Why the square root of 2 is irrational · Mathematics Class 9–10 | StemPy Lab
Course 2.2·Lesson 2 of 3
Why the square root of 2 is irrational
A calculator shows only a few digits of 2
Lesson 2 of 3Show all lessonsHide
Try the code and the simulations beside the lesson.
What we want to prove
A rational number can be written as ba, where a and b are whole numbers and b=0. An irrational number cannot. Is 2 rational?
A calculator shows 2=1.41421356… It shows only a few digits. It cannot tell us whether the digits start to repeat much later. We need a proof, and it was found more than two thousand years ago.
The proof, step by step
Theorem.2 is irrational.
Proof.
Suppose the opposite. Suppose 2=ba, where a and b are whole numbers with no common factor other than 1. Every fraction can be cancelled down to lowest terms, so this is allowed.
Square both sides.2=b2a2, so a2=2b2.
So a is even.a2 is a multiple of 2. Since 2 is a prime, 2 divides a, by the key fact of the last lesson. Write a=2c.
Put it back.(2c)2=2b2 gives 4c2=2b2, so b2=2c2.
So b is even.b2 is a multiple of 2, so 2 divides b.
The contradiction. Now 2 divides both a and b. But we chose them with no common factor. This is impossible.
So the supposition is false, and 2 is irrational.
The proof that the square root of 2 is irrational, as seven boxes joined by arrows. 1: Suppose root 2 equals a over b, a fraction in lowest terms. 2: Square both sides: a squared equals 2 b squared. 3: So 2 divides a squared, and 2 is a prime, so 2 divides a; write a equals 2c. 4: Then 4 c squared equals 2 b squared, so b squared equals 2 c squared. 5: So 2 divides b squared, and 2 divides b. 6, in red: both a and b are even, so the fraction was not in lowest terms. 7, in red: impossible, so root 2 is not a fraction: it is irrational.
The picture shows the same chain. Each step follows from the one before it. The only step that can be wrong is the first one, the supposition, so it must be wrong.
Fractions come close, but never arrive
The best fractions, such as 57, 1217 and 2941, give p2−2q2 equal to 1 or −1. They come very close to 2. If p2−2q2 were ever 0, the square of qp would be exactly 2, and the proof says that this never happens.
The same proof for other roots
Take 3. Suppose 3=ba in lowest terms. Then a2=3b2. The prime 3 divides a2, so 3 divides a. Write a=3c. Then 9c2=3b2, so b2=3c2, and 3 divides b. Both are multiples of 3, which is a contradiction.
The same steps work for 5, 7, 11 and the square root of any primep. Only the prime changes.
Why it fails for the square root of 4
Try the steps with 4=ba. Then a2=4b2, so a=2b and ba=2. There is no contradiction, because 4=2 really is a fraction, 12. Notice that 4 is not a prime, so the key fact does not apply to it.
In general, n is irrational for every whole number n that is not a perfect square. A perfect square, such as 4, 9 or 16, has a whole number as its square root.
Practise with new numbers
Try it in Python
The program searches for a fraction ba with a2=2b2, for every bottom b up to 100000. Then it does the same for 3.
A search can only check finitely many fractions. The proof covers all of them at once.
Common mistakes
Writing 2=1.414.1.414 is the fraction 10001414, and its square is 1.999396, not 2. It is only close.
Forgetting the words "lowest terms". The whole contradiction comes from them.
Skipping a reason. From a2=2b2 we may say that 2 divides a only because 2 is a prime.
Thinking every square root is irrational.9=3 and 16=4.
Remember these
p is irrational for every prime p. n is irrational when n is not a perfect square.
The proof: suppose lowest terms, square both sides, use the key fact twice, and find a common factor.
Decimals from a calculator, or a computer search, cannot prove that a number is irrational.
Check yourself
Try each one on your own first. If you are stuck, open a hint. Then check with Show the answer.
In the proof for 2, why may we start with a and b that have no common factor?
In the proof for 7, we reach a2=7b2 and write a=7c. What equation do we get for b?
Is 11 rational or irrational?
57=1.4 is close to 2. Work out 72−2×52. What does it tell you?
Which of 13, 36 and 40 are irrational?
Enroll free in Irrational Numbers and Proofs
Every lesson is open to read. Enrolling also lets you:
Mark lessons done and carry on where you stopped.
Take the tests of this lesson and its course.
Count the course towards the certificate for its chapter.
, so it cannot tell us whether the digits ever repeat. We prove that
2
is irrational by contradiction: if it were a fraction in lowest terms, both its top and its bottom would be even. The same proof works for the square root of any prime. It fails for a perfect square such as
4
, because
4=2
.
about 25 min1 simulation1 practice question1 Python program5 questions to check yourself
This lesson is free to read. Enroll free to keep your place and take the tests.
Prove that the cube root of 2, the number whose cube is 2, is irrational.