Prove √2, 2^{\frac{3}{2}} & √3+√2 Are Algebraic Numbers

  • Thread starter Thread starter cragar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the numbers √2, 2^{\frac{3}{2}}, and √3 + √2 are algebraic. An algebraic number is defined as a root of a polynomial with integer coefficients.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the meaning of "show" in the context of the problem, questioning whether it implies providing an example or a formal proof. There are attempts to express each number as an equation and manipulate it to derive a polynomial with integer coefficients.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on how to express √2 and √3 + √2 in polynomial form, while others discuss the terminology used in relation to roots of polynomials and equations. Multiple interpretations of the terminology are being explored, but no consensus has been reached on the best way to articulate the concept.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing discussion about the appropriate terminology for roots of polynomials versus roots of equations, highlighting potential confusion in definitions and usage.

cragar
Messages
2,546
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


Show that √2 , [itex]2^{\frac{3}{2}}[/itex] and √3+√2 are algebraic
A real number is algebraic when it is the root of a polynomial with integer coefficients.

The Attempt at a Solution


When they say show, does that mean just give an example? Is it different than proving something.
So I took √2=x and then squared both sides same for √3
and then did the same thing for √2+√3=x . I squared both sides.
but then you have to do it again. and eventually you get a polynomial out with integer
coefficients.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cragar said:

Homework Statement


Show that √2 , [itex]2^{\frac{3}{2}}[/itex] and √3+√2 are algebraic
A real number is algebraic when it is the root of a polynomial with integer coefficients.

The Attempt at a Solution


When they say show, does that mean just give an example? Is it different than proving something.
So I took √2=x and then squared both sides same for √3
and then did the same thing for √2+√3=x . I squared both sides.
but then you have to do it again. and eventually you get a polynomial out with integer
coefficients.

For each of those numbers, you have to construct a polynomial equation with integral coefficients that has that number as a root.

Start with [itex]x = n[/itex], where n is the number, then manipulate it until you get the required equation (with RHS equal to zero).
f
Your answers should resemble: [itex]3x^2 - 5 = 0[/itex] or [itex]6x^4 + 7x^3 - 8x^2 + x + 3 = 0[/itex] (just examples of the form).

You've got the right idea for [itex]\sqrt{2}[/itex], but you really need to express it as an equation.

For [itex]\sqrt{2} + \sqrt{3}[/itex], square both sides, simplify, then leave the surd term on one side, gather the integer and x terms on the other, then square both sides again, simplify, rearrange.

[itex]2^{\frac{3}{2}}[/itex] is easy, square both sides, rearrange.
 
Last edited:
so for root2 I would have [itex]x^2-2=f(x)[/itex] as the polynomial.
ok, thanks for your help.
 
cragar said:
so for root2 I would have [itex]x^2-2=f(x)[/itex] as the polynomial.
ok, thanks for your help.

Should be [itex]x^2-2=0[/itex]. The equation is the answer.
 
Curious3141 said:
Should be [itex]x^2-2=0[/itex]. The equation is the answer.

no cragar is correct, to prove a number a is algebraic, you need to find a polynomial f(x) such that f(a) = 0.

for √2, the polynomial is f(x) = x2 - 2. in fact, this is the minimal polynomial for √2. note that the polynomial g(x) = x4 - 4x2 + 4 would do just as well for establishing that √2 is algebraic.
 
Deveno said:
no cragar is correct, to prove a number a is algebraic, you need to find a polynomial f(x) such that f(a) = 0.

for √2, the polynomial is f(x) = x2 - 2. in fact, this is the minimal polynomial for √2. note that the polynomial g(x) = x4 - 4x2 + 4 would do just as well for establishing that √2 is algebraic.

Ah, fair enough.

It's understood the RHS is zero.
 
Curious3141 said:
Ah, fair enough.

It's understood the RHS is zero.

yes, that's what we mean by a root.
 
Deveno said:
yes, that's what we mean by a root.

Actually, I think the use of the word "root" is somewhat irregular. "Root of a polynomial" is acceptable, just as is "root of an equation".

For example, in this Wolfram page: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PolynomialRoots.html, the word root is used in both contexts.

Maybe "zeroes of a polynomial function with integral coefficients" is a less contentious way of putting it.

The words "solution" is also uncontentious, since this word has to pertain to a stated equation (rather than just a function).
 
it's kind of weird...an n-th root of a is a root of xn - a, but the "root of a polynomial" may not be a (n-th) root in this sense.

but, yes, when one speaks of a "root of a function", one means an x such that f(x) = 0. for example, pi is a root of the sine function. the term "zero" might be more unambiguous.
 
  • #10
Deveno said:
it's kind of weird...an n-th root of a is a root of xn - a, but the "root of a polynomial" may not be a (n-th) root in this sense.

Yes, but that usage of the word "root" is understood to be distinct.

but, yes, when one speaks of a "root of a function", one means an x such that f(x) = 0. for example, pi is a root of the sine function. the term "zero" might be more unambiguous.

What I'm saying is "root of an equation" is also acceptable terminology, at least in common mathematical use.

In any case, for this problem, it doesn't matter a whole deal.

Cragar can answer "This number is algebraic because it is is a root of P(x)" or "...because it is a root of P(x) = 0", or "...because it is a zero of P(x)", or "...because it is a solution of P(x) = 0", or "...because it satisfies P(x) = 0".

The concept is what's important, and as long as he expresses his meaning clearly, no one can mark him wrong. The rest is just hair-splitting semantics. :smile:
 
  • #11
Curious3141 said:
Yes, but that usage of the word "root" is understood to be distinct.



What I'm saying is "root of an equation" is also acceptable terminology, at least in common mathematical use.

In any case, for this problem, it doesn't matter a whole deal.

Cragar can answer "This number is algebraic because it is is a root of P(x)" or "...because it is a root of P(x) = 0", or "...because it is a zero of P(x)", or "...because it is a solution of P(x) = 0", or "...because it satisfies P(x) = 0".

The concept is what's important, and as long as he expresses his meaning clearly, no one can mark him wrong. The rest is just hair-splitting semantics. :smile:

which, no doubt, explains my plethora of split-ends.
 
  • #12
Deveno said:
which, no doubt, explains my plethora of split-ends.

You need more trichology, less trigonometry. :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K