• YOU can help the next generation of students in the community!
    Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page

Another challenge question: Irrationality of e (1 Viewer)

k02033

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Messages
239
Location
Parramatta
Gender
Male
HSC
2007




so


clearly



factorizing gives



therefore



since

Now



where



therefore



as required
 

shaon0

...
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
2,029
Location
Guess
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
more like forgot my discrete maths already, but yea i will run with the lame late excuse.
e-Sn=1/(n+1)!+...
So, 0<1/(n+2)!+...<1/(n(n+1)!)
Does the above help?
The proof is long-winded. It could've been proved a lot quicker if there was an "otherwise."
 

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,662
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Nice work with the inequality, and yes contradiction is pretty much the only way to go for the second part. Its not very long, just a little tricky.

Hint: Consider the proven inequality for certain special partial sums.
 
Last edited:

k02033

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Messages
239
Location
Parramatta
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
:( underestimated the question, i tried to look at specific sums and using the good old gcd contradiction, doesnt seem to work...
 

shaon0

...
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
2,029
Location
Guess
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Is e E (0,1/q) where e=p/q? And, this is a weird idea but is it legit to consider e as the magnitude of error between the bounds (ie. a distance)?
 
Last edited:

k02033

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Messages
239
Location
Parramatta
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
ha ha the answer is funny, its so obvious

Theorem: e is irrational.

Proof by contradiction:

Let where p,q, are positive integers.

From part 1 we know



Now let n=q and multiply throughout by q! gives



Now the middle term is an integer! And you cant have an integer satisfying that inequality therefore e is irrational, as required. I was way too stubborn with the gcd approach, 20 pages of trial and error ...
 
Last edited:

shaon0

...
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
2,029
Location
Guess
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
ha ha the answer is funny, its so obvious

Theorem: e is irrational.

Proof by contradiction:

Let where p,q, are positive integers.

From part 1 we know



Now let n=q and multiply throughout by q! gives



Now the middle term is an integer! And you cant have an integer satisfying that inequality therefore e is irrational, as required. I was way too stubborn with the gcd approach, 20 pages of trial and error ...
Fuck! I essentially had the last line but didn't deduce anything from it, so i chucked the paper in the bin :( Kudos, k02033. I would rep you again but need to spread the rep.
 

k02033

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Messages
239
Location
Parramatta
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Fuck! I literally, had the last line but didn't deduce anything from it, so i chucked the paper in the bin :( Kudos, k02033. I would rep you again but need to spread the rep.
yay! i had it ages ago too, how embarrassing hahhaha ( i threw my pen couple of times)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top