Homepage › Solution manuals › Terence Tao › Analysis I › Exercise 4.4.3 (Irrationality of $\sqrt{2}$)

Exercise 4.4.3 (Irrationality of $\sqrt{2}$)

Fill in the gaps marked (why?) in the proof of Proposition 4.4.4.

Answers

I reproduce the proof of Proposition 4.4.4, filling the gaps.

Proof. Suppose for sake of contradiction that we had a rational number x for which x 2 = 2 . Clearly x is not zero. We may assume that x is positive, for if x were negative then we could just replace x by − x (since x 2 = ( − x ) 2 ). Thus x = p ∕ q for some positive integers p , q , so ( p ∕ q ) 2 = 2 , which we can rearrange as p 2 = 2 q 2 . Define a natural number p to be even if p = 2 k for some natural number k , and odd if p = 2 k + 1 for some natural number k . Every natural number is either even or odd, but not both.

(why? : by Proposition 2.3.9, the Euclidean division of p by 2 gives a quotient k and a remainder r such that p = 2 k + r , 0 ≤ r < 2 , so r = 0 or r = 1 . This shows that every natural number is even or odd. If p is simultaneously even and odd, then p = 2 k = 2 l + 1 for some natural numbers k , l . Then 2 ( k − l ) = 1 , where k − l > 0 , thus k − l ∈ ℕ ∖ { 0 } , so 1 = 2 ( k − l ) ≥ 2 , this is a contradiction since 1 < 2 (I avoid here to use 2 ∣ 1 !). This shows that p is either even or odd, but not both.)

If p is odd, then p 2 is also odd,

(why? : if p is odd, p = 2 k + 1 for some k ∈ ℕ , then p 2 = ( 2 k + 1 ) 2 = 4 k 2 + 4 k + 1 = 2 ( 2 k 2 + 2 k ) + 1 = 2 l + 1 , where l = 2 k 2 + 2 k ∈ ℕ , so p 2 is odd.)

which contradicts p 2 = 2 q 2 . Thus p is even, i.e., p = 2 k for some natural number k . Since p is positive, k must also be positive. Inserting p = 2 k into p 2 = 2 q 2 , we obtain 4 k 2 = 2 q 2 , so that q 2 = 2 k 2 .

To summarize, we started with a pair ( p , q ) of positive integers such that p 2 = 2 q 2 , and ended with a pair ( q , k ) of positive integers such that q 2 = 2 k 2 . Since p 2 = 2 q 2 , we have q < p .

(why? : Since q > 0 , q 2 < q 2 + q 2 = 2 q 2 = p 2 , thus q < p . Indeed, if q ≥ p ≥ 0 , q 2 ≥ p 2 .)

If we rewrite p ′ : = q , and q ′ : = k , we thus can pass from one solution ( p , q ) to the equation p 2 = 2 q 2 to a new solution ( p ′ , q ′ ) to the same equation which has a smaller value of p . But then we can repeat this procedure again and again obtaining a sequence ( p ″ , q ″ ) , ( p ‴ , q ‴ ) , etc. of solutions to p 2 = 2 q 2 , each one with a smaller value of p than the previous, and each one consisting of positive integers. But this contradicts the principle of infinite descent (see Exercise 4.4.2). This contradiction shows that we could not have had a rational x for which x 2 = 2 . □

Note: this proof gives an example of infinite descent. If we know a little bit of elementary number theory, we can write a variant without infinite descent.

Write x = p ∕ q , where gcd ( p , q ) = 1 . As above, p 2 = 2 q 2 shows that p is even, and then q is also even. But 2 ∣ p and 2 ∣ q . This shows that gcd ( p , q ) > 1 . This is a contradiction, which shows that there is no rational x for which x 2 = 2 .

User profile picture
2024-06-14 13:39
Comments