The square root is by definition the nonnegative number such that . Notation: and
because Also, and thus would also be a good candidate for the 'square root of 9'. However, as stated in the definition, the term stands only for the positive number, the square of which is equal to , i.e., . The square root of a positive integer that is not a square of an integer is always irrational. So is not rational, i.e., cannot be written as a fraction.
The root of a negative number does not exist within the set of real numbers because squares of such number can never be negative. But you can't catch out mathematicians: they can imagine such a root and extend the set of real number with imaginary numbers. They come in this way with the set of complex numbers, that are commonly used in mathematics, science and engineering. The root of is denoted by .
For any natural number we have:
and
For any natural numbers and we have:
How temping it may be, there is no sum rule for roots. For nonnegative numbers and we have:
A concrete example with numbers illustrates this:
The above properties of roots can be used to simplify roots and expressions containing roots.
The square root of a natural number greater than 1, say is called irreducible if cannot be divided by a square number greater than 1. Thus, and are irreducible roots, but is not, because
Each square root of a positive integer can be written in the standard form, i.e., as a positive integer or as the product of a positive number and an irreducible square root.
So, the expression for positive integers and is in standard form if there exist no square number greater than 1 that divides .
That there exist a standard form of a square root of a positive integer is rooted in the fact that any positive integer can be uniquely written as , where and are positive integers and cannot be divided by a square of an integer greater than 1. We have: .
If is a prime divisor of , but does not divide , then is a prime divisor of and contributes to this number.
If is a prime divisor of and divides , but does not divide , then is a divisor of and contributes to this number.
If is a prime divisor of , and and divide , but does not divide , then is a divisor of an and contributes to both numbers.
And we can go on like this.
Concrete examples:
You can find the standard form by 'extracting all squares from the root'. The example below illustrate this.
First we find the largest perfect square that is a divisor of
.
In this case we can write:
This follows, for example, from the prime factorisation of
:
Instead of prime factorisation of a number you can also proceed in small steps and already extract a recognised square from the root. In this case you see perhaps that
can be divided by the square number
and you can write down:
Next you can focus on finding a square number that divides the newly obtained smaller number under the root sign, namely
. In this way you may get to the greatest square number that divides
or you reduce the problem in each step to a less difficult problem of similar nature.
Once the largest perfect square is found that divides
we can apply the computational rules
and
for natural numbers
and
:
Surd and Other Roots (33:54)