What is flawed in the reasoning about solving irrational numbers?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the proof of the irrationality of the expression x = √2 + √3, where the user attempts to demonstrate that xc cannot be an integer for any integer c. The reasoning involves assuming x is rational (p/q) and deriving a contradiction by showing that both √2 and √3 are irrational, thus proving that xc cannot be an integer. The participants also explore whether similar reasoning applies when substituting π for √3, concluding that the proof structure remains valid but requires careful definition of boundaries a and b.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of irrational numbers and their properties
  • Familiarity with proof by contradiction techniques
  • Basic knowledge of algebraic expressions and integer properties
  • Concept of rational numbers and their definitions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of irrational numbers in depth
  • Learn advanced proof techniques in mathematics, particularly proof by contradiction
  • Explore the implications of irrationality in algebraic expressions
  • Investigate the relationship between irrational numbers and transcendental numbers
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of mathematics, and anyone interested in number theory and proofs involving irrational numbers will benefit from this discussion.

glebovg
Messages
156
Reaction score
0
Can anyone explain what is wrong with my reasoning?

Suppose x = \frac{p}{q} and let x = \sqrt 2 + \sqrt 3. Also, let a,b,c \in {\Bbb Z} and assume a < xc < b. If I show that xc must be an integer, and I know there does not exist c such that \sqrt 2 c, or \sqrt 3 c is an integer. Then, \left( {\sqrt 2 + \sqrt 3 } \right)c cannot be an integer, a contradiction.

p and q are integers, where q > 1. I am supposing that \sqrt 2 + \sqrt 3 = p/q.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What are you trying to prove exactly?

If x is a rational number, p and q would have to be integers and therefore x could not be \sqrt{2} + \sqrt{3}. That's the contradiction. That means xc could never be rational for any integer c
 
Suppose, beforehand we show that xc is an integer, and then show it is not. By the way, is it true that \sqrt 2 c + \sqrt 3 c is never an integer? I think it is true. Then we have arrived at a contradiction.
 
For instance, you could do a proof of this form:

1. Assume x = \sqrt{2} + \sqrt{3} is rational.
2. Define a < xc < b, where a, b, and c are integers.
3. Prove that \sqrt{2} and \sqrt{3} are both irrational (by the contradiction proof I posted)
4. Since integers are a subset of rational numbers, and x is not in the set of rational numbers, then xc cannot be an integer for any integer c.
 
Yes, I know. I just gave an example. Suppose x = \sqrt 2 + \pi. Would the same argument work? I know I left some detail out, but essentially I show that xc has to be an integer. Using the same reasoning would I arrive at a contradiction?
 
Last edited:
tazzzdo said:
For instance, you could do a proof of this form:

1. Assume x = \sqrt{2} + \sqrt{3} is rational.
2. Define a < xc < b, where a, b, and c are integers.
3. Prove that \sqrt{2} and \sqrt{3} are both irrational (by the contradiction proof I posted)
4. Since integers are a subset of rational numbers, and x is not in the set of rational numbers, then xc cannot be an integer for any integer c.

Are you sure this would work? I think the only problem is part 2. You cannot just define a < xc < b. You have to show that is the case. Correct? If I suppose x = \sqrt 2 + \pi. Would the same argument work? We know that both \sqrt 2 and \pi are irrational. If I I show that part 2 must hold, etc. I would arrive at a contradiction. Correct?
 
Last edited:
I'm a little confused because it's rather vague. a and b are arbitrary, correct? You originally just assumed a < xc < b just as i did. So I don't get what you're trying to prove with that. a and b are just boundaries that imply |a/c| < x < |b/c|
 
For example, let x = \sqrt 2 + \pi and assume x = p/q. Suppose we can show that xc, where c is an integer, must be an integer between two integers, namely a and b i.e. a < xc < b. If I prove that xc cannot be an integer, would it be reasonable to infer that we have a contradiction? I know it may sound confusing. I hope it makes sense. Essentially, if we show that xc must be an integer between a and b, assuming x = p/q, and then show xc cannot be an integer, will we have a contradiction (assuming we can actually show xc must be between a and b)? Can we then infer that x is irrational?
 
Last edited:
  • #10
You can absolutely prove that x is irrational and therefore xc is irrational and not an integer.

1. Show x is irrational by contradiction.
2. Assume a < xc < b for integers a, b, c, where xc is an integer.
3. Prove that since x is irrational, then xc is also irrational and therefore not an integer.

What's the problem? You could pick a and b to be anything outside of xc. It seems like that part is pointless. If the heart of the proof is to prove that xc cannot be an integer between some integers a and b, then just prove xc cannot be an integer (no matter what xc is, there will be integers that it lies between).
 
  • #11
It seems like if we let x = \sqrt 2 + \pi it does not work.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
1K