Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum

Ask Dr. Math - Questions and Answers from our Archives
_____________________________________________
Associated Topics || Dr. Math Home || Search Dr. Math
_____________________________________________

Density Property of Rational Numbers


Date: 09/21/2001 at 11:12:36
From: Benjamin Sutton
Subject: Density Property of Rational Numbers  

How was the density property of rational numbers proven?


Date: 09/21/2001 at 12:37:09
From: Doctor Paul
Subject: Re: Density Property of Rational Numbers  

If by the density property of rational number you mean the statement:

"between any two real numbers a and b there exists a rational number r 
such that a < r < b"

then the proof is as follows:

We first need the Archimedean Property:

if x > 0 and y > 0 are real numbers, then there exists a positive 
integer n such that n*x > y.  This tells us that even if a is quite 
small and b is quite large, some integer multiple of a will exceed b.  
Another way to think of this is, "given enough time, one can empty a 
large bathtub with a small spoon."

The Archimedean property has a proof, but I won't state it here 
because it requires a bit more math than you've probably had. If 
you're interested, write back and I'll provide it. Otherwise we'll 
just claim that it is inherently obvious.

Now back to the denseness of the rational numbers.

We need to show that given real number a and b we can construct 
a < m/n < b for some integers m and n.

We can assume that n > 0 without loss of generality. If our fraction 
m/n is to be negative, just let m be the negative number.

Since n > 0 we can multiply everything by n and we don't have to worry 
about flipping the inequality. Thus we need an < m < bn.

Since b > a we have b-a > 0 and so, by the Archimedean property, there 
exists a postive integer n such that n(b-a) > 1 (pick x = b-a and 
y = 1 in the statement of the Archimedean property above; we can do 
this since b-a and 1 are both greater than zero).

Since bn-an > 1 it is fairly evident that there is an integer m 
between an and bn. Does this make sense? If the difference between two 
numbers is greater than one unit (i.e., if two numbers are more than 
one unit apart), there must be an integer between them, since the 
integers are spaced *exactly* one unit apart. If this isn't clear, try 
to pick two numbers that are more than one unit apart such that there 
isn't an integer between them. I think you'll find yourself unable to 
do so.

Thus there exist integers m and n such that an < m < bn, which implies 

   a < m/n < b

- which was to be shown. Notice that this proof doesn't tell us how to 
find m/n. All it does is show that m/n exists. Such proofs are very 
common in higher mathematics.

- Doctor Paul, The Math Forum
  http://mathforum.org/dr.math/   
    
Associated Topics:
High School Number Theory

Search the Dr. Math Library:


Find items containing (put spaces between keywords):
 
Click only once for faster results:

[ Choose "whole words" when searching for a word like age.]

all keywords, in any order at least one, that exact phrase
parts of words whole words

Submit your own question to Dr. Math

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

_____________________________________
Math Forum Home || Math Library || Quick Reference || Math Forum Search
_____________________________________

Ask Dr. MathTM
© 1994-2013 The Math Forum
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/