![]() The expansion of 1/7 also requires an infinite sequence of digits. the period 142857 is repeated indefinitely. In case of 1/7 brackets designate a period. The more 3s you write the closer the decimal fraction comes to 1/3 but no finite expansion willĮver equal 1/3 exactly. That's why we write ellipses in the decimal expansion ofġ/3. Will take an infinite sequence of digits. 142857.Īs you see, some rational numbers are written as finite decimal fractions (1/5 and 3/8). For simplicity, I'll handle only numbersīetween 0 and 1. Of convergent sequences of rational numbers (see Ref ). Without giving a rigorous definition let me say that Cantor defined irrational numbers as limits ![]() "In mathematics the art of asking questions is more valuable than solving problems." (see Ref ) Incidentally, Cantor's doctoral thesis was titled The one suggested by Georg Cantor (1845-1918), the father of modern Set Theory. Calculus actually solves the problem.Īs often the case in Mathematics, there are many ways to define irrational numbers. Geometry suggests that a solution should exists. However, Arithmetic proves powerless to solve the equation. In Arithmetic we pose and successfully solve a variety of problems until we unwittingly ask to solve a very innocently looking equation x 2 = 5. It is interesting to observe the characteristic unity of Mathematics as reflected in this example. For, otherwise, what else might it be equal to? As I already mentioned, it takes methods beyond Arithmetic to introduce irrational numbers. Thus there exists a line segment whose length should be equal √ 5. Indeed, apply the Pythagorean Theorem to the right-angled triangle with sides 1 and 2. There is in fact great many ways to establish this result with various degrees of intuitive appeal.) This is because √ 2, being the length of the diagonal in a unit square, was the first number proved not to be rational. The above proof is commonly used to prove the irrationality of √ 2. (In fact for any integer n, which is not a square of another integer, √ n is irrational. By the same token, q is then divisible by 5 which makes the fraction p/q reducible. Substituting this intoĥq 2 = p 2 and dividing by 5 gives q 2 = 5s 2. Therefore I can use a theorem by Euclid (Elements, VII.30) (see also Ref ) to claim that since 5 is a factor of p 2 it also divides p, i.e. 5 is a prime number (it has no other divisors but itself and 1). Thus 5q 2 = p 2 so that p 2 is divisible by 5. See if you know enough to answer this question. It would be a very legitimate question to ask whether every rational number has an irreducible representation. The fraction p/q in this case is called irreducible. ![]() In the representation r = p/q assume p and q are mutually prime, i.e. Proof that for no rational number r = p/q, (p/q) 2 = 5Īssume that a rational number r exists such that r 2 = 5. It's impossible to derive in Arithmetic that such a number actually exists. Thus Arithmetic can show that, when squared, no rational number gives 5. Just to remind, √ 5 stands for the number whose square equals 5. Using only arithmetic methods it's easy to prove that the number √ 5 is not rational. The theory of irrational numbers belongs to Calculus. Much of the scope of the theory of rational numbers is covered by Arithmetic. However, there are numbers which are neither rational or irrational (for example, infinitesimal numbers are neither rational nor irrational). Irrationality is a term reserved for a very special kind of numbers. In Mathematics, it's not quite true that what is not rational is irrational. This is by no means a definition of irrational numbers. On the other hand, the number √ 5 by itself is not rational and is called irrational. May not at first look rational but it simplifies to 3 which is 3 = 3/1 a rational fraction. In reality every number can be written in many different ways. Rational and Irrational numbersĪ number r is rational if it can be written as a fraction r = p/q where both p and q are integers. Let's talk a little about each of these in turn. However, not all objects that can be added or multiplied are designated as numbers.Īs a matter of fact, there are many different kinds of numbers. The most common characteristic of numbers is that they can be added and multiplied to produce other numbers in their group. To paraphrase Albert Einstein, a number in and by itself has no significance and only deserves the designation of number by virtue of its being a member of a group of objects with some shared characteristics. The individual is what he is and has the significance that he has not so much in virtue of his individuality, but rather as a member of a great human community.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |