Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A more general proof shows that the mth root of an integer N is irrational, unless N is the mth power of an integer n. [7] That is, it is impossible to express the mth root of an integer N as the ratio a ⁄ b of two integers a and b, that share no common prime factor, except in cases in which b = 1.
The square root of the Gelfond–Schneider constant is the transcendental number = 1.632 526 919 438 152 844 77.... This same constant can be used to prove that "an irrational elevated to an irrational power may be rational", even without first proving its transcendence.
The irrationality exponent or Liouville–Roth irrationality measure is given by setting (,) =, [1] a definition adapting the one of Liouville numbers — the irrationality exponent () is defined for real numbers to be the supremum of the set of such that < | | < is satisfied by an infinite number of coprime integer pairs (,) with >.
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 x 2 − 2 = 0. The golden ratio (denoted φ {\displaystyle \varphi } or ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } ) is another irrational number that is not transcendental, as it is a root of the polynomial equation x 2 − ...
This requires some care in the presence of multiple roots; but a complex root and its conjugate do have the same multiplicity (and this lemma is not hard to prove). It can also be worked around by considering only irreducible polynomials ; any real polynomial of odd degree must have an irreducible factor of odd degree, which (having no multiple ...
Since e is an irrational number (see proof that e is irrational), it cannot be represented as the quotient of two integers, but it can be represented as a continued fraction. Using calculus, e may also be represented as an infinite series, infinite product, or other types of limit of a sequence.
In mathematics, a proof by infinite descent, also known as Fermat's method of descent, is a particular kind of proof by contradiction [1] used to show that a statement cannot possibly hold for any number, by showing that if the statement were to hold for a number, then the same would be true for a smaller number, leading to an infinite descent and ultimately a contradiction. [2]
In the case of two nested square roots, the following theorem completely solves the problem of denesting. [2]If a and c are rational numbers and c is not the square of a rational number, there are two rational numbers x and y such that + = if and only if is the square of a rational number d.