3

I've heard the proof that this number is irrational is accessible to even a novice to number theory:

$\alpha = 0.2 \ 3 \ 5 \ 7 \ 11 \ 13 \ 17 \ldots$

The proof may utilize that a number is irrational iff its decimal expansion either terminates or is periodic, but then I have to show that the set of primes doesn't eventually look something like this:

$\mathbb P = \{\ldots 171, 17171, 171717171, \ldots \}$

I was also told that there is a proof not dependent on that theorem. edit: by "that theorem" the theorem that characterizes irrationals as non-repeating decimals.

Does anyone know simple proofs of this? Thanks.

Bart Michels
  • 26,985
  • 6
  • 59
  • 123
GFauxPas
  • 5,097

1 Answers1

1

Hint: If $ \gcd (a, d) = 1$, then there exists infinitely many primes in the arithmetic progression $ a + n d$.

Note: This is a high power theorem whose proof is (arguably) inaccessible to a novice in number theory, but the statement is easy to understand and to accept as fact.

Hint: A number is rational if and only if its decimal representation finally repeats/terminates in 0.

Note: This is a simple fact. I'm not sure if this is the theorem you are referencing in the statement, but it doesn't require "primes eventually look something like this".

Hint: Prove that for any $k$, there must exist a sequence of $k$ 0's in the number.

Hence, this number is irrational.

Calvin Lin
  • 77,541
  • A slightly more elementary approach is to use the fact that for every $n\in\mathbb N$ there is a prime of the form $kn+1$. (This can be proven elementary, for example with cyclotomic polynomials.) – Bart Michels Oct 29 '14 at 15:10
  • Re: the comment at the second hint, what I'm saying is that if the list of all primes eventually starts looking like the set I gave, then the number would be rational. – GFauxPas Oct 29 '14 at 15:40