Irrational numbers
Write down and its digits settle into a repeating block, , forever. Write down and no such pattern ever appears — its digits run on, , without ever locking into a repeating cycle. That single difference splits every real number into two camps: rational, expressible as a fraction of integers, and irrational, which cannot be. This article stays inside the Class 9 picture — recognising irrational numbers from their decimals, combining them with rationals, and placing numbers like and exactly on the number line using a right-triangle construction. The formal contradiction-style proof that is irrational is Class 10 territory; here the emphasis is the decimal test and the geometric picture, both of which the CBSE Class 9 syllabus asks you to master.
A number is irrational exactly when its decimal expansion is non-terminating and non-recurring, and every such number still has one exact point on the number line, reachable for numbers like and by a right-triangle (Pythagorean) construction.
The core idea
Two kinds of decimals, two kinds of numbers. A rational number ( integers, ) always produces a decimal that either terminates (like ) or is non-terminating but recurring, repeating some block of digits forever (like or ). An irrational number is the opposite of both: a real number whose decimal expansion is non-terminating and non-recurring — it never ends, and no block of digits ever repeats indefinitely. Familiar examples:
where: each right-hand side is a decimal that continues forever with no repeating pattern, which is precisely the test for irrationality.
Rationals and irrationals share the number line. Every point on the number line stands for exactly one real number, and every real number — rational or irrational — has exactly one point. Together the two sets fill the line with no gaps, forming the set of real numbers. This matters because it tells you irrational numbers are not some abstract leftover; sits at a definite, locatable spot between and .
Combining rationals with irrationals. If is rational (and nonzero where needed) and is irrational, then , , , and are all irrational. But combining two irrationals can land back on a rational number — for instance , and . So "irrational plus irrational" is not automatically irrational; only "rational (nonzero) combined with irrational" is guaranteed irrational.
Locating irrationals geometrically. Since is the length of the diagonal of a unit square (), a right triangle with both legs of length has a hypotenuse of exactly . Swinging that hypotenuse onto the number line with a compass marks 's exact position — no measuring tape, no approximation.
Why "non-terminating and non-recurring" is the right test. It helps to see why every rational number must terminate or recur in the first place. Long division of by can only ever produce remainders from the list — finitely many possibilities. If a remainder ever turns up, the division stops and the decimal terminates. If it never turns up, some remainder must eventually repeat (there are only nonzero remainders to choose from), and once a remainder repeats, the digits that follow it repeat too, forever. An irrational number's decimal never falls into either trap: no remainder cycle exists because there is no fraction generating it at all. This is the deeper reason the decimal test works, not just a rule to memorise.
The goal is to show, using nothing beyond the Pythagorean relation a Class 9 student already knows, that the length has one exact, constructible point on the number line — not an approximation but a geometrically guaranteed position, obtained by building a right triangle with unit legs and transferring its hypotenuse onto the line with a compass.
Step 1. Draw a number line and mark at and at , so unit.
Step 2. At , draw a segment of length unit perpendicular to the number line, so and .
Step 3. Join to . Triangle is right-angled at , so by the Pythagorean relation:
where: and are the two legs (each unit) and is the hypotenuse, whose length works out to exactly .
Step 4. With centre and radius , draw an arc that cuts the number line on the positive side. Call the point where the arc meets the line . Since the arc has radius and is centred at (which sits at ), the point is at distance from — so represents the number exactly. This "spiral of Theodorus" idea extends further: erecting another unit perpendicular at and joining back to gives a segment of length (since ), letting the construction locate one after another.
Worked example
Classify each number as rational or irrational, with a reason: (a) , (b) , (c) , (d) .
Step 1. Check (a). The decimal is built with a growing pattern (one more each block), but the digits themselves never settle into a fixed repeating block — it is non-terminating and non-recurring. So it is irrational.
Step 2. Check (b). , a ratio of integers, so it is rational. This confirms that the square root of a perfect square is always rational, not automatically irrational.
Step 3. Check (c). Here is rational and is irrational; since a nonzero rational combined with an irrational (by addition here) is always irrational, is irrational — its decimal, approximately , never terminates or repeats.
Step 4. Check (d). is non-terminating, but the block "" recurs forever, so it is a repeating decimal and hence rational. Note this is only an approximation to ; itself is irrational.
Answer: (a) irrational, (b) rational, (c) irrational, (d) rational.
Competitive stretch
Locate on the number line, starting from the point representing found in the derivation above.
Step 1. At (which is at distance from ), draw a segment of length unit, perpendicular to the number line.
Step 2. Join to . Since and with a right angle at , the Pythagorean relation gives , so .
Step 3. With centre and radius , draw an arc cutting the number line at a point . Then represents exactly. Answer: repeating the same right-triangle idea one level up, starting from the already-located , pins down on the number line.
Common traps
- Thinking is — it is a rational approximation; the true value of is irrational and never equals exactly.
- Judging irrationality by how "complicated" a decimal looks. The only real test is whether the digits eventually repeat (rational) or never settle into a repeating block (irrational), regardless of how many digits are shown.
- Assuming every square root is irrational. Only non-perfect squares like are irrational; equal and are rational.
- Concluding two irrationals must combine to an irrational. Counterexamples: and , both rational.
Ask the tutor: Want to see why the compass-and-arc trick works for or too, or practise classifying more decimals as rational or irrational?
Why is 0.101101110111 something irrational when it clearly has a pattern?
Having a pattern in how it is built is not the same as being recurring. A recurring decimal repeats one fixed, finite block of digits forever, like . In , the block of s between the zeros keeps growing (one , then two, then three...), so there is no fixed block that repeats. Since it never settles into a repeating cycle and never terminates, it satisfies the definition of irrational, pattern or not.
Is every square root irrational?
No. A square root is irrational only when the number under the root is not a perfect square. equal exactly, so they are rational. But (and any non-perfect square) have decimal expansions that never terminate or repeat, so they are irrational. Always simplify the square root first before deciding.
Can I prove sqrt 2 is irrational in Class 9?
The Class 9 syllabus does not require the formal proof by contradiction — that is Class 10 content. In Class 9, you are expected to accept and use the fact that is irrational (its decimal never terminates or repeats), and to be able to construct its exact position on the number line using the right-triangle method. The rigorous "assume in lowest terms" argument comes later.