Question
Prove that is irrational.
Solution — Step by Step
Suppose, for contradiction, that is rational.
Then we can write where are integers, , and the fraction is in lowest terms (gcd).
By the definition of logarithm:
Raising both sides to the power :
The equation says a power of 2 equals a power of 3.
The left side, , has only 2 as a prime factor. Its prime factorisation is .
The right side, , has only 3 as a prime factor. Its prime factorisation is .
For these to be equal, both sides must have the same prime factorisation. But contains only the prime 2, while contains only the prime 3. These cannot be equal unless both are 1 (i.e., ).
But would mean , which implies , i.e., — a contradiction.
So has no solution with positive integers . This contradicts our assumption.
Since assuming is rational leads to a contradiction, must be irrational.
Why This Works
The proof relies on the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic: every integer greater than 1 has a unique prime factorisation. Since 2 and 3 are different primes, no power of 2 can equal a power of 3 (except , but that would require , which doesn’t work).
More generally: is irrational whenever and are “multiplicatively independent” — when there are no integers such that .
Alternative Method — Elegant One-Liner
By unique factorisation: the left side is even, the right side is odd. An even number cannot equal an odd number. Contradiction. ✓
This version is cleaner for exams — works because 2 is even and 3 is odd.
Common Mistake
A common error in proof by contradiction: students assume but then forget to check what constraints and must satisfy. The key is that are positive integers (since ). If we allowed , that’s a trivial case that’s easily ruled out separately.
The same proof technique works for many similar irrationality proofs: , , (check: — same argument). The method fails for (rational!) because — here both have the same prime base (2).