6
$\begingroup$

We are given a set $S$ as a subset of the rational numbers defined by:

  1. $0 \notin S$
  2. If $s_1 , s_2 \in S$, then $\frac {s_1}{s_2} \in S$
  3. There exists a nonzero rational number $q \notin S$ such that every nonzero number in $Q \setminus S$ is of the form $qs$ for some $s \in S$.

Prove that if $x \in S$, then there exist $y$ and $z$ in S such that $x=y+z$.

Taking $s_1=s_2$ tells us that $1 \in S$, and thus $ \frac{1}{s} \in S $, and $s^k \in S$ for $k$ an integer and $s \in S$. Perhaps it can be proved by taking $y=x^a, z=x^b$ and proving integers $a$ and $b$ always exist, but I can't figure it out. Can anyone help me?

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ My suspicion is that $\mathbb Q_{>0}$ is the only such $S$ (with $q =$ any negative rational). Can anybody think of any other possibilities? $\endgroup$ – TonyK Apr 3 '16 at 11:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If I'm not mistaken, then conditions in the question state precisely that $S$ is a subgroup of multiplicative group of rational numbers of index $2$. $\endgroup$ – Wojowu Apr 3 '16 at 12:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @TonyK Numbers with even $p$-adic valuation. $\endgroup$ – Wojowu Apr 3 '16 at 12:57
2
$\begingroup$

Since $S = \emptyset$ does not satisfy (3), $S$ is nonempty, say $x \in S$. Now (2) implies that $1 = x/x \in S$. It then follows that $S$ is closed under reciprocals, and hence also under multiplication. So it suffices to show that $1$ can be written as $y + z$ for some $y,z \in S$, because then each $x = xy + xz$ is a sum of elements of $S$.

Suppose for contradiction that $1 - y \not \in S$ for every $y \in S$. Since $\{1, -1\}$ does not satisfy (3), we can choose $x \in S$ with $|x| \not= 1$. Since $S$ is closed under multiplication, $x^2 \in S$, and so $1 - x^2 \not\in S$ by our assumption.

Condition (3) implies that $Q \setminus S \subseteq qS \cup \{0\}$. This is actually equality because we are given $0 \not \in S$, and if $x \in S \cap (qS \setminus \{0\})$ then $x = qy$ for some $y \in S$, and then $q = y/x \in S$, which violates (3).

So $1 - x$ and $1 - x^2$ both belong to $qS$, and therefore $\frac{1}{1 + x} = (1 - x)/(1-x^2) \in qS/qS = S/S \subseteq S$. Rewriting $\frac{1}{1+x} = 1 - \frac{x}{1+x}$, we obtain $1 - \frac{x}{1+x} \in S$. Since $\frac{x}{1+x} \in S$ as well, this contradicts our assumption.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ How are you writing $\frac{1}{1+x} = 1 - \frac{1}{1+x}$? $\endgroup$ – Seven Apr 3 '16 at 13:04
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I'm an idiot. I meant $\frac{1}{1+x} = 1 - \frac{x}{1+x}$, but that works the same. $\endgroup$ – Aidan Sims Apr 3 '16 at 13:05
  • $\begingroup$ Okay. But now how does $\frac{x}{1+x} \in S$? $\endgroup$ – Seven Apr 3 '16 at 13:13
  • $\begingroup$ Well, we started with x \in S. We showed that $\frac{1}{1+x} \in S$. And we know that $S$ is closed under multiplication. $\endgroup$ – Aidan Sims Apr 3 '16 at 13:23
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah. I realized that. I'm an idiot too :) $\endgroup$ – Seven Apr 3 '16 at 13:25
1
$\begingroup$

First notice that we only need to find one pair $s_1$, $s_2 \in S$ such that $s_1+s_2 \in S$. Then for any $x \in S$, we have

$$x=x.1=x\Bigg(\frac{s_1}{s_1+s_2}+\frac{s_2}{s_1+s_2}\Bigg) = x\frac{ s_1}{s_1+s_2}+x\frac{s_2}{s_1+s_2} $$

and we may then take $y = x\frac{ s_1}{s_1+s_2}$, $z = x\frac{s_2}{s_1+s_2}$.

Now $S$ is a subgroup of $\mathbb{Q}^{*}$, and condition 3. implies that

$\mathbb{Q}^{*} = S \cup qS$ for some $q \not\in S$. Since $\mathbb{Q}^{*}$ is the union of two cosets of $S$, the index of $S$ in $\mathbb{Q}^{*}$ is $2$.

Therefore, the square of any non-zero rational belongs to $S$, so picking $s_1 = 9$ and $s_2 = 16$ does the job.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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