Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on sh.itjust.works
nostupidquestions·No Stupid QuestionsbyAd4mWayn3

Closure of exponentiation of real algebraic numbers.

Given two real, nonzero algebraic numbers a and b, with a > 0 (so that it excludes complex numbers), is there any named subset of the reals S such that (a^b) belongs to S forall a,b? I know it's not all the reals since there should be countably many a^b's, since a,b are also countable.

View original on sh.itjust.works
18

8 replies

I see. I missed that word in the question, and I didn't remember that definition anyway.

3
ns1
feddit.uk

Fun question! I don't know the answer other than to say it's not just the algebraics because of the Gelfond-Schneider constant

Are you sure this is well-defined? You say that a and b are algebraic but "closure" implies that they could also be any members of S. This might mess up your proof that it's not all the reals if you do mean the closure.

2
Ad4mWayn3reply
sh.itjust.works

My mistake, in that case it's not the closure what I mean. But then how are those kinds of sets called?

2
ns1reply

You could say something like "the image of exponentiation over...." to mean the set of values created by applying the function once, but it sounds slightly clunky.

Looks like there aren't really very many sets of mostly transcendental numbers that have names. Computational numbers and periods are two of them, I'd guess that both probably contain your set, so you could compare with those to see where it gets you.

2

You reached the end

Closure of exponentiation of real algebraic numbers. | Spyke