Matpic
mathematics, in pictures
Series

Irrationality — the series

7 essays on one idea, from the one that introduces it to the one that assumes the rest.
  1. Two squares of side 12 inside one of side 17. Two overlapping squares laid into opposite corners of a larger one, with the overlap and the two uncovered corners marked.

    The square that cannot shrink

    The usual proof that the square root of two is irrational is about even and odd numbers. There is a proof about squares instead, in which a supposed solution is folded into a smaller one — and the folding is a drawing.

    part 1 · number
  2. Every candidate for a rational square root, tried. A column for each of 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, listing the whole numbers that divide it with their squares, and the verdict the search returns.

    Which roots refuse to be fractions

    The square root of two is not a fraction, and neither is the square root of three, five, six or seven. The rule behind the list turns an infinite question into a search over the divisors of a single number — and the search finishes.

    part 2 · number
  3. The tail that would have to be a whole number. For each denominator, the value of q! times the tail of the series for e, plotted against the band between zero and one where no whole number lies, with the bound 1/q above it.

    A tail too small to be a whole number

    If e were a fraction with denominator q, then q! times e would be a whole number. It splits into a whole part and a tail, the tail is squeezed strictly between nothing and one, and there is no whole number there.

    part 3 · number
  4. The polynomial that squeezes π. On the left, xⁿ(π − x)ⁿ/n! drawn at several degrees, its largest value falling toward nothing; on the right, the derivatives of the same polynomial at zero, every one a whole number.

    An integral that cannot be a whole number

    Niven's proof that π is not a fraction is the same squeeze as the one for e, with a much harder multiplier. A polynomial supplies the whole number; its own smallness supplies the contradiction; and both halves are computable.

    part 4 · number
  5. How closely a fraction can come, and the barrier that says no closer. Two panels at very different scales: the approximations to √2, which stay above the barrier a degree-two number obeys, and the truncations of a constructed number, which fall below every barrier drawn.

    Approached too fast to be algebraic

    An algebraic number of degree d cannot be approached by fractions faster than the denominator's dth power. So a number that is approached faster than that is the root of no polynomial at all — and one can be built by choosing where its decimal digits go.

    part 5 · number
  6. The tangent built from a continued fraction. The curve tan x on (−1.55, 1.55) with 4 of Lambert's convergents: a straight line, then rational curves that bend ever closer to the tangent and follow it towards its poles.

    The fraction Lambert built for the tangent

    The first proof that π is not a fraction, from 1761, does not look at π at all. It writes the tangent as an endless continued fraction, shows that the fraction's value at any rational point other than zero cannot be rational — because its tails are trapped between nothing and one — and then notes that tan(π/4) = 1.

    part 6 · number
  7. The continued fraction of e. Bars for the first 30 continued-fraction terms of e: mostly ones, with every third bar rising in a straight staircase, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 4, 1, 1, 6, ….

    The pattern in e's continued fraction

    Written as a continued fraction, e is 2; 1, 2, 1, 1, 4, 1, 1, 6, 1, 1, 8 — two ones, then the next even number, for ever. Euler found the pattern and proved it with a differential equation. A proof from 2006 needs only three integrals, each of which turns out to be exactly the error of one of e's own convergents.

    part 7 · number

All series