##c=2e## and ##d=2f##...which are also even. And so on. This argument should keep going forever.

But here's the thing. The natural numbers have a minimum (namely 1). So we can't keep halving forever. At some point this process must terminate. This contradicts our original argument.
 
Thanks for the help
 
Another proof:

In ##2 = (a/b)^2##, assume that ##a## and ##b## have been reduced to have no common factors.
Then ##2b^2=a^2##, so ##a## must be even (contain a factor 2).
Thus ##a=2c## for some ##c##
Thus ##2b^2=4c^2##
Thus ##b^2=2c^2##, so now ##b## must be even also.

This contradicts the assumption that ##a## and ##b## have no common factor, so no such ##a## and ##b## can exist.
 
Just do this

Suppose $$\sqrt{2}=a/b$$
where
a=2^m c
b=2^n d
c and d are odd integers
then
$$
\sqrt{2}=a/b \\
\sqrt{2}b=a \\
2b^2=a^2 \\
2(2^n d)^2=(2^m c)^2 \\
2^{2n+1} d^2=2^{2m} c^2 \\
$$
thus
2n+1=2m
2n+1 is odd while 2m is even
an even number cannot equal an odd number
contradiction
 
Last edited:
If you have never seen Vi Hart's videos, here is an amusing one on Pythagoras and the proof that 2 is irrational.

P.S. While you are there, check out her Mobius strip story of "Wind and Mr Ug"
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
12K