29
$\begingroup$

I suggested the following problem to my friend: prove that there exist irrational numbers $a$ and $b$ such that $a^b$ is rational. The problem seems to have been discussed in this question.

Now, his inital solution was like this: let's take a rational number $r$ and an irrational number $i$. Let's assume

$$a = r^i$$ $$b = \frac{1}{i}$$

So we have

$$a^b = (r^i)^\frac{1}{i} = r$$

which is rational per initial supposition. $b$ is obviously irrational if $i$ is. My friend says that it is also obvious that if $r$ is rational and $i$ is irrational, then $r^i$ is irrational. I quickly objected saying that $r = 1$ is an easy counterexample. To which my friend said, OK, for any positive rational number $r$, other than 1 and for any irrational number $i$ $r^i$ is irrational. Is this true? If so, is it easily proved? If not, can someone come up with a counterexample?

Let's stick to real numbers only (i.e. let's forget about complex numbers for now).

$\endgroup$
5
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ But of course, a cardinality argument shows that for $0 < r \neq 1$, $r^i$ is irrational for most (all but countably many) irrational $i$. So the example isn't irrepairably wrong. $\endgroup$ Jul 22, 2013 at 13:04
  • $\begingroup$ Can anyone explain why math people say "prove that there exist irrational numbers a and b..." instead of the more intuitive "prove that irrational numbers a and b exist...". The second approach makes more sense to me. $\endgroup$ Jul 22, 2013 at 16:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @makerofthings7: comments to other questions are not the way to ask new questions. Use the "ask question" link. $\endgroup$ Jul 22, 2013 at 17:17
  • $\begingroup$ @makerofthings7 Might be because $\exists$ is a prefix operator, and then the habit carries over into one's language. $\endgroup$
    – Jack M
    Jul 22, 2013 at 17:18
  • $\begingroup$ @makerofthings7 It's probably a combination of many things: (a) you speak the way people around you speak, in mathematics or anywhere else - this is just a kind of jargon, (b) there are lots of non-native English speakers reading and writing English papers, so clarity and consistency is very important, (c) "prove that x exists such that..." sounds very sloppy to me, because "such" modifies "x" ("prove that such an x exists that..."??), and in any case it might mislead you into thinking you were given a formula or algorithm for x earlier on, and are being asked to check it makes sense. $\endgroup$
    – Billy
    Jul 22, 2013 at 18:55

2 Answers 2

74
$\begingroup$

Consider $2^{\log_2 3}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}$

$\endgroup$
6
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Ah, of course! So obvious now that you've said it! $\endgroup$ Jul 22, 2013 at 12:46
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I suppose the obvious followup question is how to prove that $\log_2 3$ is not rational. $\endgroup$ Jul 22, 2013 at 17:00
  • 35
    $\begingroup$ @IlmariKaronen : if $2^{p/q}=3$, then $2^p=3^q$. $\endgroup$
    – user10676
    Jul 22, 2013 at 17:24
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Gotta be one of the shortest best answers. $\endgroup$
    – LarsH
    Jul 22, 2013 at 18:50
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ And by the Fundamental theorem of arithmetic... $\endgroup$ Feb 15, 2014 at 0:50
17
$\begingroup$

A supplement to the answer by Chris above:

Let $r$ be a positive rational number and $i$ a positive irrational number. If $r^{i}$ is rational, then $r^i=\frac{a}{b}$ for $a,b\in \mathbb{Z}$ such that $b\neq 0$. In particular, $i=\log_{r}\left(\frac{a}{b}\right)$. Therefore, Chris Eagle's answer is, in fact, prototypical. (Note also, that if $r=1$, then we get a contradiction as you observed.)

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Do you know an elementary proof of this, please? $\endgroup$
    – Alex M.
    Sep 23, 2016 at 21:26

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.