2
$\begingroup$

Let $n$ be an integer greater than $1$ and let $\sqrt[n]{2}\in \mathbb{R}$ be the unique positive $n$-th root of $2$. Show that the real numbers $1, (\sqrt[n]{2})^2,\cdot\cdot\cdot,(\sqrt[n]{2})^{n-1}$ are linearly independent over $\mathbb{Q}$.

Using the definition of linear independence, the problem is equivalent to showing that $$c_1+c_2 (\sqrt[n]{2})^2+\cdot\cdot\cdot+c_{n-1}(\sqrt[n]{2})^{n-1}=0$$ has only the trivial solution $c_1=c_2=\cdot\cdot\cdot=c_{n-1}=0$

I believe there is something special about each $\sqrt[n]{2}$ being a unique positive $n$-th root of 2 that allows us to state linear independence. In particular, this implies that each $(\sqrt[n]{2})^i$ is linearly independent where $i\in \{0,2,3,\cdot\cdot\cdot,n-1\}$.

I don't know if my intuition is correct and how to prove this linear independence rigorously.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hint: What is the minimal polynomial of $\sqrt[n]{2}$? $\endgroup$ – Slade May 13 '16 at 3:44
1
$\begingroup$

Hint: if there were a linear dependence relation between these elements, then $\sqrt[n]{2}$ would satisfy a (monic) polynomial of degree $\leqslant n-1$ (after dividing by the highest nonzero coefficient). On the other hand, $\sqrt[n]{2}$ is a root of $X^{n} - 2$, which is irreducible over $\mathbb{Q}$ by Eisenstein at $2$. Why is this first bit in contradiction with the second fact?

$\endgroup$

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.