[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference rusure::math

Title:Mathematics at DEC
Moderator:RUSURE::EDP
Created:Mon Feb 03 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2083
Total number of notes:14613

1688.0. "alien numbers" by 48451::CLC (K108 Twin Cities) Wed Nov 04 1992 10:47

I've been asked (and couldn't answer) this odd question :
Are there any real numbers (non irrational) which are not the result of the
division between two numbers ? Is there a related conjecture/theorem/demo ?
Hints anyone ?

	Thanks and regards,

	Christophe
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1688.1RUSURE::EDPAlways mount a scratch monkey.Wed Nov 04 1992 11:4064
    Re .0:         
    
    There are real numbers which are not the quotient of any two integers,
    or any two rational numbers.  For example, there do not exist any
    rational numbers p and q such that p/q equals the square root of two.
    Numbers of that sort are called irrational, meaning "without ratio".
    
    You asked about "non irrational" numbers; the real numbers can be
    partitioned into the rational numbers and the irrational numbers. 
    Every real number is one or the other, but not both.  Every rational
    number can be expressed in the form p/q, where p and q are integers. 
    Every irrational number cannot be expressed in that way.
    
    Here is a hierarchy of types of numbers:
    
    If you count, starting at zero, you get the numbers 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and
    so on.  These numbers are closed under addition.  That means you can
    add any two of the numbers and you will get another of those numbers.
    
    They are not closed under subtraction; if you subtract 7 from 3, you do
    not get any of those numbers.  So we construct the negative integers,
    which are the "additive inverses" of the positive integers.
    
    The integers are closed under addition, subtraction, and
    multiplication, but not division.  There is no integer that is equal to
    2/3.  So we construct the ratios of all pairs of integers, and that
    gives us the rational numbers.  They are closed under addition,
    subtraction, multplication, and division.
    
    However, if we want to take the square root of two, no rational number
    will be a correct answer.  If you'd like, I can show you a fairly
    simple proof of that.  Using the rational numbers, we can construct a
    larger set of numbers called the real numbers.  I will skip that
    construction for now, since it gets a bit technical, but basically it
    involves partitioning the rational numbers into two sets.  If you would
    like to see it, just ask.
    
    The set of real numbers that we get from that construction actually
    contains several types of numbers.  Obviously, it contains all the
    integers and rational numbers.  It also contains a type of numbers that
    are called algebraic.  If you write an equation such as ax^3+bx^2+cx+d
    = 0, where you have a polynomial with rational coefficients equal to 0,
    then the real solutions to such an equation are algebraic numbers.  For
    example, a solution to x^2-2 = 0 is the square root of two.  That is
    not a rational number, but it is an algebraic number.
    
    There exist real numbers that are not the solution to any equation of
    that sort.  The number pi is such a number.  Those types of numbers are
    called transcendental numbers.
    
    There is one more type of number.  The real numbers are still not
    closed when we consider solutions to polynomial equations and
    operations such as exponentiation with fractional exponents.  Thus, we
    construct complex numbers in the form a+bi, where a and b are real
    numbers and i is an imaginary number.
    
    The complex numbers are algebraically closed; every solution to any
    polynomial equation which has complex coefficients is a complex number. 
    Every algebraic operation on complex numbers -- addition, subtraction,
    multiplication, division, and exponentiation -- has a result that is a
    complex number.
    
    
    				-- edp
1688.2Thanks48451::CLCK108 Twin CitiesThu Nov 05 1992 05:382
Thanks for your answer, that's what I wanted to be sure of.
	Christophe