This might seem very simple to some but I got confused thinking over it. It goes like this:
Is every rational number divisible by every irrational number ? Why(then which of them are divisible)/ why not ? More specifically what are the criteria for the aforesaid division to be successful ?
Does the vice-versa also hold true ?
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
When we usually talk about two numbers being divisible, we talk about the natural numbers, or sometimes even the integers. So having rational numbers or irrational numbers divide the other evenly doesn't make sense in all cases.
We know that a divides b if and only if there exists some integer k such that b=ka. Now let p be a rational number and let q be an irrational number. If q divides p, we have p=kq where k is some integer. This implies q=kp. Now we know that every integer is a rational number, so k is also a rational number. But when a rational number is divided by a non zero rational number, the result is also a rational number. Hence q is a rational number, a contradiction. But note that we can derive q=kp only when k=0. If k=0, we have p=0. Hence no irrational number can divide any rational number other than 0.
Similarly, assume any irrational number is divisible by a rational number. Then we have q=pk (notations same as above). But the product of two rationals is always a rational, thus we have a contradiction. Hence no irrational number is divisible by a rational number.
This is what I think. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Log in to reply
Yeah that was ok. I spoke of this only because I encountered it while solving a problem. The problem goes like this:
Let a, b, c be positive integers such that a divides b2, b divides c2 and c divides a2. Prove that abc divides (a+b+c)7.
Using the b2 = ka, c2 = mb and a2 = nc(where k, m and n are some positive integers), I arrived at showing kmn divides kmn ((nm3)^71 + (kn3)^71 + (mk3)^71)^7. I am not able to show that the factor inside the big braces is an integer. Please help.
Log in to reply
From the multinomial theorem, we know that every term in the expansion of (a+b+c)7 is of the form mapbqcr, where m is an integer and p, q, and r are non-negative integers such that p+q+r=7 and atleast one of p, q, or r is positive. Now note that when all of p, q, and r are positive, abc divides mapbqcr. Now let any one of p, q, or r be zero. By symmetry assume p=0. Then we have q+r=7. By symmetry assume q>r (note that since 7 is an odd integer p=q ). Since both q and r are positive integers, minimum possible value for q is 4, while its maximum possible value is 6. If q=4, r=3, and the term is mb4c3=mb2∗b2c3. Since a divides b2, we get that this term is divisible by abc. Similarly we can prove that abc divides the term when q=5 and when q=6. Now consider the case when two of p, q, or r are 0. By symmetry let p be non zero. Then we must have p=7. Then the term is ma7=ma4∗a2∗a. Now c divides a2, so c2 divides a4. But b divides c2, so b divides a4. Thus abc divides ma7. So we have proved that abc divides all the terms in the expansion of (a+b+c)7 (note that all of p, q, and r cannot be 0 ) . Since (a+b+c)7 is actually the sum of all such terms, abc divides (a+b+c)7.
Note:- Note that the multinomial coefficient (i.e m) must always be an integer. According to the link provided, the multinomial coefficient is n1!n2!...nk!n!, where n=n1+n2+...+nk. This is equal to the number of permutations of n1 identical objects, n2 identical objects, ..., nk identical objects put together. This has to be an integer obviously.
Log in to reply
Another approach (which is almost equivalent to yours) that doesn't use the cases, is to argue that since a∣b2∣c4∣a8, hence the set of primes which divide a,b, and c are the same. For a given prime k, let ka, kb and kc be the number of times that k divides into a,b and c respectively. Then, we know that the number of times k divides into abc is ka+kb+kc. We also know that ka≤2kb≤4kc≤8ka. Hence, for any integer triples such that x+y+z=7, we have xka+ykb+zkc≥7min(ka,kb,kc)≥ka+kb+kc. This shows that for each prime p, the power of p which divides abc is smaller than (a+b+c)7, Hence, abc divides (a+b+c)7.
Notation: Given a prime p and an integer n, we say that p divides into n k times if pk divides n but pk+1 doesn't divide n. As such, pk is the highest power of p that divides n.
Log in to reply
Yup..I couldn't follow your last few statements.
Ohh..... I missed that fact(courtesy my negligence towards combinatorics). Now with your help I have been able to solve it. TY.......