1
$\begingroup$

From a proofs class:

Note that $2^{1/n}$ is irrational for all $n>1$, since 2 is prime. Therefore, if $m$ is a positive, rational number, then $m*2^{1/n}$ is irrational for all $n>1$. Let $m = 5$ (although there are other values that will work). Observe that there exists an interval $[a,b], 1<a<b$ for a over $n$ such that $5*2^{1/a} > e +\pi$ and $5*2^{1/b} < e + \pi$. Since $5*2^{1/n}$ is continuous, then there exists an $l$ in $[a,b]$ such that $5*2^{1/l} = e+\pi$. Since $5*2^{1/n}$ is irrational for all $n>1$, it follows that $e + \pi$ is also irrational.

I suspect the error is in the "$2^{1/n}$ is irrational" statement, although the proof we had for that seemed to cover all $n>1$ (not to mention much of this could have been reduced, but like the others we got there's a lot of "fluff" to make the problems more complicated).

I appreciate all and any help. Thank you kindly!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The only thing I've found so far is a slight working error. $5*2^{\frac{1}{n}}$ is only continuous besides at n=0. $\endgroup$ – pie314271 Feb 8 '17 at 0:34
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ $2^{1/n}$ is always irrational when $n$ in an integer greater than $1$. It is not true for all real numbers. For example $n = \frac{1}{\log_2(3)}$ is irrational, but $2^{\frac{1}{n}} = 3$ is rational. $\endgroup$ – Winther Feb 8 '17 at 0:34
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Oh, that's what was wrong.. nice! $\endgroup$ – pie314271 Feb 8 '17 at 0:34
4
$\begingroup$

The error is "sort of" in that part. The use of the variable $n$ in the statement "$2^{1/n}$ is irrational for $n > 1$" suggests that integer $n$ are intended, in which case the statement is true. But if $n$ is permitted to be itself irrational - as $l$ is at the end of the "proof" - then $n = \frac{1}{\log_{2}1.5}$ is a clear counterexample (since then $2^{1/n} = 1.5$).

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

The problem is that $m∗2^{\frac{1}{n}}$ is irrational for all rational $n>1$ . There are irrational $n$s for which $2^\frac{1}{n}$ is rational. Some multiple of log 2 would work. Therefore your $l$ may be one of those irrational exponents that rationalize the result.

$\endgroup$

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.