Q is closed under division or not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter flyingpig
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Closed Division
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around whether the set of rational numbers, denoted as Q, is closed under division. Participants reference a previous proof regarding closure under addition and explore the implications of division, particularly in relation to the definition of rational numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants examine the definition of rational numbers and the implications of having a zero denominator. Questions arise about the closure of integers under division and the distinction between rational numbers and integers.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants questioning the assumptions around division by zero and the definitions of rational and integer numbers. Some guidance has been offered regarding the nature of closure in mathematical sets, particularly in relation to division.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of excluding division by zero when discussing closure properties. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity involved in understanding these definitions and their implications in different number sets.

flyingpig
Messages
2,574
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement




Q = rational numbers

My professor proved that it is closed under addition yesterday. I kinda understood a bit...

Proof

Let r_1, r_2, \in \mathbb{Q}

r_1 + r_2 = \frac{m_1}{n_1} + \frac{m_2}{n_2} = \frac{m_1 n_2 + n_1 m_2}{n_1 n_2} \in \mathbb{Q}

By letting m_1 n_2 + n_1 m_2 = m_3 and n_3 = n_1 n_2

Since m_1, m_2, n_1, n_2 are integers, m_1 n_2 + n_1 m_2, n_1 n_2 are also integers.

So that

\frac{m_1 n_2 + n_1 m_2}{n_1 n_2} \in \mathbb{Q}

How the heck does it work for when n_1 or n_2 = 0?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take a look at the first line. There we take r_1,r_2\in \mathbb{Q}. Then we say that

r_i=\frac{m_i}{n_i}

but obviously this doesn't work for n_i=0 since division by zero is not defined in \mathbb{Q}.

That is \frac{m}{n}\in \mathbb{Q} if and only if n\neq 0...
 
I thought it is the same logic for integers, I take 1 and 0 and take 0 to be the bottom, can't do that.

If I take 0 and 1 and put 0 on top, that works, but it is an exception when it is the bottom?
 
Yes, you can never have 0 in the denominator. By definition of a rational number.
 
But the whole close division thing i can take two integers (including 0)?
 
flyingpig said:
But the whole close division thing i can take two integers (including 0)?

No, an element of \mathbb{Q} is defined as a fraction \frac{m}{n}, where n is nonzero. So you can't take 0 is the denominator, by definition.

You can't divide by 0.
 
flyingpig said:
But the whole close division thing i can take two integers (including 0)?
No. The integers are not closed under division for reasons other than the fact that 1/0 is undefined.

Is 4/3 an integer?

Perhaps you should review the definition of a 'ring'.
 
SammyS said:
No. The integers are not closed under division for reasons other than the fact that 1/0 is undefined.

Is 4/3 an integer?

Perhaps you should review the definition of a 'ring'.

Thank you, you just added more work for me...
 
flyingpig said:
Thank you, you just added more work for me...
Anytime! You're welcome.

To help out a bit more:

Whether we're discussing the Integers, the Rationals, the Reals, or Complex Numbers (all with the usual arithmetic operations):
It's always true that 0 times any element is 0, 0 being the identity element for the addition operation. Because of this, there is no multiplicative inverse for 0, and thus division (the operation that is the inverse of multiplication) by 0 is undefined. Therefore, when discussing whether division is closed, we exclude the case of division by zero.​
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K