Answer:
I think that what you are trying to show is: If
is irrational and
is rational, then
is rational. If so, a proof can be as follows:
Explanation:
Suppose that
is a rational number. Then
and
can be written as follows
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c32b0/c32b0242e689de1dbce5f00893d4e0538ec8df76" alt="r=(p_(1))/(q_(1)), \,p_(1)\in \mathbb{Z}, q_(1)\in \mathbb{Z}, q_(1)\\eq 0"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0124e/0124e5e5e3a72ed30387139763136bbabf9f502c" alt="r+s=(p_(2))/(q_(2)), \,p_(2)\in \mathbb{Z}, q_(2)\in \mathbb{Z}, q_(2)\\eq 0"
Hence we have that
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/065c7/065c749e7e6104180ccef0c5d2bc3ddf506fdebe" alt="r+s=(p_(1))/(q_(1))+s=(p_(2))/(q_(2))"
Then
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87146/871467f51ec5bae42c486f2c7d5d7e57e61097da" alt="s=(p_(2))/(q_(2))-(p_(1))/(q_(1))=(p_(2)q_(1)-p_(1)q_(2))/(q_(1)q_(2))\in \mathbb{Q}"
This is a contradiction because we assumed that
is an irrational number.
Then
must be an irrational number.