Rational Numbers

Rational numbers sound like they should be very sensible numbers. In fact, they are. Rational numbers are simply numbers that can be written as fractions or ratios (this tells you where the term rational comes from). The hierarchy of real numbers looks something like this:

Real umbers: !ny number that can name a position on a number line is a real number. "very position on a number line can be named by a real number in some form. !n important property of real numbers is the #ensity $roperty. It says that between any two real numbers, there is always another real number. Rational umbers: !ny number that can be written in fraction form is a rational number. This includes integers, terminating decimals, and repeating decimals as well as fractions.

!n integer can be written as a fraction simply by giving it a denominator of one, so any integer is a rational number. % % ! terminating decimal can be written as a fraction simply by writing it the way you say it: &.'( ) three and seventy-five hundredths ) needed to produce a fraction: rational number. , then adding if

. *o, any terminating decimal is a

! repeating decimal can be written as a fraction using algebraic methods, so any repeating decimal is a rational number.

Integers: The counting numbers (+, ,, &, ...), their opposites ( +, ,, &, ...), and -ero are integers. ! common error for students in grade ' is to assume that the integers account for all (or only) negative numbers. .hole umbers: /ero and the positive integers are the whole numbers. atural umbers: !lso called the counting numbers, this set includes all of the whole numbers e0cept -ero (+, ,, &, ....) Irrational umbers: !ny real number that cannot be written in fraction form is an irrational number. These numbers include the non1terminating, non1repeating decimals (pi, 2.3(33((333(((3333((((..., ,, etc.). !ny s4uare root that is not a perfect root is an irrational number. 5or e0ample, + and 3 are rational because + ) + and 3 ) ,, but , and & are irrational1there are no perfect s4uares between + and 3. !ll four of these numbers do name points on the number line, but they cannot be written as fractions. .hen a decimal or fractional appro0imation for an irrational number is used to compute (as in finding the area of a circle), the answer is always appro0imate and should clearly indicate this.

http:66www.eduplace.com6math6mathsteps6'6a6inde0.html

Rational Numbers
+. .hat is a rational number7 !ny ordinary number of arithmetic: !ny whole number, fraction, mi0ed number or decimal% together with its negative image. ! rational number is a nameable number, in the sense that we can name it in the standard way that we name whole numbers, fractions and mi0ed numbers. 85ive,8 8*i0 thousand eight hundred nine,8 8 ine hundred twelve millionths,8 8Three and five1eighths.8 .hat is more, we can in principle (by "uclid 9I, :) place any rational number e0actly on the number line.

.e can say that we truly know a rational number. ,. .hich of the following numbers are rational7 , + ;< &= ; & 2 (. > &.+3+(:,<(&(>:':&,&>3<,<3& &

To see the answer, pass your mouse over the colored area. To cover the answer again, click 8Refresh8 (8Reload8). !ll of them? !ll decimals are rational. That long one is an appro0imation to @, which, as we will see below, is not e4ual to any decimal. &. ! rational number can always be written in what form7 !s a fraction a b , where a and b are integers (b 2).

!n integer itself can be written as a fraction: b ) +. !nd from arithmetic, we know that we can write a decimal as a fraction. .hen a and b are positive, that is, when they are natural numbers, then we can always name their ratio. Aence the term, rational number. !t this point, the student might wonder, .hat is a number that is not rational7

!n e0ample of such a number is (8*4uare root of ,8). It is not possible to name any whole number, any fraction or any decimal whose ' s4uare is ,. ( ' ' 3: ) ,( ( ( 11 which is almost ,. is close, because

To prove that there is no rational number whose s4uare is ,, suppose there were. Then we could e0press it as a fraction That is, suppose m m m )m ) ,. n n n n m But that is impossible. *ince n is in lowest terms, then m and n have m in lowest terms. n

no common divisors e0cept +. Therefore, m m and n n also have no common divisors 11 they are relatively prime 11 and it will be impossible to divide n n into m m and get , There is no rational number 11 no number of arithmetic 11 whose s4uare is ,. Therefore we call an irrational number. By recalling the $ythagorean theorem, we can see that irrational numbers are necessary. 5or if the sides of an isosceles right triangle are called +, then we will have +C D +C ) ,, so that the hypotenuse is . There really is a length that logically deserves the name, 8 .8 Inasmuch as numbers name the lengths of lines, then is a number. 3. .hich natural numbers have rational s4uare roots7 Enly the s4uare roots of the s4uare numbers% that is, the s4uare roots of the perfect squares. ) + Rational

Irrational Irrational ) , Rational , , , Irrational

) & Rational !nd so on. Enly the s4uare roots of s4uare numbers are rational. The e0istence of these irrationals was first reali-ed by $ythagoras in the <th century B.F. In the isosceles right triangle, he called the ratio of the hypotenuse to the side 8unnameable8 or 8speechless.8 Because if we ask, 8.hat ratio has the hypotenuse to the side78 11 we cannot say. .e can e0press it only as 8*4uare root of ,.8 (. *ay the name of each number. a) c) d) 8*4uare root of &.8 b) 8*4uare root of (.8

8,.8 This is a rational 11 nameable 11 number. 8*4uare root of &6(.8 e) 8,6&.8

In the same way we saw that only the s4uare roots of s4uare numbers are rational, we could prove that the only nth roots that are rational, are the nth roots of perfect nth powers. Thus, the (th root of &, is rational because &, is a (th power, namely the (th power of ,. But the (th root of && is irrational. && is not a perfect (th power.

http:66www.themathpage.com6a$reFalc6rational1irrational1numbers.htmGrational+

Rational Numbers
! rational number is a number that can be written as a simple fraction (i.e. as a ratio). "0ample 1.5 is a rational number because +.( ) 3/2 (it can be written as a fraction) Aere are some more e0amples: Number ( +.'( .22+ 2.+++... I, (s4uare root of ,) As a Fraction (6+ '63 +6+222 +6: 7 Rational? Hes Hes Hes Hes NO !

Eops? The s4uare root of , cannot be written as a simple fraction? !nd there are many more such numbers, and because they are not rational they are called Irrational.

Formal e!inition o! Rational Number

Jore formally we would say: A rational number is a number that can be in the form p/q where p and q are integers and q is not equal to zero. *o, a rational number is: p64 .here 4 is not -ero

Examples:
p " + + + , (( +22 + +222 p/" +6+ +6, ((6+22 +6+222 # + 2.( 2.(( 2.22+

,(& '

+2 2

,(&6+2 '62

,(.& No! $"$ can%t be &ero!

'sing Rational Numbers

If a rational number is still in the form 8p648 it can be a little difficult to use, so I have a special page on how to: !dd, *ubtract, Jultiply and #ivide Rational umbers

Pythagoras' Student
The ancient greek mathematician Pythagoras believed that all numbers were rational (could be written as a fraction), but one of his students Hippasus proved (using geometry, it is thought) that you could not represent the s4uare root of , as a fraction, and so it was irrational. Aowever Pythagoras could not accept the e0istence of irrational numbers, because he believed that all numbers had perfect values. But he could not disprove Hippasus' 8irrational numbers8 and so Aippasus was thrown overboard and drowned?

http:66www.mathsisfun.com6rational1numbers.html

Rational number
2008/9 S hools !i"ipedia Sele tion# Related sub$e ts: %athemati s
In mathematics, a rational number is a number which can be e0pressed as a ratio of two integers. on1integer rational numbers (commonly called fractions) are usually written as the vulgar fraction a 6 b, where b is not -ero. a is called the numerator, and b the denominator. "ach rational number can be written in infinitely many forms, such as & 6 < ) , 6 3 ) + 6 ,, but it is said to be in simplest form when a and b have no common divisors e0cept + (i.e., they are coprime). "very non1-ero rational number has e0actly one simplest form of this type with a positive denominator. ! fraction in this simplest form is said to be an irreducible fraction, or a fraction in reduced form. The decimal e0pansion of a rational number is eventually periodic (in the case of a finite e0pansion the -eroes which implicitly follow it form the periodic part). The same is true for any other integral base above one, and is also true when rational numbers are considered to be p1adic numbers rather than real numbers. Fonversely, if the e0pansion of a number for one base is periodic, it is periodic for all bases and the number is rational. ! real number that is not a rational number is called an irrational number.

Kuarters

The set of all rational numbers, which constitutes a field, is denoted builder notation, is defined as

. Lsing the set1

where

denotes the set of integers.

()e term rational

In the mathematical world, the adMective rational often means that the underlying field considered is the field of rational numbers. 5or e0ample, a rational integer is an algebraic integer which is also a rational number, which is to say, an ordinary integer, and a rational matri0 is a matri0 whose coefficients are rational numbers. Rational polynomial usually, and most correctly, means a polynomial with rational coefficients, also called a Npolynomial over the rationalsO. Aowever, rational function does not mean the underlying field is the rational numbers, and a rational algebraic curve is not an algebraic curve with rational coefficients.

Arit)metic
Two rational numbers a 6 b and c 6 d are e4ual if and only if ad ) bc. Two fractions are added as follows

The rule for multiplication is

!dditive and multiplicative inverses e0ist in the rational numbers

It follows that the 4uotient of two fractions is given by

*g+ptian !ractions
!ny positive rational number can be e0pressed as a sum of distinct reciprocals of positive integers, such as

5or any positive rational number, there are infinitely many different such representations, called Egyptian fractions, as they were used by the ancient "gyptians. The "gyptians also had a different notation for dyadic fractions.

Formal construction
Jathematically we may construct the rational numbers as e4uivalence classes of ordered pairs of integers , with b not e4ual to -ero. .e can define addition and multiplication of these pairs with the following rules:

and if c P 2, division by

The intuition is that

stands for the number denoted by the fraction

To

conform to our e0pectation that and denote the same number, we define an e4uivalence relation on these pairs with the following rule:

This e4uivalence relation is a congruence relation: it is compatible with the addition and multiplication defined above, and we may define , to be the 4uotient set of Q, i.e. we identify two pairs (a, b) and (c, d) if they are e4uivalent in the above sense. (This construction can be carried out in any integral domain: see field of fractions.) .e can also define a total order on , by writing

The integers may be considered to be rational numbers by the embedding that maps to where denotes the e4uivalence class having as a member.

-roperties

a diagram illustrating the countabililty of the rationals The set , together with the addition and multiplication operations shown above, forms a field, the field of fractions of the integers . The rationals are the smallest field with characteristic -ero: every other field of characteristic -ero contains a copy of . The rational numbers are therefore the prime field for characteristic -ero. The algebraic closure of algebraic numbers. , i.e. the field of roots of rational polynomials, is the

The set of all rational numbers is countable. *ince the set of all real numbers is uncountable, we say that almost all real numbers are irrational, in the sense of Rebesgue measure, i.e. the set of rational numbers is a null set. The rationals are a densely ordered set: between any two rationals, there sits another one, in fact infinitely many other ones. !ny totally ordered set which is countable, dense (in the above sense), and has no least or greatest element is order isomorphic to the rational numbers.

Real numbers and topological properties o! t)e rationals

The rationals are a dense subset of the real numbers: every real number has rational numbers arbitrarily close to it. ! related property is that rational numbers are the only numbers with finite e0pansions as regular continued fractions. By virtue of their order, the rationals carry an order topology. The rational numbers also carry a subspace topology. The rational numbers form a metric space by using the metric d( , y) ) S ; yS, and this yields a third topology on . !ll three topologies coincide and turn the rationals into a topological field. The rational numbers are an important e0ample of a space which is not locally compact. The rationals are characteri-ed topologically as the uni4ue countable metri-able space without isolated points. The space is also totally disconnected. The rational numbers do not form a complete metric space% the real numbers are the completion of .

p.adic numbers
In addition to the absolute value metric mentioned above, there are other metrics which turn into a topological field: Ret p be a prime number and for any non1-ero integer a let S a S p ) p ; n, where pn is the highest power of p dividing a%

In addition write S 2 S p ) 2. 5or any rational number , we set Then defines a metric on .

The metric space is not complete, and its completion is the p1adic number field . EstrowskiTs theorem states that any non1trivial absolute value on the rational numbers is e4uivalent to either the usual real absolute value or a p1adic absolute value. http:66schools1wikipedia.org6wp6r6RationalUnumber.htm

R&'()N&* N+%,ERS
TA" R!TIE !R LJB"R* are the numbers of everyday arithmetic. They are the numbers with which we count and actually measure. They are the whole numbers, the fractions, the mi0ed numbers and decimals. a .hy are they called rational7 .e have seen that every fraction b the same ratio to + as the numerator has to the denominator: a : + ) a : b. b !ny number that is to + in the same ratio as two natural numbers, we say is rational. But we can write any number of arithmetic as a fraction. ! whole number, such as < 11 we can write as < % we can write any + mi0ed number as a fraction% and we can write any decimal as a fraction. The rational numbers are simply the numbers of arithmetic. (In algebra, these numbers of arithmetic are e0tended to their negative images.) $roblem +. .hich of these numbers are rational7 + ( & > <V .22( :., +.<&32>+,3&' has

To see the answer, pass your mouse over the colored area. To cover the answer again, click 8Refresh8 (8Reload8). !ll of them? $roblem ,. .rite each of the following as a fraction. ( () + , <V ) ( 3 &( .&( ) :., +2 ) 2 : , + 2 +'&, +222

+.'&, )

$roblem &. To what does the word 8rational8 refer7 The ratio of two natural numbers.

The number line

.e use the rational numbers for measuring. Therefore we can think of a rational number as naming a distance from 2 along the number line. But will the rational numbers account for every distance from 27 .ill every length be a rational number of units7 To pursue that 4uestion, we have the following theorem.

Any two rational numbers have the same ratio as two natural numbers.
Theorem. That is true because: 5ractions with the same denominator have the same ratio as their numerators. !nd we can always e0press fractions with the same denominator. , "0ample +. ( : ( & ) ,:&

, (

is two thirds of

& . (

.e could prove that by multiplying both fractions by their common denominator. (Resson &.) , ( : & <

"0ample ,.

Aere, we can make the denominators the same. , ) & < 3

Therefore, , ( 3 ( : ) : ) 3:( & < < < "0ample &. , ( : & >

In this e0ample, we can choose a common denominator, & W > ) ,3. .e can then obtain the numerators by cross1multiplying:

.e can always e0press the ratio of two fractions by cross1multiplying. Fross1 multiplying gives the numerators of the common denominator. 3 ' : ) &< : &( ( : ) +2 : & + , to + & 7 3

"0ample 3.

"0ample (.

"0ample <. "0plicitly, what ratio has

"0plicitly means to verbally name that ratio. + Ans/er. "0plicitly, then, , & ) 3 , + : 3 & . 3 ' ) 3 : +3 ) , : '

: + + ,

is two sevenths of +

"0ample '. .& is to +.,3 in the same ratio as which two natural numbers7 Ans/er. .e can 8clear of decimals8 by multiplying both numbers by the same power of +2% in this case, +22: .& : +.,3 ) &2 : +,3

) +( : <,,

upon dividing by ,. .e have now established the theorem:

Any two rational numbers have the same ratio as two natural numbers.
$roblem 3. *how that these rational numbers have the same ratio as two natural numbers. ( ' : ) ( : '. The denominators are the same. : : + + ( : < ) +( : +< & & , & +3 : +(. Fross1 : ) multiply. ( ' & : > ' + 2 + ,: , ) 3:+ ) &2 : (< ) +( : ,> g) c) + & , & : ) : ),:& , 3 3 3 e) + + : ) &:, , & 3 , : ) +, : +> ) , : & : & , : ' ) ( : 3, < M) & :+ ) ,:&

a)

b)

d)

f)

h)

i)

k)

+ +: , ) ,:+

l)

> :+ ) >:( (

m)

> +: ( ) (:>

n) + : &

+ ) ,

+ :

' ),:' ,

o)

' < >

: (

( : ( ) (( : 32 ) ++ : ) ( > >

p)

& , 3

: &

+ ' ) + : ) ,, : ,> ) ++ : +3 , 3 ,

$roblem (. "0plicitly, what ratio has + to ,7 , b) 3 & c) + to , , + + is one fourth of ,. ,

a)

:,)+: 3.

3 , 3 , 7 : ) &< : < ) < : +. is si times . : & : & : + + + ( + ( , 7 + : ) : ) : ) ( : ,. , 3 , 3 3 , 3

+ 3 to

+ + + is two and a half times . 3 , $roblem <. *how that these rational numbers have the same ratio as two natural numbers. a) ., : .& ) , : & b) ., : .2& ) ,2 : & c) , : .2& ) ,22 : &

d) .2,( : + ) ,( : +222 ) + : 32 f) <.+ : <.2+ ) <+2 : <2+ +

e) .2,( : .2+ ) ,( : +2 ) ( : ,

$roblem '. ! loaf of bread weighs + pounds, and you want to cut off & half a pound% where will you cut the loaf7 + (Aint: .hat ratio has half a pound to + pounds7) &

+ ,

: +

+ ) &

+ 3 : ) & : >. Fut three eighths of the loaf. , &

http:66www.themathpage.com6aReal6rational1numbers.htm