Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I need to show that $a+b\sqrt{2}$ is associative over multiplication. This is what I have so far. I may be taking a wrong route so just please let me know.

$$(a+b\sqrt{2})*((c+d \sqrt{2})*(e+f \sqrt{2} )) = \\ (a+b\sqrt{2})*(ce+2df+(cf+de)\sqrt{2}) $$

and then I just opened up the brackets and got an ugly looking thing that I am not sure what to do next. $$(ace+2adf+(acf+ade)\sqrt{2}+bce\sqrt{2}+2bdf\sqrt{2}+2(bcf+bde)$$

How would I go from here?

share|cite|improve this question
Open parentheses in both expressions and show you get the very same in both cases...! Say, $\,(\alpha\cdot\beta)\cdot\gamma=\alpha\cdot(\beta\cdot\gamma)$ – DonAntonio Aug 19 '12 at 15:04
Thanks. I gotcha :) – math101 Aug 19 '12 at 15:07
What does "associative over multiplication" mean for a binary operation? I know "associative" itself, and "distributes over multiplication", but not your combination here. – Henning Makholm Aug 19 '12 at 15:17
I meant associative with the binary operation, multiplication – math101 Aug 19 '12 at 15:47
This question has the same ambiguity as your prior question. Namely, are you allowed to view this as a subring of a ring already known to be associative (e.g. $\Bbb R$, as in Henning's answer), or, instead, are you adjoining a square-root of $2$ to $\Bbb Q$, (as, in paul's answer)? Also, what is the coefficient (base) ring, i.e. the ring that $\rm\,a,b\,$ range over? – Bill Dubuque Aug 19 '12 at 23:13
up vote 16 down vote accepted

Are you trying to show that ordinary multiplication is associative when applied to numbers of the form $a+b\sqrt2$ (with $a$ and $b$ rational and/or integral)?

That is trivially true because $(pq)r=p(qr)$ holds for all real numbers $p$, $q$, and $r$ -- the case where they all lie in $\mathbb Z+\mathbb Z\sqrt2$ or $\mathbb Q+\mathbb Q\sqrt2$ is just a special case of this general truth.

share|cite|improve this answer

Another viewpoint, if the "abstract algebra" tag is taken seriously, that these "numbers" are identifiable as elements of the quotient ring $\mathbb Q[x]/\langle x^2-2\rangle$, which inherits its associativity from the polynomial ring $\mathbb Q[x]$.

share|cite|improve this answer
LOL Don't take the abstract algebra tag too seriously. This was just a math course that briefed many advanced topics in math such as Number Theory, Group Theory, Graph Theory and many other topics. I was unsure what to tag the question so I just tagged it Abstract Algebra. Thanks – math101 Aug 19 '12 at 17:18
Heh. I did wonder! But it won't hurt anyone to be exposed to this little idea... I think Kronecker was the first proponent of this way of legitimizing algebraic numbers. – paul garrett Aug 19 '12 at 17:25
+1 Good point. Though perhaps doing something like this explicitly might be pedagogically useful as a warm-up exercise before one proves that multiplication of formal polynomials is associative. – Henning Makholm Aug 20 '12 at 1:32

You don't need any more simplifications. Now try the other order of associativity $$ \Big( (a+b\sqrt{2})*(c+d \sqrt{2}) \Big) *(e+f \sqrt{2}) = \\ \Big( ac + 2bd + (ad+bc) \sqrt{2} \Big) *(e+f \sqrt{2}) $$ which when you expand it, will give exactly what you have $$(ace+2adf+(acf+ade)\sqrt{2}+bce\sqrt{2}+2bdf\sqrt{2}+2(bcf+bde)$$

So we can conclude that $$ \Big( (a+b\sqrt{2})*(c+d \sqrt{2}) \Big) *(e+f \sqrt{2}) = (a+b\sqrt{2}) * \Big( (c+d \sqrt{2}) *(e+f \sqrt{2})\Big) $$ for all $a, b, c, d, e, f.$

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks. Didnt realize it was that simple :) – math101 Aug 19 '12 at 15:07

You should simplify and rewrite what you have in the form $x+y\sqrt{2}$, so it makes it easier to read. Next, simply compute $((a+b\sqrt{2})*(c+d\sqrt{2}))*(e+f\sqrt{2})$, and compare it to what you have. Then if they match, you will have shown what you need.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks. Stupid me. I should have realized that – math101 Aug 19 '12 at 15:06

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.