FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282  
283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   >>   >|  
I think it right to give the proof that the ratio of the circumference to the diameter is incommensurable. This method of proof was given by Lambert,[672] in the _Berlin Memoirs_ for 1761, and has been also given in the notes to Legendre's[673] Geometry, and to the English translation of the same. Though not elementary algebra, it is within the reach of a student of ordinary books.[674] Let a continued fraction, such as a ----- b + c ----- d + e - f + etc., be abbreviated into a/b+ c/d+ e/f+ etc.: each fraction being understood as falling down to the side of the preceding sign +. In every such fraction we may suppose b, d, f, etc. {368} positive; a, c, e, &c. being as required: and all are supposed integers. If this succession be continued ad infinitum, and if a/b, c/d, e/f, etc. all lie between -1 and +1, exclusive, the limit of the fraction must be incommensurable with unity; that is, cannot be A/B, where A and B are integers. First, whatever this limit may be, it lies between -1 and +1. This is obviously the case with any fraction p/(q + [omega]), where [omega] is between +-1: for, p/q, being < 1, and p and q integer, cannot be brought up to 1, by the value of [omega]. Hence, if we take any of the fractions a/b, a/b+ c/d, a/b+ c/d+ e/f, etc. say a/b+ c/d+ e/f+ g/h we have, g/h being between +-1, so is e/f+ g/h, so therefore is c/d+ e/f+ g/h; and so therefore is a/b+ c/d+ e/f+ g/h. Now, if possible, let a/b+ c/d+ etc. be A/B at the limit; A and B being integers. Let P = A c/d+ e/f+ etc., Q = P e/f+ g/h+ etc., R = Q g/h + i/k + etc. P, Q, R, etc. being integer or fractional, as may be. It is easily shown that all must be integer: for {369} A/B = a/b+ P/A, or, P = aB - bA P/A = c/d+ Q/P, or, Q = cA - dP Q/P = e/f+ R/Q, or, R = eP - fQ etc., etc. Now, since a, B, b, A, are integers, so also is P; and thence Q; and thence R, etc. But since A/B, P/A, Q/P, R/Q, etc. are all between -1 and +1, it follows that the unlimited succession of integers P, Q, R, are each less in numerical value than the preceding. Now there can be no such _unlimited_ succession of _descending_ integers: consequently, it is impossible that a/b+ c/d+, etc. can have a commensurable limit. It easily follows that the continued fraction is incommensurable if a/b, c/d, etc., being at first greater than unity, become and continue less than unity after some one point. Say t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282  
283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
fraction
 

integers

 

continued

 

succession

 

incommensurable

 

integer

 

easily

 

unlimited


preceding

 

fractional

 

Geometry

 

English

 

translation

 
Legendre
 
continue
 

greater


commensurable

 

impossible

 

numerical

 

Memoirs

 

descending

 

Berlin

 

abbreviated

 
circumference

supposed

 

infinitum

 
exclusive
 

method

 

diameter

 

required

 

falling

 

understood


positive

 
suppose
 
elementary
 
brought
 

algebra

 
fractions
 

ordinary

 

Lambert


student

 

Though