Square root of 6 proof rationality











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I was proving $sqrt 6 notin Bbb Q$, by assuming its negation and stating that: $exists (p,q) in Bbb Z times Bbb Z^*/ gcd(p,q) = 1$, and $sqrt 6 = (p/q)$.



$implies p^2 = 2 times 3q^2 implies exists k in Bbb Z; p = 2k implies 2k^2 = 3q^2$ and found two possible cases, either $q$ is even or odd, if even we get contradiction that $gcd(p, q) neq 1$, if odd we get contradiction that $2k^2 = 3q^2$.



Is it a right path for reasoning it?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Is the $k$ a typo? What is $p, k$ and $q$? Why is $q$ being even a condradiction with $gcd(p,q) = 1$? And why is $2k^2 = 3q^2$ a contradiction? You just said $2k^2 = 3q^2$ so that isn't a contradiction? You are on the right track but you haven't explained any of your arguments.
    – fleablood
    Nov 15 at 2:13










  • Why is $q$ even a contradiction? What if $k$ or $p$ (whats the difference) is odd?
    – fleablood
    Nov 15 at 2:20












  • I rearranged it!
    – J.Moh
    Nov 15 at 3:51















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I was proving $sqrt 6 notin Bbb Q$, by assuming its negation and stating that: $exists (p,q) in Bbb Z times Bbb Z^*/ gcd(p,q) = 1$, and $sqrt 6 = (p/q)$.



$implies p^2 = 2 times 3q^2 implies exists k in Bbb Z; p = 2k implies 2k^2 = 3q^2$ and found two possible cases, either $q$ is even or odd, if even we get contradiction that $gcd(p, q) neq 1$, if odd we get contradiction that $2k^2 = 3q^2$.



Is it a right path for reasoning it?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Is the $k$ a typo? What is $p, k$ and $q$? Why is $q$ being even a condradiction with $gcd(p,q) = 1$? And why is $2k^2 = 3q^2$ a contradiction? You just said $2k^2 = 3q^2$ so that isn't a contradiction? You are on the right track but you haven't explained any of your arguments.
    – fleablood
    Nov 15 at 2:13










  • Why is $q$ even a contradiction? What if $k$ or $p$ (whats the difference) is odd?
    – fleablood
    Nov 15 at 2:20












  • I rearranged it!
    – J.Moh
    Nov 15 at 3:51













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











I was proving $sqrt 6 notin Bbb Q$, by assuming its negation and stating that: $exists (p,q) in Bbb Z times Bbb Z^*/ gcd(p,q) = 1$, and $sqrt 6 = (p/q)$.



$implies p^2 = 2 times 3q^2 implies exists k in Bbb Z; p = 2k implies 2k^2 = 3q^2$ and found two possible cases, either $q$ is even or odd, if even we get contradiction that $gcd(p, q) neq 1$, if odd we get contradiction that $2k^2 = 3q^2$.



Is it a right path for reasoning it?










share|cite|improve this question















I was proving $sqrt 6 notin Bbb Q$, by assuming its negation and stating that: $exists (p,q) in Bbb Z times Bbb Z^*/ gcd(p,q) = 1$, and $sqrt 6 = (p/q)$.



$implies p^2 = 2 times 3q^2 implies exists k in Bbb Z; p = 2k implies 2k^2 = 3q^2$ and found two possible cases, either $q$ is even or odd, if even we get contradiction that $gcd(p, q) neq 1$, if odd we get contradiction that $2k^2 = 3q^2$.



Is it a right path for reasoning it?







rational-numbers






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









Mr. Brooks

24311237




24311237










asked Nov 15 at 1:12









J.Moh

395




395












  • Is the $k$ a typo? What is $p, k$ and $q$? Why is $q$ being even a condradiction with $gcd(p,q) = 1$? And why is $2k^2 = 3q^2$ a contradiction? You just said $2k^2 = 3q^2$ so that isn't a contradiction? You are on the right track but you haven't explained any of your arguments.
    – fleablood
    Nov 15 at 2:13










  • Why is $q$ even a contradiction? What if $k$ or $p$ (whats the difference) is odd?
    – fleablood
    Nov 15 at 2:20












  • I rearranged it!
    – J.Moh
    Nov 15 at 3:51


















  • Is the $k$ a typo? What is $p, k$ and $q$? Why is $q$ being even a condradiction with $gcd(p,q) = 1$? And why is $2k^2 = 3q^2$ a contradiction? You just said $2k^2 = 3q^2$ so that isn't a contradiction? You are on the right track but you haven't explained any of your arguments.
    – fleablood
    Nov 15 at 2:13










  • Why is $q$ even a contradiction? What if $k$ or $p$ (whats the difference) is odd?
    – fleablood
    Nov 15 at 2:20












  • I rearranged it!
    – J.Moh
    Nov 15 at 3:51
















Is the $k$ a typo? What is $p, k$ and $q$? Why is $q$ being even a condradiction with $gcd(p,q) = 1$? And why is $2k^2 = 3q^2$ a contradiction? You just said $2k^2 = 3q^2$ so that isn't a contradiction? You are on the right track but you haven't explained any of your arguments.
– fleablood
Nov 15 at 2:13




Is the $k$ a typo? What is $p, k$ and $q$? Why is $q$ being even a condradiction with $gcd(p,q) = 1$? And why is $2k^2 = 3q^2$ a contradiction? You just said $2k^2 = 3q^2$ so that isn't a contradiction? You are on the right track but you haven't explained any of your arguments.
– fleablood
Nov 15 at 2:13












Why is $q$ even a contradiction? What if $k$ or $p$ (whats the difference) is odd?
– fleablood
Nov 15 at 2:20






Why is $q$ even a contradiction? What if $k$ or $p$ (whats the difference) is odd?
– fleablood
Nov 15 at 2:20














I rearranged it!
– J.Moh
Nov 15 at 3:51




I rearranged it!
– J.Moh
Nov 15 at 3:51










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote













Assume $sqrt{6} = {a over b}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Z}$ . This implies



$$2 cdot 3 b^2 = a^2$$



Use the fundamental theorem of algebra to decompose both sides into a unique prime factorization. There are an even number of factors of $2$ on the rhs and an odd number of factors of $2$ on the lhs... a contradition. Same for factors of $3$.



Thus $sqrt{6} neq {a over b}$, i.e., is irrational.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Yeah, I tried to reach it without prime factorisation. A second look?
    – J.Moh
    Nov 15 at 2:42












  • You are considering the value of the rhs and lhs of the equation. I am instead looking at the number of prime factors. Frankly, I think that is so much more elegant... but I suppose this is a matter of taste. Mine applies to $sqrt{5/3}$ whereas yours doesn't... at least not as directly.
    – David G. Stork
    Nov 15 at 2:47












  • Our professor used the value way, so I am following his steps for this, though, thanks!
    – J.Moh
    Nov 15 at 2:50












  • Show him/her the better way! And stand out as a student!
    – David G. Stork
    Nov 15 at 2:51










  • Well, that doesn t apply in Morocco. Pray for me I win visa lottery so I can join a better faculty in the US :)
    – J.Moh
    Nov 15 at 3:49




















up vote
1
down vote













How about a proof by descent?



First show that $2^2<6<3^2$. Then if $sqrt{6}$ is to be rational it must have a form $p/q$ where $p,qin mathbb{Z}, q>0, 2q<p<3q$. By simple algebra the square root is also equal to $6q/p$, thus



$p/q=6q/ptext{.....Eq. 1}$.



Now if $a/b=c/d$ then also



$a/b=(ma+nc)/(mb+nd)$



for any coefficients $m,n$ where the denominator is nonzero. In particular, we Eq. 1 implies



$p/q=(3p-6q)/(3q-p)text{.....Eq. 2}$



where we already have $2q<p<3q$ and thus $0<3q-p<q$. So the proposed rational fraction $p/q$ must be equal to an alternative rational fraction with a smaller positive denominator. This causes an infinite descent contradiction forcing the assumption of a rational value to be false.



We can form a similar proof for the square root of any natural number that is not a squared integer. "Not a squared integer" is needed because the square root must be strictly between two adjacent integers to obtain a descent of positive denominators.






share|cite|improve this answer






























    up vote
    0
    down vote













    I'll play more generally
    and see what happens.



    Suppose
    $sqrt{m}
    =dfrac{u}{v}
    $

    where
    $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
    u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
    v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
    $
    .



    Then
    $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
    =dfrac{u^2}{v^2}
    =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}}
    $

    so
    $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}
    =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
    $

    or
    $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+2v_i}
    =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
    $
    .



    By unique factorization,
    $m_i+2v_i
    =2u_i
    $
    ,
    so
    $m_i
    =2u_i-2v_i
    =2(u_i-v_i)
    $
    .



    Therefore
    $m
    =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
    =prod_{p in P} p^{2(u_i-v_i)}
    =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^2
    $

    so $m$ is a perfect square.



    Therefore
    the square root of an integer
    is rational
    only if
    it is a square.



    I'll now try to generalize this
    to $k$-th roots,
    with as much cut-and-paste
    as possible.



    Suppose
    $sqrt[k]{m}
    =dfrac{u}{v}
    $

    where
    $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
    u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
    v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
    $
    .



    Then
    $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
    =dfrac{u^k}{v^k}
    =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}}
    $

    so
    $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}
    =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
    $

    or
    $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+kv_i}
    =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
    $
    .



    By unique factorization,
    $m_i+kv_i
    =ku_i
    $
    ,
    so
    $m_i
    =ku_i-kv_i
    =k(u_i-v_i)
    $
    .



    Therefore
    $m
    =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
    =prod_{p in P} p^{k(u_i-v_i)}
    =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^k
    $

    so $m$ is a perfect $k$-th power.



    Therefore
    the $k$-th root of an integer
    is rational
    only if
    it is a $k$-th power.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      When you get $2p^2 = 3q^2$ that means that $2|q^2$ so $2|q$ and that $3|p^2$ so $3|p$.



      Then if you replace $p = 3p'$ for some integer $p'$ and $q=2q'$ for some integer $q'$ you get



      $2(3p')^2 = 3(2q')^2$



      $18p'^2 = 12q'^2$



      $3p'^3 = 2q'^2$.



      Can you finish from there?



      This assumes you know Euclid's lemma that 1) prime numbers exist and 2) if $p$ is prime and $p|a*b$ then either $p|a$ or $p|b$ (or both).






      share|cite|improve this answer





















      • I tried to reach it without prime factorisation, can you have a second look?
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:42











      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2999044%2fsquare-root-of-6-proof-rationality%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      2
      down vote













      Assume $sqrt{6} = {a over b}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Z}$ . This implies



      $$2 cdot 3 b^2 = a^2$$



      Use the fundamental theorem of algebra to decompose both sides into a unique prime factorization. There are an even number of factors of $2$ on the rhs and an odd number of factors of $2$ on the lhs... a contradition. Same for factors of $3$.



      Thus $sqrt{6} neq {a over b}$, i.e., is irrational.






      share|cite|improve this answer























      • Yeah, I tried to reach it without prime factorisation. A second look?
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:42












      • You are considering the value of the rhs and lhs of the equation. I am instead looking at the number of prime factors. Frankly, I think that is so much more elegant... but I suppose this is a matter of taste. Mine applies to $sqrt{5/3}$ whereas yours doesn't... at least not as directly.
        – David G. Stork
        Nov 15 at 2:47












      • Our professor used the value way, so I am following his steps for this, though, thanks!
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:50












      • Show him/her the better way! And stand out as a student!
        – David G. Stork
        Nov 15 at 2:51










      • Well, that doesn t apply in Morocco. Pray for me I win visa lottery so I can join a better faculty in the US :)
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 3:49

















      up vote
      2
      down vote













      Assume $sqrt{6} = {a over b}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Z}$ . This implies



      $$2 cdot 3 b^2 = a^2$$



      Use the fundamental theorem of algebra to decompose both sides into a unique prime factorization. There are an even number of factors of $2$ on the rhs and an odd number of factors of $2$ on the lhs... a contradition. Same for factors of $3$.



      Thus $sqrt{6} neq {a over b}$, i.e., is irrational.






      share|cite|improve this answer























      • Yeah, I tried to reach it without prime factorisation. A second look?
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:42












      • You are considering the value of the rhs and lhs of the equation. I am instead looking at the number of prime factors. Frankly, I think that is so much more elegant... but I suppose this is a matter of taste. Mine applies to $sqrt{5/3}$ whereas yours doesn't... at least not as directly.
        – David G. Stork
        Nov 15 at 2:47












      • Our professor used the value way, so I am following his steps for this, though, thanks!
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:50












      • Show him/her the better way! And stand out as a student!
        – David G. Stork
        Nov 15 at 2:51










      • Well, that doesn t apply in Morocco. Pray for me I win visa lottery so I can join a better faculty in the US :)
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 3:49















      up vote
      2
      down vote










      up vote
      2
      down vote









      Assume $sqrt{6} = {a over b}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Z}$ . This implies



      $$2 cdot 3 b^2 = a^2$$



      Use the fundamental theorem of algebra to decompose both sides into a unique prime factorization. There are an even number of factors of $2$ on the rhs and an odd number of factors of $2$ on the lhs... a contradition. Same for factors of $3$.



      Thus $sqrt{6} neq {a over b}$, i.e., is irrational.






      share|cite|improve this answer














      Assume $sqrt{6} = {a over b}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Z}$ . This implies



      $$2 cdot 3 b^2 = a^2$$



      Use the fundamental theorem of algebra to decompose both sides into a unique prime factorization. There are an even number of factors of $2$ on the rhs and an odd number of factors of $2$ on the lhs... a contradition. Same for factors of $3$.



      Thus $sqrt{6} neq {a over b}$, i.e., is irrational.







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited Nov 16 at 5:11

























      answered Nov 15 at 2:32









      David G. Stork

      8,90521232




      8,90521232












      • Yeah, I tried to reach it without prime factorisation. A second look?
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:42












      • You are considering the value of the rhs and lhs of the equation. I am instead looking at the number of prime factors. Frankly, I think that is so much more elegant... but I suppose this is a matter of taste. Mine applies to $sqrt{5/3}$ whereas yours doesn't... at least not as directly.
        – David G. Stork
        Nov 15 at 2:47












      • Our professor used the value way, so I am following his steps for this, though, thanks!
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:50












      • Show him/her the better way! And stand out as a student!
        – David G. Stork
        Nov 15 at 2:51










      • Well, that doesn t apply in Morocco. Pray for me I win visa lottery so I can join a better faculty in the US :)
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 3:49




















      • Yeah, I tried to reach it without prime factorisation. A second look?
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:42












      • You are considering the value of the rhs and lhs of the equation. I am instead looking at the number of prime factors. Frankly, I think that is so much more elegant... but I suppose this is a matter of taste. Mine applies to $sqrt{5/3}$ whereas yours doesn't... at least not as directly.
        – David G. Stork
        Nov 15 at 2:47












      • Our professor used the value way, so I am following his steps for this, though, thanks!
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 2:50












      • Show him/her the better way! And stand out as a student!
        – David G. Stork
        Nov 15 at 2:51










      • Well, that doesn t apply in Morocco. Pray for me I win visa lottery so I can join a better faculty in the US :)
        – J.Moh
        Nov 15 at 3:49


















      Yeah, I tried to reach it without prime factorisation. A second look?
      – J.Moh
      Nov 15 at 2:42






      Yeah, I tried to reach it without prime factorisation. A second look?
      – J.Moh
      Nov 15 at 2:42














      You are considering the value of the rhs and lhs of the equation. I am instead looking at the number of prime factors. Frankly, I think that is so much more elegant... but I suppose this is a matter of taste. Mine applies to $sqrt{5/3}$ whereas yours doesn't... at least not as directly.
      – David G. Stork
      Nov 15 at 2:47






      You are considering the value of the rhs and lhs of the equation. I am instead looking at the number of prime factors. Frankly, I think that is so much more elegant... but I suppose this is a matter of taste. Mine applies to $sqrt{5/3}$ whereas yours doesn't... at least not as directly.
      – David G. Stork
      Nov 15 at 2:47














      Our professor used the value way, so I am following his steps for this, though, thanks!
      – J.Moh
      Nov 15 at 2:50






      Our professor used the value way, so I am following his steps for this, though, thanks!
      – J.Moh
      Nov 15 at 2:50














      Show him/her the better way! And stand out as a student!
      – David G. Stork
      Nov 15 at 2:51




      Show him/her the better way! And stand out as a student!
      – David G. Stork
      Nov 15 at 2:51












      Well, that doesn t apply in Morocco. Pray for me I win visa lottery so I can join a better faculty in the US :)
      – J.Moh
      Nov 15 at 3:49






      Well, that doesn t apply in Morocco. Pray for me I win visa lottery so I can join a better faculty in the US :)
      – J.Moh
      Nov 15 at 3:49












      up vote
      1
      down vote













      How about a proof by descent?



      First show that $2^2<6<3^2$. Then if $sqrt{6}$ is to be rational it must have a form $p/q$ where $p,qin mathbb{Z}, q>0, 2q<p<3q$. By simple algebra the square root is also equal to $6q/p$, thus



      $p/q=6q/ptext{.....Eq. 1}$.



      Now if $a/b=c/d$ then also



      $a/b=(ma+nc)/(mb+nd)$



      for any coefficients $m,n$ where the denominator is nonzero. In particular, we Eq. 1 implies



      $p/q=(3p-6q)/(3q-p)text{.....Eq. 2}$



      where we already have $2q<p<3q$ and thus $0<3q-p<q$. So the proposed rational fraction $p/q$ must be equal to an alternative rational fraction with a smaller positive denominator. This causes an infinite descent contradiction forcing the assumption of a rational value to be false.



      We can form a similar proof for the square root of any natural number that is not a squared integer. "Not a squared integer" is needed because the square root must be strictly between two adjacent integers to obtain a descent of positive denominators.






      share|cite|improve this answer



























        up vote
        1
        down vote













        How about a proof by descent?



        First show that $2^2<6<3^2$. Then if $sqrt{6}$ is to be rational it must have a form $p/q$ where $p,qin mathbb{Z}, q>0, 2q<p<3q$. By simple algebra the square root is also equal to $6q/p$, thus



        $p/q=6q/ptext{.....Eq. 1}$.



        Now if $a/b=c/d$ then also



        $a/b=(ma+nc)/(mb+nd)$



        for any coefficients $m,n$ where the denominator is nonzero. In particular, we Eq. 1 implies



        $p/q=(3p-6q)/(3q-p)text{.....Eq. 2}$



        where we already have $2q<p<3q$ and thus $0<3q-p<q$. So the proposed rational fraction $p/q$ must be equal to an alternative rational fraction with a smaller positive denominator. This causes an infinite descent contradiction forcing the assumption of a rational value to be false.



        We can form a similar proof for the square root of any natural number that is not a squared integer. "Not a squared integer" is needed because the square root must be strictly between two adjacent integers to obtain a descent of positive denominators.






        share|cite|improve this answer

























          up vote
          1
          down vote










          up vote
          1
          down vote









          How about a proof by descent?



          First show that $2^2<6<3^2$. Then if $sqrt{6}$ is to be rational it must have a form $p/q$ where $p,qin mathbb{Z}, q>0, 2q<p<3q$. By simple algebra the square root is also equal to $6q/p$, thus



          $p/q=6q/ptext{.....Eq. 1}$.



          Now if $a/b=c/d$ then also



          $a/b=(ma+nc)/(mb+nd)$



          for any coefficients $m,n$ where the denominator is nonzero. In particular, we Eq. 1 implies



          $p/q=(3p-6q)/(3q-p)text{.....Eq. 2}$



          where we already have $2q<p<3q$ and thus $0<3q-p<q$. So the proposed rational fraction $p/q$ must be equal to an alternative rational fraction with a smaller positive denominator. This causes an infinite descent contradiction forcing the assumption of a rational value to be false.



          We can form a similar proof for the square root of any natural number that is not a squared integer. "Not a squared integer" is needed because the square root must be strictly between two adjacent integers to obtain a descent of positive denominators.






          share|cite|improve this answer














          How about a proof by descent?



          First show that $2^2<6<3^2$. Then if $sqrt{6}$ is to be rational it must have a form $p/q$ where $p,qin mathbb{Z}, q>0, 2q<p<3q$. By simple algebra the square root is also equal to $6q/p$, thus



          $p/q=6q/ptext{.....Eq. 1}$.



          Now if $a/b=c/d$ then also



          $a/b=(ma+nc)/(mb+nd)$



          for any coefficients $m,n$ where the denominator is nonzero. In particular, we Eq. 1 implies



          $p/q=(3p-6q)/(3q-p)text{.....Eq. 2}$



          where we already have $2q<p<3q$ and thus $0<3q-p<q$. So the proposed rational fraction $p/q$ must be equal to an alternative rational fraction with a smaller positive denominator. This causes an infinite descent contradiction forcing the assumption of a rational value to be false.



          We can form a similar proof for the square root of any natural number that is not a squared integer. "Not a squared integer" is needed because the square root must be strictly between two adjacent integers to obtain a descent of positive denominators.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited 18 hours ago

























          answered yesterday









          Oscar Lanzi

          11.6k11935




          11.6k11935






















              up vote
              0
              down vote













              I'll play more generally
              and see what happens.



              Suppose
              $sqrt{m}
              =dfrac{u}{v}
              $

              where
              $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
              u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
              v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
              $
              .



              Then
              $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
              =dfrac{u^2}{v^2}
              =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}}
              $

              so
              $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}
              =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
              $

              or
              $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+2v_i}
              =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
              $
              .



              By unique factorization,
              $m_i+2v_i
              =2u_i
              $
              ,
              so
              $m_i
              =2u_i-2v_i
              =2(u_i-v_i)
              $
              .



              Therefore
              $m
              =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
              =prod_{p in P} p^{2(u_i-v_i)}
              =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^2
              $

              so $m$ is a perfect square.



              Therefore
              the square root of an integer
              is rational
              only if
              it is a square.



              I'll now try to generalize this
              to $k$-th roots,
              with as much cut-and-paste
              as possible.



              Suppose
              $sqrt[k]{m}
              =dfrac{u}{v}
              $

              where
              $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
              u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
              v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
              $
              .



              Then
              $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
              =dfrac{u^k}{v^k}
              =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}}
              $

              so
              $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}
              =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
              $

              or
              $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+kv_i}
              =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
              $
              .



              By unique factorization,
              $m_i+kv_i
              =ku_i
              $
              ,
              so
              $m_i
              =ku_i-kv_i
              =k(u_i-v_i)
              $
              .



              Therefore
              $m
              =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
              =prod_{p in P} p^{k(u_i-v_i)}
              =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^k
              $

              so $m$ is a perfect $k$-th power.



              Therefore
              the $k$-th root of an integer
              is rational
              only if
              it is a $k$-th power.






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                0
                down vote













                I'll play more generally
                and see what happens.



                Suppose
                $sqrt{m}
                =dfrac{u}{v}
                $

                where
                $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
                u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
                v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
                $
                .



                Then
                $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                =dfrac{u^2}{v^2}
                =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}}
                $

                so
                $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}
                =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
                $

                or
                $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+2v_i}
                =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
                $
                .



                By unique factorization,
                $m_i+2v_i
                =2u_i
                $
                ,
                so
                $m_i
                =2u_i-2v_i
                =2(u_i-v_i)
                $
                .



                Therefore
                $m
                =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                =prod_{p in P} p^{2(u_i-v_i)}
                =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^2
                $

                so $m$ is a perfect square.



                Therefore
                the square root of an integer
                is rational
                only if
                it is a square.



                I'll now try to generalize this
                to $k$-th roots,
                with as much cut-and-paste
                as possible.



                Suppose
                $sqrt[k]{m}
                =dfrac{u}{v}
                $

                where
                $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
                u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
                v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
                $
                .



                Then
                $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                =dfrac{u^k}{v^k}
                =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}}
                $

                so
                $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}
                =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
                $

                or
                $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+kv_i}
                =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
                $
                .



                By unique factorization,
                $m_i+kv_i
                =ku_i
                $
                ,
                so
                $m_i
                =ku_i-kv_i
                =k(u_i-v_i)
                $
                .



                Therefore
                $m
                =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                =prod_{p in P} p^{k(u_i-v_i)}
                =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^k
                $

                so $m$ is a perfect $k$-th power.



                Therefore
                the $k$-th root of an integer
                is rational
                only if
                it is a $k$-th power.






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote









                  I'll play more generally
                  and see what happens.



                  Suppose
                  $sqrt{m}
                  =dfrac{u}{v}
                  $

                  where
                  $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
                  u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
                  v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
                  $
                  .



                  Then
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                  =dfrac{u^2}{v^2}
                  =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}}
                  $

                  so
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
                  $

                  or
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+2v_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
                  $
                  .



                  By unique factorization,
                  $m_i+2v_i
                  =2u_i
                  $
                  ,
                  so
                  $m_i
                  =2u_i-2v_i
                  =2(u_i-v_i)
                  $
                  .



                  Therefore
                  $m
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{2(u_i-v_i)}
                  =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^2
                  $

                  so $m$ is a perfect square.



                  Therefore
                  the square root of an integer
                  is rational
                  only if
                  it is a square.



                  I'll now try to generalize this
                  to $k$-th roots,
                  with as much cut-and-paste
                  as possible.



                  Suppose
                  $sqrt[k]{m}
                  =dfrac{u}{v}
                  $

                  where
                  $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
                  u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
                  v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
                  $
                  .



                  Then
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                  =dfrac{u^k}{v^k}
                  =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}}
                  $

                  so
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
                  $

                  or
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+kv_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
                  $
                  .



                  By unique factorization,
                  $m_i+kv_i
                  =ku_i
                  $
                  ,
                  so
                  $m_i
                  =ku_i-kv_i
                  =k(u_i-v_i)
                  $
                  .



                  Therefore
                  $m
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{k(u_i-v_i)}
                  =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^k
                  $

                  so $m$ is a perfect $k$-th power.



                  Therefore
                  the $k$-th root of an integer
                  is rational
                  only if
                  it is a $k$-th power.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  I'll play more generally
                  and see what happens.



                  Suppose
                  $sqrt{m}
                  =dfrac{u}{v}
                  $

                  where
                  $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
                  u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
                  v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
                  $
                  .



                  Then
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                  =dfrac{u^2}{v^2}
                  =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}}
                  $

                  so
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{2v_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
                  $

                  or
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+2v_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{2u_i}
                  $
                  .



                  By unique factorization,
                  $m_i+2v_i
                  =2u_i
                  $
                  ,
                  so
                  $m_i
                  =2u_i-2v_i
                  =2(u_i-v_i)
                  $
                  .



                  Therefore
                  $m
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{2(u_i-v_i)}
                  =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^2
                  $

                  so $m$ is a perfect square.



                  Therefore
                  the square root of an integer
                  is rational
                  only if
                  it is a square.



                  I'll now try to generalize this
                  to $k$-th roots,
                  with as much cut-and-paste
                  as possible.



                  Suppose
                  $sqrt[k]{m}
                  =dfrac{u}{v}
                  $

                  where
                  $m = prod_{p in P} p^{m_i},
                  u = prod_{p in P} p^{u_i},
                  v = prod_{p in P} p^{v_i}
                  $
                  .



                  Then
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                  =dfrac{u^k}{v^k}
                  =dfrac{ prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}}{prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}}
                  $

                  so
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}prod_{p in P} p^{kv_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
                  $

                  or
                  $prod_{p in P} p^{m_i+kv_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{ku_i}
                  $
                  .



                  By unique factorization,
                  $m_i+kv_i
                  =ku_i
                  $
                  ,
                  so
                  $m_i
                  =ku_i-kv_i
                  =k(u_i-v_i)
                  $
                  .



                  Therefore
                  $m
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{m_i}
                  =prod_{p in P} p^{k(u_i-v_i)}
                  =left(prod_{p in P} p^{u_i-v_i}right)^k
                  $

                  so $m$ is a perfect $k$-th power.



                  Therefore
                  the $k$-th root of an integer
                  is rational
                  only if
                  it is a $k$-th power.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 15 at 1:37









                  marty cohen

                  71.3k546123




                  71.3k546123






















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      When you get $2p^2 = 3q^2$ that means that $2|q^2$ so $2|q$ and that $3|p^2$ so $3|p$.



                      Then if you replace $p = 3p'$ for some integer $p'$ and $q=2q'$ for some integer $q'$ you get



                      $2(3p')^2 = 3(2q')^2$



                      $18p'^2 = 12q'^2$



                      $3p'^3 = 2q'^2$.



                      Can you finish from there?



                      This assumes you know Euclid's lemma that 1) prime numbers exist and 2) if $p$ is prime and $p|a*b$ then either $p|a$ or $p|b$ (or both).






                      share|cite|improve this answer





















                      • I tried to reach it without prime factorisation, can you have a second look?
                        – J.Moh
                        Nov 15 at 2:42















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      When you get $2p^2 = 3q^2$ that means that $2|q^2$ so $2|q$ and that $3|p^2$ so $3|p$.



                      Then if you replace $p = 3p'$ for some integer $p'$ and $q=2q'$ for some integer $q'$ you get



                      $2(3p')^2 = 3(2q')^2$



                      $18p'^2 = 12q'^2$



                      $3p'^3 = 2q'^2$.



                      Can you finish from there?



                      This assumes you know Euclid's lemma that 1) prime numbers exist and 2) if $p$ is prime and $p|a*b$ then either $p|a$ or $p|b$ (or both).






                      share|cite|improve this answer





















                      • I tried to reach it without prime factorisation, can you have a second look?
                        – J.Moh
                        Nov 15 at 2:42













                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote









                      When you get $2p^2 = 3q^2$ that means that $2|q^2$ so $2|q$ and that $3|p^2$ so $3|p$.



                      Then if you replace $p = 3p'$ for some integer $p'$ and $q=2q'$ for some integer $q'$ you get



                      $2(3p')^2 = 3(2q')^2$



                      $18p'^2 = 12q'^2$



                      $3p'^3 = 2q'^2$.



                      Can you finish from there?



                      This assumes you know Euclid's lemma that 1) prime numbers exist and 2) if $p$ is prime and $p|a*b$ then either $p|a$ or $p|b$ (or both).






                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      When you get $2p^2 = 3q^2$ that means that $2|q^2$ so $2|q$ and that $3|p^2$ so $3|p$.



                      Then if you replace $p = 3p'$ for some integer $p'$ and $q=2q'$ for some integer $q'$ you get



                      $2(3p')^2 = 3(2q')^2$



                      $18p'^2 = 12q'^2$



                      $3p'^3 = 2q'^2$.



                      Can you finish from there?



                      This assumes you know Euclid's lemma that 1) prime numbers exist and 2) if $p$ is prime and $p|a*b$ then either $p|a$ or $p|b$ (or both).







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Nov 15 at 2:28









                      fleablood

                      65.3k22682




                      65.3k22682












                      • I tried to reach it without prime factorisation, can you have a second look?
                        – J.Moh
                        Nov 15 at 2:42


















                      • I tried to reach it without prime factorisation, can you have a second look?
                        – J.Moh
                        Nov 15 at 2:42
















                      I tried to reach it without prime factorisation, can you have a second look?
                      – J.Moh
                      Nov 15 at 2:42




                      I tried to reach it without prime factorisation, can you have a second look?
                      – J.Moh
                      Nov 15 at 2:42


















                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded



















































                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2999044%2fsquare-root-of-6-proof-rationality%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Bundesstraße 106

                      Verónica Boquete

                      Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten