Transcendental number

Template:Short description Template:Redirect

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 with integer (or, equivalently, rational) coefficients. The best-known transcendental numbers are Template:Mvar and Template:Mvar.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> 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 Template:Tmath and the set of complex numbers Template:Tmath 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.<ref name=numbers>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite arXiv</ref><ref>Template:Cite encyclopedia</ref> 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 irrational, 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 Template:Math. 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 Template:Math.

HistoryEdit

The name "transcendental" comes Template:Ety,<ref>Template:Cite encyclopedia s.v.</ref> and was first used for the mathematical concept in Leibniz's 1682 paper in which he proved that Template:Math is not an algebraic function of Template:Mvar.<ref>Template:Harvnb; Template:Harvnb</ref> Euler, in the eighteenth century, was probably the first person to define transcendental numbers in the modern sense.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>

Johann Heinrich Lambert conjectured that Template:Mvar and [[Pi|Template:Mvar]] were both transcendental numbers in his 1768 paper proving the number Template:Mvar is irrational, and proposed a tentative sketch proof that Template:Mvar is transcendental.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>

Joseph Liouville first proved the existence of transcendental numbers in 1844,<ref name=Kempner>Template:Harvnb</ref> and in 1851 gave the first decimal examples such as the Liouville constant

<math display=block> \begin{align}

 L_b &= \sum_{n=1}^\infty 10^{-n!} \\[2pt]
 &= 10^{-1} + 10^{-2} + 10^{-6} + 10^{-24} + 10^{-120} + 10^{-720} + 10^{-5040} + 10^{-40320} + \ldots \\[4pt]
 &= 0.\textbf{1}\textbf{1}000\textbf{1}00000000000000000\textbf{1}00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\ \ldots

\end{align}</math>

in which the Template:Mvarth digit after the decimal point is Template:Math if Template:Mvar = Template:Mvar Template:Math (Template:Mvar factorial) for some Template:Mvar and Template:Math otherwise.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> In other words, the Template:Mvarth digit of this number is 1 only if Template:Mvar is one of Template:Math, 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 is called the Liouville numbers. Liouville showed that all Liouville numbers are transcendental.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>

The first number to be proven transcendental without having been specifically constructed for the purpose of proving transcendental numbers' existence was Template:Mvar, 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.<ref>Template:Harvnb; Template:Harvnb</ref> 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.Template:Efn Cantor's work established the ubiquity of transcendental numbers.

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

In 1900 David Hilbert posed a question about transcendental numbers, Hilbert's seventh problem: If Template:Mvar is an algebraic number that is not 0 or 1, and Template:Mvar is an irrational algebraic number, is Template:Math 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).<ref>Template:Cite report</ref>

PropertiesEdit

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 every rational number is the root of some integer polynomial of degree one.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref> 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 Template:Mvar 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, Template:Mvar and Template:Math are both transcendental, but Template:Math is obviously not. It is unknown whether Template:Math, for example, is transcendental, though at least one of Template:Math and Template:Mvar must be transcendental. More generally, for any two transcendental numbers Template:Mvar and Template:Mvar, at least one of Template:Math and Template:Mvar must be transcendental. To see this, consider the polynomial Template:Math . If Template:Math and Template:Mvar 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, Template:Mvar and Template:Mvar, 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 simple 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 Template:Mvar, one can show that Template:Mvar is not a Liouville number (although the partial quotients in its continued fraction expansion are unbounded). Kurt Mahler showed in 1953 that Template:Mvar 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>Template:Harvnb</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 transcendentalEdit

Numbers proven to be transcendental:

[[pi|Template:Mvar]] (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).
Template:Math if Template:Math is algebraic and nonzero (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem), in particular Euler's number Template:Mvar.
Template:Math where Template:Math is a positive integer; in particular Gelfond's constant Template:Math (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem).
Algebraic combinations of Template:Math and Template:Math such as Template:Math and Template:Math (following from their algebraic independence).<ref name=":2">Template:Cite journal</ref>
Template:Math where Template:Math is algebraic but not 0 or 1, and Template:Math is irrational algebraic, in particular the Gelfond–Schneider constant <math>2^{\sqrt{2}}</math> (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem).
The natural logarithm Template:Math if Template:Math is algebraic and not equal to 0 or 1, for any branch of the logarithm function (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).
Template:Math if Template:Math and Template:Math are positive integers not both powers of the same integer, and Template:Math is not equal to 1 (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem).
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 Baker's theorem).

The trigonometric functions Template:Math and their hyperbolic counterparts, for any nonzero algebraic number Template:Math, expressed in radians (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).
Non-zero results of the inverse trigonometric functions Template:Math and their hyperbolic counterparts, for any algebraic number Template:Math (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).
<math>\pi^{-1}{\arctan(x)}</math>, for rational Template:Math such that <math>x \notin \{0,\pm{1}\}</math>.<ref name=":1">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}</ref>

The fixed point of the cosine function (also referred to as the Dottie number Template:Math) – the unique real solution to the equation Template:Math, where Template:Math is in radians (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem).<ref name="wolfram_dottie">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}</ref>

Template:Math if Template:Math is algebraic and nonzero, for any branch of the Lambert W Function (by the Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem), in particular the omega constant Template:Math.
Template:Math if both Template:Math and the order Template:Math are algebraic such that <math>a \neq 0</math>, for any branch of the generalized Lambert W function.<ref>Template:Cite arXiv</ref>
Template:Math, the square super-root of any natural number is either an integer or transcendental (by the Gelfond–Schneider theorem).
Values of the gamma function of rational numbers that are of the form <math>\Gamma(n/2),\Gamma(n/3),\Gamma(n/4)</math> or <math>\Gamma(n/6)</math>.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Algebraic combinations of Template:Math and Template:Math or of Template:Math and Template:Math such as the lemniscate constant <math>\varpi</math> (following from their respective algebraic independences).<ref name=":2" />
The values of Beta function <math>\Beta(a,b)</math> if <math>a, b</math> and <math>a+b</math> are non-integer rational numbers.<ref name=":3">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}</ref>

The Bessel function of the first kind Template:Math, its first derivative, and the quotient <math>\tfrac{J'_\nu (x)}{J_\nu (x)}</math> are transcendental when Template:Math is rational and Template:Math is algebraic and nonzero,<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> and all nonzero roots of Template:Math and Template:Math are transcendental when Template:Math is rational.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
The number <math>\tfrac{\pi}{2} \tfrac{Y_0 (2)}{J_0 (2)} - \gamma</math>, where Template:Math and Template:Math are Bessel functions and Template:Math is the Euler–Mascheroni constant.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Values of the Fibonacci zeta function at the positive even argument.<ref name="Murty2013">Template:Citation</ref>
Any Liouville number, in particular: Liouville's constant <math>\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac1{10^{k!}}</math>.
Numbers with irrationality measure larger than 2, such as the Champernowne constant <math>C_{10}</math> (by Roth's theorem).
Numbers artificially constructed not to be algebraic periods.<ref>Template:Cite arXiv</ref>
Any non-computable number, in particular: Chaitin's constant.
Constructed irrational numbers which are not simply normal in any base.Template:Sfn
Any number for which the digits with respect to some fixed base form a Sturmian word.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>
The Prouhet–Thue–Morse constant<ref>Template:Harvnb; Template:Harvnb</ref> and the related rabbit constant.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}</ref>

The Komornik–Loreti constant.<ref>Template:Citation</ref>
The paperfolding constant (also named as "Gaussian Liouville number").<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}</ref>

The values of the infinite series with fast convergence rate as defined by Y. Gao and J. Gao, such as <math>\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{3^n}{2^{3^n}}</math>.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}</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>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Numbers of the form <math>\sum_{k=0}^\infty 10^{-b^k}</math> and <math>\sum_{k=0}^\infty 10^{-\left\lfloor b^{k} \right\rfloor}</math> For Template:Math where <math>b \mapsto\lfloor b \rfloor</math> is the floor function.<ref name="Kempner" /><ref>Template:Cite arXiv</ref><ref name="Sha1999">Template:Harvnb</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref name="Lox1988">Template:Harvnb</ref><ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>
The numbers <math>\alpha = 3.3003300000...</math> and <math> \alpha^{-1} = 0.3030000030...</math> with only two different decimal digits whose nonzero digit positions are given by the Moser–de Bruijn sequence and its double.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>
The values of the Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction <math>R(q)</math> where <math>Template:Q \in \mathbb C</math> is algebraic and <math>0 < |q| < 1</math>.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> The lemniscatic values of theta function <math>\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty q^{n^2}</math> (under the same conditions for <math>Template:Q</math>) are also transcendental.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Template:Math where <math>Template:Q \in \mathbb C</math> is algebraic but not imaginary quadratic (i.e, the exceptional set of this function is the number field whose degree of extension over <math>\mathbb Q</math> is 2).
The constants <math>\epsilon_k</math> and <math>\nu_k</math> in the formula for first index of occurrence of Gijswijt's sequence, where k is any integer greater than 1.<ref>Template:Cite arXiv</ref>

Conjectured transcendental numbersEdit

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

Most nontrivial combinations of two or more transcendental numbers are themselves not known to be transcendental or even irrational: Template:Mvar, Template:Math, Template:Mvar^{Template:Mvar}, Template:Math, Template:Math, Template:Math, Template:Math. It has been shown that both Template:Math and Template:Math do not satisfy any polynomial equation of degree Template:Math and integer coefficients of average size 10⁹.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}</ref> At least one of the numbers Template:Math and Template:Math is transcendental.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Schanuel's conjecture would imply that all of the above numbers are transcendental and algebraically independent.<ref name=":12">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>

The Euler–Mascheroni constant Template:Mvar: In 2010 it has been shown that an infinite list of Euler-Lehmer constants (which includes Template:Math) contains at most one algebraic number.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> In 2012 it was shown that at least one of Template:Mvar and the Gompertz constant Template:Mvar is transcendental.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
The values of the Riemann zeta function Template:Math at odd positive integers <math>n\geq3</math>; in particular Apéry's constant Template:Math, which is known to be irrational. For the other numbers Template:Math even this is not known.
The values of the Dirichlet beta function Template:Math at even positive integers <math>n\geq2</math>; in particular Catalan's Constant Template:Math. (none of them are known to be irrational).<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Values of the Gamma Function Template:Math for positive integers <math>n=5</math> and <math>n\geq7</math> are not known to be irrational, let alone transcendental.<ref name=":0">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}</ref><ref name=":4">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> For <math>n\geq2</math> at least one the numbers Template:Math and Template:Math is transcendental.<ref name=":3" />

Any number given by some kind of limit that is not obviously algebraic.<ref name=":4" />

Proofs for specific numbersEdit

A proof that Template:Mvar is transcendentalEdit

The first proof that [[E (mathematical constant)|the base of the natural logarithms, Template:Mvar]], 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 Template:Mvar is algebraic. Then there exists a finite set of integer coefficients Template:Math satisfying the equation: <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> It is difficult to make use of the integer status of these coefficients when multiplied by a power of the irrational Template:Mvar, but we can absorb those powers into an integral which “mostly” will assume integer values. For a positive integer Template:Mvar, define the polynomial <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 <math display=block>

 \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k(x) \, e^{-x}\, \mathrm{d}x\ ,

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

 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 <math display=block>

 P + Q = 0

</math> 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 Template:Mvar will turn out to be an integer, but more importantly it grows quickly with Template:Mvar.

Lemma 1Edit

There are arbitrarily large Template:Mvar such that <math>\ \tfrac{P}{k!}\ </math> is a non-zero integer.

Proof. Recall the standard integral (case of the Gamma function) <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>.

This would allow us to compute <math>P</math> exactly, because any term of <math>P</math> can be rewritten as <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 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 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>.

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 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) <math display=block>

 f_k(t) = t^k \bigl[ (t-1) \cdots (t-n) \bigr]^{k+1} =
 \bigl[ (-1)^{n}(n!) \bigr]^{k+1} t^k + \text{higher degree terms}

</math> and those higher degree terms all give rise to factorials <math>(k+1)!</math> or larger. Hence <math display=block>

 P \equiv 
 c_0 \int_0^\infty f_k(t) e^{-t} \,\mathrm{d}t \equiv
 c_0 \bigl[ (-1)^{n}(n!) \bigr]^{k+1} k! \pmod{(k+1)}

</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.

Lemma 2Edit

For sufficiently large Template:Mvar, <math>\left| \tfrac{Q}{k!} \right| <1</math>.

Proof. Note that

<math display=block>\begin{align}

 f_k e^{-x} &= x^{k} \left[ (x-1)(x-2) \cdots (x-n) \right]^{k+1} e^{-x}\\
 &= \left (x(x-1)\cdots(x-n) \right)^k \cdot \left( (x-1) \cdots (x-n) e^{-x} \right) \\
 &= u(x)^k \cdot v(x)

\end{align}</math>

where Template:Math are continuous functions of Template:Mvar for all Template:Mvar, so are bounded on the interval Template:Math. That is, there are constants Template:Math such that

<math display=block>\ \left| f_k e^{-x} \right| \leq |u(x)|^k \cdot |v(x)| < G^k H \quad \text{ for } 0 \leq x \leq n ~.</math>

So each of those integrals composing Template:Mvar is bounded, the worst case being

<math display=block>\left| \int_{0}^{n} f_{k} e^{-x}\ \mathrm{d}\ x \right| \leq \int_{0}^{n} \left| f_{k} e^{-x} \right| \ \mathrm{d}\ x \leq \int_{0}^{n}G^k H\ \mathrm{d}\ x = n G^k H ~.</math>

It is now possible to bound the sum Template:Mvar as well:

where Template:Mvar is a constant not depending on Template:Mvar. It follows that

<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.

ConclusionEdit

Choosing a value of Template:Mvar that satisfies 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: an impossibility. It follows that the original assumption, that Template:Mvar can satisfy a polynomial equation with integer coefficients, is also impossible; that is, Template:Mvar is transcendental.

The transcendence of Template:MvarEdit

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

For detailed information concerning the proofs of the transcendence of Template:Mvar and Template:Mvar, see the references and external links.