Exceptional Set
If ƒ(z) is an algebraic function and α is an algebraic number then ƒ(α) will also be an algebraic number. The converse is not true: there are entire transcendental functions ƒ(z) such that ƒ(α) is an algebraic number for any algebraic α. In many instances, however, the set of algebraic numbers α where ƒ(α) is algebraic is fairly small. For example, if ƒ is the exponential function, ƒ(z) = ez, then the only algebraic number α where ƒ(α) is also algebraic is α = 0, where ƒ(α) = 1. For a given transcendental function this set of algebraic numbers giving algebraic results is called the exceptional set of the function, that is the set
If this set can be calculated then it can often lead to results in transcendence theory. For example, Lindemann proved in 1882 that the exceptional set of the exponential function is just {0}. In particular exp(1) = e is transcendental. Also, since exp(iπ) = -1 is algebraic we know that iπ cannot be algebraic. Since i is algebraic this implies that π is a transcendental number.
In general, finding the exceptional set of a function is a difficult problem, but it has been calculated for some functions:
- ,
- ,
- Here j is Klein's j-invariant, H is the upper half-plane, and is the degree of the number field Q(α). This result is due to Theodor Schneider.
- ,
- This result is a corollary of the Gelfond–Schneider theorem which says that if α is algebraic and not 0 or 1, and if β is algebraic and irrational then αβ is transcendental. Thus the function 2x could be replaced by cx for any algebraic c not equal to 0 or 1. Indeed, we have:
- A consequence of Schanuel's conjecture in transcendental number theory would be that
- A function with empty exceptional set that doesn't require one to assume this conjecture is the function ƒ(x) = exp(1 + πx).
While calculating the exceptional set for a given function is not easy, it is known that given any subset of the algebraic numbers, say A, there is a transcendental function ƒ whose exceptional set is A. Since, as mentioned above, this includes taking A to be the whole set of algebraic numbers, there is no way to determine if a function is transcendental just by looking at its values at algebraic numbers. In fact, Alex Wilkie showed that the situation is even worse: he constructed a transcendental function ƒ: R → R that is analytic everywhere but whose transcendence cannot be detected by any first-order method.
Read more about this topic: Transcendental Function
Famous quotes containing the words exceptional and/or set:
“Every generation rewrites the past. In easy times history is more or less of an ornamental art, but in times of danger we are driven to the written record by a pressing need to find answers to the riddles of today.... In times of change and danger when there is a quicksand of fear under men’s reasoning, a sense of continuity with generations gone before can stretch like a lifeline across the scary present and get us past that idiot delusion of the exceptional Now that blocks good thinking.”
—John Dos Passos (1896–1970)
“The ladies understood each other, in the careful way that ladies do once they understand each other. They were rather a pair than a couple, supporting each other from day to day, rather a set of utile, if ill-matched, bookends between which stood the opinion and idea in the metaphorical volumes that both connected them and kept them apart.”
—Alexander Theroux (b. 1940)