"Easy example" of transcendental numbers

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Hill
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of transcendental numbers, particularly in the context of Galois theory and field extensions. Participants express confusion regarding the identification of transcendental numbers and the nature of the variable ##x## in the example presented in a lecture by Richard E Borcherds.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants define transcendental numbers as irrational numbers that are not algebraic, meaning they cannot be expressed as the root of any rational polynomial.
  • Others clarify that ##x## is transcendental if there is no polynomial ##p(t) \in \mathbb{Q}[t]## such that ##p(x)=0##.
  • One participant questions the absence of such a polynomial for ##x##, indicating a lack of understanding of what ##x## represents.
  • Another participant suggests that ##x## can be interpreted as an indeterminate, which does not satisfy any algebraic equation except for trivial cases.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between the field of rational functions ##\mathbb{Q}(x)## and the field obtained by adjoining the transcendental number ##\pi##, with a mention of Lindemann's proof regarding ##\pi##'s transcendence.
  • Some participants express confusion about the specific example of a transcendental number in the context of the lecture, noting that the lecturer refers to ##x## as transcendental rather than providing a specific example.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach a consensus on the nature of ##x## and its classification as a transcendental number. Multiple competing views and uncertainties remain regarding the definitions and examples of transcendental numbers.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the clarity of what ##x## represents and the assumptions about transcendental numbers. The discussion also reflects varying levels of understanding of algebraic versus transcendental classifications.

Hill
Messages
795
Reaction score
618
I am watching this lecture by Richard E Borcherds on Galois theory: Field extensions and the following "easy example" is not easy for me to understand.

Here it is screen-by-screen:
Screenshot 2024-12-13 140036.png

Screenshot 2024-12-13 140121.png

Screenshot 2024-12-13 140151.png

Screenshot 2024-12-13 140219.png

Screenshot 2024-12-13 140238.png

Screenshot 2024-12-13 140352.png

Screenshot 2024-12-13 140441.png

Screenshot 2024-12-13 140503.png


How should I notice that x is transcendental?
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2024-12-13 140036.png
    Screenshot 2024-12-13 140036.png
    19.5 KB · Views: 52
  • Screenshot 2024-12-13 140310.png
    Screenshot 2024-12-13 140310.png
    23.5 KB · Views: 61
Physics news on Phys.org
Transcendental numbers are defined as irrational but not being in any other subset of irrationals.

Trancendental numbers are irrational with non-repeating, and non-terminating decimals but not algebraic like the ##\sqrt{2}## ie they can't be expressed as the solution to:

##(x^2-2)=0##
 
Last edited:
##x## is transcendental if it is not algebraic. Algebraic numbers are those which are a root of a rational polynomial, and there is no polynomial ##p(t)\in \mathbb{Q}[t]## such that ##p(x)=0.##
 
Why
fresh_42 said:
there is no polynomial ##p(t)\in \mathbb{Q}[t]## such that ##p(x)=0##
?
 
Hill said:
Why

?
What is ##x##?
 
fresh_42 said:
What is ##x##?
I don't know. This is my question.
 
I read it as an indeterminate and as such does not fulfill any equation, except ##x\cdot 0=0.##
 
So, where is an example of a transcendental number in this?
 
Hill said:
So, where is an example of a transcendental number in this?
If you consider ##\mathbb{Q}(x)## the field of rational functions, i.e. the quotient of polynomials in ##x.## It is the same field as if we adjointed ##\pi##
$$
\mathbb{Q}(x) \cong \mathbb{Q}(\pi).
$$
The only difference is, that we need Lindemann's proof to see that ##\pi## is transcendental whereas an indeterminate is transcendental per definition of an indeterminate as a variable that does not fulfill an algebraic equation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hill
  • #10
Hill said:
So, where is an example of a transcendental number in this?
Read carefully, he doesn't say transcendetal number. He says that ##x## is transcendental.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hill

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K