Prove the irrationality of pi by contradiction

  • Thread starter Thread starter etotheipi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Contradiction Pi
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
36 replies · 5K views
etotheipi
Homework Statement
Suppose ##\pi = \frac{p}{q}## and let $$I_n = \int_0^{\pi} f(x) \sin{x} dx$$ where ##f(x) = \frac{q^n x^n (\pi - x)^n}{n!}##. Show that $$I_n = \sum_{j=0}^n (-1)^j \left(f^{(2j)}(\pi) + f^{(2j)}(0)\right)$$
Relevant Equations
N/A
Normally you can do reduction formula type questions with I.B.P., but here that just results in something like $$I_n = \left[-f(x) \cos{x}\right]_0^{\pi} + \frac{q^n n}{n!} \int_0^{\pi} \cos{(x)} x^{n-1} (\pi - x)^{n-1} (\pi - 2x) dx$$I can't seem to get anywhere from here though. Substitutions like ##u = \pi - x## are useless since it just gets you back to the original thing! I did I.B.P. again but that just made it worse...

I'm not too sure either how we get a sum from it; I suspect a series expansion might be involved but I tried expanding ##(1 - \frac{x}{\pi})^n## binomially as well as substituting in the Maclaurin for ##\sin## but that gets me nowhere either.

Once you do obtain this form you're then supposed to show also that $$I_n \leq \frac{\pi}{n!} \left(\frac{q\pi^2}{4}\right)^n$$ and that ##I_n \rightarrow 0## as ##n \rightarrow \infty## to finally deduce ##\pi## is irrational.

Though at the moment I'm still struggling to get the first part out! I wondered if anyone could provide any hints... thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
Not sure this works:

$$I_n = \int_0^\pi f(x) \sin(x)dx \leq \int_0^\pi \frac{q^n x^n (\pi-x)^n}{n!}dx = \dots$$
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
MathematicalPhysicist said:
What do you want us to show?
The sum equals to what?

Ah sorry, yes it's supposed to be shown to be equal to ##I_n##. I've fixed the problem statement!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you must do IBP once more cause its the only way to relate ##I_n## with ##I_{n-1}## along some other integrals. But the way you wrote it after the first IBP doesn't help, I believe it is better to write it down as
$$I_n=[-f(x)cosx]_0^{\pi}+\frac{q^nn}{n!}(\int_0^{\pi}x^{n-1}(\pi-x)^{n}\cos xdx-\int_0^{\pi}x^{n}(\pi-x)^{n-1}\cos x dx)$$.
Now each of the above two integral terms will give a contribution to a ##I_{n-1}## term along with other integrals (which other integrals will cancel out, not so sure about that) when you do IBP once more.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
Delta2 said:
I think you must do IBP once more cause its the only way to relate ##I_n## with ##I_{n-1}## along some other integrals. But the way you wrote it after the first IBP doesn't help, I believe it is better to write it down as
$$I_n=[-f(x)cosx]_0^{\pi}+\frac{q^nn}{n!}(\int_0^{\pi}x^{n-1}(\pi-x)^{n}\cos xdx-\int_0^{\pi}x^{n}(\pi-x)^{n-1}\cos x dx)$$.
Now each of the above two integral terms will give a contribution to a ##I_{n-1}## term along with other integrals (which other integrals will cancel out, not so sure about that) when you do IBP once more.

If I do it again then I get
$$I_n=\frac{q^nn}{n!}\int_0^{\pi} \sin{(x)} x^{n-2}(\pi - x)^{n-2}\left(2xn(\pi - x) - (n-1)[x^2 + (\pi -x)^2]\right)$$Now we do get something similar looking to ##I_{n-2}## but it's got those extra terms multiplied on the end so I can't just substitute to get rid of the integral.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron
etotheipi said:
If I do it again then I get
$$I_n=\frac{q^nn}{n!}\int_0^{\pi} \sin{(x)} x^{n-2}(\pi - x)^{n-2}\left(2xn(\pi - x) - (n-1)[x^2 + (\pi -x)^2]\right)$$Now we do get something similar looking to ##I_{n-2}## but it's got those extra terms multiplied on the end so I can't just substitute to get rid of the integral.
This looks fine to me, just notice that the first term is
$$2\int_0^{\pi}\sin x x^{n-1}(\pi-x)^{n-1}dx$$ which is essentially ##I_{n-1}##

I think the rest two terms add to zero. To see this what do you get from the integral
$$\int_0^{\pi}\sin x x^n(\pi-x)^{n-2}dx$$ if you do the substitution ##y=\pi-x## and knowing that ##\sin(\pi-y)=\sin(y)##
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
Delta2 said:
I think the rest two terms add to zero. To see this what do you get from the integral
$$\int_0^{\pi}\sin x x^n(\pi-x)^{n-2}dx$$ if you do the substitution ##y=\pi-x## and knowing that ##\sin(\pi-y)=\sin(y)##

Yes that works, you get the same integral back except negated which results in ##2I=0\implies I=0##. That gives us ##I_n = \frac{2q^n n^2}{n!} I_{n-1}##. I'll see if I can do anything with that!
 
You must have some "constants" ##g(n,q)## in front which come from IBP an also it must be ##I_n=g(n,q)+2qnI_{n-1}## because ##I_{n-1}=\int_0^{\pi}\frac{q^{n-1}x^{n-1}(\pi-x)^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}\sin x dx##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
Sorry for the delay! I've been working on it for a little while! I think I've made some progress; I had a go just leaving ##f(x)## as itself without substituting in the full expression because we're aiming to get a sum of derivatives of sum sort. I get, for subsequent applications, \begin{align*}
I_n &= [-f(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + \int_{0}^{\pi} \cos{x} f'(x) dx\\
I_n &= [-f(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f'(x) \sin{x}]_0^{\pi} - \int_{0}^{\pi} \sin{x} f''(x) dx\\
I_n &= [-f(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f'(x) \sin{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f''(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} - \int_{0}^{\pi} \cos{x} f^{(3)}(x) dx\\
I_n &= [-f(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f'(x) \sin{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f''(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + [-f^{(3)}(x) \sin{x}]_0^{\pi} + \int_{0}^{\pi} \sin{x} f^{(4)}(x) dx
\end{align*}
So each term is of the form ##[f^{k}(x) \frac{d^k}{dx^k}(-\cos{x})]_0^{\pi}##. Also, considering that the highest possible power in ##f(x)## is ##x^{2n}##, the ##(2n+1)^{th}## derivative of ##f(x)## is going to be zero and the integral at the very end disappears.

So I tried evaluating these and I end up getting $$I_n = (f(\pi) + f(0)) + 0 + (-f''(\pi)-f''(0)) + 0 + \cdots$$ and since only the terms containing even derivatives (with ##\cos##) remain, it does indeed turn out to be
$$I_n = \sum_{j=0}^n (-1)^j \left(f^{(2j)}(\pi) + f^{(2j)}(0)\right)$$ Now I've got to try and do the second part, showing that ##I_n \leq \frac{\pi}{n!} \left(\frac{q\pi^2}{4}\right)^n##. You can say $$I_n \leq \int_{0}^{\pi} f(x) dx = \frac{q^n}{n!}\int_0^{\pi} x^n (\pi - x)^n dx$$ so we really just need to show that $$\int_0^{\pi} (x (\pi - x))^n dx \leq \frac{\pi^{2n+1}}{4^n}$$I said that the equation ##y = x\pi - x^2## is just an inverted parabola with vertex at ##y = \frac{\pi^2}{4}##. So it then follows that $$\int_0^{\pi} (x (\pi - x))^n dx \leq \int_0^{\pi} (\frac{\pi^2}{4})^n dx = \frac{\pi^{2n+1}}{4^n}$$ so the statement ##I_n \leq \frac{\pi}{n!} \left(\frac{q\pi^2}{4}\right)^n## is indeed also true. As ##n \rightarrow \infty## then ##I_n \rightarrow 0##.

Now I just need to try and find out why all of that shows ##\pi## is irrational...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Adesh and Delta2
An idea that might work, if ##\pi=\frac{p}{q}## then work out ##I_n## as
$$I_n=\int_0^{\frac{1}{q}}f(x)\sin x dx+\int_{\frac{1}{q}}^{\frac{2}{q}} f(x) \sin x dx+...+\int_{\frac{p-1}{q}}^{\frac{p}{q}} f(x) \sin x dx$$

and then try to find a lower bound for each term of the above and finally conclude that ##I_n## cannot converge to zero.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Isn't there an official reference for this proof?

Just asking.

I'm not sure, I just found the question on a problem sheet I came across. I would also be interested to see if anyone can find a reference!
 
etotheipi said:
let $$I_n = \int_0^{\pi} f(x) \sin{x} dx$$ where ##f(x) = \frac{q^n x^n (\pi - x)^n}{n!}##. Show that ... $$I_n \leq \frac{\pi}{n!} \left(\frac{q\pi^2}{4}\right)^n$$
There seems to be a far easier way for that step.
##x(\pi-x)\le\frac{\pi^2}4##, and ##\sin(x)\le 1##, so ##f(x)\sin(x)\le\frac{1}{n!}(\frac{q\pi^2}4)^{^n}##.
Am I missing something?

Take a look at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_π_is_irrational#Niven's_proof and the Bourbaki group proof that follows it.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
haruspex said:
Take a look at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_π_is_irrational#Niven's_proof and the Bourbaki group proof that follows it.

Ah okay, so the reason is that ##I_n## is an integer from the first part, but approaches zero from the second part, and that is the contradiction. Thanks for the link!

haruspex said:
There seems to be a far easier way for that step.
##x(\pi-x)\le\frac{\pi^2}4##, and ##\sin(x)\le 1##, so ##f(x)\sin(x)\le\frac{1}{n!}(\frac{q\pi^2}4)^{^n}##.
Am I missing something?

Whoops, you're quite right! That's definitely an easier route.
 
etotheipi said:
Ah okay, so the reason is that ##I_n## is an integer from the first part, but approaches zero from the second part, and that is the contradiction. Thanks for the link!
I understand that ##I_n## is an integer due to the summation equation but why it is a positive integer, couldn't it be zero?
Whoops, you're quite right! That's definitely an easier route.
I don't understand you and @haruspex here , didn't you essentially do the same thing??or not?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
Delta2 said:
I don't understand you and @haruspex here , didn't you essentially do the same thing??or not?
I think it's essentially the same idea, it's just his is slightly more direct.
Delta2 said:
I understand that ##I_n## is an integer due to the summation equation but why it is a positive integer, couldn't it be zero?
I had just presumed that since both ##f(x)## and ##\sin{x}## are greater than zero (since ##q>0##) in ##(0, \pi)##, ##I_n## is also going to be strictly greater than zero. There's probably a better way of saying that, but I imagined that the graph between ##(0,\pi)## is going to bound a non-zero area no matter how large you make ##n##.

This could be wrong, in which case I'm also not too sure! :wideeyed:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
etotheipi said:

​
In​
=[−f(x)cosx]π0+∫π0cosxf′(x)dx
In​
=[−f(x)cosx]π0+[f′(x)sinx]π0−∫π0sinxf′′(x)dx
In​
=[−f(x)cosx]π0+[f′(x)sinx]π0+[f′′(x)cosx]π0−∫π0cosxf(3)(x)dx
In​

=[−f(x)cosx]π0+[f′(x)sinx]π0+[f′′(x)cosx]π0+[−f(3)(x)sinx]π0+∫π0sinxf(4)(x)dxIn=[−f(x)cos⁡x]0π+∫0πcos⁡xf′(x)dxIn=[−f(x)cos⁡x]0π+[f′(x)sin⁡x]0π−∫0πsin⁡xf″(x)dxIn=[−f(x)cos⁡x]0π+[f′(x)sin⁡x]0π+[f″(x)cos⁡x]0π−∫0πcos⁡xf(3)(x)dxIn=[−f(x)cos⁡x]0π+[f′(x)sin⁡x]0π+[f″(x)cos⁡x]0π+[−f(3)(x)sin⁡x]0π+∫0πsin⁡xf(4)(x)dx​

\begin{align*} I_n &= [-f(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + \int_{0}^{\pi} \cos{x} f'(x) dx\\ I_n &= [-f(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f'(x) \sin{x}]_0^{\pi} - \int_{0}^{\pi} \sin{x} f''(x) dx\\ I_n &= [-f(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f'(x) \sin{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f''(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} - \int_{0}^{\pi} \cos{x} f^{(3)}(x) dx\\ I_n &= [-f(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f'(x) \sin{x}]_0^{\pi} + [f''(x) \cos{x}]_0^{\pi} + [-f^{(3)}(x) \sin{x}]_0^{\pi} + \int_{0}^{\pi} \sin{x} f^{(4)}(x) dx \end{align*}
How can we ignore the integral which are appearing at last? Although, I have arrived at the same result but still I want to know what argument we should use to ignore the integral that are appearing after each step.
 
We don't ignore that integral for the first ##2n## steps, we do integration by parts of that integral to reach the next step and so on till we reach the ##(2n+1) ## step where the integral will be ##\int \cos x f^{(2n+1)}(x)dx## which we can prove it will be zero because ##f^{(2n+1)}## is zero because the highest power of ##f## is ##x^{2n}##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron, Sze Wen and etotheipi
Delta2 said:
We don't ignore that integral for the first ##2n## steps, we do integration by parts of that integral to reach the next step and so on till we reach the ##(2n+1) ## step where the integral will be ##\int \cos x f^{(2n+1)}(x)dx## which we can prove it will be zero because ##f^{(2n+1)}## is zero because the highest power of ##f## is ##x^{2n}##
Sir I didn’t get how $$\int_{0}^{\pi} f^{2n+1} (x) \cos x dx = 0$$ ?
 
First of all it is ##\int_0^{\pi} f^{(2n+1)}(x) \cos x dx=0## ( we have the (2n+1) derivative of f and not f raised to the (2n+1) power)

Second, can you see that from the definition of f we can conclude that the highest power term is ##x^{2n}##? You might have to use binomial expansion of the ##(\pi-x)^n## .
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron and etotheipi
Delta2 said:
First of all it is ##\int_0^{\pi} f^{(2n+1)}(x) \cos x dx=0## ( we have the (2n+1) derivative of f and not f raised to the (2n+1) power)

Second, can you see that from the definition of f we can conclude that the highest power term is ##x^{2n}##? You might have to use binomial expansion of the ##(\pi-x)^n## .
Do you mean the highest term in ##f^{(2n+1)} (x)## ?
 
Delta2 said:
No I mean the highest term in ##f(x)##.
##\left (\pi + (-x) \right)^n = \pi^n + ... + (-x)^{n} ## when we multiply this by ##x^n## we would have the highest term ## x^{2n}##. Everything is clear till here.
 
Adesh said:
##\left (\pi + (-x) \right)^n = \pi^n + ... + (-x)^{n} ## when we multiply this by ##x^n## we would have the highest term ## x^{2n}##. Everything is clear till here.
Fine so now if you take the 1st derivative what will be the highest power of ##f'(x)##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Adesh
Delta2 said:
Fine so now if you take the 1st derivative what will be the highest power of ##f'(x)##?
Got you! Thank you so much! After ##2n## the differentiation ##f(x)## will become a constant and therefore ##f^{(2n+1)}(x)## is just zero.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron, etotheipi and Delta2
Delta2 said:
I understand that InInI_n is an integer due to the summation equation
How ##I_n## will be an integer? By the summation equation I think ##I_n## will be a rational number.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2