Proving Rational Intersection of Sets with Irrational Elements

In summary, we are tasked with proving that the intersection of S and T, defined as S={p+q\sqrt{2} : p,q \in Q} and T={p+q\sqrt{3} : p,q \in Q}, is equal to the set of rational numbers,
  • #1
KeynesianDude
5
0

Homework Statement



Let S={p+q[tex]\sqrt{2}[/tex] : p,q [tex]\in[/tex] Q} and T={p+q[tex]\sqrt{3}[/tex] : p,q [tex]\in[/tex] Q}. Prove that S[tex]\cap[/tex]T = Q.

Homework Equations



See above.

The Attempt at a Solution



I was thinking possible using

S[tex]\cap[/tex]T=Q
S + T - S[tex]\cup[/tex]T = Q

But I have no idea how to combine them? I don't believe it's necessary to first prove S and T are rational individually.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
hmmm... not sure but is there some way to show that

[tex] p + q\sqrt{2} = s + t\sqrt{3}[/tex]
iff q=t=0
(maybe consider the case p = s = 0 first)

then the intersection reduces to only the rationals?
 
  • #3
Thanks for your response. I was thinking the same thing.

Would it be a bad idea to transfer this to one of the math discussion threads? It's high-level undergrad and low-level grad type proof writing class.
 
  • #4
why not try it first... (more volume here & they're not meant for homework)
say you have
[tex] p + q\sqrt{2} \in Q}[/tex]
[tex] s + t\sqrt{3} \in T}[/tex]

the intersection will be given by elements that satisfy
[tex] p + q\sqrt{2} = s + t\sqrt{3}[/tex]

re-arranging
[tex] p-s = (t\sqrt{3} -q\sqrt{2})[/tex]

the left is cleary rational, can the righthand side ever be rational? (haven't tried to prove it or find conditions, but probably a good place to start)
 
Last edited:
  • #5
lanedance said:
why not try it first... (more voluem here & they're not meant for homework)
say you have
[tex] p + q\sqrt{2} \in Q}[/tex]
[tex] s + t\sqrt{3} \in T}[/tex]

the intersection will be given by elements that satisfy
[tex] p + q\sqrt{2} = s + t\sqrt{3}[/tex]

re-arranging
[tex] p-s = (t\sqrt{3} -q\sqrt{2})[/tex]

the left is cleary rational, can the righthand side ever be rational? (haven't tried to prove it or find conditions, but probably a good place to start)

You should probably try and solve it before you transfer it. lanedance has good suggestions. Square both sides if t and q are both nonzero. Is sqrt(6) rational? Or is sqrt(2) or sqrt(3) if one of t or q happen to be zero?
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Dick said:
You should probably try and solve it before you transfer it. lanedance has good suggestions. Square both sides if t and q are both nonzero. Is sqrt(6) rational? Or is sqrt(2) or sqrt(3) if one of t or q happen to be zero?

[[tex]\sqrt{6}[/tex] is definitely not rational. I squared both sides and am kind of clueless. It seems like no matter what I do it will always come off as irrational.

It seems like I need to get t or q to be zero to this to work, huh?
 
  • #7
You want to prove t AND q are both zero. You've got three cases to worry about. t=0, q not zero, q=0, t not zero and q and t both not zero. Yes, you need t=q=0 to make it work. Can you show this?
 
  • #8
Dick said:
You want to prove t AND q are both zero. You've got three cases to worry about. t=0, q not zero, q=0, t not zero and q and t both not zero. Yes, you need t=q=0 to make it work. Can you show this?

Would this be acceptable?

Suppose 3t2-2[tex]\sqrt{6}[/tex]tq+3q is rational, then q:=0. Hence,

(p-s)2=3t2

Both sides are clearly rational. Therefore, S[tex]\cap[/tex]T [tex]\in[/tex] Q.
 
  • #9
helps if you show what you are doing, but i think that's the plan

Remember this is the equation that must be sastified by any points in the intersection of S & T.

so note if u is rational, then so is u^2. So as you're hinting... what limits can you put on t & q, to be in the intersection? will need to consider all the cases as Dick mentioned
 
  • #10
KeynesianDude said:
Would this be acceptable?

Suppose 3t2-2[tex]\sqrt{6}[/tex]tq+3q is rational, then q:=0. Hence,

(p-s)2=3t2

Both sides are clearly rational. Therefore, S[tex]\cap[/tex]T [tex]\in[/tex] Q.

no - consider the case separately when t,q both non zero, then look at the square
if one of t,q = 0, there is no need to look at the square

note that sqrt(2) is not rational but (sqrt(2))^2 is not,
i think this is because you can show that u^2 irrational implies u is irrational, but u irrational does not imply u^2 is irrational
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Proving Rational Intersection of Sets with Irrational Elements

What is a rational set?

A rational set is a collection of numbers that can be expressed as a ratio of two integers. For example, 1/2 and 3/4 are rational numbers, while √2 and π are not.

What does it mean for two sets to intersect?

Two sets intersect if they have at least one element in common. In other words, the intersection of two sets A and B is the set of elements that are in both A and B.

How do you determine if two rational sets intersect?

To determine if two rational sets intersect, you can compare the elements of the sets and see if there are any common elements. Alternatively, you can also use the formula A ∩ B = {x | x ∈ A and x ∈ B} to find the intersection.

Can a rational set intersect with an irrational set?

No, a rational set and an irrational set cannot intersect. This is because irrational numbers cannot be expressed as a ratio of two integers, so there can be no common elements between a rational set and an irrational set.

What is the significance of rational sets intersecting in mathematics?

The intersection of rational sets is significant in mathematics because it allows us to solve equations and inequalities involving rational numbers. It also helps us understand the relationships between different sets and how they overlap.

Back
Top