Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Mathematics
General TopicsResearchOperations ResearchStatisticsMathematical LogicNumerical AnalysisUndergraduate MathAlgebra HelpRecreational Math
Math Software
MapleMathematicaMATLABScilabSASSPSS

Math Forum / Mathematics / Undergraduate Math / August 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

finding a rational number between a rational and irrational

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
actuarynrt - 26 Aug 2007 03:12 GMT
I've been getting great help here in this discussion forum.

The question I have is:
Find a rational number between 3.14159 and π.

I am thinking i could just select some number slightly larger than 3.14159 like 3.141591 and that would be it; because π is approximately equal to 3.14592654...

Am I correct in selecting 3.141591 as an answer? My text doesn't give an answer (I'm assuming because there could be many).

Thanks.

John
actuarynrt - 26 Aug 2007 03:14 GMT
Oops...

the ? should actually be Pi

Looking for a number between 3.14159 and Pi
Virgil - 26 Aug 2007 04:20 GMT
In article
<12525364.1188094408997.JavaMail.jakarta@nitrogen.mathforum.org>,

> I've been getting great help here in this discussion forum.
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Am I correct in selecting 3.141591 as an answer? My text doesn't give an
> answer (I'm assuming because there could be many).

Your value is one of infinitely many rationals between them.
Jeremy Watts - 26 Aug 2007 13:09 GMT
> I've been getting great help here in this discussion forum.
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Am I correct in selecting 3.141591 as an answer? My text doesn't give an
> answer (I'm assuming because there could be many).

Do you mean 'irrational' rather than rational?  Because as Virgil pointed
out there will be infinitely many rationals between 3.141591 and pi, you
could take your pick...

If you meant irrational then 15001/15000 * cuberoot (31)  is approximately
equal to 3.14159008, and is irrational and lies between 3.14159 and pi.

Jeremy Watts

> Thanks.
>
> John
The Qurqirish Dragon - 26 Aug 2007 14:48 GMT
> I've been getting great help here in this discussion forum.
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> John

As others have stated, there are an infinite number of solutions for
this sort of problem. One way to get an answer is the way you did it:
1) List the digits of the decimal expansion of both the given rational
and irrational numbers, until there is a difference.
2) Extend your number by choosing digits until it is between the
givens (generally this should only take 2 more digits at most, but you
might have a 49999999 vs. 50000000 situation that needs more digits)
3) If you need a rational, stop here. If you need an irrational,
append here any irrational sequence of digits (e.g.
101001000100001....)
Dana - 26 Aug 2007 17:07 GMT
> Find a rational number between 3.14159 and ?.
> Am I correct in selecting 3.141591 as an answer?

I would say "no", as 3.14... is not a Rational Number.
The obvious answer is any number between 0 and Pi - 3.141591.
Here's a different approach at a typical computer' precision.

Here's your number:
num = 314159/100000

Let' turn the difference into a ratio:
Rationalize[N[Pi - num]]

199421 / 75151404527

This should be the thightest ratio we can get on our computer.
This works:
num + 199420./75151404527 < Pi
True

But this is a hair too high.
num + 199421./75151404527 < Pi
False

Since there are an infinit solutions to a/b < Pi-num,
what if we picked "b", and found the range for a?
(n-Numerator,  d-denominator)

Reduce[n/d < 199421/75151404527, n][[2]]
n < (199421*d)/75151404527

Here, given a denominator 'd, we can find the range for 'a
Suppose we want to use a denominator of 1,000,000.

(199421*d)/75151404527 /. d -> 1000000

2.6535897932333796

Our numerator must be <2.6, or basically, 1 or 2.
Hence, 2/1,000,000 is ok.

num + 2./1000000 < Pi

True

but we now know this should be too high.
num + 3./1000000 < Pi

False

If we reverse the above equation, we find that the denominator must be >=
376,848
Signature

Dana

> I've been getting great help here in this discussion forum.
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> John
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2010 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.