1

I solved a similar question $a^4 = 2$ but I didn't find it hard. This one is taking a lot of my time and I still don't understand how to solve this.

Here's what I have tried so far.

edit:

\begin{align} a^2 &= 3 \\ a &= \left(\frac mn\right) \\ a^2 &= \left(\frac mn\right)^2 = 3 \\ m^2 &= 3n^2 \\ m &= 3p \\ m^2 &= (3p)^2 \\ 9p^2 &= 3n^2 \end{align}

In another similar question $a^3 = 2$, I had to divide a common number from each side to finally solve the problem. But with this problem, I don't know how to continue.

Roarke
  • 67
  • 1
    How did you get $m=2p$? And how did that become $m^3=(2p)^2$? – Arthur Mar 20 '21 at 00:10
  • 1
    Follow the same reasoning used to show that $\sqrt 2$ is irrational. This one is not any harder. – lulu Mar 20 '21 at 00:12
  • 2
    Do you understand why the step $m=2p$ was justified when you were solving $a^2=2$? – kingW3 Mar 20 '21 at 00:12
  • @kingW3 Because $m$ was even, so it was divisible by 2 for some integer $p$. Is that correct? – Roarke Mar 20 '21 at 00:18
  • @Roarke Yes. The step $m=2p$ is infered. In this case it should be a different number. Can you figure out which one? – CyclotomicField Mar 20 '21 at 00:18
  • @CyclotomicField Oh god, I tried every way to solve this but didn't even try to remember what the definition meant. I assume that number to be 3? – Roarke Mar 20 '21 at 00:19
  • @Roarke It is $3$. In fact the statement $m=3n^2$ means that $m$ is divisible by $3$. You had to assume that $n/m$ was in lowest terms then you derived a contradiction. Keep going and you got it. – CyclotomicField Mar 20 '21 at 00:20
  • @CyclotomicField I did and got $(3p)^2 = 3n^2$. Then, $9p^2 = 3n^2$. I divided both sides with 3 and was left with $3p^2 = n^2$. – Roarke Mar 20 '21 at 00:22
  • @Roarke hi is my answer helpful, or is it too confusing? I also added a bonus easy proof on the bottom – Some Guy Mar 20 '21 at 00:27
  • @Roarke glad my answer helped – Some Guy Mar 20 '21 at 00:28
  • "... and was left with $3p^2 = n^2$" SO that means $n = 3q$ for some $q$ and you have both $m=3p$ and $n = 3q$ so... that's that. – fleablood Mar 20 '21 at 00:34
  • @Roarke Right. You divide both sides by $3$ and conclude that both $n$ and $m$ are divisible by $3$, contradicting the fact that it was in lowest terms. Now try to generalize this to prove that $x^2=p$ is irrational for any prime number $p$. – CyclotomicField Mar 20 '21 at 01:01

3 Answers3

2

Alright, make the straightforward assumption that $a= \frac mn$ with $m,n$ in lowest terms and they are integers. Thus, we get $(\frac mn)^2 = 3$, which soon becomes $m^2 = 3n^2$. Thus, $m^2$ is a multiple of $3$.

However, for $m^2$ to be a multiple of $3$, it needs to have an even number of factors of $3$. If it had an odd number of factors of $3$, you wouldn't get an integer for $m$ when you take the square root of $m^2$ because squares come in factors of even powers like $3^2$ or $2^2$. Thus, you must have an even number of $3$s in $m^2$, for it to be divisible by $3$. Now, when we take the square root of $m^2$ to get $m$, half of the $3$s disappear, but not all of them, so $m$ is divisible by $3$. Since $m$ is divisible by $3$, it can be expressed as $m=3p$. Thus, we get $(3p)^2 = 3n^2 \implies 3p^2 = n^2 $. Using the same logic as before, we can show that $n$ is divisible by $3$. This means that both $m,n$ are divisible by $3$, contradicting our initial assumption that $\frac mn$ is in lowest terms and shouldn't have any common factors besides $1$. Thus, there is no such $a = \frac mn$ with $m,n$ in lowest terms and integers such that $a^2=3$.

Here is a bonus easy proof. Rearrange $a^2=3$ to get $a^2-3=0$. By the rational root theorem, all the POSSIBLE rational roots of this polynomial are $a=-1,1,-3,3$. Let's see if any of these $a$ make $a^2=3$. Testing all these $a$, we see that none of these work, thus there is no RATIONAL $a$ such that $a^2=3$.

Some Guy
  • 2,728
  • This is a basic question which is asked in innumerable "intro to proofs" style classes. It has been asked-and-answered on this site a comparable number of times. Rather than providing another answer to this duplicate question (and others like it), please consider helping the asker by taking a couple of minutes to look for those duplicates before you answer. This ensures that the asker gets an answer to their question, and helps to keep the site organized. – Xander Henderson Mar 20 '21 at 00:30
  • Been staring at this for a few minutes now. I've got a few questions. What do you mean by when we take the square root of $m^2$ half of the 3s disappear? I'm very confused about this. – Roarke Mar 20 '21 at 00:31
  • 1
    @Roarke $\sqrt{81} = \sqrt{3333} = 33 = 9$, see half of them disappeared – Some Guy Mar 20 '21 at 00:32
  • @XanderHenderson I did search. I found a few duplicates as well. But they just provided answers straight up. A few of them had explained things too, but they were too hard for me to grasp. I spent over 2 hours just reading online before posting this question. Even went to Reddit, forums and searched the site. And multiple releated questions. My main goal was to know what do I need to do, and why do I need to do that. – Roarke Mar 20 '21 at 00:34
1

The classic method known as "infinite descent". Assume from where you had : $m^2 = 3n^2 \implies m = 3k \implies n^2 = 3k^2 \implies n = 3p$, and it keeps going indefinitely with new pairs $(k,p)$ with $k < m, p < n$ and both are multiple of $3$ which is impossible. Thus there is no $(m,n)$ which satisfies the equation. So $\sqrt{3}$ must be irrational.

1

From $$ m^2 = 3n^2 \text{,} $$ we know $3$ divides $m$, so $m = 3 m_1$ $$ 9 m_1^2 = 3 n^2 $$ $$ 3 m_1^2 = n^2 $$ This tells us $3$ divides $n$. We have found that $3$ is a common factor of $m$ and $n$.

You failed to introduce $m$ or $n$ in your derivation and you are missing any words that would make this common divisor lead to a contradiction. Perhaps you believe that a proper proof is just a barrage of equations. It is not. You need to introduce new symbols and explain how they relate. For instance, a reader is right to ask "Why did you set $a = m/n$? What is $m$? What is $n$? Are there any conditions among $m$ and $n$?" Your demonstration is not a proof -- it is missing all the words that explain what you are doing and why.

Eric Towers
  • 70,953
  • This is a basic question which is asked in innumerable "intro to proofs" style classes. It has been asked-and-answered on this site a comparable number of times. Rather than providing another answer to this duplicate question (and others like it), please consider helping the asker by taking a couple of minutes to look for those duplicates before you answer. This ensures that the asker gets an answer to their question, and helps to keep the site organized. – Xander Henderson Mar 20 '21 at 00:30
  • @XanderHenderson : The correct answer to this Question includes the extensive complaint about its "proof's" poor writing style. OP has, in comments, asserted "My main goal was to know what do I need to do, and why do I need to do that." I am certain this Answer is exactly responsive to this goal relative to this Question. The other answers I found to this and minor variants of this question were not responsive to the specific deficiencies of this Question's proof. Therefore, your comment does not improve this Answer. – Eric Towers Mar 20 '21 at 15:18