Proof that $mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})cupmathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})$ is not a subfield of $mathbb{R}$











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Í already have found a proof About the statment which I did not understand, I will write it down, so maybe someone can explain me the part that I did not understand. But if there are easier ways to prove the statement I would be delighted to know.



$alpha:=sqrt{2}+sqrt{3}notin U:= mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})cupmathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})iffalpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})$ and $alpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})$



Proof: $alpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})$



Assume $exists_{r,sin mathbb{Q}}r+ssqrt{2}=sqrt{2}+sqrt{3}$



$iff sqrt{3}=r+(s-1)sqrt2$



$iff 3=r^2+2r(s-1)sqrt2+2(s-1)^2$



Which implicates $3=0$ or $sqrt3in mathbb{Q}$ or $sqrt{3/2}in mathbb{Q}$ or $sqrt{2}in mathbb{Q}$



I don't understand the last implication, I Need some help here.



Many Thanks










share|cite|improve this question






















  • I would really like to understand the last implication
    – RM777
    15 hours ago















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Í already have found a proof About the statment which I did not understand, I will write it down, so maybe someone can explain me the part that I did not understand. But if there are easier ways to prove the statement I would be delighted to know.



$alpha:=sqrt{2}+sqrt{3}notin U:= mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})cupmathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})iffalpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})$ and $alpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})$



Proof: $alpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})$



Assume $exists_{r,sin mathbb{Q}}r+ssqrt{2}=sqrt{2}+sqrt{3}$



$iff sqrt{3}=r+(s-1)sqrt2$



$iff 3=r^2+2r(s-1)sqrt2+2(s-1)^2$



Which implicates $3=0$ or $sqrt3in mathbb{Q}$ or $sqrt{3/2}in mathbb{Q}$ or $sqrt{2}in mathbb{Q}$



I don't understand the last implication, I Need some help here.



Many Thanks










share|cite|improve this question






















  • I would really like to understand the last implication
    – RM777
    15 hours ago













up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











Í already have found a proof About the statment which I did not understand, I will write it down, so maybe someone can explain me the part that I did not understand. But if there are easier ways to prove the statement I would be delighted to know.



$alpha:=sqrt{2}+sqrt{3}notin U:= mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})cupmathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})iffalpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})$ and $alpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})$



Proof: $alpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})$



Assume $exists_{r,sin mathbb{Q}}r+ssqrt{2}=sqrt{2}+sqrt{3}$



$iff sqrt{3}=r+(s-1)sqrt2$



$iff 3=r^2+2r(s-1)sqrt2+2(s-1)^2$



Which implicates $3=0$ or $sqrt3in mathbb{Q}$ or $sqrt{3/2}in mathbb{Q}$ or $sqrt{2}in mathbb{Q}$



I don't understand the last implication, I Need some help here.



Many Thanks










share|cite|improve this question













Í already have found a proof About the statment which I did not understand, I will write it down, so maybe someone can explain me the part that I did not understand. But if there are easier ways to prove the statement I would be delighted to know.



$alpha:=sqrt{2}+sqrt{3}notin U:= mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})cupmathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})iffalpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})$ and $alpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{3})$



Proof: $alpha notin mathbb{Q}(sqrt{2})$



Assume $exists_{r,sin mathbb{Q}}r+ssqrt{2}=sqrt{2}+sqrt{3}$



$iff sqrt{3}=r+(s-1)sqrt2$



$iff 3=r^2+2r(s-1)sqrt2+2(s-1)^2$



Which implicates $3=0$ or $sqrt3in mathbb{Q}$ or $sqrt{3/2}in mathbb{Q}$ or $sqrt{2}in mathbb{Q}$



I don't understand the last implication, I Need some help here.



Many Thanks







abstract-algebra






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 15 hours ago









RM777

1158




1158












  • I would really like to understand the last implication
    – RM777
    15 hours ago


















  • I would really like to understand the last implication
    – RM777
    15 hours ago
















I would really like to understand the last implication
– RM777
15 hours ago




I would really like to understand the last implication
– RM777
15 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










We know that any element of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ can be uniquely written as $a + b sqrt{2}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Q}$ (the unicity is important). So, if $alpha in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$, then so does $alpha - sqrt{2} = sqrt{3} in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$. So you can write $sqrt{3} = r + s sqrt{2}$. Squaring that equality, we get



$$3 = (r^2 + 2 s^2) + 2rs sqrt{2} $$



By unicity, the number $3$ can be uniquely written as $3 + 0 sqrt{2}$, so in the right hand side we get $r^2 + 2 s^2 = 3$ and $2rs=0$. From $rs = 0$ we get that $r=0$ or $s = 0$. If $s=0$, then $r^2 = 3$, which is impossible since $r$ is rational. And if $r = 0$, then $2s^2=3$ so $s^2 = frac{3}{2}$, which is also impossible since $s$ is rational. So in summary, $sqrt{3}$ is not in $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    3
    down vote













    Well, $alphanotin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$ is equivalent to $sqrt 3notin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$.
    On the contrary, $sqrt 3 = a+bsqrt 2$ for some rational numbers $a,b$. Squaring gives $3 = a^2+2absqrt 2 + 2b^2$. Then $sqrt 2$ could be written as a rational number, which is impossible as it is irrational.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • This only holds if you assume $ab ne 0$. You still have to consider the case $ab=0$ and derive a contradiction from that.
      – Joel Cohen
      14 hours ago










    • Indeed, but the cases either $a=0$ or $b=0$ are easy.
      – Wuestenfux
      14 hours ago


















    up vote
    3
    down vote













    Me neither - but if $r(s-1) neq 0$ you can rewrite the last equation to obtain $$mathbb{Q} ni frac{3-r^2-2(s-1)^2}{2r(s-1)} = sqrt{2} notin mathbb{Q},$$ a contradiction. If $s=1$ we have $3=r^2$, if $r=0$ the equation reads $3=2(s-1)^2$ - both is impossible because of the uniqueness of prime factorization.






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • You have to assume that $r(s-1) ne 0$ to do that. Which then leaves the case $r(s-1) = 0$ to be considered.
      – Joel Cohen
      14 hours ago










    • You're right of course, edited my answer.
      – Stockfish
      11 hours ago


















    up vote
    2
    down vote













    Instead of that just try to check is this $U:=mathbb{Q}(sqrt 2)cup mathbb{Q}(sqrt 3)$ a Group?



    Let us take $sqrt2,sqrt3in U$ [Both exists] but $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U$.



    So definitely it cannot be a Subfield of $mathbb{R}$.






    share|cite|improve this answer





















    • Yes that's exactly what I want to prove $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U $
      – RM777
      15 hours ago










    • Alright! Note that: $sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)={a+bsqrt2:a,binmathbb{Q}}$ and so $sqrt2+sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)$ Further, if we assume $sqrt3=a+bsqrt2$ the $3=a^2+2b^2$ and $2ab=0$ gives the contradiction.
      – Sujit Bhattacharyya
      15 hours ago













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019882%2fproof-that-mathbbq-sqrt2-cup-mathbbq-sqrt3-is-not-a-subfield-of%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    2
    down vote



    accepted










    We know that any element of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ can be uniquely written as $a + b sqrt{2}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Q}$ (the unicity is important). So, if $alpha in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$, then so does $alpha - sqrt{2} = sqrt{3} in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$. So you can write $sqrt{3} = r + s sqrt{2}$. Squaring that equality, we get



    $$3 = (r^2 + 2 s^2) + 2rs sqrt{2} $$



    By unicity, the number $3$ can be uniquely written as $3 + 0 sqrt{2}$, so in the right hand side we get $r^2 + 2 s^2 = 3$ and $2rs=0$. From $rs = 0$ we get that $r=0$ or $s = 0$. If $s=0$, then $r^2 = 3$, which is impossible since $r$ is rational. And if $r = 0$, then $2s^2=3$ so $s^2 = frac{3}{2}$, which is also impossible since $s$ is rational. So in summary, $sqrt{3}$ is not in $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.






    share|cite|improve this answer

























      up vote
      2
      down vote



      accepted










      We know that any element of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ can be uniquely written as $a + b sqrt{2}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Q}$ (the unicity is important). So, if $alpha in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$, then so does $alpha - sqrt{2} = sqrt{3} in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$. So you can write $sqrt{3} = r + s sqrt{2}$. Squaring that equality, we get



      $$3 = (r^2 + 2 s^2) + 2rs sqrt{2} $$



      By unicity, the number $3$ can be uniquely written as $3 + 0 sqrt{2}$, so in the right hand side we get $r^2 + 2 s^2 = 3$ and $2rs=0$. From $rs = 0$ we get that $r=0$ or $s = 0$. If $s=0$, then $r^2 = 3$, which is impossible since $r$ is rational. And if $r = 0$, then $2s^2=3$ so $s^2 = frac{3}{2}$, which is also impossible since $s$ is rational. So in summary, $sqrt{3}$ is not in $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.






      share|cite|improve this answer























        up vote
        2
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        2
        down vote



        accepted






        We know that any element of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ can be uniquely written as $a + b sqrt{2}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Q}$ (the unicity is important). So, if $alpha in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$, then so does $alpha - sqrt{2} = sqrt{3} in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$. So you can write $sqrt{3} = r + s sqrt{2}$. Squaring that equality, we get



        $$3 = (r^2 + 2 s^2) + 2rs sqrt{2} $$



        By unicity, the number $3$ can be uniquely written as $3 + 0 sqrt{2}$, so in the right hand side we get $r^2 + 2 s^2 = 3$ and $2rs=0$. From $rs = 0$ we get that $r=0$ or $s = 0$. If $s=0$, then $r^2 = 3$, which is impossible since $r$ is rational. And if $r = 0$, then $2s^2=3$ so $s^2 = frac{3}{2}$, which is also impossible since $s$ is rational. So in summary, $sqrt{3}$ is not in $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        We know that any element of $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$ can be uniquely written as $a + b sqrt{2}$ with $a, b in mathbb{Q}$ (the unicity is important). So, if $alpha in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$, then so does $alpha - sqrt{2} = sqrt{3} in mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$. So you can write $sqrt{3} = r + s sqrt{2}$. Squaring that equality, we get



        $$3 = (r^2 + 2 s^2) + 2rs sqrt{2} $$



        By unicity, the number $3$ can be uniquely written as $3 + 0 sqrt{2}$, so in the right hand side we get $r^2 + 2 s^2 = 3$ and $2rs=0$. From $rs = 0$ we get that $r=0$ or $s = 0$. If $s=0$, then $r^2 = 3$, which is impossible since $r$ is rational. And if $r = 0$, then $2s^2=3$ so $s^2 = frac{3}{2}$, which is also impossible since $s$ is rational. So in summary, $sqrt{3}$ is not in $mathbb{Q}[sqrt{2}]$.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 15 hours ago









        Joel Cohen

        7,24412037




        7,24412037






















            up vote
            3
            down vote













            Well, $alphanotin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$ is equivalent to $sqrt 3notin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$.
            On the contrary, $sqrt 3 = a+bsqrt 2$ for some rational numbers $a,b$. Squaring gives $3 = a^2+2absqrt 2 + 2b^2$. Then $sqrt 2$ could be written as a rational number, which is impossible as it is irrational.






            share|cite|improve this answer





















            • This only holds if you assume $ab ne 0$. You still have to consider the case $ab=0$ and derive a contradiction from that.
              – Joel Cohen
              14 hours ago










            • Indeed, but the cases either $a=0$ or $b=0$ are easy.
              – Wuestenfux
              14 hours ago















            up vote
            3
            down vote













            Well, $alphanotin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$ is equivalent to $sqrt 3notin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$.
            On the contrary, $sqrt 3 = a+bsqrt 2$ for some rational numbers $a,b$. Squaring gives $3 = a^2+2absqrt 2 + 2b^2$. Then $sqrt 2$ could be written as a rational number, which is impossible as it is irrational.






            share|cite|improve this answer





















            • This only holds if you assume $ab ne 0$. You still have to consider the case $ab=0$ and derive a contradiction from that.
              – Joel Cohen
              14 hours ago










            • Indeed, but the cases either $a=0$ or $b=0$ are easy.
              – Wuestenfux
              14 hours ago













            up vote
            3
            down vote










            up vote
            3
            down vote









            Well, $alphanotin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$ is equivalent to $sqrt 3notin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$.
            On the contrary, $sqrt 3 = a+bsqrt 2$ for some rational numbers $a,b$. Squaring gives $3 = a^2+2absqrt 2 + 2b^2$. Then $sqrt 2$ could be written as a rational number, which is impossible as it is irrational.






            share|cite|improve this answer












            Well, $alphanotin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$ is equivalent to $sqrt 3notin {Bbb Q}(sqrt 2)$.
            On the contrary, $sqrt 3 = a+bsqrt 2$ for some rational numbers $a,b$. Squaring gives $3 = a^2+2absqrt 2 + 2b^2$. Then $sqrt 2$ could be written as a rational number, which is impossible as it is irrational.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 15 hours ago









            Wuestenfux

            2,6621410




            2,6621410












            • This only holds if you assume $ab ne 0$. You still have to consider the case $ab=0$ and derive a contradiction from that.
              – Joel Cohen
              14 hours ago










            • Indeed, but the cases either $a=0$ or $b=0$ are easy.
              – Wuestenfux
              14 hours ago


















            • This only holds if you assume $ab ne 0$. You still have to consider the case $ab=0$ and derive a contradiction from that.
              – Joel Cohen
              14 hours ago










            • Indeed, but the cases either $a=0$ or $b=0$ are easy.
              – Wuestenfux
              14 hours ago
















            This only holds if you assume $ab ne 0$. You still have to consider the case $ab=0$ and derive a contradiction from that.
            – Joel Cohen
            14 hours ago




            This only holds if you assume $ab ne 0$. You still have to consider the case $ab=0$ and derive a contradiction from that.
            – Joel Cohen
            14 hours ago












            Indeed, but the cases either $a=0$ or $b=0$ are easy.
            – Wuestenfux
            14 hours ago




            Indeed, but the cases either $a=0$ or $b=0$ are easy.
            – Wuestenfux
            14 hours ago










            up vote
            3
            down vote













            Me neither - but if $r(s-1) neq 0$ you can rewrite the last equation to obtain $$mathbb{Q} ni frac{3-r^2-2(s-1)^2}{2r(s-1)} = sqrt{2} notin mathbb{Q},$$ a contradiction. If $s=1$ we have $3=r^2$, if $r=0$ the equation reads $3=2(s-1)^2$ - both is impossible because of the uniqueness of prime factorization.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • You have to assume that $r(s-1) ne 0$ to do that. Which then leaves the case $r(s-1) = 0$ to be considered.
              – Joel Cohen
              14 hours ago










            • You're right of course, edited my answer.
              – Stockfish
              11 hours ago















            up vote
            3
            down vote













            Me neither - but if $r(s-1) neq 0$ you can rewrite the last equation to obtain $$mathbb{Q} ni frac{3-r^2-2(s-1)^2}{2r(s-1)} = sqrt{2} notin mathbb{Q},$$ a contradiction. If $s=1$ we have $3=r^2$, if $r=0$ the equation reads $3=2(s-1)^2$ - both is impossible because of the uniqueness of prime factorization.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • You have to assume that $r(s-1) ne 0$ to do that. Which then leaves the case $r(s-1) = 0$ to be considered.
              – Joel Cohen
              14 hours ago










            • You're right of course, edited my answer.
              – Stockfish
              11 hours ago













            up vote
            3
            down vote










            up vote
            3
            down vote









            Me neither - but if $r(s-1) neq 0$ you can rewrite the last equation to obtain $$mathbb{Q} ni frac{3-r^2-2(s-1)^2}{2r(s-1)} = sqrt{2} notin mathbb{Q},$$ a contradiction. If $s=1$ we have $3=r^2$, if $r=0$ the equation reads $3=2(s-1)^2$ - both is impossible because of the uniqueness of prime factorization.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            Me neither - but if $r(s-1) neq 0$ you can rewrite the last equation to obtain $$mathbb{Q} ni frac{3-r^2-2(s-1)^2}{2r(s-1)} = sqrt{2} notin mathbb{Q},$$ a contradiction. If $s=1$ we have $3=r^2$, if $r=0$ the equation reads $3=2(s-1)^2$ - both is impossible because of the uniqueness of prime factorization.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited 11 hours ago

























            answered 15 hours ago









            Stockfish

            44726




            44726












            • You have to assume that $r(s-1) ne 0$ to do that. Which then leaves the case $r(s-1) = 0$ to be considered.
              – Joel Cohen
              14 hours ago










            • You're right of course, edited my answer.
              – Stockfish
              11 hours ago


















            • You have to assume that $r(s-1) ne 0$ to do that. Which then leaves the case $r(s-1) = 0$ to be considered.
              – Joel Cohen
              14 hours ago










            • You're right of course, edited my answer.
              – Stockfish
              11 hours ago
















            You have to assume that $r(s-1) ne 0$ to do that. Which then leaves the case $r(s-1) = 0$ to be considered.
            – Joel Cohen
            14 hours ago




            You have to assume that $r(s-1) ne 0$ to do that. Which then leaves the case $r(s-1) = 0$ to be considered.
            – Joel Cohen
            14 hours ago












            You're right of course, edited my answer.
            – Stockfish
            11 hours ago




            You're right of course, edited my answer.
            – Stockfish
            11 hours ago










            up vote
            2
            down vote













            Instead of that just try to check is this $U:=mathbb{Q}(sqrt 2)cup mathbb{Q}(sqrt 3)$ a Group?



            Let us take $sqrt2,sqrt3in U$ [Both exists] but $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U$.



            So definitely it cannot be a Subfield of $mathbb{R}$.






            share|cite|improve this answer





















            • Yes that's exactly what I want to prove $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U $
              – RM777
              15 hours ago










            • Alright! Note that: $sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)={a+bsqrt2:a,binmathbb{Q}}$ and so $sqrt2+sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)$ Further, if we assume $sqrt3=a+bsqrt2$ the $3=a^2+2b^2$ and $2ab=0$ gives the contradiction.
              – Sujit Bhattacharyya
              15 hours ago

















            up vote
            2
            down vote













            Instead of that just try to check is this $U:=mathbb{Q}(sqrt 2)cup mathbb{Q}(sqrt 3)$ a Group?



            Let us take $sqrt2,sqrt3in U$ [Both exists] but $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U$.



            So definitely it cannot be a Subfield of $mathbb{R}$.






            share|cite|improve this answer





















            • Yes that's exactly what I want to prove $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U $
              – RM777
              15 hours ago










            • Alright! Note that: $sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)={a+bsqrt2:a,binmathbb{Q}}$ and so $sqrt2+sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)$ Further, if we assume $sqrt3=a+bsqrt2$ the $3=a^2+2b^2$ and $2ab=0$ gives the contradiction.
              – Sujit Bhattacharyya
              15 hours ago















            up vote
            2
            down vote










            up vote
            2
            down vote









            Instead of that just try to check is this $U:=mathbb{Q}(sqrt 2)cup mathbb{Q}(sqrt 3)$ a Group?



            Let us take $sqrt2,sqrt3in U$ [Both exists] but $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U$.



            So definitely it cannot be a Subfield of $mathbb{R}$.






            share|cite|improve this answer












            Instead of that just try to check is this $U:=mathbb{Q}(sqrt 2)cup mathbb{Q}(sqrt 3)$ a Group?



            Let us take $sqrt2,sqrt3in U$ [Both exists] but $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U$.



            So definitely it cannot be a Subfield of $mathbb{R}$.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 15 hours ago









            Sujit Bhattacharyya

            883316




            883316












            • Yes that's exactly what I want to prove $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U $
              – RM777
              15 hours ago










            • Alright! Note that: $sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)={a+bsqrt2:a,binmathbb{Q}}$ and so $sqrt2+sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)$ Further, if we assume $sqrt3=a+bsqrt2$ the $3=a^2+2b^2$ and $2ab=0$ gives the contradiction.
              – Sujit Bhattacharyya
              15 hours ago




















            • Yes that's exactly what I want to prove $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U $
              – RM777
              15 hours ago










            • Alright! Note that: $sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)={a+bsqrt2:a,binmathbb{Q}}$ and so $sqrt2+sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)$ Further, if we assume $sqrt3=a+bsqrt2$ the $3=a^2+2b^2$ and $2ab=0$ gives the contradiction.
              – Sujit Bhattacharyya
              15 hours ago


















            Yes that's exactly what I want to prove $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U $
            – RM777
            15 hours ago




            Yes that's exactly what I want to prove $sqrt2+sqrt3notin U $
            – RM777
            15 hours ago












            Alright! Note that: $sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)={a+bsqrt2:a,binmathbb{Q}}$ and so $sqrt2+sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)$ Further, if we assume $sqrt3=a+bsqrt2$ the $3=a^2+2b^2$ and $2ab=0$ gives the contradiction.
            – Sujit Bhattacharyya
            15 hours ago






            Alright! Note that: $sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)={a+bsqrt2:a,binmathbb{Q}}$ and so $sqrt2+sqrt3notinmathbb{Q}(sqrt2)$ Further, if we assume $sqrt3=a+bsqrt2$ the $3=a^2+2b^2$ and $2ab=0$ gives the contradiction.
            – Sujit Bhattacharyya
            15 hours ago




















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019882%2fproof-that-mathbbq-sqrt2-cup-mathbbq-sqrt3-is-not-a-subfield-of%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Bressuire

            Cabo Verde

            Gyllenstierna