This is a question from Pinter p.124. It asks me to describe the partition of the set of nonzero real numbers, $\mathbb{R}^*$ where the associated equivalence relation is $a$ ~ $b$ iff $\frac{a}{b}$ $\in \mathbb{Q}$.

I'm not sure if I can describe it as either:

{$A_r : r \in \mathbb{Q} \times \mathbb{R}^*$} where $A_r = \{x\in\mathbb{R}^* : \frac{x}{b} = a, r = (a,b)\}$


{$[y]:y\in \mathbb{R}^*$} where $[y] = \{ x \in\mathbb{R}^*:\frac{x}{y} \in \mathbb{Q}\}$

assuming that each disjoint set can have repeating labels? Thanks a lot.

  • $\begingroup$ Your descriptions, while not wrong, do not really shed light on the structure of the partition. You are just using the definition of the equivalence class, and I believe the question is asking for more than that. $\endgroup$ – theyaoster May 19 '18 at 19:46

Hint 1: Given a rational number $q$, for every non-zero rational $p$, $p/q$ is also rational. Furthermore, for an irrational $x$, $q/x$ is irrational. This argument classifies the equivalence classes whose elements are all rational.

Hint 2: For the equivalence classes containing irrational numbers, take an irrational $x$. Then, if $x \sim y$ for $y \in \mathbb{R}^*$, then $y$ must be irrational (why?). Recall that $[x]$ contains all $y$ such that $x \sim y$, so determining the elements of $[x]$ comes down to determining when the ratio $x/y$ of two irrational numbers is rational.

  • $\begingroup$ Hi Brian, thanks for your hints. I have thought those before but got stuck on the condition when the ratio of 2 irrational numbers is rational. It is clear that the ratio of $ax$ and $bx$ where $a$ and $b$ are rational and $x$ is irrational will yield a rational number. However, I'm not sure if 2 distinct irrationals that cannot be written as a multiple of a common irrational, their rational can still be rational. And if that's not the case, I suppose there'll still be infinitely many classes because there are infinitely many irrational numbers. $\endgroup$ – mackbox May 19 '18 at 20:03
  • $\begingroup$ Good reasoning. Given an irrational $x$, assume $x/y$ is rational. Then, consider two cases: $y$ is either a rational multiple of $x$, or an irrational multiple of $x$. You already said what happens in the first case. What happens in the second? In fact, is it even possible? $\endgroup$ – theyaoster May 19 '18 at 20:13
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks again Brian. That's the problem, mate. If $a$ and $b$ are distinct, irrational and cannot be written as a multiple of any irrational number besides themselves, I'm not sure if you divide $a$ by $b$, whether it can give you a rational number. Intuitively, that's not true but I don't know how to prove it. (say if I start by saying $a/b = c$, then $a = b \times c$, then what?). Could you give me a few more pointers so I can see why? $\endgroup$ – mackbox May 19 '18 at 20:40
  • $\begingroup$ It could be easier to think about the contrapositive: show that if $a/b$ is rational, then $a$ and $b$ can be written as rational multiples of one another. Start by assuming $a/b = c$ is rational. Then, $a = bc$ shows that $a$ is a rational multiple of $b$ since $c$ is rational. Does this clear it up? $\endgroup$ – theyaoster May 19 '18 at 21:11
  • $\begingroup$ That's very clear thanks a lot! I didn't realize your previous comment was actually based on contrapositive! So now the equivalent classes for the irrational numbers in $\mathbb{R}^*$ can be stated as $[x] = \{ y \in \mathbb{R}^* : y$ is a rational multiple of $x \} $, is that right? $\endgroup$ – mackbox May 19 '18 at 21:37

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.