What is wrong with this proof? Claim: $\ln(2)$ is rational.

224 Views Asked by At

Claim: $\ln 2$ is a rational number. (Note that $\ln 2 = 1 - \frac12 + \frac13 - \frac14 + \cdots + \frac{(-1)^{n+1}}n = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{n+1}}n$). This is done by proving that $\ln 2 = 1 - \frac12 + \frac13 - \frac14 + \cdots + \frac{(-1)^{n+1}}n$ is rational.

Proof by induction on $n$:

Base case:

$n = 1$: 1 is obviously rational.

Inductive hypothesis:

Suppose that $1 - \frac12 + \frac13 - \frac14 + \cdots + \frac{(-1)^{k+1}}k$ is rational.

Inductive step:

We need to show that $1 - \frac12 + \frac13 - \frac14 + \cdots + \frac{(-1)^{k+2}}{k+1}$ is a rational number. Observe that $1 - \frac12 + \frac13 - \frac14 + \cdots + \frac{(-1)^{k+2}}{k+1} = (1 - \frac12 + \frac13 - \frac14 + \cdots + \frac{(-1)^{k+1}}k) + \frac{(-1)^{k+2}}{k+1}$. By the induction hypothesis, $1 - \frac12 + \frac13 - \frac14 + \cdots + \frac{(-1)^{k+1}}k$ is a rational number. Furthermore, $\frac{(-1)^{k+2}}{k+1}$ is a rational number, as it can be expressed as a fraction. Thus, summing two rational numbers will result in another rational number, and by induction we have proven that $\ln 2$ is rational.

My thoughts are

  • First, in the inductive step, we should state that this holds for some $n$.
  • Second, we know that $\ln(2)$ is irrational.
  • This seems really sound, but I just can't find the mistake in the induction proof.

Any thoughts?

2

There are 2 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

What the induction proves (somewhat verbosely, possibly to hide that not much is really happening) is that each of the partial sums is a rational number, which is true.

But $\log 2$ is the limit of the partial sums, and the limit of a sequence of rationals is not necessarily rational.


In fact, it is well known that every real number is the sum of a series of rationals. For example,

$$ \pi = 3 + \frac{1}{10} + \frac{4}{100} + \frac{1}{1000} + \frac{5}{10000} + \frac{9}{100000} + \cdots $$

0
On

You proved that every partial sum is rational, that is, $\log(2)$ is the limit of a rational sequence. But the rational numbers set is not closed in the real numbers set, it means that exists sequences of rational numbers that converge to a irrational number.

In this case, the rational sequence of the partial sums converge to irrational limit $\log(2)$.