i. Prove that is irrational; and
ii. Determine whether is rational or not.
Solution.
i. Assume on the contrary that be rational, may I rewrite it in terms of a quotient (or a fraction) where the numerator and the nonzero denominator are a pair of coprime integers.
I.e., where
and
.
Roughwork.
From we have
.
So let for some integer
.
Roughwork.
We have also seen .
If and when both statements and
meet, it implies
and
are no more coprime, and thus a contradiction.
Definition. (Coprime) Two integers and
are said to be coprime if the only positive integer that divides them both is one. Equivalently speaking, the greatest common divisor (gcd) of
and
is 1,i.e.,
, or written simply,
. Synonymous with
coprime' are relatively prime’, `mutually prime’, and the like.
ii.
To prove or disprove from scratch, assume that be rational, and see what happens. Let
for some coprimes s.t.
.
Contradiction arises .
is irrational.
(to be continued)
(doing another way around)
To make use of part i., one might find the Lemma below useful:
Lemma. The product of any two rational numbers is again one rational number.
Proof. Let and
be rational numbers in their simplest forms reducible.
If were rational, again were its square rational in view of the aforementioned Lemma. Just make an experiment in so doing:
On logic,
However, as shown in part i., is irrational. The assumption that
be rational has been contradicted.
The contrary is true that is
rational.
