Not at all. On the contrary, your English is very good. It was my fault.

The one and only one Carl Friedrich Gauss.Quote:

By the way, who it is in your picture avatar...?

Printable View

- Jul 31st 2010, 10:39 AMDemandeur
- Jul 31st 2010, 11:00 AMAlso sprach ZarathustraQuote:

Not at all. On the contrary, your English is very good. It was my fault.

Quote:

The one and only one Carl Friedrich Gauss.

- Jul 31st 2010, 01:03 PMVlasev
- Aug 1st 2010, 01:22 PMawkward
I don't know whether or not is rational or not, but there is an interesting proof in which this quantity figures.

Problem: Can be rational if a and b are irrational?

Consider . If x is rational then we have our example. If not, and x is irrational, then consider , and we again have an example of rational with irrational a, b. So whether x is rational or not, we have the required example.

This is an example of (to me) an absolutely infuriating proof. We know either x or is an example of rational with irrational a and b, but we don't know which, and the proof gives us no clue!

This proof is discussed in "The Princeton Companion to Mathematics". - Aug 1st 2010, 03:09 PMVlasev
The Gelfond-Schneider theorem says that [LaTeX ERROR: Convert failed] is transcendental and hence irrational. But I hear you. it's quite a nasty little existence proof!