[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Types in Mathematica thread
On 6 Dec 2005, at 17:58, ggroup at sarj.ca wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 6, 2005 at 00:03 GMT -0500, Kristen W Carlson
> wrote:
>
>> Andrzej, why there isn't a test for transcendentals--Transcendental.
>
> From Mathworld <http://mathworld.wolfram.com/
> TranscendentalNumber.html>:
> A number can then be tested to see if it is transcendental using
> the Mathematica command Not[Element[x, Algebraics]].
>
>
>
In fact Mathematica knows quite a lot about transcendental numbers:
Not[Element[E^Pi, Algebraics]]
True
Not[Element[Sqrt[2]^Sqrt[2], Algebraics]]
True
Not[Element[E^Pi+Sqrt[2], Algebraics]]
True
Of course it won't tell you anything about the numbers that are not
known to be transcendental (even though almost certainly are):
Element[Pi^E ,Algebraics]
Element[Pi^E,Algebraics]
(note that Pi is much harder than E, for example we do not know if
Element[Pi^Sqrt[2],Algebraics]
For E this is well known. Everything in the case of Pi is much
harder than in the case of E.
Of course all of this is subject to the usual limitations:
Element[Exp[Pi*I*(Cos[Pi/27]^2 + Sin[Pi/27]^2)], Algebraics]
Element[Exp[Pi*I*(Cos[Pi/27]^2 + Sin[Pi/27]^2)], Algebraics]
even though
Simplify[Exp[Pi*I*(Cos[Pi/27]^2+Sin[Pi/27]^2)]]
-1
If we then use this on an expression that Mathematica can't
explicitly simplify to something it knows about you won't get any
answer. Thus you certainly you are unlikely discover any new
transcendental numbers in this way.
Andrzej Kozlowski
Prev by Date:
**Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Types in Mathematica thread**
Next by Date:
**Re: Types in Mathematica, a practical example**
Previous by thread:
**Re: Re: Re: Re: Types in Mathematica thread**
Next by thread:
**Mathematica and Transcendental Numbers**
| |