The square root of 2, or the one-half power of 2, written in mathematics as or , is the positive algebraic number that, when multiplied by itself, equals the number 2. Technically, it must be called the principal square root of 2, to distinguish it from the negative number with the same property.
Geometrically, the square root of 2 is the length of a diagonal across a square with sides of one unit of length; this follows from the Pythagorean theorem. It was probably the first number known to be irrational. The fraction (? 1.4142857) is sometimes used as a good rational approximation with a reasonably small denominator.
The Babylonian clay tablet YBC 7289 (c. 1800-1600 BC) gives an approximation of in four sexagesimal figures, , which is accurate to about six decimal digits, and is the closest possible three-place sexagesimal representation of :
Another early approximation is given in ancient Indian mathematical texts, the Sulbasutras (c. 800-200 BC), as follows: Increase the length [of the side] by its third and this third by its own fourth less the thirty-fourth part of that fourth. That is,
This approximation is the seventh in a sequence of increasingly accurate approximations based on the sequence of Pell numbers, which can be derived from the continued fraction expansion of . Despite having a smaller denominator, it is only slightly less accurate than the Babylonian approximation.
Pythagoreans discovered that the diagonal of a square is incommensurable with its side, or in modern language, that the square root of two is irrational. Little is known with certainty about the time or circumstances of this discovery, but the name of Hippasus of Metapontum is often mentioned. For a while, the Pythagoreans treated as an official secret the discovery that the square root of two is irrational, and, according to legend, Hippasus was murdered for divulging it. The square root of two is occasionally called Pythagoras's number or Pythagoras's constant, for example by Conway & Guy (1996).
Further information: Babylonian method.
In ancient Roman architecture, Vitruvius describes the use of the square root of 2 progression or ad quadratum technique. It consists basically in a geometric, rather than arithmetic, method to double a square, in which the diagonal of the original square is equal to the side of the resulting square. Vitruvius attributes the idea to Plato. The system was employed to build pavements by creating a square tangent to the corners of the original square at 45 degrees of it. The proportion was also used to design atria by giving them a length equal to a diagonal taken from a square, whose sides are equivalent to the intended atrium's width.
There are a number of algorithms for approximating as a ratio of integers or as a decimal. The most common algorithm for this, which is used as a basis in many computers and calculators, is the Babylonian method for computing square roots, which is one of many methods of computing square roots. It goes as follows:
First, pick a guess, a0 > 0; the value of the guess affects only how many iterations are required to reach an approximation of a certain accuracy. Then, using that guess, iterate through the following recursive computation:
The more iterations through the algorithm (that is, the more computations performed and the greater "n"), the better the approximation. Each iteration roughly doubles the number of correct digits. Starting with a0 = 1, the results of the algorithm are as follows:
a : b=a+1: c (for example: 3 : 4 : 5, 20 : 21: 29, 119 : 120 : 169, 696 : 697 : 985, ...), and innovative algorithmic formula utilizing recursive method.
Recursive method offers the most common algorithm for effective approximating, which is used as a basis in many computers and calculators.
It works as follows:
First, pick arbitrary Primitive Twin Pythagorean Triple. Then using the following below formula calculate initial and starting approximations which give birth to consequent more precise approximations. They represent entire branches of best approximations.
a : b=a+1: c
A = (4 × c^2 - 1) / (2 × c × (a + b)), where A is our fractional initial approximation.
For example, if triple 3 : 4 : 5 is picked, then A = (4 × 5^2 - 1) / (2 × 5 × (3 + 4)) = 99/70.
Second, produce further approximations for ?2 and isosceles right triangle by using the next similar recursive computation algorithmic formula:
Choose the values for an and cn. The choice of these values will affect the speed at which the estimates converge towards the correct value. Then iterate through the following recursive computation and algorithm:
Start with n=1.
Calculate nth estimate as (2 × cn2 - 1) / (2 × an × cn)
where an is the leg of isosceles right triangle and cn is its hypothenuse/slope.
Then increase n by 1 and repeat.
The more iterations through the algorithm (that is, the more computations performed and the greater n), the better the approximation.
Starting with c1 = 99 and a1 = 70, the results of the algorithm are as follows:
1st estimate = (2 × 99^2 - 1) / (2 × 70 × 99) = 19601 / 13860 = 1.41421356421...;
a2 = 13860, c2 = 19601.
2nd estimate = (2 × 19601^2 - 1) / (2 × 13860 × 19601) = 768398401 / 543339720 = 1.4142135623730950499992...;
a3 = 543339720, c3 = 768398401.
3rd estimate = (2 × 768398401^2 - 1) / (2 × 543339720 × 768398401) =
= 1180872205318713601 / 835002744095575440 = 1.41421356237309504880168872420969807907...;
(cf actual value of 1.41421356237309504880168872420969807856)
Each iteration roughly doubles the number of correct digits.
Third, pick another arbitrary random Primitive Twin Pythagorean Triple from a list and repeat the procedure to obtain a new branch of approximations.
A simple rational approximation (? 1.4142857) is sometimes used. Despite having a denominator of only 70, it differs from the correct value by less than (approx. ). Since it is a convergent of the continued fraction representation of the square root of two, any better rational approximation has a denominator not less than 169, since (? 1.4142012) is the next convergent with an error of approx. .
The rational approximation of the square root of two derived from four iterations of the Babylonian method after starting with a0 = 1 is too large by about ; its square is ? .
Partial list of most useful and precise rational approximations for ?2:
7 / 5, 17 / 12, 41 / 29, 65 / 46, 99 / 70, 239/169, 577 / 408, 1393 / 985, 3363 / 2378, 16477 / 11651, 19601 / 13860, 114243 / 80782, 145326 / 102761, 161564 / 114243, 665857 / 470832, 3880899 / 2744210, 22619537 / 15994428, 131836323 / 93222358, 942777611471 / 666644442222, and etc...
In 1997 the value of was calculated to 137,438,953,444 decimal places by Yasumasa Kanada's team. In February 2006 the record for the calculation of was eclipsed with the use of a home computer. Shigeru Kondo calculated 1 trillion decimal places in 2010. Among mathematical constants with computationally challenging decimal expansions, only ? has been calculated more precisely. Such computations aim to check empirically whether such numbers are normal.
This is a table of recent records in calculating the digits of .
|Date||Name||Number of digits|
|June 28, 2016||Ron Watkins||10 trillion|
|April 3, 2016||Ron Watkins||5 trillion|
|February 9, 2012||Alexander Yee||2 trillion|
|March 22, 2010||Shigeru Kondo||1 trillion|
A short proof of the irrationality of can be obtained from the rational root theorem, that is, if p(x) is a monic polynomial with integer coefficients, then any rational root of p(x) is necessarily an integer. Applying this to the polynomial p(x) = x2 - 2, it follows that is either an integer or irrational. Because is not an integer (2 is not a perfect square), must therefore be irrational. This proof can be generalized to show that any square root of any natural number that is not the square of a natural number is irrational.
One proof of the number's irrationality is the following proof by infinite descent. It is also a proof by contradiction, also known as an indirect proof, in that the proposition is proved by assuming that the opposite of the proposition is true and showing that this assumption is false, thereby implying that the proposition must be true.
Because there is a contradiction, the assumption (1) that is a rational number must be false. This means that is not a rational number. That is, is irrational.
This proof was hinted at by Aristotle, in his Analytica Priora, §I.23. It appeared first as a full proof in Euclid's Elements, as proposition 117 of Book X. However, since the early 19th century, historians have agreed that this proof is an interpolation and not attributable to Euclid.
As with the proof by infinite descent, we obtain . Being the same quantity, each side has the same prime factorization by the fundamental theorem of arithmetic, and in particular, would have to have the factor 2 occur the same number of times. However, the factor 2 appears an odd number of times on the right, but an even number of times on the left--a contradiction.
A simple proof is attributed by John Horton Conway to Stanley Tennenbaum when the latter was a student in the early 1950s and whose most recent appearance is in an article by Noson Yanofsky in the May-June 2016 issue of American Scientist. Given two squares with integer sides respectively a and b, one of which has twice the area of the other, place two copies of the smaller square in the larger as shown in Figure 1. The square overlap region in the middle ((2b - a)2) must equal the sum of the two uncovered squares (2(a - b)2). However, these squares on the diagonal have positive integer sides that are smaller than the original squares. Repeating this process, there are arbitrarily small squares one twice the area of the other, yet both having positive integer sides, which is impossible since positive integers cannot be less than 1.
Another geometric reductio ad absurdum argument showing that is irrational appeared in 2000 in the American Mathematical Monthly. It is also an example of proof by infinite descent. It makes use of classic compass and straightedge construction, proving the theorem by a method similar to that employed by ancient Greek geometers. It is essentially the algebraic proof of the previous section viewed geometrically in yet another way.
Let ?ABC be a right isosceles triangle with hypotenuse length m and legs n as shown in Figure 2. By the Pythagorean theorem, = . Suppose m and n are integers. Let m:n be a ratio given in its lowest terms.
Because ?EBF is a right angle and ?BEF is half a right angle, ?BEF is also a right isosceles triangle. Hence BE = m - n implies BF = m - n. By symmetry, DF = m - n, and ?FDC is also a right isosceles triangle. It also follows that FC = n - (m - n) = 2n - m.
Hence, there is an even smaller right isosceles triangle, with hypotenuse length 2n - m and legs m - n. These values are integers even smaller than m and n and in the same ratio, contradicting the hypothesis that m:n is in lowest terms. Therefore, m and n cannot be both integers, hence is irrational.
In a constructive approach, one distinguishes between on the one hand not being rational, and on the other hand being irrational (i.e., being quantifiably apart from every rational), the latter being a stronger property. Given positive integers a and b, because the valuation (i.e., highest power of 2 dividing a number) of 2b2 is odd, while the valuation of a2 is even, they must be distinct integers; thus || >= 1. Then
the latter inequality being true because it is assumed that √ (otherwise the quantitative apartness can be trivially established). This gives a lower bound of for the difference ||, yielding a direct proof of irrationality not relying on the law of excluded middle; see Errett Bishop (1985, p. 18). This proof constructively exhibits a discrepancy between and any rational.
Proof: For the given equation, there are only six possible combinations of oddness and evenness for whole-number values of and that produce a whole-number value for . A simple enumeration of all six possibilities shows why four of these six are impossible. Of the two remaining possibilities, one can be proven to not contain any solutions using modular arithmetic, leaving the sole remaining possibility as the only one to contain solutions, if any.
|Both even||Even||Impossible. The given Diophantine equation is primitive and therefore contains no common factors throughout.|
|Both odd||Odd||Impossible. The sum of two odd numbers does not produce an odd number.|
|Both even||Odd||Impossible. The sum of two even numbers does not produce an odd number.|
|One even, another odd||Even||Impossible. The sum of an even number and an odd number does not produce an even number.|
|One even, another odd||Odd||Possible|
The fifth possibility (both and odd and even) can be shown to contain no solutions as follows.
Since is even, must be divisible by , hence
The square of any odd number is always . The square of any even number is always . Since both and are odd and is even:
which is impossible. Therefore, the fifth possibility is also ruled out, leaving the sixth to be the only possible combination to contain solutions, if any.
An extension of this lemma is the result that two identical whole-number squares can never be added to produce another whole-number square, even when the equation is not in its simplest form.
Proof: Assume is rational. Therefore,
But the lemma proves that the sum of two identical whole-number squares cannot produce another whole-number square.
Therefore, the assumption that is rational is contradicted.
is irrational. Q. E. D.
This number satisfies
One interesting property of is
This is related to the property of silver ratios.
can also be expressed in terms of the copies of the imaginary unit i using only the square root and arithmetic operations, if the square root symbol is interpreted suitably for the complex numbers i and -i:
is also the only real number other than 1 whose infinite tetrate (i.e., infinite exponential tower) is equal to its square. In other words: if for c > 1, x1 = c and xn+1 = cxn for n > 1, the limit of xn will be called as n -> ? (if this limit exists) f(c). Then is the only number c > 1 for which f(c) = c2. Or symbolically:
appears in Viète's formula for ?:
for m square roots and only one minus sign.
Similar in appearance but with a finite number of terms, appears in various trigonometric constants:
It is not known whether is a normal number, a stronger property than irrationality, but statistical analyses of its binary expansion are consistent with the hypothesis that it is normal to base two.
The identity cos = sin = , along with the infinite product representations for the sine and cosine, leads to products such as
The number can also be expressed by taking the Taylor series of a trigonometric function. For example, the series for cos gives
The Taylor series of with x = 1 and using the double factorial n!! gives
The convergence of this series can be accelerated with an Euler transform, producing
The square root of two has the following continued fraction representation:
The convergents formed by truncating this representation form a sequence of fractions that approximate the square root of two to increasing accuracy, and that are described by the Pell numbers (known as side and diameter numbers to the ancient Greeks because of their use in approximating the ratio between the sides and diagonal of a square). The first convergents are: , , , , , , , . The convergent differs from by almost exactly  and then the next convergent is .
The following nested square expressions converge to :
In 1786, German physics professor Georg Lichtenberg found that any sheet of paper whose long edge is times longer than its short edge could be folded in half and aligned with its shorter side to produce a sheet with exactly the same proportions as the original. This ratio of lengths of the longer over the shorter side guarantees that cutting a sheet in half along a line results in the smaller sheets having the same (approximate) ratio as the original sheet. When Germany standardised paper sizes at the beginning of the 20th century, they used Lichtenberg's ratio to create the "A" series of paper sizes. Today, the (approximate) aspect ratio of paper sizes under ISO 216 (A4, A0, etc.) is 1:.
Let shorter length and longer length of the sides of a sheet of paper, with
Let be the analogue ratio of the halved sheet, then
There are some interesting properties involving the square root of 2 in the physical sciences:
The number has applications in the area of video games. In particular, the popularity of MOBAs with three lanes on a square map means that the geometry of the map is such that the middle lane is shorter than the top and bottom lanes by ~70% as given by the ratio /2, the reciprocal. This means a player can traverse the map diagonally from base to base in less than three quarters of the time it would take to use the top or bottom lanes.