Instructions: To add a question/comment to a specific line, equation, table or graph simply click on it.
Click on the annotations on the left side of the paper to read and reply to the questions and comments.
Theodor Estermann proved the irrationality of $\sqrt2$ without rely...
Exactly why is it sufficient to prove sqrt(m) - n is irrational? Th...
Note that $q$ is by assumption the smallest integer we can use as a...
In fact it is even possible to generalize: for positive integers $m...

Discussion

Note that $q$ is by assumption the smallest integer we can use as a denominator in $\alpha$. Since $m,n,q$ and $p$ are integers $r=(m-n^2)q-2np$ is also an integer and so we were able to rewrite $\alpha$ as a quotient of 2 integers but this time with $p$ in the denominator. As $p<q$ we have reached a contradiction and $\sqrt m$ must be irrational. Exactly why is it sufficient to prove sqrt(m) - n is irrational? This stopped me cold. You can remove the first $k$ digits in the decimal expansion of any irrational number without changing its irrationality. So therefore a number is irrational iff its fractional part is also irrational. Since $n < \sqrt{m} < n+1$, $\sqrt{m} - n$ is precisely this fractional part. Theodor Estermann proved the irrationality of $\sqrt2$ without relying on the prime factorization of $m$. He claimed that his proof was even easier than [Pythagoras' proof](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root_of_2#Pythagorean_theorem_proof). Estermann started by defining a set $S$ of all natural numbers $n$ such that $n\sqrt2$ is an integer. If the set $S$ was not empty, it would have a least element $k$, for instance. Now if we consider: $$ (\sqrt2 -1)k\sqrt 2=2k -k\sqrt2 $$ Since $k\in S$, both $(\sqrt2 -1)k$ and $2k -k\sqrt2$ are naturals. So by definition $(\sqrt2 -1)k \in S$. However $(\sqrt2 -1)k < k$, contradicting the initial assumption that k is the least element of S. This way we conclude that $S$ is empty and $\sqrt2$ must be irrational. Flanders generalizes the proof of Estermann by replacing 2 by $m$ and replacing 1 by the greatest integer less than $\sqrt m$. In fact it is even possible to generalize: for positive integers $m$ and $k$, $^{k}\sqrt m$ is rational only when $m$ is a perfect $k^{th}$ power. To prove this let us suppose that $^{k}\sqrt m=\frac{a}{b}$ where $a,b>0$ and are integers and the Greatest Common Divisor between $a$ and $b$ is 1. Now $$ ^{k}\sqrt m=\frac{a}{b} \equiv m = \frac{a^k}{b^k} \equiv mb^k = a^k $$ If $b$ has a prime factor $c$ that does not divide $a$, then $c$ does not divide any positive power of $a$. If $b>1$, $a^k$ can be written in terms of powers of $b$ ($a^k=mb^k$) and consequently contradicts the initial assumption, since $a$ and $b$ don't have any common divisors apart from 1. The only option we have is $b=1$ and in that case $m=a^k$ is a perfect power. rational + irrational = irrational (if rational + irrational = rational we would get irrational = rational - rational, but rationals are closed under addition and subtraction). Hence (sqrt(m) - n) + n = sqrt(m) is irrational (irrational + rational = irrational) This sort of argument is common for properties that are closed under some operation (like rationality with addition).