Jump to content

Transcendental number: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Whoops
→‎top: The definition is directly derived from that of an algebraic number, so reuse that definition
(33 intermediate revisions by 22 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|In mathematics, a non-algebraic number}}
{{Redirect|U-number|thermal conductivity|R-value (insulation)#U-value}}
{{Redirect|U-number|thermal conductivity|R-value (insulation)#U-value}}


In [[mathematics]], a '''transcendental number''' is a [[real number|real]] or [[complex number]] that is not [[algebraic number|algebraic]] – that is, not the [[Zero of a function|root]] of a non-zero [[polynomial]] of finite degree with [[integer]] (or, equivalently, [[rational number|rational]]) [[coefficient]]s. The best-known transcendental numbers are [[Pi|{{mvar|π}}]] and [[e (mathematical constant)|{{mvar|e}}]].<ref>{{cite web |first=Cliff |last=Pickover |title=The 15&nbsp;most famous transcendental numbers |website=sprott.physics.wisc.edu |url=http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/trans.html |access-date=2020-01-23}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Shidlovskii |first1=Andrei B. |date=June 2011 |title=Transcendental Numbers |publisher=Walter de Gruyter |isbn=9783110889055 |page=1}}</ref> The quality of a number being transcendental is called '''transcendence'''.
{{Short description|In mathematics, a non-algebraic number}}

In [[mathematics]], a '''transcendental number''' is a [[real number|real]] or [[complex number]] that is not [[algebraic number|algebraic]] – that is, not the [[Zero of a function|root]] of a non-zero [[polynomial]] of finite degree with [[rational number|rational]] [[coefficient]]s. The best known transcendental numbers are [[Pi|{{mvar|π}}]] and [[e (mathematical constant)|{{mvar|e}}]].<ref>{{cite web |first=Cliff |last=Pickover |title=The 15&nbsp;most famous transcendental numbers |website=sprott.physics.wisc.edu |url=http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/trans.html |access-date=2020-01-23}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Shidlovskii |first1=Andrei B. |date=June 2011 |title=Transcendental Numbers |publisher=Walter de Gruyter |isbn=9783110889055 |page=1}}</ref>
Though only a few classes of transcendental numbers are known – partly because it can be extremely difficult to show that a given number is transcendental – transcendental numbers are not rare: indeed, [[almost all]] real and complex numbers are transcendental, since the algebraic numbers form a [[countable set]], while the [[set (mathematics)|set]] of [[real numbers]] and the set of [[complex number]]s are both [[uncountable set]]s, and therefore larger than any countable set.


Though only a few classes of transcendental numbers are known – partly because it can be extremely difficult to show that a given number is transcendental – transcendental numbers are not rare: indeed, [[almost all]] real and complex numbers are transcendental, since the algebraic numbers form a [[countable set]], while the [[set (mathematics)|set]] of [[real numbers]] and the set of [[complex number]]s are both [[uncountable set]]s, and therefore larger than any countable set. All '''transcendental real numbers''' (also known as '''real transcendental numbers''' or '''transcendental irrational numbers''') are [[irrational number]]s, since all rational numbers are algebraic.<ref name=numbers>{{cite book |last1=Bunday |first1=B. D. |last2=Mulholland |first2=H. |title=Pure Mathematics for Advanced Level |date=20 May 2014 |publisher=Butterworth-Heinemann |isbn=978-1-4831-0613-7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=02_iBQAAQBAJ |access-date=21 March 2021 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Baker |first1=A. |title=On Mahler's classification of transcendental numbers |journal=Acta Mathematica |date=1964 |volume=111 |pages=97–120 |doi=10.1007/bf02391010 |s2cid=122023355 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite arXiv |last1=Heuer |first1=Nicolaus |last2=Loeh |first2=Clara |title=Transcendental simplicial volumes |date=1 November 2019 |class=math.GT |eprint=1911.06386 }}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Real number |department=mathematics |url=https://www.britannica.com/science/real-number |access-date=2020-08-11 |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |lang=en}}</ref> The [[Converse (logic)|converse]] is not true: Not all irrational numbers are transcendental. Hence, the set of real numbers consists of non-overlapping rational, algebraic non-rational and transcendental real numbers.<ref name=numbers/> For example, the [[square root of 2]] is an irrational number, but it is not a transcendental number as it is a root of the polynomial equation {{math|''x''<sup>2</sup> − 2 {{=}} 0}}. The [[golden ratio]] (denoted <math>\varphi</math> or <math>\phi</math>) is another irrational number that is not transcendental, as it is a root of the polynomial equation {{math|''x''<sup>2</sup> − ''x'' − 1 {{=}} 0}}. The quality of a number being transcendental is called '''transcendence'''.
All '''transcendental real numbers''' (also known as '''real transcendental numbers''' or '''transcendental irrational numbers''') are [[irrational number]]s, since all rational numbers are algebraic.<ref name=numbers>{{cite book |last1=Bunday |first1=B. D. |last2=Mulholland |first2=H. |title=Pure Mathematics for Advanced Level |date=20 May 2014 |publisher=Butterworth-Heinemann |isbn=978-1-4831-0613-7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=02_iBQAAQBAJ |access-date=21 March 2021 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Baker |first1=A. |title=On Mahler's classification of transcendental numbers |journal=Acta Mathematica |date=1964 |volume=111 |pages=97–120 |doi=10.1007/bf02391010 |s2cid=122023355 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite arXiv |last1=Heuer |first1=Nicolaus |last2=Loeh |first2=Clara |title=Transcendental simplicial volumes |date=1 November 2019 |class=math.GT |eprint=1911.06386 }}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Real number |department=mathematics |url=https://www.britannica.com/science/real-number |access-date=2020-08-11 |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |lang=en}}</ref> The [[Converse (logic)|converse]] is not true: Not all irrational numbers are transcendental. Hence, the set of real numbers consists of non-overlapping sets of rational, algebraic non-rational, and transcendental real numbers.<ref name=numbers/> For example, the [[square root of 2]] is an irrational number, but it is not a transcendental number as it is a root of the polynomial equation {{math|''x''<sup>2</sup> − 2 {{=}} 0}}. The [[golden ratio]] (denoted <math>\varphi</math> or <math>\phi</math>) is another irrational number that is not transcendental, as it is a root of the polynomial equation {{math|''x''<sup>2</sup> − ''x'' − 1 {{=}} 0}}.


==History==
==History==
The name "transcendental" comes {{ety|la|trānscendere|to climb over or beyond, surmount}},<ref>{{cite dictionary |title=transcendental |dictionary=[[Oxford English Dictionary]] |url=http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/204606}} ''s.v.''</ref> and was first used for the mathematical concept in [[Gottfried Leibniz|Leibniz's]] 1682 paper in which he proved that {{math|sin ''x''}} is not an [[algebraic function]] of {{mvar|x}}&nbsp;.<ref>{{harvnb|Leibniz|Gerhardt|Pertz|1858|pp=97–98}}; {{harvnb|Bourbaki|1994|p=74}}</ref> [[Leonhard Euler|Euler]], in the 18th century, was probably the first person to define transcendental ''numbers'' in the modern sense.<ref>{{harvnb|Erdős|Dudley|1983}}</ref>
The name "transcendental" comes {{ety|la|trānscendere|to climb over or beyond, surmount}},<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=transcendental |dictionary=[[Oxford English Dictionary]] |url=http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/204606}} ''s.v.''</ref> and was first used for the mathematical concept in [[Gottfried Leibniz|Leibniz's]] 1682 paper in which he proved that {{math|sin ''x''}} is not an [[algebraic function]] of {{mvar|x}}&nbsp;.<ref>{{harvnb|Leibniz|Gerhardt|Pertz|1858|pp=97–98}}; {{harvnb|Bourbaki|1994|p=74}}</ref> [[Leonhard Euler|Euler]], in the 18th century, was probably the first person to define transcendental ''numbers'' in the modern sense.<ref>{{harvnb|Erdős|Dudley|1983}}</ref>


[[Johann Heinrich Lambert]] conjectured that {{mvar|[[E (mathematical constant)|e]]}} and [[Pi|{{mvar|π}}]] were both transcendental numbers in his 1768 paper proving the number {{mvar|π}} is [[irrational number|irrational]], and proposed a tentative sketch of a proof of {{mvar|π}}'s transcendence.<ref>{{harvnb|Lambert|1768}}</ref>
[[Johann Heinrich Lambert]] conjectured that {{mvar|[[E (mathematical constant)|e]]}} and [[Pi|{{mvar|π}}]] were both transcendental numbers in his 1768 paper proving the number {{mvar|π}} is [[irrational number|irrational]], and proposed a tentative sketch proof that {{mvar|π}} is transcendental.<ref>{{harvnb|Lambert|1768}}</ref>


[[Joseph Liouville]] first proved the existence of transcendental numbers in 1844,<ref name=Kempner>{{harvnb|Kempner|1916}}</ref> and in 1851 gave the first decimal examples such as the [[Liouville number|Liouville constant]] <!-- "Decimal Liouville constant" uses 10^-n! | "Binary Liouville constant" uses 2^-n! //-->
[[Joseph Liouville]] first proved the existence of transcendental numbers in 1844,<ref name=Kempner>{{harvnb|Kempner|1916}}</ref> and in 1851 gave the first decimal examples such as the [[Liouville number|Liouville constant]] <!-- "Decimal Liouville constant" uses 10^-n! | "Binary Liouville constant" uses 2^-n! //-->
Line 29: Line 31:
Cantor's work established the ubiquity of transcendental numbers.
Cantor's work established the ubiquity of transcendental numbers.


In 1882, [[Ferdinand von Lindemann]] published the first complete proof of the transcendence of {{mvar|π}}. He first proved that {{math|''e''<sup>''a''</sup>}} is transcendental if {{mvar|a}} is a non-zero algebraic number. Then, since {{math|''e''<sup>''iπ''</sup> {{=}} −1}} is algebraic (see [[Euler's identity]]), {{math|''iπ''}} must be transcendental. But since {{math|''i''}} is algebraic, {{mvar|π}} therefore must be transcendental. This approach was generalized by [[Karl Weierstrass]] to what is now known as the [[Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem]]. The transcendence of {{mvar|π}} allowed the proof of the impossibility of several ancient geometric constructions involving [[compass and straightedge]], including the most famous one, [[squaring the circle]].
In 1882, [[Ferdinand von Lindemann]] published the first complete proof that {{mvar|π}} is transcendental. He first proved that {{math|''e''<sup>''a''</sup>}} is transcendental if {{mvar|a}} is a non-zero algebraic number. Then, since {{math|''e''<sup>''iπ''</sup> {{=}} −1}} is algebraic (see [[Euler's identity]]), {{math|''iπ''}} must be transcendental. But since {{math|''i''}} is algebraic, {{mvar|π}} must therefore be transcendental. This approach was generalized by [[Karl Weierstrass]] to what is now known as the [[Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem]]. That {{mvar|π}} is transcendental implies that geometric constructions involving [[compass and straightedge]] cannot produce certain results, for example [[squaring the circle]].


In 1900, [[David Hilbert]] posed a question about transcendental numbers, [[Hilbert's seventh problem]]: If {{mvar|a}} is an algebraic number that is not zero or one, and {{mvar|b}} is an irrational [[algebraic number]], is {{math|''a''<sup>''b''</sup>}} necessarily transcendental? The affirmative answer was provided in 1934 by the [[Gelfond–Schneider theorem]]. This work was extended by [[Alan Baker (mathematician)|Alan Baker]] in the 1960s in his work on lower bounds for linear forms in any number of logarithms (of algebraic numbers).<ref>{{cite report |first=Alan |last=Baker |year=1998 |title=J.J. O'Connor and E.F. Robertson |type=biographies |series=The MacTutor History of Mathematics archive |publisher=[[University of St. Andrew's]] |place=[[St Andrews|St. Andrew's, Scotland]] |website=www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk |url=http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Baker_Alan.html}}</ref>
In 1900, [[David Hilbert]] posed a question about transcendental numbers, [[Hilbert's seventh problem]]: If {{mvar|a}} is an [[algebraic number]] that is not zero or one, and {{mvar|b}} is an irrational algebraic number, is {{math|''a''<sup>''b''</sup>}} necessarily transcendental? The affirmative answer was provided in 1934 by the [[Gelfond–Schneider theorem]]. This work was extended by [[Alan Baker (mathematician)|Alan Baker]] in the 1960s in his work on lower bounds for linear forms in any number of logarithms (of algebraic numbers).<ref>{{cite report |first=Alan |last=Baker |year=1998 |title=J.J. O'Connor and E.F. Robertson |type=biographies |series=The MacTutor History of Mathematics archive |publisher=[[University of St. Andrew's]] |place=[[St Andrews|St. Andrew's, Scotland]] |website=www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk |url=http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Baker_Alan.html}}</ref>


==Properties==
==Properties==
A transcendental number is a (possibly complex) number that is not the root of any integer polynomial. Every real transcendental number must also be [[irrational number|irrational]], since a [[rational number]] is the root of an integer polynomial of [[degree of a polynomial|degree]] one.<ref>{{harvnb|Hardy|1979}}</ref> The set of transcendental numbers is [[uncountable|uncountably infinite]]. Since the polynomials with rational coefficients are [[countable]], and since each such polynomial has a finite number of [[zero of a function|zeroes]], the [[algebraic number]]s must also be countable. However, [[Cantor's diagonal argument]] proves that the real numbers (and therefore also the [[complex number|complex numbers]]) are uncountable. Since the real numbers are the union of algebraic and transcendental numbers, it is impossible for both [[subset]]s to be countable. This makes the transcendental numbers uncountable.
A transcendental number is a (possibly complex) number that is not the root of any integer polynomial. Every real transcendental number must also be [[irrational number|irrational]], since a [[rational number]] is the root of an integer polynomial of [[degree of a polynomial|degree]] one.<ref>{{harvnb|Hardy|1979}}</ref> The set of transcendental numbers is [[uncountable|uncountably infinite]]. Since the polynomials with rational coefficients are [[countable]], and since each such polynomial has a finite number of [[zero of a function|zeroes]], the [[algebraic number]]s must also be countable. However, [[Cantor's diagonal argument]] proves that the real numbers (and therefore also the [[complex number]]s) are uncountable. Since the real numbers are the union of algebraic and transcendental numbers, it is impossible for both [[subset]]s to be countable. This makes the transcendental numbers uncountable.


No [[rational number]] is transcendental and all real transcendental numbers are irrational. The [[irrational number]]s contain all the real transcendental numbers and a subset of the algebraic numbers, including the [[quadratic irrational]]s and other forms of algebraic irrationals.
No [[rational number]] is transcendental and all real transcendental numbers are irrational. The [[irrational number]]s contain all the real transcendental numbers and a subset of the algebraic numbers, including the [[quadratic irrational]]s and other forms of algebraic irrationals.
Line 40: Line 42:
Applying any non-constant single-variable [[algebraic function]] to a transcendental argument yields a transcendental value. For example, from knowing that {{mvar|π}} is transcendental, it can be immediately deduced that numbers such as <math>5\pi</math>, <math>\tfrac{\pi - 3}{\sqrt{2}}</math>, <math>(\sqrt{\pi}-\sqrt{3})^8</math>, and <math>\sqrt[4]{\pi^5+7}</math> are transcendental as well.
Applying any non-constant single-variable [[algebraic function]] to a transcendental argument yields a transcendental value. For example, from knowing that {{mvar|π}} is transcendental, it can be immediately deduced that numbers such as <math>5\pi</math>, <math>\tfrac{\pi - 3}{\sqrt{2}}</math>, <math>(\sqrt{\pi}-\sqrt{3})^8</math>, and <math>\sqrt[4]{\pi^5+7}</math> are transcendental as well.


However, an algebraic function of several variables may yield an algebraic number when applied to transcendental numbers if these numbers are not [[algebraically independent]]. For example, {{mvar|π}} and {{math|(1 − ''π'')}} are both transcendental, but {{math|''π'' + (1 − ''π'') {{=}} 1}} is obviously not. It is unknown whether {{math|''e'' + ''π''}}, for example, is transcendental, though at least one of {{math|''e'' + ''π''}} and {{mvar|eπ}} must be transcendental. More generally, for any two transcendental numbers {{mvar|a}} and {{mvar|b}}, at least one of {{math|''a'' + ''b''}} and {{mvar|ab}} must be transcendental. To see this, consider the polynomial {{math|(''x'' − ''a'')(''x'' − ''b'') {{=}} ''x''<sup>2</sup> − (''a'' + ''b'') ''x'' + ''a b''}}&nbsp;. If {{math| (''a'' + ''b'')}} and {{mvar|a b}} were both algebraic, then this would be a polynomial with algebraic coefficients. Because algebraic numbers form an [[algebraically closed field]], this would imply that the roots of the polynomial, {{mvar|a}} and {{mvar|b}}, must be algebraic. But this is a contradiction, and thus it must be the case that at least one of the coefficients is transcendental.
However, an [[algebraic function]] of several variables may yield an algebraic number when applied to transcendental numbers if these numbers are not [[algebraically independent]]. For example, {{mvar|π}} and {{math|(1 − ''π'')}} are both transcendental, but {{math|''π'' + (1 − ''π'') {{=}} 1}} is obviously not. It is unknown whether {{math|''e'' + ''π''}}, for example, is transcendental, though at least one of {{math|''e'' + ''π''}} and {{mvar|eπ}} must be transcendental. More generally, for any two transcendental numbers {{mvar|a}} and {{mvar|b}}, at least one of {{math|''a'' + ''b''}} and {{mvar|ab}} must be transcendental. To see this, consider the polynomial {{math|(''x'' − ''a'')(''x'' − ''b'') {{=}} ''x''<sup>2</sup> − (''a'' + ''b'') ''x'' + ''a b''}}&nbsp;. If {{math| (''a'' + ''b'')}} and {{mvar|a b}} were both algebraic, then this would be a polynomial with algebraic coefficients. Because algebraic numbers form an [[algebraically closed field]], this would imply that the roots of the polynomial, {{mvar|a}} and {{mvar|b}}, must be algebraic. But this is a contradiction, and thus it must be the case that at least one of the coefficients is transcendental.


The [[non-computable numbers]] are a strict subset of the transcendental numbers.
The [[non-computable numbers]] are a strict subset of the transcendental numbers.


All [[Liouville number]]s are transcendental, but not vice versa. Any Liouville number must have unbounded partial quotients in its [[continued fraction]] expansion. Using a [[Cantor's diagonal argument|counting argument]] one can show that there exist transcendental numbers which have bounded partial quotients and hence are not Liouville numbers.
All [[Liouville number]]s are transcendental, but not vice versa. Any Liouville number must have unbounded partial quotients in its [[continued fraction]] expansion. Using a [[Cantor's diagonal argument|counting argument]] one can show that there exist transcendental numbers which have bounded partial quotients and hence are not Liouville numbers.


Using the explicit continued fraction expansion of {{mvar|e}}, one can show that {{mvar|e}} is not a Liouville number (although the partial quotients in its continued fraction expansion are unbounded). [[Kurt Mahler]] showed in 1953 that {{mvar|π}} is also not a Liouville number. It is conjectured that all infinite continued fractions with bounded terms, that have a "simple" structure, and that are not eventually periodic are transcendental<ref>{{harvnb|Adamczewski|Bugeaud|2005}}</ref> (in other words, algebraic irrational roots of at least third degree polynomials do not have apparent pattern in their continued fraction expansions, since eventually periodic continued fractions correspond to quadratic irrationals, see [[Hermite's problem]]).
Using the explicit continued fraction expansion of {{mvar|e}}, one can show that {{mvar|e}} is not a Liouville number (although the partial quotients in its continued fraction expansion are unbounded). [[Kurt Mahler]] showed in 1953 that {{mvar|π}} is also not a Liouville number. It is conjectured that all infinite continued fractions with bounded terms, that have a "simple" structure, and that are not eventually periodic are transcendental<ref>{{harvnb|Adamczewski|Bugeaud|2005}}</ref> (in other words, algebraic irrational roots of at least third degree polynomials do not have apparent pattern in their continued fraction expansions, since eventually periodic continued fractions correspond to quadratic irrationals, see [[Hermite's problem]]).


==Numbers proven to be transcendental==
==Numbers proven to be transcendental==
Line 60: Line 62:
* {{math|[[natural logarithm|ln]] ''a''}} if {{mvar|a}} is algebraic and not equal to 0 or 1, for any branch of the logarithm function (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem), in particular: the [[universal parabolic constant]].
* {{math|[[natural logarithm|ln]] ''a''}} if {{mvar|a}} is algebraic and not equal to 0 or 1, for any branch of the logarithm function (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem), in particular: the [[universal parabolic constant]].
* {{math|[[Logarithm|log]]<sub>''b''</sub> ''a''}} if {{mvar|a}} and {{mvar|b}} are positive integers not both powers of the same integer, and {{mvar|a}} is not equal to 1 (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem).
* {{math|[[Logarithm|log]]<sub>''b''</sub> ''a''}} if {{mvar|a}} and {{mvar|b}} are positive integers not both powers of the same integer, and {{mvar|a}} is not equal to 1 (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem).
* {{math|[[inverse trigonometric functions|arcsin]] ''a''}}, {{math|arccos ''a''}}, {{math|arctan ''a''}}, {{math|arccsc ''a''}}, {{math|arcsec ''a''}}, {{math|arccot ''a''}} and their [[Inverse hyperbolic functions|hyperbolic counterparts]], for any algebraic number {{mvar|a}} where <math>a \notin \{0,1\}</math> (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).
* Non-zero results of {{math|[[inverse trigonometric functions|arcsin]] ''a''}}, {{math|arccos ''a''}}, {{math|arctan ''a''}}, {{math|arccsc ''a''}}, {{math|arcsec ''a''}}, {{math|arccot ''a''}} and their [[Inverse hyperbolic functions|hyperbolic counterparts]], for any algebraic number {{mvar|a}} (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).
* The [[Bessel function|Bessel function of the first kind]] {{math|''J''<sub>''ν''</sub>(''x'')}}, its first derivative, and the quotient <math>\tfrac{J'_\nu (x)}{J_\nu (x)}</math> are transcendental when ''ν'' is rational and ''x'' is algebraic and nonzero,<ref>{{cite book |last1=Siegel |first1=Carl L. |title=On Some Applications of Diophantine Approximations |chapter=Über einige Anwendungen diophantischer Approximationen: Abhandlungen der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Physikalisch-mathematische Klasse 1929, Nr. 1 |date=2014 |publisher=Scuola Normale Superiore |isbn=978-88-7642-520-2 |pages=81–138 |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-7642-520-2_2 |language=de |doi=10.1007/978-88-7642-520-2_2 }}</ref> and all nonzero roots of {{math|''J''<sub>''ν''</sub>(x)}} and {{math|''J''{{'}}<sub>''ν''</sub>(x)}} are transcendental when ''ν'' is rational.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lorch |first1=Lee |last2=Muldoon |first2=Martin E. |title=Transcendentality of zeros of higher dereivatives of functions involving Bessel functions |journal=International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences |date=1995 |volume=18 |issue=3 |pages=551–560 |doi=10.1155/S0161171295000706 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
* The [[Bessel function|Bessel function of the first kind]] {{math|''J''<sub>''ν''</sub>(''x'')}}, its first derivative, and the quotient <math>\tfrac{J'_\nu (x)}{J_\nu (x)}</math> are transcendental when ''ν'' is rational and ''x'' is algebraic and nonzero,<ref>{{cite book |last1=Siegel |first1=Carl L. |title=On Some Applications of Diophantine Approximations |chapter=Über einige Anwendungen diophantischer Approximationen: Abhandlungen der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Physikalisch-mathematische Klasse 1929, Nr. 1 |date=2014 |publisher=Scuola Normale Superiore |isbn=978-88-7642-520-2 |pages=81–138 |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-7642-520-2_2 |language=de |doi=10.1007/978-88-7642-520-2_2 }}</ref> and all nonzero roots of {{math|''J''<sub>''ν''</sub>(x)}} and {{math|''J''{{'}}<sub>''ν''</sub>(x)}} are transcendental when ''ν'' is rational.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lorch |first1=Lee |last2=Muldoon |first2=Martin E. |title=Transcendentality of zeros of higher dereivatives of functions involving Bessel functions |journal=International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences |date=1995 |volume=18 |issue=3 |pages=551–560 |doi=10.1155/S0161171295000706 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
* {{math|''[[Lambert W function|W]]''(''a'')}} if {{mvar|a}} is algebraic and nonzero, for any branch of the Lambert W Function (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem), in particular: {{math|Ω}} the [[omega constant]]
* {{math|''[[Lambert W function|W]]''(''a'')}} if {{mvar|a}} is algebraic and nonzero, for any branch of the Lambert W Function (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem), in particular: {{math|Ω}} the [[omega constant]]
* {{math|''W''(''r'',''a'')}} if both {{mvar|a}} and the order {{mvar|r}} are algebraic such that <math>a \neq 0</math>, for any branch of the generalized Lambert W function.<ref>{{Cite arXiv |first1=István |last1=Mező |first2=Árpád |last2=Baricz |date=June 22, 2015 |title=On the generalization of the Lambert W function |class=math.CA |eprint=1408.3999 }}</ref>
* {{math|''W''(''r'',''a'')}} if both {{mvar|a}} and the order {{mvar|r}} are algebraic such that <math>a \neq 0</math>, for any branch of the generalized Lambert W function.<ref>{{Cite arXiv |first1=István |last1=Mező |first2=Árpád |last2=Baricz |date=June 22, 2015 |title=On the generalization of the Lambert W function |class=math.CA |eprint=1408.3999 }}</ref>
* {{math|{{sqrt|''x''}}{{sub|''s''}}}}, the [[Tetration#Square super-root|square super-root]] of any natural number is either an integer or transcendental (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem)
* {{math|{{sqrt|''x''}}{{sub|''s''}}}}, the [[Tetration#Square super-root|square super-root]] of any natural number is either an integer or transcendental (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem)
* <math>\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{3}\right)\ </math>,<ref>{{harvnb|le Lionnais|1979|p=46}} via Wolfram Mathworld, [http://mathworld.wolfram.com/TranscendentalNumber.html Transcendental Number]</ref> <math>\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{4}\right)\ </math>,<ref name = "Chudnovsky">{{harvnb|Chudnovsky|1984}} via Wolfram Mathworld, [http://mathworld.wolfram.com/TranscendentalNumber.html Transcendental Number]</ref> and <math>\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{6}\right)\ </math>.<ref name = "Chudnovsky"/> The numbers <math>\ \operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{2}{3}\right)\ ,</math> <math>\ \operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{3}{4}\right)\ ,</math> and <math>\ \operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{5}{6}\right)\ </math> are also known to be transcendental. The numbers <math>\ \tfrac{1}{\pi}\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{4}\right)^4\ </math> and <math>\ \tfrac{1}{\pi}\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{3}\right)^2\ </math> are also transcendental.<ref name=":0">{{cite web |title=Mathematical constants |department=Mathematics (general) |url=https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/mathematics/recreational-mathematics/mathematical-constants |access-date=2022-09-22 |website=Cambridge University Press |lang=en}}</ref>
* <math>\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{3}\right)\ </math>,<ref>{{harvnb|le Lionnais|1979|p=46}} via Wolfram Mathworld, [http://mathworld.wolfram.com/TranscendentalNumber.html Transcendental Number]</ref> <math>\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{4}\right)\ </math>,<ref name = "Chudnovsky">{{harvnb|Chudnovsky|1984}} via Wolfram Mathworld, [http://mathworld.wolfram.com/TranscendentalNumber.html Transcendental Number]</ref> and <math>\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{6}\right)\ </math>.<ref name = "Chudnovsky"/> The numbers <math>\ \operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{2}{3}\right)\ ,</math> <math>\ \operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{3}{4}\right)\ ,</math> and <math>\ \operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{5}{6}\right)\ </math> are also known to be transcendental. The numbers <math>\ \tfrac{1}{\pi}\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{4}\right)^4\ </math> and <math>\ \tfrac{1}{\pi}\operatorname\Gamma\left(\tfrac{1}{3}\right)^2\ </math> are also transcendental.<ref name=":0">{{cite web |title=Mathematical constants |department=Mathematics (general) |url=https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/mathematics/recreational-mathematics/mathematical-constants |access-date=2022-09-22 |website=Cambridge University Press |language=en}}</ref>
* The values of [[Beta function|Euler beta function]] <math>\Beta(a,b)</math> (in which {{mvar|a}}, {{mvar|b}} and <math>a+b</math> are non-integer rational numbers).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Waldschmidt |first=Michel |date=September 7, 2005 |title=Transcendence of Periods: The State of the Art |url=https://webusers.imj-prg.fr/~michel.waldschmidt/articles/pdf/TranscendencePeriods.pdf |website=webusers.imj-prg.fr}}</ref>
* The values of [[Beta function|Euler beta function]] <math>\Beta(a,b)</math> (in which {{mvar|a}}, {{mvar|b}} and <math>a+b</math> are non-integer rational numbers).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Waldschmidt |first=Michel |date=September 7, 2005 |title=Transcendence of Periods: The State of the Art |url=https://webusers.imj-prg.fr/~michel.waldschmidt/articles/pdf/TranscendencePeriods.pdf |website=webusers.imj-prg.fr}}</ref>
* {{nobr|{{math|0.64341054629 ...}} ,}} [[Cahen's constant]].<ref>{{harvnb|Davison|Shallit|1991}}</ref>
* {{nobr|{{math|0.64341054629 ...}} ,}} [[Cahen's constant]].<ref>{{harvnb|Davison|Shallit|1991}}</ref>
* <math>\pi + \ln (2) + \sqrt{2} \ln (3)</math>.<ref name=":1" /> In general, all numbers of the form <math>\pi + \beta_1 \ln (a_1) + \cdots + \beta_n \ln (a_n)</math> are transcendental, where <math>\beta_j</math> are algebraic for all <math>1 \leq j \leq n</math> and <math>a_j</math> are non-zero algebraic for all <math>1 \leq j \leq n</math> (by the [[Baker's theorem]]).
* <math>\pi + \ln (2) + \sqrt{2} \ln (3)</math>.<ref name=":1" /> In general, all numbers of the form <math>\pi + \beta_1 \ln (a_1) + \cdots + \beta_n \ln (a_n)</math> are transcendental, where <math>\beta_j</math> are algebraic for all <math>1 \leq j \leq n</math> and <math>a_j</math> are non-zero algebraic for all <math>1 \leq j \leq n</math> (by the [[Baker's theorem]]).

* The [[Champernowne constant]]s, the irrational numbers formed by concatenating representations of all positive integers.<ref>{{harvnb|Mahler|1937}}; {{harvnb|Mahler|1976|p=12}}</ref>
* The [[Champernowne constant]]s, the irrational numbers formed by concatenating representations of all positive integers.<ref>{{harvnb|Mahler|1937}}; {{harvnb|Mahler|1976|p=12}}</ref>
* {{math|Ω}}, [[Chaitin's constant]] (since it is a non-computable number).<ref>{{harvnb|Calude|2002|page=239}}</ref>
* {{math|Ω}}, [[Chaitin's constant]] (since it is a non-computable number).<ref>{{harvnb|Calude|2002|page=239}}</ref>
* The supremum limit of the [[Specker sequence|Specker sequences]] (since they are non-computable numbers).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Grue Simonsen |first=Jakob |title=Specker Sequences Revisited |url=http://hjemmesider.diku.dk/~simonsen/papers/j2.pdf |website=hjemmesider.diku.dk}}</ref>
* The supremum limit of the [[Specker sequence]]s (since they are non-computable numbers).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Grue Simonsen |first=Jakob |title=Specker Sequences Revisited |url=http://hjemmesider.diku.dk/~simonsen/papers/j2.pdf |website=hjemmesider.diku.dk}}</ref>
* The so-called ''Fredholm constants,'' such as<ref name="Kempner" /><ref name="Sha1999">{{harvnb|Shallit|1996}}</ref>{{efn|
* The so-called ''Fredholm constants,'' such as<ref name="Kempner" /><ref name="Sha1999">{{harvnb|Shallit|1996}}</ref>{{efn|
The name 'Fredholm number' is misplaced: Kempner first proved this number is transcendental, and the note on page 403 states that Fredholm never studied this number.<ref>{{harvnb|Allouche|Shallit|2003|pp=385,403}}</ref>
The name 'Fredholm number' is misplaced: Kempner first proved this number is transcendental, and the note on page 403 states that Fredholm never studied this number.<ref>{{harvnb|Allouche|Shallit|2003|pp=385,403}}</ref>
Line 79: Line 80:
:which also holds by replacing 10 with any algebraic number {{math|''b'' > 1}}.<ref name=Lox1988>{{harvnb|Loxton|1988}}</ref>
:which also holds by replacing 10 with any algebraic number {{math|''b'' > 1}}.<ref name=Lox1988>{{harvnb|Loxton|1988}}</ref>
* <math>\frac{{\arctan(x)}}{\pi}</math> , for rational number {{mvar|x}} such that <math>x \notin \{0,\pm{1}\}</math>.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Weisstein |first=Eric W. |title=Transcendental Number |url=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ |access-date=2023-08-09 |website=mathworld.wolfram.com |language=en}}</ref>
* <math>\frac{{\arctan(x)}}{\pi}</math> , for rational number {{mvar|x}} such that <math>x \notin \{0,\pm{1}\}</math>.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Weisstein |first=Eric W. |title=Transcendental Number |url=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ |access-date=2023-08-09 |website=mathworld.wolfram.com |language=en}}</ref>

* The values of the [[Rogers–Ramanujan continued fraction|Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction]] <math>R(q)</math> where <math>{{q}} \in \mathbb C</math> is algebraic and <math>0 < |q| < 1</math>.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Duverney |first1=Daniel |last2=Nishioka |first2=Keiji |last3=Nishioka |first3=Kumiko |last4=Shiokawa |first4=Iekata |title=Transcendence of Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction and reciprocal sums of Fibonacci numbers |journal=Proceedings of the Japan Academy, Series A, Mathematical Sciences |volume=73 |issue=7 |pages=140–142 |doi=10.3792/pjaa.73.140 |issn=0386-2194 |date=1997|doi-access=free }}</ref> The lemniscatic values of [[theta function]] <math>\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2}</math> (under the same conditions for <math>{{q}}</math>) are also transcendental.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bertrand |first=Daniel |date=1997 |title=Theta functions and transcendence |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1009749608672 |journal=The Ramanujan Journal |volume=1 |issue=4 |pages=339–350 |doi=10.1023/A:1009749608672|s2cid=118628723 }}</ref>
* The values of the [[Rogers–Ramanujan continued fraction|Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction]] <math>R(q)</math> where <math>{{q}} \in \mathbb C</math> is algebraic and <math>0 < |q| < 1</math>.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Duverney |first1=Daniel |last2=Nishioka |first2=Keiji |last3=Nishioka |first3=Kumiko |last4=Shiokawa |first4=Iekata |title=Transcendence of Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction and reciprocal sums of Fibonacci numbers |journal=Proceedings of the Japan Academy, Series A, Mathematical Sciences |volume=73 |issue=7 |pages=140–142 |doi=10.3792/pjaa.73.140 |issn=0386-2194 |date=1997|doi-access=free }}</ref> The lemniscatic values of [[theta function]] <math>\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2}</math> (under the same conditions for <math>{{q}}</math>) are also transcendental.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bertrand |first=Daniel |date=1997 |title=Theta functions and transcendence |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1009749608672 |journal=The Ramanujan Journal |volume=1 |issue=4 |pages=339–350 |doi=10.1023/A:1009749608672|s2cid=118628723 }}</ref>
* {{math|''[[j-invariant|j]]''(''q'')}} where <math>{{q}} \in \mathbb C</math> is algebraic but not imaginary quadratic (i.e, the [[Transcendental function|exceptional set]] of this function is the number field whose degree of [[Field extension|extension]] over <math>\mathbb Q</math> is 2).
* {{math|''[[j-invariant|j]]''(''q'')}} where <math>{{q}} \in \mathbb C</math> is algebraic but not imaginary quadratic (i.e, the [[Transcendental function|exceptional set]] of this function is the number field whose degree of [[Field extension|extension]] over <math>\mathbb Q</math> is 2).
Line 87: Line 87:
* [[Gauss's constant]] and the related [[lemniscate constant]].<ref>{{Cite journal|title=The lemniscate constants|last=Todd|first=John|date=1975|journal=Communications of the ACM|volume=18|pages=14–19|doi=10.1145/360569.360580|s2cid=85873|doi-access=free}}</ref>
* [[Gauss's constant]] and the related [[lemniscate constant]].<ref>{{Cite journal|title=The lemniscate constants|last=Todd|first=John|date=1975|journal=Communications of the ACM|volume=18|pages=14–19|doi=10.1145/360569.360580|s2cid=85873|doi-access=free}}</ref>
* Any number of the form <math>\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{E_n(\beta^{r^n})}{F_n(\beta^{r^n})}</math> (where <math>E_n(z)</math>, <math>F_n(z)</math> are polynomials in variables <math>n</math> and <math>z</math>, <math>\beta</math> is algebraic and <math>\beta \neq 0</math>, <math>r</math> is any integer greater than 1).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Kurosawa |first=Takeshi |date=2007-03-01 |title=Transcendence of certain series involving binary linear recurrences |journal=Journal of Number Theory |language=en |volume=123 |issue=1 |pages=35–58 |doi=10.1016/j.jnt.2006.05.019 |issn=0022-314X|doi-access=free }}</ref>
* Any number of the form <math>\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{E_n(\beta^{r^n})}{F_n(\beta^{r^n})}</math> (where <math>E_n(z)</math>, <math>F_n(z)</math> are polynomials in variables <math>n</math> and <math>z</math>, <math>\beta</math> is algebraic and <math>\beta \neq 0</math>, <math>r</math> is any integer greater than 1).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Kurosawa |first=Takeshi |date=2007-03-01 |title=Transcendence of certain series involving binary linear recurrences |journal=Journal of Number Theory |language=en |volume=123 |issue=1 |pages=35–58 |doi=10.1016/j.jnt.2006.05.019 |issn=0022-314X|doi-access=free }}</ref>

* Artificially constructed non-[[Period (algebraic geometry)|periodic]] numbers.<ref>{{cite arXiv |last=Yoshinaga |first=Masahiko |date=2008-05-03 |title=Periods and elementary real numbers |eprint=0805.0349 |class=math.AG}}</ref>
* Artificially constructed non-[[Period (algebraic geometry)|periodic]] numbers.<ref>{{cite arXiv |last=Yoshinaga |first=Masahiko |date=2008-05-03 |title=Periods and elementary real numbers |eprint=0805.0349 |class=math.AG}}</ref>
* The Robbins constant in [[Mean line segment length|three-dimensional line picking problem]].<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/mathematicalcons0000finc|url-access=registration|quote=Schmutz.|title=Mathematical Constants|author=Steven R. Finch|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2003|isbn=978-3-540-67695-9|page=[https://archive.org/details/mathematicalcons0000finc/page/479 479]}}</ref>
* The Robbins constant in [[Mean line segment length|three-dimensional line picking problem]].<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/mathematicalcons0000finc|url-access=registration|quote=Schmutz.|title=Mathematical Constants|author=Steven R. Finch|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2003|isbn=978-3-540-67695-9|page=[https://archive.org/details/mathematicalcons0000finc/page/479 479]}}</ref>
* The aforementioned Liouville constant for any algebraic {{math|''b'' ∈ (0, 1)}}.
* The aforementioned Liouville constant for any algebraic {{math|''b'' ∈ (0, 1)}}.
* The sum of reciprocals of [[Exponential factorial|exponential factorials]].<ref name=":1" />
* The sum of reciprocals of [[exponential factorial]]s.<ref name=":1" />
* The [[Prouhet–Thue–Morse constant]]<ref>{{harvnb|Mahler|1929}}; {{harvnb|Allouche|Shallit|2003|p=387}}</ref> and the related rabbit constant.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Weisstein |first=Eric W. |title=Rabbit Constant |url=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ |access-date=2023-08-09 |website=mathworld.wolfram.com |language=en}}</ref>
* The [[Prouhet–Thue–Morse constant]]<ref>{{harvnb|Mahler|1929}}; {{harvnb|Allouche|Shallit|2003|p=387}}</ref> and the related rabbit constant.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Weisstein |first=Eric W. |title=Rabbit Constant |url=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ |access-date=2023-08-09 |website=mathworld.wolfram.com |language=en}}</ref>
* The [[Komornik–Loreti constant]].<ref>{{citation|last1=Allouche|first1=Jean-Paul|last2=Cosnard|first2=Michel|doi=10.2307/2695302|issue=5|journal=American Mathematical Monthly|jstor=2695302|mr=1763399|pages=448–449|title=The Komornik–Loreti constant is transcendental|volume=107|year=2000}}</ref>
* The [[Komornik–Loreti constant]].<ref>{{citation|last1=Allouche|first1=Jean-Paul|last2=Cosnard|first2=Michel|doi=10.2307/2695302|issue=5|journal=American Mathematical Monthly|jstor=2695302|mr=1763399|pages=448–449|title=The Komornik–Loreti constant is transcendental|volume=107|year=2000}}</ref>
Line 102: Line 101:
* 3.300330000000000330033... and its reciprocal 0.30300000303..., two numbers with only two different decimal digits whose nonzero digit positions are given by the [[Moser–de Bruijn sequence]] and its double.<ref>{{harvnb|Blanchard|Mendès France|1982}}</ref>
* 3.300330000000000330033... and its reciprocal 0.30300000303..., two numbers with only two different decimal digits whose nonzero digit positions are given by the [[Moser–de Bruijn sequence]] and its double.<ref>{{harvnb|Blanchard|Mendès France|1982}}</ref>
* The number <math>\tfrac{\pi}{2} \tfrac{Y_0 (2)}{J_0 (2)} - \gamma</math>, where {{math|''Y''{{sub|''α''}}(''x'')}} and {{math|''J''{{sub|''α''}}(''x'')}} are Bessel functions and {{mvar|γ}} is the [[Euler–Mascheroni constant]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Mahler |first1=Kurt |last2=Mordell |first2=Louis Joel |date=1968-06-04 |title=Applications of a theorem by A. B. Shidlovski |journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences |volume=305 |issue=1481 |pages=149–173 |doi=10.1098/rspa.1968.0111 |bibcode=1968RSPSA.305..149M |s2cid=123486171 |url=https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.1968.0111}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lagarias |first=Jeffrey C. |date=2013-07-19 |title=Euler's constant: Euler's work and modern developments |arxiv=1303.1856 |journal=Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society |volume=50 |issue=4 |pages=527–628 |doi=10.1090/S0273-0979-2013-01423-X |doi-access=free |issn=0273-0979}}</ref>
* The number <math>\tfrac{\pi}{2} \tfrac{Y_0 (2)}{J_0 (2)} - \gamma</math>, where {{math|''Y''{{sub|''α''}}(''x'')}} and {{math|''J''{{sub|''α''}}(''x'')}} are Bessel functions and {{mvar|γ}} is the [[Euler–Mascheroni constant]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Mahler |first1=Kurt |last2=Mordell |first2=Louis Joel |date=1968-06-04 |title=Applications of a theorem by A. B. Shidlovski |journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences |volume=305 |issue=1481 |pages=149–173 |doi=10.1098/rspa.1968.0111 |bibcode=1968RSPSA.305..149M |s2cid=123486171 |url=https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.1968.0111}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lagarias |first=Jeffrey C. |date=2013-07-19 |title=Euler's constant: Euler's work and modern developments |arxiv=1303.1856 |journal=Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society |volume=50 |issue=4 |pages=527–628 |doi=10.1090/S0273-0979-2013-01423-X |doi-access=free |issn=0273-0979}}</ref>
* Nesterenko proved in 1996 that <math>\pi,e^\pi</math> and <math>\Gamma(1/4)</math> are algebraically independent.<ref name=":0" /> This results in the transcendence of the Weierstrass constant<ref>{{Cite web |last=Weisstein |first=Eric W. |title=Weierstrass Constant |url=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/WeierstrassConstant.html|access-date=2023-08-12 |website=mathworld.wolfram.com |language=en}}</ref> and the number <math>\sum_{n=2}^\infty \frac{1}{n^4-1}</math>.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Elsner |first1=Carsten |last2=Shimomura |first2=Shun |last3=Shiokawa |first3=Iekata |date=2012-09-01 |title=Algebraic independence of certain numbers related to modular functions |journal=Functiones et Approximatio Commentarii Mathematici |volume=47 |issue=1 |doi=10.7169/facm/2012.47.1.10 |issn=0208-6573|doi-access=free }}</ref>

* Nesterenko proved in 1996 that <math>\pi,e^\pi</math> and <math>\Gamma(1/4)</math> are algebraically independent.<ref name=":0" /> This results in the transcendence of the Weierstrass constant<ref>{{Cite web |last=Weisstein |first=Eric W. |title=Weierstrass Constant |url=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ |access-date=2023-08-12 |website=mathworld.wolfram.com |language=en}}</ref> and the number <math>\sum_{n=2}^\infty \frac{1}{n^4-1}</math>.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Elsner |first1=Carsten |last2=Shimomura |first2=Shun |last3=Shiokawa |first3=Iekata |date=2012-09-01 |title=Algebraic independence of certain numbers related to modular functions |journal=Functiones et Approximatio Commentarii Mathematici |volume=47 |issue=1 |doi=10.7169/facm/2012.47.1.10 |issn=0208-6573|doi-access=free }}</ref>


==Possible transcendental numbers==
==Possible transcendental numbers==
Numbers which have yet to be proven to be either transcendental or algebraic:
Numbers which have yet to be proven to be either transcendental or algebraic:
* Most sums, products, powers, etc. of the number {{mvar|π}} and the [[E (mathematical constant)|number {{mvar|e}}]], e.g. {{mvar|eπ}}, {{math|''e'' + ''π''}}, {{math|''π'' − ''e''}}, {{math|''π''/''e''}}, {{mvar|π}}<sup>{{mvar|π}}</sup>, {{math|''e''<sup>''e''</sup>}}, {{math|''π''<sup>''e''</sup>}}, {{math|''π''{{sup|{{sqrt|2}}}}}}, {{math|''e''<sup>''π''<sup>2</sup></sup>}} are not known to be rational, algebraically irrational or transcendental. A notable exception is {{math|''e''{{sup|''π''{{sqrt|''n''}}}}}} (for any positive integer {{mvar|n}}) which has been proven transcendental.<ref>{{MathWorld|IrrationalNumber|Irrational Number}}</ref> It has been shown that both {{math|''e'' + ''π''}} and {{math|''π''/''e''}} do not satisfy any [[polynomial equation]] of degree {{math|<math>\leq 8</math>}} and integer coefficients of average size 10<sup>9</sup>.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Weisstein |first=Eric W. |title=e |url=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ |access-date=2023-08-12 |website=mathworld.wolfram.com |language=en}}</ref>
* Most sums, products, powers, etc. of the number {{mvar|π}} and the [[E (mathematical constant)|number {{mvar|e}}]], e.g. {{mvar|eπ}}, {{math|''e'' + ''π''}}, {{math|''π'' − ''e''}}, {{math|''π''/''e''}}, {{mvar|π}}<sup>{{mvar|π}}</sup>, {{math|''e''<sup>''e''</sup>}}, {{math|''π''<sup>''e''</sup>}}, {{math|''π''{{sup|{{sqrt|2}}}}}}, {{math|''e''<sup>''π''<sup>2</sup></sup>}} are not known to be rational, algebraically irrational or transcendental. A notable exception is {{math|''e''{{sup|''π''{{sqrt|''n''}}}}}} (for any positive integer {{mvar|n}}) which has been proven transcendental.<ref>{{MathWorld|IrrationalNumber|Irrational Number}}</ref> At least one of the numbers {{math|''e''<sup>''e''</sup>}} and {{math|''e''<sup>''e<sup>2</sup>''</sup>}} is transcendental, according to W. D. Brownawell (1974).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Brownawell |first=W. Dale |date=1974-02-01 |title=The algebraic independence of certain numbers related by the exponential function |url=https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974JNT.....6...22B |journal=Journal of Number Theory |volume=6 |pages=22–31 |doi=10.1016/0022-314X(74)90005-5 |issn=0022-314X|doi-access=free }}</ref> It has been shown that both {{math|''e'' + ''π''}} and {{math|''π''/''e''}} do not satisfy any [[polynomial equation]] of degree {{math|<math>\leq 8</math>}} and integer coefficients of average size 10<sup>9</sup>.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Weisstein |first=Eric W. |title=e |url=https://mathworld.wolfram.com/ |access-date=2023-08-12 |website=mathworld.wolfram.com |language=en}}</ref>
* The [[Euler–Mascheroni constant]] {{mvar|γ}}'':'' In 2010 M. Ram Murty and N. Saradha found an infinite list of numbers containing {{math|{{sfrac|''γ''|4}}}} such that all but at most one of them are transcendental.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Murty |first1=M. Ram |last2=Saradha |first2=N. |date=2010-12-01 |title=Euler–Lehmer constants and a conjecture of Erdös |journal=[[Journal of Number Theory]] |lang=en |volume=130 |issue=12 |pages=2671–2682 |doi=10.1016/j.jnt.2010.07.004 |doi-access=free |issn=0022-314X}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Murty |first1=M. Ram |last2=Zaytseva |first2=Anastasia |date=2013-01-01 |title=Transcendence of generalized Euler constants |journal=[[The American Mathematical Monthly]] |volume=120 |issue=1 |pages=48–54 |doi=10.4169/amer.math.monthly.120.01.048 |s2cid=20495981 |issn=0002-9890}}</ref> In 2012 it was shown that at least one of {{mvar|γ}} and the [[Gompertz constant|Euler–Gompertz constant]] {{mvar|δ}} is transcendental.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Rivoal |first=Tanguy |date=2012 |title=On the arithmetic nature of the values of the gamma function, Euler's constant, and Gompertz's constant|journal=Michigan Mathematical Journal |lang=en |volume=61 |issue=2 |pages=239–254 |doi=10.1307/mmj/1339011525 |doi-access=free |issn=0026-2285 |url=https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.mmj/1339011525}}</ref>
* The [[Euler–Mascheroni constant]] {{mvar|γ}}'':'' In 2010 M. Ram Murty and N. Saradha found an infinite list of numbers containing {{math|{{sfrac|''γ''|4}}}} such that all but at most one of them are transcendental.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Murty |first1=M. Ram |last2=Saradha |first2=N. |date=2010-12-01 |title=Euler–Lehmer constants and a conjecture of Erdös |journal=[[Journal of Number Theory]] |language=en |volume=130 |issue=12 |pages=2671–2682 |doi=10.1016/j.jnt.2010.07.004 |doi-access=free |issn=0022-314X}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Murty |first1=M. Ram |last2=Zaytseva |first2=Anastasia |date=2013-01-01 |title=Transcendence of generalized Euler constants |journal=[[The American Mathematical Monthly]] |volume=120 |issue=1 |pages=48–54 |doi=10.4169/amer.math.monthly.120.01.048 |s2cid=20495981 |issn=0002-9890}}</ref> In 2012 it was shown that at least one of {{mvar|γ}} and the [[Gompertz constant|Euler–Gompertz constant]] {{mvar|δ}} is transcendental.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Rivoal |first=Tanguy |date=2012 |title=On the arithmetic nature of the values of the gamma function, Euler's constant, and Gompertz's constant|journal=Michigan Mathematical Journal |language=en |volume=61 |issue=2 |pages=239–254 |doi=10.1307/mmj/1339011525 |doi-access=free |issn=0026-2285 |url=https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.mmj/1339011525}}</ref>
* [[Apéry's constant]] {{math|''ζ''(3)}} (whose irrationality was proved by [[Apéry]]).
* [[Apéry's constant]] {{math|''ζ''(3)}} (whose irrationality was proved by [[Apéry]]).
* The [[reciprocal Fibonacci constant]] and reciprocal Lucas constant<ref>{{Cite web |title=A093540 - OEIS |url=https://oeis.org/A093540 |access-date=2023-08-12 |website=oeis.org}}</ref> (both of which have been proved to be irrational).
* The [[reciprocal Fibonacci constant]] and reciprocal Lucas constant<ref>{{Cite web |title=A093540 - OEIS |url=https://oeis.org/A093540 |access-date=2023-08-12 |website=oeis.org}}</ref> (both of which have been proved to be irrational).
Line 116: Line 114:
* The [[Feigenbaum constants]] {{mvar|δ}} and {{mvar|α}}, also not proven to be irrational.
* The [[Feigenbaum constants]] {{mvar|δ}} and {{mvar|α}}, also not proven to be irrational.
* [[Mills' constant]] and [[Twin prime#Conjectures|twin prime constant]] (also not proven to be irrational).
* [[Mills' constant]] and [[Twin prime#Conjectures|twin prime constant]] (also not proven to be irrational).
* The [[Tetration|cube super-root]] of any natural number is either an integer or irrational (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem). <ref>{{Cite web |last1=Marshall |first1=J. Ash |last2=Tan |first2=Yiren |date=March 2012 |title=A rational number of the form a<sup>a</sup> with a irrational |url=https://condor.depaul.edu/mash/atotheamg.pdf }}</ref> However, it is still unclear if the irrational numbers in the later case are all transcendental.{{citation needed|date=August 2023}}
* The second and later eigenvalues of the [[Gauss–Kuzmin–Wirsing operator|Gauss-Kuzmin-Wirsing operator]], also not proven to be irrational.
* The second and later eigenvalues of the [[Gauss–Kuzmin–Wirsing operator|Gauss-Kuzmin-Wirsing operator]], also not proven to be irrational.
* The [[Copeland–Erdős constant]], formed by concatenating the decimal representations of the prime numbers.
* The [[Copeland–Erdős constant]], formed by concatenating the decimal representations of the prime numbers.
Line 127: Line 124:
* [[Four exponentials conjecture]].
* [[Four exponentials conjecture]].


==Proofs for specific numbers==
==Sketch of a proof that {{mvar|e}} is transcendental==
===A proof that {{mvar|e}} is transcendental===
The first proof that [[E (mathematical constant)|the base of the natural logarithms, {{mvar|e}}]], is transcendental dates from 1873. We will now follow the strategy of [[David Hilbert]] (1862–1943) who gave a simplification of the original proof of [[Charles Hermite]]. The idea is the following:
The first proof that [[E (mathematical constant)|the base of the natural logarithms, {{mvar|e}}]], is transcendental dates from 1873. We will now follow the strategy of [[David Hilbert]] (1862–1943) who gave a simplification of the original proof of [[Charles Hermite]]. The idea is the following:


Assume, for purpose of [[Proof by contradiction|finding a contradiction]], that {{mvar|e}} is algebraic. Then there exists a finite set of integer coefficients {{math|''c''<sub>0</sub>, ''c''<sub>1</sub>, ..., ''c<sub>n</sub>''}} satisfying the equation:
Assume, for purpose of [[Proof by contradiction|finding a contradiction]], that {{mvar|e}} is algebraic. Then there exists a finite set of integer coefficients {{math|''c''<sub>0</sub>, ''c''<sub>1</sub>, ..., ''c<sub>n</sub>''}} satisfying the equation:
<math display=block>

<math display=block>c_{0} + c_{1}e + c_{2} e^{2} + \cdots+c_{n} e^{n} = 0, \qquad c_0, c_n \neq 0 ~.</math>
c_{0} + c_{1}e + c_{2} e^{2} + \cdots + c_{n} e^{n} = 0, \qquad c_0, c_n \neq 0 ~.
</math>
It is difficult to make use of the integer status of these coefficients when multiplied by a power of the irrational {{mvar|e}}, but we can absorb those powers into an integral which “mostly” will assume integer values. For a positive integer {{mvar|k}}, define the polynomial

<math display=block>
Now for a positive integer {{mvar|k}}, we define the following polynomial:
f_k(x) = x^{k} \left [(x-1)\cdots(x-n) \right ]^{k+1},

</math>
<math display=block>f_k(x) = x^{k} \left [(x-1)\cdots(x-n) \right ]^{k+1},</math>

and multiply both sides of the above equation by
and multiply both sides of the above equation by
<math display=block>

<math display=block>\int^{\infty}_{0} f_k\ e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x\ ,</math>
\int^{\infty}_{0} f_k(x) \, e^{-x}\, \mathrm{d}x\ ,
</math>

to arrive at the equation:
to arrive at the equation:
<math display=block>

<math display=block>c_{0} \left (\int^{\infty}_{0} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right)+ c_1e \left( \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right )+\cdots+ c_{n}e^{n} \left( \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right) = 0 ~.</math>
c_0 \left (\int^{\infty}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right) +
c_1 e \left( \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right )
+ \cdots +
c_{n}e^{n} \left( \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right) = 0 ~.
</math>


By splitting respective domains of integration, this equation can be written in the form
By splitting respective domains of integration, this equation can be written in the form
<math display=block>

<math display=block>P + Q = 0 </math>
P + Q = 0
</math>

where
where
<math display=block>
\begin{align}
P &= c_{0} \left( \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
+ c_{1} e \left( \int^{\infty}_{1} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
+ c_{2} e^{2} \left( \int^{\infty}_{2} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
+ \cdots
+ c_{n} e^{n} \left( \int^{\infty}_{n} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
\\
Q &= c_{1} e \left(\int^{1}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
+ c_{2}e^{2} \left( \int^{2}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
+ \cdots+c_{n} e^{n} \left( \int^{n}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
\end{align}
</math>
Here {{mvar|P}} will turn out to be an integer, but more importantly it grows quickly with {{mvar|k}}.


====Lemma 1====
<math display=block>\begin{align}
''There are arbitrarily large {{mvar|k}} such that <math>\ \tfrac{P}{k!}\ </math> is a non-zero integer.''
P &= c_{0} \left( \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right)+ c_{1} e \left( \int^{\infty}_{1} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right) + c_{2} e^{2} \left( \int^{\infty}_{2} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right) + \cdots + c_{n} e^{n} \left( \int^{\infty}_{n} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right) \\
Q &= c_{1} e \left(\int^{1}_{0} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right) + c_{2}e^{2} \left( \int^{2}_{0} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right) + \cdots+c_{n} e^{n} \left( \int^{n}_{0} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right)
\end{align}</math>


'''Proof.''' Recall the standard integral (case of the [[Gamma function]])
'''Lemma 1.''' For an appropriate choice of {{mvar|k}}, <math>\ \tfrac{P}{k!}\ </math> is a non-zero integer.
<math display=block>
\int^{\infty}_{0} t^{j} e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t = j!
</math>
valid for any [[natural number]] <math>j</math>. More generally,


: if <math> g(t) = \sum_{j=0}^m b_j t^j </math> then <math> \int^{\infty}_{0} g(t) e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t = \sum_{j=0}^m b_j j! </math>.
<blockquote>'''Proof.''' Each term in {{mvar|P}} is an integer times a sum of factorials, which results from the relation


This would allow us to compute <math>P</math> exactly, because any term of <math>P</math> can be rewritten as
<math display=block>\ \int^{\infty}_{0} x^{j} e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x = j!\ </math>
<math display=block>
c_{a} e^{a} \int^{\infty}_{a} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x =
c_{a} \int^{\infty}_{a} f_k(x) e^{-(x-a)} \,\mathrm{d}x =
\left\{ \begin{aligned} t &= x-a \\ x &= t+a \\ \mathrm{d}x &= \mathrm{d}t \end{aligned} \right\} =
c_a \int_0^\infty f_k(t+a) e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t
</math>
through a [[Integration by substitution|change of variables]]. Hence
<math display="block">
P = \sum_{a=0}^n c_a \int_0^\infty f_k(t+a) e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t
= \int_0^\infty \biggl( \sum_{a=0}^n c_a f_k(t+a) \biggr) e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t
</math>
That latter sum is a polynomial in <math>t</math> with integer coefficients, i.e., it is a linear combination of powers <math>t^j</math> with integer coefficients. Hence the number <math>P</math> is a linear combination (with those same integer coefficients) of factorials <math>j!</math>; in particular <math>P</math> is an integer.


Smaller factorials divide larger factorials, so the smallest <math>j!</math> occurring in that linear combination will also divide the whole of <math>P</math>. We get that <math>j!</math> from the lowest power <math>t^j</math> term appearing with a nonzero coefficient in <math>\textstyle \sum_{a=0}^n c_a f_k(t+a) </math>, but this smallest exponent <math>j</math> is also the [[Multiplicity (mathematics)#Multiplicity of a root of a polynomial|multiplicity]] of <math>t=0</math> as a root of this polynomial. <math>f_k(x)</math> is chosen to have multiplicity <math>k</math> of the root <math>x=0</math> and multiplicity <math>k+1</math> of the roots <math>x=a</math> for <math>a=1,\dots,n</math>, so that smallest exponent is <math>t^k</math> for <math>f_k(t)</math> and <math>t^{k+1}</math> for <math>f_k(t+a)</math> with <math> a>0 </math>. Therefore <math>k!</math> divides <math>P</math>.
which is valid for any positive integer {{mvar|j}} (consider the [[Gamma function]]).


To establish the last claim in the lemma, that <math>P</math> is nonzero, it is sufficient to prove that <math>k+1</math> does not divide <math>P</math>. To that end, let <math>k+1</math> be any [[prime number|prime]] larger than <math>n</math> and <math>|c_0|</math>. We know from the above that <math>(k+1)!</math> divides each of <math> \textstyle c_a \int_0^\infty f_k(t+a) e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t </math> for <math> 1 \leqslant a \leqslant n </math>, so in particular all of those ''are'' divisible by <math>k+1</math>. It comes down to the first term <math> \textstyle c_0 \int_0^\infty f_k(t) e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t </math>. We have (see [[falling and rising factorials]])
It is non-zero because for every {{mvar|a}} satisfying {{math| 0 < ''a'' ≤ ''n''}}, the integrand in
<math display=block>

f_k(t) = t^k \bigl[ (t-1) \cdots (t-n) \bigr]^{k+1} =
<math display=block>c_{a} e^{a} \int^{\infty}_{a} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x </math>
\bigl[ (-1)^{n}(n!) \bigr]^{k+1} t^k + \text{higher degree terms}

</math>
is {{mvar|e{{sup|−x}} }} times a sum of terms whose lowest power of {{mvar|x}} is {{math| ''k'' + 1 }} after substituting {{mvar|x}} for {{math| ''x'' + ''a'' }} in the integral. Then this becomes a sum of integrals of the form
and those higher degree terms all give rise to factorials <math>(k+1)!</math> or larger. Hence

<math display=block>
<math display=block>\ A_{j-k}\int^{\infty}_{0}x^{j}e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x\ </math> Where {{mvar|A{{sub|j−k}} }} is integer.
P \equiv

c_0 \int_0^\infty f_k(t) e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t \equiv
with {{math| ''k''+1 ≤ ''j''}}, and it is therefore an integer divisible by {{math| (''k''+1)!}}. After dividing by {{math| ''k!''}}, we get zero {{math|[[Modular arithmetic|mod]] ''k'' + 1}} . However, we can write:
c_0 \bigl[ (-1)^{n}(n!) \bigr]^{k+1} k! \pmod{(k+1)}

</math>
<math display=block>\ \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x = \int^{\infty}_{0} \left( \left[ m(-1)^{n}(n!) \right]^{k+1} e^{-x} x^k + \cdots \right)\ \mathrm{d}\ x\ </math>
That right hand side is a product of nonzero integer factors less than the prime <math>k+1</math>, therefore that product is not divisible by <math>k+1</math>, and the same holds for <math>P</math>; in particular <math>P</math> cannot be zero.

and thus

<math display=block>{\frac {1}{k!}}c_{0}\int _{0}^{\infty }f_{k} e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \equiv c_{0} \left[\ (-1)^{n}(n!)\ \right]^{k+1}\ \not\equiv\ 0{\pmod {k+1}} ~.</math>

So when dividing each integral in {{mvar|P}} by {{math|''k''!}}, the initial one is not divisible by {{math|''k'' + 1}}, but all the others are, as long as {{math|''k'' + 1}} is prime and larger than {{mvar|n}} and {{math| {{!}}''c''{{sub|0}}{{!}}&nbsp;}}. It follows that <math>\tfrac{P}{k!}\ </math> itself is not divisible by the prime {{nobr| {{math|''k'' + 1}} }} and therefore cannot be zero.</blockquote>


====Lemma 2====
'''Lemma 2.''' <math>\left| \tfrac{Q}{k!} \right| <1</math> for sufficiently large {{mvar|k}}.
''For sufficiently large {{mvar|k}}, <math>\left| \tfrac{Q}{k!} \right| <1</math>.''


<blockquote> '''Proof.''' Note that
'''Proof.''' Note that


<math display=block>\begin{align}
<math display=block>\begin{align}
Line 209: Line 235:
<math display=block>\ \left| \frac{Q}{k!} \right| < M \cdot \frac{G^k}{k!} \to 0 \quad \text{ as } k \to \infty\ ,</math>
<math display=block>\ \left| \frac{Q}{k!} \right| < M \cdot \frac{G^k}{k!} \to 0 \quad \text{ as } k \to \infty\ ,</math>


finishing the proof of this lemma.</blockquote>
finishing the proof of this lemma.

====Conclusion====


Choosing a value of {{mvar|k}} satisfying both lemmas leads to a non-zero integer <math>\left(\tfrac{P}{k!}\right)</math> added to a vanishingly small quantity <math>\left(\tfrac{Q}{k!}\right)</math> being equal to zero, is an impossibility. It follows that the original assumption, that {{mvar|e}} can satisfy a polynomial equation with integer coefficients, is also impossible; that is, {{mvar|e}} is transcendental.
Choosing a value of {{mvar|k}} satisfying both lemmas leads to a non-zero integer <math>\left(\tfrac{P}{k!}\right)</math> added to a vanishingly small quantity <math>\left(\tfrac{Q}{k!}\right)</math> being equal to zero, is an impossibility. It follows that the original assumption, that {{mvar|e}} can satisfy a polynomial equation with integer coefficients, is also impossible; that is, {{mvar|e}} is transcendental.
Line 517: Line 545:
* {{MathWorld |title=Liouville's Constant |id=LiouvillesConstant}}
* {{MathWorld |title=Liouville's Constant |id=LiouvillesConstant}}
* {{cite web
* {{cite web
|title=Proof that {{mvar|e}} is transcendental |lang=en
|title=Proof that {{mvar|e}} is transcendental |language=en
|website=planetmath.org
|website=planetmath.org
|url=http://planetmath.org/EIsTranscendental
|url=http://planetmath.org/EIsTranscendental
Line 523: Line 551:
* {{cite web
* {{cite web
|title=Proof that the Liouville constant is transcendental
|title=Proof that the Liouville constant is transcendental
|lang=en
|language=en
|website=deanlmoore.com
|website=deanlmoore.com
|url=https://deanlmoore.com/liouvilles-proof
|url=https://deanlmoore.com/liouvilles-proof
Line 535: Line 563:
|conference=Rahmen der 79.&nbsp;Hauptversammlung des Deutschen Vereins zur Förderung des mathematischen und naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts [79th&nbsp;Annual, General Meeting of the German Association for the Promotion of Mathematics and Science Education]
|conference=Rahmen der 79.&nbsp;Hauptversammlung des Deutschen Vereins zur Förderung des mathematischen und naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts [79th&nbsp;Annual, General Meeting of the German Association for the Promotion of Mathematics and Science Education]
|journal=Der mathematische und naturwissenschaftliche Unterricht
|journal=Der mathematische und naturwissenschaftliche Unterricht
|volume=42 |pages=75–80 (presentation), 375-376 (responses)
|volume=42 |pages=75–80 (presentation), 375–376 (responses)
|place=Kiel, DE
|place=Kiel, DE
|via=[[University of Munich]] (mathematik.uni-muenchen.de ) |url=http://www.mathematik.uni-muenchen.de/~fritsch/euler.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110716060646/http://www.mathematik.uni-muenchen.de/~fritsch/euler.pdf |archive-date=2011-07-16
|via=[[University of Munich]] (mathematik.uni-muenchen.de ) |url=http://www.mathematik.uni-muenchen.de/~fritsch/euler.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110716060646/http://www.mathematik.uni-muenchen.de/~fritsch/euler.pdf |archive-date=2011-07-16
Line 542: Line 570:
|author=Fritsch, R.
|author=Fritsch, R.
|year=2003
|year=2003
|title=Hilberts Beweis der Transzendenz der Ludolphschen Zahl {{mvar|π}} |lang=de
|title=Hilberts Beweis der Transzendenz der Ludolphschen Zahl {{mvar|π}} |language=de
|journal=Дифференциальная геометрия многообразий фигур
|journal=Дифференциальная геометрия многообразий фигур
|volume=34 |pages=144–148
|volume=34 |pages=144–148

Revision as of 11:51, 16 June 2024

In mathematics, a transcendental number is a real or complex number that is not algebraic – that is, not the root of a non-zero polynomial of finite degree with integer (or, equivalently, rational) coefficients. The best-known transcendental numbers are π and e.[1][2] The quality of a number being transcendental is called transcendence.

Though only a few classes of transcendental numbers are known – partly because it can be extremely difficult to show that a given number is transcendental – transcendental numbers are not rare: indeed, almost all real and complex numbers are transcendental, since the algebraic numbers form a countable set, while the set of real numbers and the set of complex numbers are both uncountable sets, and therefore larger than any countable set.

All transcendental real numbers (also known as real transcendental numbers or transcendental irrational numbers) are irrational numbers, since all rational numbers are algebraic.[3][4][5][6] The converse is not true: Not all irrational numbers are transcendental. Hence, the set of real numbers consists of non-overlapping sets of rational, algebraic non-rational, and transcendental real numbers.[3] For example, the square root of 2 is an irrational number, but it is not a transcendental number as it is a root of the polynomial equation x2 − 2 = 0. The golden ratio (denoted or ) is another irrational number that is not transcendental, as it is a root of the polynomial equation x2x − 1 = 0.

History

The name "transcendental" comes from Latin trānscendere 'to climb over or beyond, surmount',[7] and was first used for the mathematical concept in Leibniz's 1682 paper in which he proved that sin x is not an algebraic function of x .[8] Euler, in the 18th century, was probably the first person to define transcendental numbers in the modern sense.[9]

Johann Heinrich Lambert conjectured that e and π were both transcendental numbers in his 1768 paper proving the number π is irrational, and proposed a tentative sketch proof that π is transcendental.[10]

Joseph Liouville first proved the existence of transcendental numbers in 1844,[11] and in 1851 gave the first decimal examples such as the Liouville constant

in which the nth digit after the decimal point is 1 if n is equal to k! (k factorial) for some k and 0 otherwise.[12] In other words, the nth digit of this number is 1 only if n is one of the numbers 1! = 1, 2! = 2, 3! = 6, 4! = 24, etc. Liouville showed that this number belongs to a class of transcendental numbers that can be more closely approximated by rational numbers than can any irrational algebraic number, and this class of numbers are called Liouville numbers, named in his honour. Liouville showed that all Liouville numbers are transcendental.[13]

The first number to be proven transcendental without having been specifically constructed for the purpose of proving transcendental numbers' existence was e, by Charles Hermite in 1873.

In 1874, Georg Cantor proved that the algebraic numbers are countable and the real numbers are uncountable. He also gave a new method for constructing transcendental numbers.[14] Although this was already implied by his proof of the countability of the algebraic numbers, Cantor also published a construction that proves there are as many transcendental numbers as there are real numbers.[a] Cantor's work established the ubiquity of transcendental numbers.

In 1882, Ferdinand von Lindemann published the first complete proof that π is transcendental. He first proved that ea is transcendental if a is a non-zero algebraic number. Then, since e = −1 is algebraic (see Euler's identity), must be transcendental. But since i is algebraic, π must therefore be transcendental. This approach was generalized by Karl Weierstrass to what is now known as the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem. That π is transcendental implies that geometric constructions involving compass and straightedge cannot produce certain results, for example squaring the circle.

In 1900, David Hilbert posed a question about transcendental numbers, Hilbert's seventh problem: If a is an algebraic number that is not zero or one, and b is an irrational algebraic number, is ab necessarily transcendental? The affirmative answer was provided in 1934 by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem. This work was extended by Alan Baker in the 1960s in his work on lower bounds for linear forms in any number of logarithms (of algebraic numbers).[16]

Properties

A transcendental number is a (possibly complex) number that is not the root of any integer polynomial. Every real transcendental number must also be irrational, since a rational number is the root of an integer polynomial of degree one.[17] The set of transcendental numbers is uncountably infinite. Since the polynomials with rational coefficients are countable, and since each such polynomial has a finite number of zeroes, the algebraic numbers must also be countable. However, Cantor's diagonal argument proves that the real numbers (and therefore also the complex numbers) are uncountable. Since the real numbers are the union of algebraic and transcendental numbers, it is impossible for both subsets to be countable. This makes the transcendental numbers uncountable.

No rational number is transcendental and all real transcendental numbers are irrational. The irrational numbers contain all the real transcendental numbers and a subset of the algebraic numbers, including the quadratic irrationals and other forms of algebraic irrationals.

Applying any non-constant single-variable algebraic function to a transcendental argument yields a transcendental value. For example, from knowing that π is transcendental, it can be immediately deduced that numbers such as , , , and are transcendental as well.

However, an algebraic function of several variables may yield an algebraic number when applied to transcendental numbers if these numbers are not algebraically independent. For example, π and (1 − π) are both transcendental, but π + (1 − π) = 1 is obviously not. It is unknown whether e + π, for example, is transcendental, though at least one of e + π and must be transcendental. More generally, for any two transcendental numbers a and b, at least one of a + b and ab must be transcendental. To see this, consider the polynomial (xa)(xb) = x2 − (a + b) x + a b . If (a + b) and a b were both algebraic, then this would be a polynomial with algebraic coefficients. Because algebraic numbers form an algebraically closed field, this would imply that the roots of the polynomial, a and b, must be algebraic. But this is a contradiction, and thus it must be the case that at least one of the coefficients is transcendental.

The non-computable numbers are a strict subset of the transcendental numbers.

All Liouville numbers are transcendental, but not vice versa. Any Liouville number must have unbounded partial quotients in its continued fraction expansion. Using a counting argument one can show that there exist transcendental numbers which have bounded partial quotients and hence are not Liouville numbers.

Using the explicit continued fraction expansion of e, one can show that e is not a Liouville number (although the partial quotients in its continued fraction expansion are unbounded). Kurt Mahler showed in 1953 that π is also not a Liouville number. It is conjectured that all infinite continued fractions with bounded terms, that have a "simple" structure, and that are not eventually periodic are transcendental[18] (in other words, algebraic irrational roots of at least third degree polynomials do not have apparent pattern in their continued fraction expansions, since eventually periodic continued fractions correspond to quadratic irrationals, see Hermite's problem).

Numbers proven to be transcendental

Numbers proven to be transcendental:

, the Gelfond–Schneider constant (or Hilbert number)
  • sin a, cos a, tan a, csc a, sec a, and cot a, and their hyperbolic counterparts, for any nonzero algebraic number a, expressed in radians (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).
  • The fixed point of the cosine function (also referred to as the Dottie number d) – the unique real solution to the equation cos x = x, where x is in radians (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).[19]
  • ln a if a is algebraic and not equal to 0 or 1, for any branch of the logarithm function (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem), in particular: the universal parabolic constant.
  • logb a if a and b are positive integers not both powers of the same integer, and a is not equal to 1 (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem).
  • Non-zero results of arcsin a, arccos a, arctan a, arccsc a, arcsec a, arccot a and their hyperbolic counterparts, for any algebraic number a (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).
  • The Bessel function of the first kind Jν(x), its first derivative, and the quotient are transcendental when ν is rational and x is algebraic and nonzero,[20] and all nonzero roots of Jν(x) and J'ν(x) are transcendental when ν is rational.[21]
  • W(a) if a is algebraic and nonzero, for any branch of the Lambert W Function (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem), in particular: Ω the omega constant
  • W(r,a) if both a and the order r are algebraic such that , for any branch of the generalized Lambert W function.[22]
  • xs, the square super-root of any natural number is either an integer or transcendental (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem)
  • ,[23] ,[24] and .[24] The numbers and are also known to be transcendental. The numbers and are also transcendental.[25]
  • The values of Euler beta function (in which a, b and are non-integer rational numbers).[26]
  • 0.64341054629 ... , Cahen's constant.[27]
  • .[28] In general, all numbers of the form are transcendental, where are algebraic for all and are non-zero algebraic for all (by the Baker's theorem).
  • The Champernowne constants, the irrational numbers formed by concatenating representations of all positive integers.[29]
  • Ω, Chaitin's constant (since it is a non-computable number).[30]
  • The supremum limit of the Specker sequences (since they are non-computable numbers).[31]
  • The so-called Fredholm constants, such as[11][32][b]
which also holds by replacing 10 with any algebraic number b > 1.[34]
  • , for rational number x such that .[28]
  • The values of the Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction where is algebraic and .[35] The lemniscatic values of theta function (under the same conditions for ) are also transcendental.[36]
  • j(q) where is algebraic but not imaginary quadratic (i.e, the exceptional set of this function is the number field whose degree of extension over is 2).
  • The values of the infinite series with fast convergence rate as defined by Y. Gao and J. Gao, such as .[37]
  • The real constant in the definition of van der Corput's constant involving the Fresnel integrals.[38]
  • The real constant in the definition of Zolotarev-Schur constant involving the complete elliptic integral functions.[39]
  • Gauss's constant and the related lemniscate constant.[40]
  • Any number of the form (where , are polynomials in variables and , is algebraic and , is any integer greater than 1).[41]
  • Artificially constructed non-periodic numbers.[42]
  • The Robbins constant in three-dimensional line picking problem.[43]
  • The aforementioned Liouville constant for any algebraic b ∈ (0, 1).
  • The sum of reciprocals of exponential factorials.[28]
  • The Prouhet–Thue–Morse constant[44] and the related rabbit constant.[45]
  • The Komornik–Loreti constant.[46]
  • Any number for which the digits with respect to some fixed base form a Sturmian word.[47]
  • The paperfolding constant (also named as "Gaussian Liouville number").[48]
  • Constructed irrational numbers which are not simply normal in any base.[49]
  • For β > 1
where is the floor function.[50]
  • 3.300330000000000330033... and its reciprocal 0.30300000303..., two numbers with only two different decimal digits whose nonzero digit positions are given by the Moser–de Bruijn sequence and its double.[51]
  • The number , where Yα(x) and Jα(x) are Bessel functions and γ is the Euler–Mascheroni constant.[52][53]
  • Nesterenko proved in 1996 that and are algebraically independent.[25] This results in the transcendence of the Weierstrass constant[54] and the number .[55]

Possible transcendental numbers

Numbers which have yet to be proven to be either transcendental or algebraic:

  • Most sums, products, powers, etc. of the number π and the number e, e.g. , e + π, πe, π/e, ππ, ee, πe, π2, eπ2 are not known to be rational, algebraically irrational or transcendental. A notable exception is eπn (for any positive integer n) which has been proven transcendental.[56] At least one of the numbers ee and ee2 is transcendental, according to W. D. Brownawell (1974).[57] It has been shown that both e + π and π/e do not satisfy any polynomial equation of degree and integer coefficients of average size 109.[58]
  • The Euler–Mascheroni constant γ: In 2010 M. Ram Murty and N. Saradha found an infinite list of numbers containing γ/4 such that all but at most one of them are transcendental.[59][60] In 2012 it was shown that at least one of γ and the Euler–Gompertz constant δ is transcendental.[61]
  • Apéry's constant ζ(3) (whose irrationality was proved by Apéry).
  • The reciprocal Fibonacci constant and reciprocal Lucas constant[62] (both of which have been proved to be irrational).
  • Catalan's constant, and the values of Dirichlet beta function at other even integers, β(4), β(6), ... (not even proven to be irrational).[63]
  • Khinchin's constant, also not proven to be irrational.
  • The Riemann zeta function at other odd positive integers, ζ(5), ζ(7), ... (not proven to be irrational).
  • The Feigenbaum constants δ and α, also not proven to be irrational.
  • Mills' constant and twin prime constant (also not proven to be irrational).
  • The second and later eigenvalues of the Gauss-Kuzmin-Wirsing operator, also not proven to be irrational.
  • The Copeland–Erdős constant, formed by concatenating the decimal representations of the prime numbers.
  • The relative density of regular prime numbers: in 1964, Siegel conjectured that its value is .
  • has not been proven to be irrational.[25]
  • Various constants whose value is not known with high precision, such as the Landau's constant and the Grothendieck constant.

Related conjectures:

Proofs for specific numbers

A proof that e is transcendental

The first proof that the base of the natural logarithms, e, is transcendental dates from 1873. We will now follow the strategy of David Hilbert (1862–1943) who gave a simplification of the original proof of Charles Hermite. The idea is the following:

Assume, for purpose of finding a contradiction, that e is algebraic. Then there exists a finite set of integer coefficients c0, c1, ..., cn satisfying the equation: It is difficult to make use of the integer status of these coefficients when multiplied by a power of the irrational e, but we can absorb those powers into an integral which “mostly” will assume integer values. For a positive integer k, define the polynomial and multiply both sides of the above equation by to arrive at the equation:

By splitting respective domains of integration, this equation can be written in the form where Here P will turn out to be an integer, but more importantly it grows quickly with k.

Lemma 1

There are arbitrarily large k such that is a non-zero integer.

Proof. Recall the standard integral (case of the Gamma function) valid for any natural number . More generally,

if then .

This would allow us to compute exactly, because any term of can be rewritten as through a change of variables. Hence That latter sum is a polynomial in with integer coefficients, i.e., it is a linear combination of powers with integer coefficients. Hence the number is a linear combination (with those same integer coefficients) of factorials ; in particular is an integer.

Smaller factorials divide larger factorials, so the smallest occurring in that linear combination will also divide the whole of . We get that from the lowest power term appearing with a nonzero coefficient in , but this smallest exponent is also the multiplicity of as a root of this polynomial. is chosen to have multiplicity of the root and multiplicity of the roots for , so that smallest exponent is for and for with . Therefore divides .

To establish the last claim in the lemma, that is nonzero, it is sufficient to prove that does not divide . To that end, let be any prime larger than and . We know from the above that divides each of for , so in particular all of those are divisible by . It comes down to the first term . We have (see falling and rising factorials) and those higher degree terms all give rise to factorials or larger. Hence That right hand side is a product of nonzero integer factors less than the prime , therefore that product is not divisible by , and the same holds for ; in particular cannot be zero.

Lemma 2

For sufficiently large k, .

Proof. Note that

where u(x), v(x) are continuous functions of x for all x, so are bounded on the interval [0, n]. That is, there are constants G, H > 0 such that

So each of those integrals composing Q is bounded, the worst case being

It is now possible to bound the sum Q as well:

where M is a constant not depending on k. It follows that

finishing the proof of this lemma.

Conclusion

Choosing a value of k satisfying both lemmas leads to a non-zero integer added to a vanishingly small quantity being equal to zero, is an impossibility. It follows that the original assumption, that e can satisfy a polynomial equation with integer coefficients, is also impossible; that is, e is transcendental.

The transcendence of π

A similar strategy, different from Lindemann's original approach, can be used to show that the number π is transcendental. Besides the gamma-function and some estimates as in the proof for e, facts about symmetric polynomials play a vital role in the proof.

For detailed information concerning the proofs of the transcendence of π and e, see the references and external links.

See also

Number systems
Complex
Real
Rational
Integer
Natural
Zero: 0
One: 1
Prime numbers
Composite numbers
Negative integers
Fraction
Finite decimal
Dyadic (finite binary)
Repeating decimal
Irrational
Algebraic irrational
Transcendental
Imaginary

Notes

  1. ^ Cantor's construction builds a one-to-one correspondence between the set of transcendental numbers and the set of real numbers. In this article, Cantor only applies his construction to the set of irrational numbers.[15]
  2. ^ The name 'Fredholm number' is misplaced: Kempner first proved this number is transcendental, and the note on page 403 states that Fredholm never studied this number.[33]

References

  1. ^ Pickover, Cliff. "The 15 most famous transcendental numbers". sprott.physics.wisc.edu. Retrieved 2020-01-23.
  2. ^ Shidlovskii, Andrei B. (June 2011). Transcendental Numbers. Walter de Gruyter. p. 1. ISBN 9783110889055.
  3. ^ a b Bunday, B. D.; Mulholland, H. (20 May 2014). Pure Mathematics for Advanced Level. Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 978-1-4831-0613-7. Retrieved 21 March 2021.
  4. ^ Baker, A. (1964). "On Mahler's classification of transcendental numbers". Acta Mathematica. 111: 97–120. doi:10.1007/bf02391010. S2CID 122023355.
  5. ^ Heuer, Nicolaus; Loeh, Clara (1 November 2019). "Transcendental simplicial volumes". arXiv:1911.06386 [math.GT].
  6. ^ "Real number". Encyclopædia Britannica. mathematics. Retrieved 2020-08-11.
  7. ^ "transcendental". Oxford English Dictionary. s.v.
  8. ^ Leibniz, Gerhardt & Pertz 1858, pp. 97–98; Bourbaki 1994, p. 74
  9. ^ Erdős & Dudley 1983
  10. ^ Lambert 1768
  11. ^ a b Kempner 1916
  12. ^ "Weisstein, Eric W. "Liouville's Constant", MathWorld".
  13. ^ Liouville 1851
  14. ^ Cantor 1874; Gray 1994
  15. ^ Cantor 1878, p. 254
  16. ^ Baker, Alan (1998). J.J. O'Connor and E.F. Robertson. www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk (biographies). The MacTutor History of Mathematics archive. St. Andrew's, Scotland: University of St. Andrew's.
  17. ^ Hardy 1979
  18. ^ Adamczewski & Bugeaud 2005
  19. ^ Weisstein, Eric W. "Dottie Number". Wolfram MathWorld. Wolfram Research, Inc. Retrieved 23 July 2016.
  20. ^ Siegel, Carl L. (2014). "Über einige Anwendungen diophantischer Approximationen: Abhandlungen der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Physikalisch-mathematische Klasse 1929, Nr. 1". On Some Applications of Diophantine Approximations (in German). Scuola Normale Superiore. pp. 81–138. doi:10.1007/978-88-7642-520-2_2. ISBN 978-88-7642-520-2.
  21. ^ Lorch, Lee; Muldoon, Martin E. (1995). "Transcendentality of zeros of higher dereivatives of functions involving Bessel functions". International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences. 18 (3): 551–560. doi:10.1155/S0161171295000706.
  22. ^ Mező, István; Baricz, Árpád (June 22, 2015). "On the generalization of the Lambert W function". arXiv:1408.3999 [math.CA].
  23. ^ le Lionnais 1979, p. 46 via Wolfram Mathworld, Transcendental Number
  24. ^ a b Chudnovsky 1984 via Wolfram Mathworld, Transcendental Number
  25. ^ a b c "Mathematical constants". Mathematics (general). Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 2022-09-22.
  26. ^ Waldschmidt, Michel (September 7, 2005). "Transcendence of Periods: The State of the Art" (PDF). webusers.imj-prg.fr.
  27. ^ Davison & Shallit 1991
  28. ^ a b c Weisstein, Eric W. "Transcendental Number". mathworld.wolfram.com. Retrieved 2023-08-09.
  29. ^ Mahler 1937; Mahler 1976, p. 12
  30. ^ Calude 2002, p. 239
  31. ^ Grue Simonsen, Jakob. "Specker Sequences Revisited" (PDF). hjemmesider.diku.dk.
  32. ^ Shallit 1996
  33. ^ Allouche & Shallit 2003, pp. 385, 403
  34. ^ Loxton 1988
  35. ^ Duverney, Daniel; Nishioka, Keiji; Nishioka, Kumiko; Shiokawa, Iekata (1997). "Transcendence of Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction and reciprocal sums of Fibonacci numbers". Proceedings of the Japan Academy, Series A, Mathematical Sciences. 73 (7): 140–142. doi:10.3792/pjaa.73.140. ISSN 0386-2194.
  36. ^ Bertrand, Daniel (1997). "Theta functions and transcendence". The Ramanujan Journal. 1 (4): 339–350. doi:10.1023/A:1009749608672. S2CID 118628723.
  37. ^ "A140654 - OEIS". oeis.org. Retrieved 2023-08-12.
  38. ^ Weisstein, Eric W. "van der Corput's Constant". mathworld.wolfram.com. Retrieved 2023-08-10.
  39. ^ Weisstein, Eric W. "Zolotarev-Schur Constant". mathworld.wolfram.com. Retrieved 2023-08-12.
  40. ^ Todd, John (1975). "The lemniscate constants". Communications of the ACM. 18: 14–19. doi:10.1145/360569.360580. S2CID 85873.
  41. ^ Kurosawa, Takeshi (2007-03-01). "Transcendence of certain series involving binary linear recurrences". Journal of Number Theory. 123 (1): 35–58. doi:10.1016/j.jnt.2006.05.019. ISSN 0022-314X.
  42. ^ Yoshinaga, Masahiko (2008-05-03). "Periods and elementary real numbers". arXiv:0805.0349 [math.AG].
  43. ^ Steven R. Finch (2003). Mathematical Constants. Cambridge University Press. p. 479. ISBN 978-3-540-67695-9. Schmutz.
  44. ^ Mahler 1929; Allouche & Shallit 2003, p. 387
  45. ^ Weisstein, Eric W. "Rabbit Constant". mathworld.wolfram.com. Retrieved 2023-08-09.
  46. ^ Allouche, Jean-Paul; Cosnard, Michel (2000), "The Komornik–Loreti constant is transcendental", American Mathematical Monthly, 107 (5): 448–449, doi:10.2307/2695302, JSTOR 2695302, MR 1763399
  47. ^ Pytheas Fogg 2002
  48. ^ "A143347 - OEIS". oeis.org. Retrieved 2023-08-09.
  49. ^ Bugeaud 2012, p. 113.
  50. ^ Adamczewski, Boris (March 2013). "The Many Faces of the Kempner Number". arXiv:1303.1685 [math.NT].
  51. ^ Blanchard & Mendès France 1982
  52. ^ Mahler, Kurt; Mordell, Louis Joel (1968-06-04). "Applications of a theorem by A. B. Shidlovski". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences. 305 (1481): 149–173. Bibcode:1968RSPSA.305..149M. doi:10.1098/rspa.1968.0111. S2CID 123486171.
  53. ^ Lagarias, Jeffrey C. (2013-07-19). "Euler's constant: Euler's work and modern developments". Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society. 50 (4): 527–628. arXiv:1303.1856. doi:10.1090/S0273-0979-2013-01423-X. ISSN 0273-0979.
  54. ^ Weisstein, Eric W. "Weierstrass Constant". mathworld.wolfram.com. Retrieved 2023-08-12.
  55. ^ Elsner, Carsten; Shimomura, Shun; Shiokawa, Iekata (2012-09-01). "Algebraic independence of certain numbers related to modular functions". Functiones et Approximatio Commentarii Mathematici. 47 (1). doi:10.7169/facm/2012.47.1.10. ISSN 0208-6573.
  56. ^ Weisstein, Eric W. "Irrational Number". MathWorld.
  57. ^ Brownawell, W. Dale (1974-02-01). "The algebraic independence of certain numbers related by the exponential function". Journal of Number Theory. 6: 22–31. doi:10.1016/0022-314X(74)90005-5. ISSN 0022-314X.
  58. ^ Weisstein, Eric W. "e". mathworld.wolfram.com. Retrieved 2023-08-12.
  59. ^ Murty, M. Ram; Saradha, N. (2010-12-01). "Euler–Lehmer constants and a conjecture of Erdös". Journal of Number Theory. 130 (12): 2671–2682. doi:10.1016/j.jnt.2010.07.004. ISSN 0022-314X.
  60. ^ Murty, M. Ram; Zaytseva, Anastasia (2013-01-01). "Transcendence of generalized Euler constants". The American Mathematical Monthly. 120 (1): 48–54. doi:10.4169/amer.math.monthly.120.01.048. ISSN 0002-9890. S2CID 20495981.
  61. ^ Rivoal, Tanguy (2012). "On the arithmetic nature of the values of the gamma function, Euler's constant, and Gompertz's constant". Michigan Mathematical Journal. 61 (2): 239–254. doi:10.1307/mmj/1339011525. ISSN 0026-2285.
  62. ^ "A093540 - OEIS". oeis.org. Retrieved 2023-08-12.
  63. ^ Rivoal, T.; Zudilin, W. (2003-08-01). "Diophantine properties of numbers related to Catalan's constant". Mathematische Annalen. 326 (4): 705–721. doi:10.1007/s00208-003-0420-2. hdl:1959.13/803688. ISSN 1432-1807. S2CID 59328860.

Sources

External links