Show $mathbb{Q}[sqrt[3]{2}]$ is a field by rationalizing












6












$begingroup$


I need to rationalize $displaystylefrac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}$



I'm given what I need to rationalize it, namely $displaystylefrac{(a^2-2bc)+(-ab+2c^2)sqrt[3]2+(b^2-ac)sqrt[3]2^2}{(a^2-2bc)+(-ab+2c^2)sqrt[3]2+(b^2-ac)sqrt[3]2^2}$



But I fail to see the motivation behind this. Can someone give a more general explanation of how to come to this expression?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    6












    $begingroup$


    I need to rationalize $displaystylefrac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}$



    I'm given what I need to rationalize it, namely $displaystylefrac{(a^2-2bc)+(-ab+2c^2)sqrt[3]2+(b^2-ac)sqrt[3]2^2}{(a^2-2bc)+(-ab+2c^2)sqrt[3]2+(b^2-ac)sqrt[3]2^2}$



    But I fail to see the motivation behind this. Can someone give a more general explanation of how to come to this expression?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      6












      6








      6


      2



      $begingroup$


      I need to rationalize $displaystylefrac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}$



      I'm given what I need to rationalize it, namely $displaystylefrac{(a^2-2bc)+(-ab+2c^2)sqrt[3]2+(b^2-ac)sqrt[3]2^2}{(a^2-2bc)+(-ab+2c^2)sqrt[3]2+(b^2-ac)sqrt[3]2^2}$



      But I fail to see the motivation behind this. Can someone give a more general explanation of how to come to this expression?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I need to rationalize $displaystylefrac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}$



      I'm given what I need to rationalize it, namely $displaystylefrac{(a^2-2bc)+(-ab+2c^2)sqrt[3]2+(b^2-ac)sqrt[3]2^2}{(a^2-2bc)+(-ab+2c^2)sqrt[3]2+(b^2-ac)sqrt[3]2^2}$



      But I fail to see the motivation behind this. Can someone give a more general explanation of how to come to this expression?







      field-theory extension-field






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Feb 5 '13 at 1:07









      zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

      734421




      734421






















          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5












          $begingroup$

          You can multiply it by $1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4$ and insist the product not have any factors of $sqrt[3]2$ or $sqrt[3]4$. So
          $$(a+bsqrt[3]2+csqrt[3]4)(1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4)=\a+ebe+2cd+sqrt[3]2(ad+b+2ce)+sqrt[3]4(ae+bd+c)$$



          So we need $ad+b+2ce=0, ae+bd+c=0$, giving $$e=-frac {ad+b}{2c}\-a^2d-ab+2cbd+2c^2=0\(a^2-2bc)d=2c^2-ab\(a^2-2bc)e=b^2-ac$$ Then we make the leading term $a^2-bc$ to clear the fractions






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Heh. Beat me to the punch. +1
            $endgroup$
            – Rick Decker
            Feb 5 '13 at 1:45



















          5












          $begingroup$

          You rationalize by using Euclid's algorithm as used to prove Bézout's identity.



          Let $alpha = sqrt[3]{2}$. We have obviously to assume $a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2 = a+balpha + c alpha^2 ne 0$.



          Consider the polynomial $0 ne a + b x + c x^2 in mathbb{Q}[x]$. Since $x^3 - 2$ is irreducible in $mathbb{Q}[x]$, for the gcd we have $(a + b x + c x^2, x^3 - 2) = 1$. Use Euclid's algorithm to find polynomials $u, v in mathbb{Q}[x]$ such that $(a + b x + c x^2) cdot u + (x^3 - 2) cdot v = 1$. Now evaluate this for $x = alpha$ to obtain $(a + b alpha+ calpha^2) cdot u(alpha) = 1$, so that
          begin{equation}
          frac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}
          =
          frac{1}{a + b alpha+ c alpha^2}
          =
          u(alpha).
          end{equation}






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            I prefer this approach. Magic Bezout's identity. +1
            $endgroup$
            – mrs
            Feb 6 '13 at 2:44



















          4












          $begingroup$

          You can also rationalize this by making use of the algebraic identity



          $$x^3 + y^3 + z^3 - 3xyz ; = ; left(x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yzright)left(x+y+zright)$$



          You can view this as analogous to binomial square root rationalization, in which having a denominator of the form $x+y,$ where $x^2$ and $y^2$ are free of radicals, can be freed of radicals by multiplying both numerator and denominator by $x-y.$ In your situation, $x+y+z$ is what you have in the denominator and what you do is multiply both numerator and denominator by the "conjugate" $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yz.$ This identity doesn't take care of rationalizing a general trinomial made up of cube roots, by the way. For this there is a much more complicated identity that will work. See this 16 November 2010 AP-calculus post at Math Forum for a discussion of how to obtain such an identity.



          Incidentally, this algebraic identity has a lot of uses, the best known probably being one of the ways of obtaining the cubic formula for solving cubic equations. This identity makes a lot of appearances in 19th century algebra texts and more about it can be found in the following sci.math thread I started on 23 April 2009: Factorization of a^3 + b^3 + c^3 - 3abc. I've assembled over a hundred old references to it since then, and one day I might write a historical survey of its mathematical and educational appearances in 19th century literature. It's also a standard identity for those serious about mathematical olympiad problems.



          A few months after those sci.math posts I discovered the following short survey paper on this algebraic identity:



          Desmond MacHale, My favourite polynomial, The Mathematical Gazette 75 #472 (June 1991), 157-165.



          See also Mark B. Villarino's recent (2 January 2013) paper A cubic surface of revolution.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$





















            2












            $begingroup$

            You rationalize by multiplying by the conjugates. The conjugates of $root3of2$ are $rho_1root3of2$ and $rho_2root3of2$ where $rho_1=e^{2pi i/3}$ and $rho_2=rho_1^2=e^{4pi i/3}$. So, you want to multiply top and bottom by $$(a+brho_1root3of2+crho_2root3of2^2)(a+brho_2root3of2+crho_1root3of2^2)$$ Multiply all that out, and simplify by using $rho_1rho_2=1$ and $rho_2^2=rho_1$ and maybe $1+rho_1+rho_2=0$, and with any luck you'll get what you're looking for.



            This works in general, in that to rationalize you can always multiply by all the conjugates. The bad news is that it's not always so easy to find simple expressions for the conjugates.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I know this is a bit of an old post and apologize, but could you explain how you came up with those two expressions you multiplied by? I understood fine the conjugates of $sqrt[3]{2}$, but I couldn't understand why those expressions were chosen.. Is it meant to "cycle through" $rho_1$ and $rho_2$?
              $endgroup$
              – Andrew Tawfeek
              Nov 29 '17 at 2:47






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @Andrew, those two expressions are the conjugates of $a+broot3of2+croot3of2^2$. Note that the conjugate of a sum is the sum of the conjugates; the conjugate of a product is the product of the conjugates; and conjugation fixes the rationals.
              $endgroup$
              – Gerry Myerson
              Nov 29 '17 at 2:55











            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',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            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%2f294993%2fshow-mathbbq-sqrt32-is-a-field-by-rationalizing%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









            5












            $begingroup$

            You can multiply it by $1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4$ and insist the product not have any factors of $sqrt[3]2$ or $sqrt[3]4$. So
            $$(a+bsqrt[3]2+csqrt[3]4)(1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4)=\a+ebe+2cd+sqrt[3]2(ad+b+2ce)+sqrt[3]4(ae+bd+c)$$



            So we need $ad+b+2ce=0, ae+bd+c=0$, giving $$e=-frac {ad+b}{2c}\-a^2d-ab+2cbd+2c^2=0\(a^2-2bc)d=2c^2-ab\(a^2-2bc)e=b^2-ac$$ Then we make the leading term $a^2-bc$ to clear the fractions






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Heh. Beat me to the punch. +1
              $endgroup$
              – Rick Decker
              Feb 5 '13 at 1:45
















            5












            $begingroup$

            You can multiply it by $1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4$ and insist the product not have any factors of $sqrt[3]2$ or $sqrt[3]4$. So
            $$(a+bsqrt[3]2+csqrt[3]4)(1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4)=\a+ebe+2cd+sqrt[3]2(ad+b+2ce)+sqrt[3]4(ae+bd+c)$$



            So we need $ad+b+2ce=0, ae+bd+c=0$, giving $$e=-frac {ad+b}{2c}\-a^2d-ab+2cbd+2c^2=0\(a^2-2bc)d=2c^2-ab\(a^2-2bc)e=b^2-ac$$ Then we make the leading term $a^2-bc$ to clear the fractions






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Heh. Beat me to the punch. +1
              $endgroup$
              – Rick Decker
              Feb 5 '13 at 1:45














            5












            5








            5





            $begingroup$

            You can multiply it by $1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4$ and insist the product not have any factors of $sqrt[3]2$ or $sqrt[3]4$. So
            $$(a+bsqrt[3]2+csqrt[3]4)(1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4)=\a+ebe+2cd+sqrt[3]2(ad+b+2ce)+sqrt[3]4(ae+bd+c)$$



            So we need $ad+b+2ce=0, ae+bd+c=0$, giving $$e=-frac {ad+b}{2c}\-a^2d-ab+2cbd+2c^2=0\(a^2-2bc)d=2c^2-ab\(a^2-2bc)e=b^2-ac$$ Then we make the leading term $a^2-bc$ to clear the fractions






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            You can multiply it by $1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4$ and insist the product not have any factors of $sqrt[3]2$ or $sqrt[3]4$. So
            $$(a+bsqrt[3]2+csqrt[3]4)(1+dsqrt[3]2+esqrt[3]4)=\a+ebe+2cd+sqrt[3]2(ad+b+2ce)+sqrt[3]4(ae+bd+c)$$



            So we need $ad+b+2ce=0, ae+bd+c=0$, giving $$e=-frac {ad+b}{2c}\-a^2d-ab+2cbd+2c^2=0\(a^2-2bc)d=2c^2-ab\(a^2-2bc)e=b^2-ac$$ Then we make the leading term $a^2-bc$ to clear the fractions







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Feb 5 '13 at 1:35









            Ross MillikanRoss Millikan

            299k24200374




            299k24200374












            • $begingroup$
              Heh. Beat me to the punch. +1
              $endgroup$
              – Rick Decker
              Feb 5 '13 at 1:45


















            • $begingroup$
              Heh. Beat me to the punch. +1
              $endgroup$
              – Rick Decker
              Feb 5 '13 at 1:45
















            $begingroup$
            Heh. Beat me to the punch. +1
            $endgroup$
            – Rick Decker
            Feb 5 '13 at 1:45




            $begingroup$
            Heh. Beat me to the punch. +1
            $endgroup$
            – Rick Decker
            Feb 5 '13 at 1:45











            5












            $begingroup$

            You rationalize by using Euclid's algorithm as used to prove Bézout's identity.



            Let $alpha = sqrt[3]{2}$. We have obviously to assume $a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2 = a+balpha + c alpha^2 ne 0$.



            Consider the polynomial $0 ne a + b x + c x^2 in mathbb{Q}[x]$. Since $x^3 - 2$ is irreducible in $mathbb{Q}[x]$, for the gcd we have $(a + b x + c x^2, x^3 - 2) = 1$. Use Euclid's algorithm to find polynomials $u, v in mathbb{Q}[x]$ such that $(a + b x + c x^2) cdot u + (x^3 - 2) cdot v = 1$. Now evaluate this for $x = alpha$ to obtain $(a + b alpha+ calpha^2) cdot u(alpha) = 1$, so that
            begin{equation}
            frac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}
            =
            frac{1}{a + b alpha+ c alpha^2}
            =
            u(alpha).
            end{equation}






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I prefer this approach. Magic Bezout's identity. +1
              $endgroup$
              – mrs
              Feb 6 '13 at 2:44
















            5












            $begingroup$

            You rationalize by using Euclid's algorithm as used to prove Bézout's identity.



            Let $alpha = sqrt[3]{2}$. We have obviously to assume $a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2 = a+balpha + c alpha^2 ne 0$.



            Consider the polynomial $0 ne a + b x + c x^2 in mathbb{Q}[x]$. Since $x^3 - 2$ is irreducible in $mathbb{Q}[x]$, for the gcd we have $(a + b x + c x^2, x^3 - 2) = 1$. Use Euclid's algorithm to find polynomials $u, v in mathbb{Q}[x]$ such that $(a + b x + c x^2) cdot u + (x^3 - 2) cdot v = 1$. Now evaluate this for $x = alpha$ to obtain $(a + b alpha+ calpha^2) cdot u(alpha) = 1$, so that
            begin{equation}
            frac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}
            =
            frac{1}{a + b alpha+ c alpha^2}
            =
            u(alpha).
            end{equation}






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I prefer this approach. Magic Bezout's identity. +1
              $endgroup$
              – mrs
              Feb 6 '13 at 2:44














            5












            5








            5





            $begingroup$

            You rationalize by using Euclid's algorithm as used to prove Bézout's identity.



            Let $alpha = sqrt[3]{2}$. We have obviously to assume $a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2 = a+balpha + c alpha^2 ne 0$.



            Consider the polynomial $0 ne a + b x + c x^2 in mathbb{Q}[x]$. Since $x^3 - 2$ is irreducible in $mathbb{Q}[x]$, for the gcd we have $(a + b x + c x^2, x^3 - 2) = 1$. Use Euclid's algorithm to find polynomials $u, v in mathbb{Q}[x]$ such that $(a + b x + c x^2) cdot u + (x^3 - 2) cdot v = 1$. Now evaluate this for $x = alpha$ to obtain $(a + b alpha+ calpha^2) cdot u(alpha) = 1$, so that
            begin{equation}
            frac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}
            =
            frac{1}{a + b alpha+ c alpha^2}
            =
            u(alpha).
            end{equation}






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            You rationalize by using Euclid's algorithm as used to prove Bézout's identity.



            Let $alpha = sqrt[3]{2}$. We have obviously to assume $a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2 = a+balpha + c alpha^2 ne 0$.



            Consider the polynomial $0 ne a + b x + c x^2 in mathbb{Q}[x]$. Since $x^3 - 2$ is irreducible in $mathbb{Q}[x]$, for the gcd we have $(a + b x + c x^2, x^3 - 2) = 1$. Use Euclid's algorithm to find polynomials $u, v in mathbb{Q}[x]$ such that $(a + b x + c x^2) cdot u + (x^3 - 2) cdot v = 1$. Now evaluate this for $x = alpha$ to obtain $(a + b alpha+ calpha^2) cdot u(alpha) = 1$, so that
            begin{equation}
            frac{1}{a+bsqrt[3]2 + c(sqrt[3]2)^2}
            =
            frac{1}{a + b alpha+ c alpha^2}
            =
            u(alpha).
            end{equation}







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Feb 5 '13 at 20:45









            Andreas CarantiAndreas Caranti

            56.8k34397




            56.8k34397












            • $begingroup$
              I prefer this approach. Magic Bezout's identity. +1
              $endgroup$
              – mrs
              Feb 6 '13 at 2:44


















            • $begingroup$
              I prefer this approach. Magic Bezout's identity. +1
              $endgroup$
              – mrs
              Feb 6 '13 at 2:44
















            $begingroup$
            I prefer this approach. Magic Bezout's identity. +1
            $endgroup$
            – mrs
            Feb 6 '13 at 2:44




            $begingroup$
            I prefer this approach. Magic Bezout's identity. +1
            $endgroup$
            – mrs
            Feb 6 '13 at 2:44











            4












            $begingroup$

            You can also rationalize this by making use of the algebraic identity



            $$x^3 + y^3 + z^3 - 3xyz ; = ; left(x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yzright)left(x+y+zright)$$



            You can view this as analogous to binomial square root rationalization, in which having a denominator of the form $x+y,$ where $x^2$ and $y^2$ are free of radicals, can be freed of radicals by multiplying both numerator and denominator by $x-y.$ In your situation, $x+y+z$ is what you have in the denominator and what you do is multiply both numerator and denominator by the "conjugate" $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yz.$ This identity doesn't take care of rationalizing a general trinomial made up of cube roots, by the way. For this there is a much more complicated identity that will work. See this 16 November 2010 AP-calculus post at Math Forum for a discussion of how to obtain such an identity.



            Incidentally, this algebraic identity has a lot of uses, the best known probably being one of the ways of obtaining the cubic formula for solving cubic equations. This identity makes a lot of appearances in 19th century algebra texts and more about it can be found in the following sci.math thread I started on 23 April 2009: Factorization of a^3 + b^3 + c^3 - 3abc. I've assembled over a hundred old references to it since then, and one day I might write a historical survey of its mathematical and educational appearances in 19th century literature. It's also a standard identity for those serious about mathematical olympiad problems.



            A few months after those sci.math posts I discovered the following short survey paper on this algebraic identity:



            Desmond MacHale, My favourite polynomial, The Mathematical Gazette 75 #472 (June 1991), 157-165.



            See also Mark B. Villarino's recent (2 January 2013) paper A cubic surface of revolution.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              4












              $begingroup$

              You can also rationalize this by making use of the algebraic identity



              $$x^3 + y^3 + z^3 - 3xyz ; = ; left(x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yzright)left(x+y+zright)$$



              You can view this as analogous to binomial square root rationalization, in which having a denominator of the form $x+y,$ where $x^2$ and $y^2$ are free of radicals, can be freed of radicals by multiplying both numerator and denominator by $x-y.$ In your situation, $x+y+z$ is what you have in the denominator and what you do is multiply both numerator and denominator by the "conjugate" $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yz.$ This identity doesn't take care of rationalizing a general trinomial made up of cube roots, by the way. For this there is a much more complicated identity that will work. See this 16 November 2010 AP-calculus post at Math Forum for a discussion of how to obtain such an identity.



              Incidentally, this algebraic identity has a lot of uses, the best known probably being one of the ways of obtaining the cubic formula for solving cubic equations. This identity makes a lot of appearances in 19th century algebra texts and more about it can be found in the following sci.math thread I started on 23 April 2009: Factorization of a^3 + b^3 + c^3 - 3abc. I've assembled over a hundred old references to it since then, and one day I might write a historical survey of its mathematical and educational appearances in 19th century literature. It's also a standard identity for those serious about mathematical olympiad problems.



              A few months after those sci.math posts I discovered the following short survey paper on this algebraic identity:



              Desmond MacHale, My favourite polynomial, The Mathematical Gazette 75 #472 (June 1991), 157-165.



              See also Mark B. Villarino's recent (2 January 2013) paper A cubic surface of revolution.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                4












                4








                4





                $begingroup$

                You can also rationalize this by making use of the algebraic identity



                $$x^3 + y^3 + z^3 - 3xyz ; = ; left(x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yzright)left(x+y+zright)$$



                You can view this as analogous to binomial square root rationalization, in which having a denominator of the form $x+y,$ where $x^2$ and $y^2$ are free of radicals, can be freed of radicals by multiplying both numerator and denominator by $x-y.$ In your situation, $x+y+z$ is what you have in the denominator and what you do is multiply both numerator and denominator by the "conjugate" $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yz.$ This identity doesn't take care of rationalizing a general trinomial made up of cube roots, by the way. For this there is a much more complicated identity that will work. See this 16 November 2010 AP-calculus post at Math Forum for a discussion of how to obtain such an identity.



                Incidentally, this algebraic identity has a lot of uses, the best known probably being one of the ways of obtaining the cubic formula for solving cubic equations. This identity makes a lot of appearances in 19th century algebra texts and more about it can be found in the following sci.math thread I started on 23 April 2009: Factorization of a^3 + b^3 + c^3 - 3abc. I've assembled over a hundred old references to it since then, and one day I might write a historical survey of its mathematical and educational appearances in 19th century literature. It's also a standard identity for those serious about mathematical olympiad problems.



                A few months after those sci.math posts I discovered the following short survey paper on this algebraic identity:



                Desmond MacHale, My favourite polynomial, The Mathematical Gazette 75 #472 (June 1991), 157-165.



                See also Mark B. Villarino's recent (2 January 2013) paper A cubic surface of revolution.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                You can also rationalize this by making use of the algebraic identity



                $$x^3 + y^3 + z^3 - 3xyz ; = ; left(x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yzright)left(x+y+zright)$$



                You can view this as analogous to binomial square root rationalization, in which having a denominator of the form $x+y,$ where $x^2$ and $y^2$ are free of radicals, can be freed of radicals by multiplying both numerator and denominator by $x-y.$ In your situation, $x+y+z$ is what you have in the denominator and what you do is multiply both numerator and denominator by the "conjugate" $x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - xy - xz - yz.$ This identity doesn't take care of rationalizing a general trinomial made up of cube roots, by the way. For this there is a much more complicated identity that will work. See this 16 November 2010 AP-calculus post at Math Forum for a discussion of how to obtain such an identity.



                Incidentally, this algebraic identity has a lot of uses, the best known probably being one of the ways of obtaining the cubic formula for solving cubic equations. This identity makes a lot of appearances in 19th century algebra texts and more about it can be found in the following sci.math thread I started on 23 April 2009: Factorization of a^3 + b^3 + c^3 - 3abc. I've assembled over a hundred old references to it since then, and one day I might write a historical survey of its mathematical and educational appearances in 19th century literature. It's also a standard identity for those serious about mathematical olympiad problems.



                A few months after those sci.math posts I discovered the following short survey paper on this algebraic identity:



                Desmond MacHale, My favourite polynomial, The Mathematical Gazette 75 #472 (June 1991), 157-165.



                See also Mark B. Villarino's recent (2 January 2013) paper A cubic surface of revolution.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Feb 5 '13 at 20:33









                Dave L. RenfroDave L. Renfro

                25.2k33982




                25.2k33982























                    2












                    $begingroup$

                    You rationalize by multiplying by the conjugates. The conjugates of $root3of2$ are $rho_1root3of2$ and $rho_2root3of2$ where $rho_1=e^{2pi i/3}$ and $rho_2=rho_1^2=e^{4pi i/3}$. So, you want to multiply top and bottom by $$(a+brho_1root3of2+crho_2root3of2^2)(a+brho_2root3of2+crho_1root3of2^2)$$ Multiply all that out, and simplify by using $rho_1rho_2=1$ and $rho_2^2=rho_1$ and maybe $1+rho_1+rho_2=0$, and with any luck you'll get what you're looking for.



                    This works in general, in that to rationalize you can always multiply by all the conjugates. The bad news is that it's not always so easy to find simple expressions for the conjugates.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$













                    • $begingroup$
                      I know this is a bit of an old post and apologize, but could you explain how you came up with those two expressions you multiplied by? I understood fine the conjugates of $sqrt[3]{2}$, but I couldn't understand why those expressions were chosen.. Is it meant to "cycle through" $rho_1$ and $rho_2$?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Andrew Tawfeek
                      Nov 29 '17 at 2:47






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @Andrew, those two expressions are the conjugates of $a+broot3of2+croot3of2^2$. Note that the conjugate of a sum is the sum of the conjugates; the conjugate of a product is the product of the conjugates; and conjugation fixes the rationals.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Gerry Myerson
                      Nov 29 '17 at 2:55
















                    2












                    $begingroup$

                    You rationalize by multiplying by the conjugates. The conjugates of $root3of2$ are $rho_1root3of2$ and $rho_2root3of2$ where $rho_1=e^{2pi i/3}$ and $rho_2=rho_1^2=e^{4pi i/3}$. So, you want to multiply top and bottom by $$(a+brho_1root3of2+crho_2root3of2^2)(a+brho_2root3of2+crho_1root3of2^2)$$ Multiply all that out, and simplify by using $rho_1rho_2=1$ and $rho_2^2=rho_1$ and maybe $1+rho_1+rho_2=0$, and with any luck you'll get what you're looking for.



                    This works in general, in that to rationalize you can always multiply by all the conjugates. The bad news is that it's not always so easy to find simple expressions for the conjugates.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$













                    • $begingroup$
                      I know this is a bit of an old post and apologize, but could you explain how you came up with those two expressions you multiplied by? I understood fine the conjugates of $sqrt[3]{2}$, but I couldn't understand why those expressions were chosen.. Is it meant to "cycle through" $rho_1$ and $rho_2$?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Andrew Tawfeek
                      Nov 29 '17 at 2:47






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @Andrew, those two expressions are the conjugates of $a+broot3of2+croot3of2^2$. Note that the conjugate of a sum is the sum of the conjugates; the conjugate of a product is the product of the conjugates; and conjugation fixes the rationals.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Gerry Myerson
                      Nov 29 '17 at 2:55














                    2












                    2








                    2





                    $begingroup$

                    You rationalize by multiplying by the conjugates. The conjugates of $root3of2$ are $rho_1root3of2$ and $rho_2root3of2$ where $rho_1=e^{2pi i/3}$ and $rho_2=rho_1^2=e^{4pi i/3}$. So, you want to multiply top and bottom by $$(a+brho_1root3of2+crho_2root3of2^2)(a+brho_2root3of2+crho_1root3of2^2)$$ Multiply all that out, and simplify by using $rho_1rho_2=1$ and $rho_2^2=rho_1$ and maybe $1+rho_1+rho_2=0$, and with any luck you'll get what you're looking for.



                    This works in general, in that to rationalize you can always multiply by all the conjugates. The bad news is that it's not always so easy to find simple expressions for the conjugates.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$



                    You rationalize by multiplying by the conjugates. The conjugates of $root3of2$ are $rho_1root3of2$ and $rho_2root3of2$ where $rho_1=e^{2pi i/3}$ and $rho_2=rho_1^2=e^{4pi i/3}$. So, you want to multiply top and bottom by $$(a+brho_1root3of2+crho_2root3of2^2)(a+brho_2root3of2+crho_1root3of2^2)$$ Multiply all that out, and simplify by using $rho_1rho_2=1$ and $rho_2^2=rho_1$ and maybe $1+rho_1+rho_2=0$, and with any luck you'll get what you're looking for.



                    This works in general, in that to rationalize you can always multiply by all the conjugates. The bad news is that it's not always so easy to find simple expressions for the conjugates.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Feb 5 '13 at 2:22









                    Gerry MyersonGerry Myerson

                    147k8151303




                    147k8151303












                    • $begingroup$
                      I know this is a bit of an old post and apologize, but could you explain how you came up with those two expressions you multiplied by? I understood fine the conjugates of $sqrt[3]{2}$, but I couldn't understand why those expressions were chosen.. Is it meant to "cycle through" $rho_1$ and $rho_2$?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Andrew Tawfeek
                      Nov 29 '17 at 2:47






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @Andrew, those two expressions are the conjugates of $a+broot3of2+croot3of2^2$. Note that the conjugate of a sum is the sum of the conjugates; the conjugate of a product is the product of the conjugates; and conjugation fixes the rationals.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Gerry Myerson
                      Nov 29 '17 at 2:55


















                    • $begingroup$
                      I know this is a bit of an old post and apologize, but could you explain how you came up with those two expressions you multiplied by? I understood fine the conjugates of $sqrt[3]{2}$, but I couldn't understand why those expressions were chosen.. Is it meant to "cycle through" $rho_1$ and $rho_2$?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Andrew Tawfeek
                      Nov 29 '17 at 2:47






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @Andrew, those two expressions are the conjugates of $a+broot3of2+croot3of2^2$. Note that the conjugate of a sum is the sum of the conjugates; the conjugate of a product is the product of the conjugates; and conjugation fixes the rationals.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Gerry Myerson
                      Nov 29 '17 at 2:55
















                    $begingroup$
                    I know this is a bit of an old post and apologize, but could you explain how you came up with those two expressions you multiplied by? I understood fine the conjugates of $sqrt[3]{2}$, but I couldn't understand why those expressions were chosen.. Is it meant to "cycle through" $rho_1$ and $rho_2$?
                    $endgroup$
                    – Andrew Tawfeek
                    Nov 29 '17 at 2:47




                    $begingroup$
                    I know this is a bit of an old post and apologize, but could you explain how you came up with those two expressions you multiplied by? I understood fine the conjugates of $sqrt[3]{2}$, but I couldn't understand why those expressions were chosen.. Is it meant to "cycle through" $rho_1$ and $rho_2$?
                    $endgroup$
                    – Andrew Tawfeek
                    Nov 29 '17 at 2:47




                    1




                    1




                    $begingroup$
                    @Andrew, those two expressions are the conjugates of $a+broot3of2+croot3of2^2$. Note that the conjugate of a sum is the sum of the conjugates; the conjugate of a product is the product of the conjugates; and conjugation fixes the rationals.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Gerry Myerson
                    Nov 29 '17 at 2:55




                    $begingroup$
                    @Andrew, those two expressions are the conjugates of $a+broot3of2+croot3of2^2$. Note that the conjugate of a sum is the sum of the conjugates; the conjugate of a product is the product of the conjugates; and conjugation fixes the rationals.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Gerry Myerson
                    Nov 29 '17 at 2:55


















                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f294993%2fshow-mathbbq-sqrt32-is-a-field-by-rationalizing%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

                    Questions related to Moebius Transform of Characteristic Function of the Primes

                    List of scandals in India

                    Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?