Math Is Fun Forum

  Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

#1 2007-08-22 11:50:48

MathsIsFun
Administrator
Registered: 2005-01-21
Posts: 7,711

Rational and Irrational Numbers

I have just updated these two pages:

Rational Numbers
Irrational Numbers

Do they stand up under your watchful gazes?


"The physicists defer only to mathematicians, and the mathematicians defer only to God ..."  - Leon M. Lederman

Offline

#2 2007-08-22 11:53:51

mikau
Member
Registered: 2005-08-22
Posts: 1,504

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

the rational one was really good!

Pythagoras drowned Hippasus for his cleverness?!! WAHAHA!

the irrational one is also cool.

It might be worth it to make a page explaining the method by which you can convert any repeating decimal value to a ratio of two ints. (oh no! 0.99.. = 1 strikes again!) and post a link to it in the rational numbers page.

Just a thought. Anyway, really cool!

Last edited by mikau (2007-08-22 11:58:40)


A logarithm is just a misspelled algorithm.

Offline

#3 2007-08-22 15:00:03

John E. Franklin
Member
Registered: 2005-08-29
Posts: 3,588

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

Looks neat.
I didn't know the square root of 99 was irrational.
How did you know that?
And I love your calculator; 32 digits is a lot! Where do I get one?
I also wrote a computer program to do square roots and cosines to a thousand digits as you know from that old post with the cosine answers.  I didn't check the answers with other software because I don't have maple or mathematica.
Is the square root of every whole number between 65 and 80 irrational??


igloo myrtilles fourmis

Offline

#4 2007-08-23 03:21:42

Ricky
Moderator
Registered: 2005-12-04
Posts: 3,791

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

I didn't know the square root of 99 was irrational.
How did you know that?

The square root of any non-perfect square is irrational.


"In the real world, this would be a problem.  But in mathematics, we can just define a place where this problem doesn't exist.  So we'll go ahead and do that now..."

Offline

#5 2007-09-15 01:10:29

landof+
Member
Registered: 2007-03-24
Posts: 131

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

hey, why don't you include why he was drowned? because he was irrational!


I shall be on leave until I say so...

Offline

#6 2007-09-15 02:16:07

Identity
Member
Registered: 2007-04-18
Posts: 934

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

landof+ wrote:

hey, why don't you include why he was drowned? because he was irrational!

that's just a point of view

i personally dislike the pythagoreans because they were like the early church in that they suppressed knowledge from the masses.

Offline

#7 2008-01-19 17:35:19

JohnnyReinB
Member
Registered: 2007-10-08
Posts: 453

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

Just one observation on the list of famous irrationals, there are two pi


"There is not a difference between an in-law and an outlaw, except maybe that an outlaw is wanted" wink

Nisi Quam Primum, Nequequam

Offline

#8 2008-01-19 18:02:50

Jai Ganesh
Administrator
Registered: 2005-06-28
Posts: 45,954

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

But for the 2 pi's as JohnnyReinB pointed out, the pages are lovely.
A separate page for transcendental numbers would be much useful.


It appears to me that if one wants to make progress in mathematics, one should study the masters and not the pupils. - Niels Henrik Abel.

Nothing is better than reading and gaining more and more knowledge - Stephen William Hawking.

Offline

#9 2008-01-19 18:08:17

JohnnyReinB
Member
Registered: 2007-10-08
Posts: 453

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

yes, they were great!


"There is not a difference between an in-law and an outlaw, except maybe that an outlaw is wanted" wink

Nisi Quam Primum, Nequequam

Offline

#10 2008-02-27 05:48:53

LuisRodg
Real Member
Registered: 2007-10-23
Posts: 322

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

Does anyone know what the student's proof was as to why sqrt(2) could not be represented as fraction?

Offline

#11 2008-02-27 05:56:16

mathsyperson
Moderator
Registered: 2005-06-22
Posts: 4,900

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

I'm guessing it was something like this, since it's the only one I know:

Assume that √2 is rational. Then there is a fraction p/q in its lowest form (so, p and q are coprime) such that (p/q)² = 2.
∴ p²/q² = 2
∴ p² = 2q².

Because p² is equal to 2 multiplied by an integer, p² must be even. But that means that p must be even, so we can write it as 2k, for some integer k.

We now have (2k)² = 2q².
∴ 4k² = 2q²
2k² = q².

By similar reasoning to above, q must be even and therefore can be written as 2m, for some integer m.

Then we have p/q = 2k/2m. This contradicts with p/q being in its lowest form, and so √2 cannot be rational.


Why did the vector cross the road?
It wanted to be normal.

Offline

#12 2008-02-27 05:57:23

LuisRodg
Real Member
Registered: 2007-10-23
Posts: 322

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

It says it was a geometric proof?

Offline

#13 2008-02-27 05:59:00

mathsyperson
Moderator
Registered: 2005-06-22
Posts: 4,900

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

Ah, so it does. In that case I have no idea. smile


Why did the vector cross the road?
It wanted to be normal.

Offline

#14 2008-02-27 06:02:49

LuisRodg
Real Member
Registered: 2007-10-23
Posts: 322

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

Ya. I seen your proof since its the most common one, and as you said, the only one I seen which is why I was interested in seeing the geometric one.

Offline

#15 2008-05-08 22:54:10

JohnnyReinB
Member
Registered: 2007-10-08
Posts: 453

Re: Rational and Irrational Numbers

Wikipedia wrote:

Geometric proof

Another reductio ad absurdum showing that √2 is irrational is less well-known. It is also an example of proof by infinite descent. It makes use of classic compass and straightedge construction, proving the theorem by a method similar to that employed by ancient Greek geometers.

Let ABC be a right isosceles triangle with hypotenuse length m and legs n. By the Pythagorean theorem, m/n = √2. Suppose m and n are integers. Let m:n be a ratio given in its lowest terms.

Draw the arcs BD and CE with centre A. Join DE. It follows that AB = AD, AC = AE and the ∠BAC and ∠DAE coincide. Therefore the triangles ABC and ADE are congruent by SAS.

Since ∠EBF is a right angle and ∠BEF is half a right angle, BEF is also a right isosceles triangle. Hence BE = m − n implies BF = m − n. By symmetry, DF = m − n, and FDC is also a right isosceles triangle. It also follows that FC = n − (m − n) = 2n − m.

Hence we have an even smaller right isosceles triangle, with hypotenuse length 2n − m and legs m − n. These values are integers even smaller than m and n and in the same ratio, contradicting the hypothesis that m:n is in lowest terms. Therefore m and n cannot be both integers, hence √2 is irrational.
240px-Irrationality_of_sqrt2.svg.png

Last edited by JohnnyReinB (2008-05-08 22:55:53)


"There is not a difference between an in-law and an outlaw, except maybe that an outlaw is wanted" wink

Nisi Quam Primum, Nequequam

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB