Intuition can be one way!

Show that the numbers 2,3,5\sqrt 2, \sqrt 3, \sqrt 5 can never be the terms (not necessarily consecutive) of a single Arithmetic Progression.


Generalized Form: Show that the numbers p,q,r\sqrt p, \sqrt q, \sqrt r can never be the terms (not necessarily consecutive) of a single Arithmetic Progression, where p,q,rp,q,r are three distinct prime numbers.

#Algebra #ArithmeticProgression(AP) #Proofs #JEE #IITJEE

Note by Sandeep Bhardwaj
5 years, 9 months ago

No vote yet
1 vote

  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:

  • Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
  • Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
  • Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
  • Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.

MarkdownAppears as
*italics* or _italics_ italics
**bold** or __bold__ bold

- bulleted
- list

  • bulleted
  • list

1. numbered
2. list

  1. numbered
  2. list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
paragraph 1

paragraph 2

paragraph 1

paragraph 2

[example link](https://brilliant.org)example link
> This is a quote
This is a quote
    # I indented these lines
    # 4 spaces, and now they show
    # up as a code block.

    print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
MathAppears as
Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3 2×3 2 \times 3
2^{34} 234 2^{34}
a_{i-1} ai1 a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3} 23 \frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2} 2 \sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3 i=13 \sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta sinθ \sin \theta
\boxed{123} 123 \boxed{123}

Comments

Suppose ai=2,aj=3,ak=5a_{i} = \sqrt{2}, a_{j} = \sqrt{3}, a_{k} =\sqrt{5} are terms in an arithmetic sequence {an}\{a_{n}\} with common difference d,d, where i,j,ki,j,k are not necessarily consecutive. Then

2=a1+(i1)d,3=a1+(j1)d\sqrt{2} = a_{1} + (i - 1)d, \sqrt{3} = a_{1} + (j - 1)d and ak=a1+(k1)d.a_{k} = a_{1} + (k - 1)d.

We can then subtract these equations from one another successively to find that

32=(ji)d\sqrt{3} - \sqrt{2} = (j - i)d and 53=(kj)d\sqrt{5} - \sqrt{3} = (k - j)d

kjji=5332=15+1063.\Longrightarrow \dfrac{k - j}{j - i} = \dfrac{\sqrt{5} - \sqrt{3}}{\sqrt{3} - \sqrt{2}} = \sqrt{15} + \sqrt{10} - \sqrt{6} - 3.

But then the LHS of this last equation is rational and the RHS irrational, and so our initial assumption that 2,3,5\sqrt{2}, \sqrt{3}, \sqrt{5} are terms of the same AP is false.

For the generalized form with primes p,q,rp,q,r the RHS of the last equation would become

rqqp=1qp(rq+rppqq),\dfrac{\sqrt{r} - \sqrt{q}}{\sqrt{q} - \sqrt{p}} = \dfrac{1}{q - p}(\sqrt{rq} + \sqrt{rp} - \sqrt{pq} - q),

which is, as before, irrational, (since none of rq,rp,pqrq, rp, pq are perfect squares, nor do the roots cancel).

(Note that they cannot be terms of the same geometric progression either.)

Brian Charlesworth - 5 years, 9 months ago

Log in to reply

Greetings, Brian! Just to play the devil's advocate: How do you know that 15+106\sqrt{15}+\sqrt{10}-\sqrt{6} isn't rational?

Otto Bretscher - 5 years, 9 months ago

Log in to reply

The most rational reasoning is to use the standard method of rationalising and finding a contradiction. This should help

Sualeh Asif - 5 years, 9 months ago

Greetings, Otto! Yes, I was afraid that someone was going to ask that. I was just about to write up a proof, but I notice now that the approach I was going to use is the same as in Sualeh's link, so I think that reference will suffice. :)

Brian Charlesworth - 5 years, 9 months ago

Log in to reply

@Brian Charlesworth Thank you both!

Otto Bretscher - 5 years, 9 months ago
×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...