Re: [math-fun] FWL more confusion re arctrig
Fred Lunnon <fred.lunnon@gmail.com> wrote:
However, I did slip up again: gamma has not actually been proven transcendental! I should have employed exp(1), or zeta(3), or indeed a continuum of other possibilities.
Zeta(3) has not actually been proven transcendental either. (It was proven irrational by Apery in 1978.)
Oops! Hasn't been my week, has it ... WFL On 8/9/15, Keith F. Lynch <kfl@keithlynch.net> wrote:
Fred Lunnon <fred.lunnon@gmail.com> wrote:
However, I did slip up again: gamma has not actually been proven transcendental! I should have employed exp(1), or zeta(3), or indeed a continuum of other possibilities.
Zeta(3) has not actually been proven transcendental either. (It was proven irrational by Apery in 1978.)
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
participants (2)
-
Fred Lunnon -
Keith F. Lynch