fom
Posts:
1,035
Registered:
12/4/12
|
|
Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the root
s
Posted:
Feb 19, 2013 5:28 PM
|
|
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
> contradiction.
> 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.
|
|
