Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots
Replies: 6   Last Post: Feb 20, 2013 3:13 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Virgil Posts: 8,833 Registered: 1/6/11
Re: Matheology � 222 Back to the roots
Posted: Feb 20, 2013 3:13 PM

In article
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 19 Feb., 23:28, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
> > On 2/19/2013 9:16 AM, WM wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> > > On 19 Feb., 15:09, Alan Smaill <sma...@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > >> WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> writes:
> > >>> On 19 Feb., 11:03, Alan Smaill <sma...@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >>>> Do you think that the square root of 2 is rational?
> >
> > >>> No, but I know that it has no decimal or binary representation.
> >
> > >> So, how do you know it's not rational, then?
> >
> > > Because every rational number has a representation in a finite base.
> >
> > >> Is there "no doubt", as you describe the conclusion of an argument
> > >> using induction over the natural numbers?

> >
> > > No there is no induction required but the simple proof by
> > > Assume sqrt2 = m/n with m,n coprime. You can find it in many places of
> > > the internet, for instance in chapter 3 of my Geschichte des
> > > Unendlichen.

> >
> > Humor us.
> >
> > Show us for surd(5).
> >
> > The proof for surd(2) is special because it uses odds and evens.-

>
> And you think that the fundamental theorem of number theory makes a
> difference between prime factor 2 and others, say 3 or 5 or 7?

Does WM claim that anything proof valid for 2 must also be valid for 3
or 5 or other primes? How about the proof that 2 is even, does that
proof make all primes even?
--

Date Subject Author
2/19/13 Alan Smaill
2/19/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
2/19/13 Michael Klemm
2/19/13 fom
2/20/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
2/20/13 Virgil