Non-Transcendental Numbers Def. What if we allow √14 as a coefficicie?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Swimmingly!
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition of non-transcendental numbers and the implications of allowing radicals as coefficients in polynomials. The original poster questions whether introducing coefficients like √3 or 2^(1/3) leads to new non-transcendental numbers or if polynomials with such coefficients can be transformed into those with rational coefficients.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between non-transcendental numbers and the introduction of radical coefficients in polynomials. They question whether new non-transcendental numbers can emerge from this allowance and discuss the process of eliminating radicals through raising to powers.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing differing viewpoints on the ability to eliminate radicals and the nature of algebraic numbers. Some express skepticism about the simplicity of the argument that all radicals can be removed through exponentiation, while others affirm that the roots of polynomials with algebraic coefficients remain algebraic.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the definitions of non-transcendental and algebraic numbers, as well as the implications of using radical coefficients in polynomial equations. There is an ongoing examination of the assumptions underlying these definitions and their consequences.

Swimmingly!
Messages
43
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A non-transcendental number is one that's a root of a (non-constant) polynomial with rational coefficients.
Does allowing radicals as coefficients, eg: 5√3, 2^(1/3) get us any new different numbers?

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


1. In some cases we get no new numbers, eg:
x^2+\sqrt[3]{3}=0\Leftrightarrow x^6=3

x^2+x\sqrt{3}+\sqrt{2}=0\Leftrightarrow x^2+x\sqrt{3}=-\sqrt{2} \Rightarrow x^4+3x^2+2x^3\sqrt{3}=2 \Leftrightarrow x^4+3x^2-2=-2x^3\sqrt{3} \Rightarrow (x^4+3x^2-2)^2=4x^6 \times 3

We solve this by isolating the radicalss and squaring/cubing/etc them. But with more coefficients it becomes harder. What about a 5th degree polynomials with only cubic radical coefficients?

So the question is:
-Do we get new non-trascendental numbers if we allow rational AND radicals as coefficients.
-Can we always turn a polynomial with radical coefficients into a one with rational coefficients?

PS: By radicals I mean just some number that's written with the nth-root symbol. Use whatever definition you feel fits best.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


No, you can get rid of all the (finite nr. of) radicals after a finite number of raising to a suitable natural power, so that the definition of algebraic numbers is exhaustive.
 


dextercioby said:
No, you can get rid of all the (finite nr. of) radicals after a finite number of raising to a suitable natural power, so that the definition of algebraic numbers is exhaustive.
How exactly can you always just raise them to a suitable power without creating additional radicals to be solved?
 


Swimmingly! said:
How exactly can you always just raise them to a suitable power without creating additional radicals to be solved?

You usually say 'algebraic' instead of non-transcendental. And no, allowing algebraic numbers as coefficients instead of integers will not give you any transcendental roots. The roots of an polynomial with algebraic coefficients are algebraic. I don't think the proof is as simple as arguing you can clear all the radicals by taking powers. I kind of doubt it's true. But the algebraic part is true nonetheless.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K