Semjase Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 I've found an exact equation for e without pi e=(cos(1/2)+i*sin(1/2))^(2/i) does this mean that e is not a transcendental number? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 does this mean that e is not a transcendental number? No, we have proofs that e is transcendental. Having a closed expression that like, which is correct, does not change these proofs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unity+ Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 You are pretty much just isolating e from the equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted October 14, 2013 Share Posted October 14, 2013 You are pretty much just isolating e from the equation. You're pretty ,much right - but the above is a bit of a over-complicated cosx+isinx = e^ix cos1/2+isin1/2 = e^(i/2) (e^(i/2))^(2/i)=e Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalfWit Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 I've found an exact equation for e without pi e=(cos(1/2)+i*sin(1/2))^(2/i) does this mean that e is not a transcendental number? If you find a polynomial with rational coefficients that has e as a zero, then e would not be transcendental. That's the definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniton Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 Herein the definition of transcendental number.... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendental_number Now u know the definition... So, your formula doesn't proof whether it is transcendent or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now