Questions: Density of the Rationals

5 questions to test your understanding

Score: 0 / 5
Question 1 Multiple Choice

A student argues: 'Since rationals are dense in the reals, if I pick a real number uniformly at random, it's more likely to be rational than irrational.' What is wrong with this reasoning?

ANothing — density means rationals are everywhere, so the probability should be high
BDensity is a topological property about neighborhoods, not a measure-theoretic one; the rationals have measure zero and a randomly chosen real is rational with probability zero
CThe argument is correct for small intervals but fails for the whole real line
DRationals are actually not dense in the reals, so the premise is false
Question 2 Multiple Choice

In the proof that a rational exists between any two reals a < b, which tool is used to find a denominator q large enough that consecutive multiples 1/q, 2/q, 3/q, ... are spaced more finely than the interval (a,b)?

AThe completeness of ℝ (every Cauchy sequence converges)
BThe uncountability of the irrationals
CThe Archimedean property (for any ε > 0, there exists n ∈ ℕ with 1/n < ε)
DThe intermediate value theorem
Question 3 True / False

Between any two distinct real numbers, there are infinitely many rational numbers.

TTrue
FFalse
Question 4 True / False

Because the rationals are dense in ℝ, they make up a positive fraction of the length of any interval on the real line.

TTrue
FFalse
Question 5 Short Answer

Explain the apparent paradox: the rationals are dense in ℝ (every real number is arbitrarily close to rationals) and yet, in a precise measure-theoretic sense, 'almost all' real numbers are irrational.

Think about your answer, then reveal below.