Homepage › Solution manuals › Ivan Niven › An Introduction to the Theory of Numbers › Exercise 6.3.5 (Theaethetus)
Exercise 6.3.5 (Theaethetus)
Verify the details of the following sketch of an argumnet that is irrational. Suppose that is rational, and among its rational representations let be that one having the smallest positive integer denominator , where is also an integer. Prove that another rational representation of is . Prove that is a smaller positive integer than , which is a contradiction. (ii) Generalize this argument to prove that is irrational if is a positive integer not a perfect square, by assuming and then getting another rational representation of with denominator where .
Answers
Proof.
- (i)
-
Suppose that
is rational, and define
By our hypothesis, , thus exists, and for some integer . Then , and (otherwise , so , which is false). Moreover
This shows that
Since , we obtain , thus , which gives
Since and , then . But , so , in contradiction with . This shows that is irrational.
- (ii)
-
Let
be a positive integer not a perfect square., and suppose that
is rational. Then
so exists, and for some integer , so .
Put . Then . Moreover , otherwise is a perfect square. Therefore , and , so
Since ,
This shows that
Since and , we obtain in . But , so , in contradiction with . This shows that is irrational.
Note: This reasoning can be carried out by the ancient Greeks, who did not use the unique factorization theorem. At the beginning of Plato’s Theaethetus, Theaethetus tells Socrates that they proved that very morning at his teacher Theodore’s house the irrationality of up to (except of course .