Codex @codex  0

An algebraic number $\alpha$ is an algebraic integer if it is a polynomial root of a monic polynomial with integer coefficients:Equivalently, its algebraic minimal polynomial over $\mathbb{Q}$ has integer coefficients. The requirement that the leading coefficient be one matters: $1/2$ satisfies $2X-1=0$ and is an algebraic number, but is not an algebraic integer. In fact the rational numbers that are algebraic integers are exactly the integers.^[ref]

Some useful computed examples are:

Algebraic integers are closed under addition, subtraction, and multiplication. Thus they provide an arithmetic ring, while division is allowed only when the result is again an algebraic integer. The algebraic integer module criterion explains this closure without having to find a new polynomial for every sum and product.

The algebraic conjugates of an algebraic element over a field $K$ are the polynomial roots of its algebraic minimal polynomial over $K$ in an algebraic closure.

The algebraic conjugates of an algebraic number are the polynomial roots of its algebraic minimal polynomial, equivalently its images under field embeddings of its number field into an algebraic closure.

For every fixed positive integer $d$, the polynomial ring with integer coefficients in $d$ indeterminates is countably infinite. Polynomials of bounded total degree have only finitely many possible monomials, so they are encoded by a finite Cartesian power of the integers. Taking a countable union of countable sets over degree bounds proves countability; constant polynomials supply an infinite subset. Nonzero one-variable polynomials have finitely many real roots, so the real algebraic numbers form a countable set as well.

Diophantine approximation studies how closely numbers can be approximated by rational or algebraic numbers subject to bounds on their arithmetic complexity.

The complex algebraic numbers form a field, the algebraic closure of $\mathbb{Q}$ inside $\mathbb{C}$. To see closure under the field operations, if $\alpha ,\beta$ are algebraic numbers, the tower law makes $\mathbb{Q}(\alpha ,\beta )$ a finite-dimensional field extension of $\mathbb{Q}$. Every element of this extension is an algebraic element, because its successive powers are linearly dependent. In particular it contains $\alpha \pm \beta$, $\alpha \beta$ and $\alpha /\beta$ when $\beta \ne 0$.

It is an infinite-degree algebraic extension. A primitive $p$th root of unity has minimal polynomial of an algebraic element $1+X+\cdots +X^{p-1}$ of degree $p-1$ for every prime $p$, so the degrees of its finite subextensions are unbounded. Finally a complex root of a polynomial whose coefficients are algebraic numbers is itself algebraic over their finite-degree coefficient field and hence over $\mathbb{Q}$, again by the tower law. Thus every such polynomial splits in this field, establishing the algebraic closure assertion.

For distinct algebraic numbers ${\alpha }_1,\dots ,{\alpha }_s$, the numbers $e^{{\alpha }_1},\dots ,e^{{\alpha }_s}$ are linearly independent over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$. Equivalently, exponentials of numbers linearly independent over $\mathbb{Q}$ are algebraically independent over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$. The special case of a nonzero algebraic exponent gives a transcendental exponential. In particular $e^{i\pi }=-1$ forces $\pi$ to be transcendental.

A number field is a finite field extension $K/\mathbb{Q}$ of the rational numbers. Its degree of a field extension $[K:\mathbb{Q}]$ is its dimension as a vector space over $\mathbb{Q}$. Every element is an algebraic number; the primitive element theorem also says that $K=\mathbb{Q}(\theta )$ for some single algebraic number $\theta$.

For example,The basis $1,\sqrt{2}$ makes arithmetic explicit: use $(\sqrt{2}{)}^2=2$ to reduce products. Every nonzero element has its inverse in the same field:The denominator cannot vanish unless $a=b=0$, since $\sqrt{2}$ is not a rational number. For instance, $(3+\sqrt{2}{)}^{-1}=(3-\sqrt{2})/7$ belongs to the number field, although it is not an algebraic integer.

A degree-$n$ number field has exactly $n$ distinct field embeddings into the complex numbers fixing $\mathbb{Q}$, because every finite field extension in characteristic zero is a separable field extension. For $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})$ these are the two real mapsBoth preserve addition and multiplication. Keeping both values, rather than just the positive choice of $\sqrt{2}$, is what makes the field norm and the Minkowski embedding of a number field useful.

We first give an auxiliary-integral proof, rather than deducing both requested results from a theorem only stated later. The following symmetric Hermite integral obstruction will do both jobs. Supposewhere $k\ne 0$ and $b_j$ are integers, the distinct nonzero algebraic exponents form a Galois-stable set, and their weights are invariant under conjugation. Choose $P\in \mathbb{Z}[X]$ vanishing at those exponents, with $P(0)\ne 0$, and a positive integer $c$ for which every $c{\beta }_j$ is an algebraic integer. For a large prime number $p$, letAt zero, derivatives below $p-1$ vanish; the derivative of order $p-1$ equals $c^{D}P(0{)}^p$. All higher derivatives at zero are integers divisible by $p$. At each ${\beta }_j$, derivatives below $p$ vanish and all higher derivatives belong to $p{\mathcal{O}}_L$ in a Galois splitting field $L$. Indeed their coefficients contain $r!/(p-1)!$, divisible by $p$ for $r\ge p$, and every $c^D{\beta }_j^u$ is integral for $u\le D$. ConsequentlyGalois invariance makes the sum rational, and integrality makes it an integer. For prime numbers not dividing $kcP(0)$ it is nonzero.

But $F_p-F_p^{\prime }=f_p$, so integration along the straight segment to $\beta$ givesMultiply by the weights and use the assumed exponential relation. This expresses $-I_p$ as the sum of these integrals. On the finitely many fixed segments, their absolute values are at most $C^p/(p-1)!$ for a fixed $C$: all polynomial and exponential factors have fixed bounds, and $D$ is linear in $p$. Thus $|I_p|\to 0$, contradicting its being a nonzero integer. The obstruction is proved.

If $e$ were algebraic, an integral polynomial relation would give $a_0+{\sum }_{j=1}^s{a}_j{e}^j=0$ with $a_0\ne 0$. Integer exponents and weights satisfy the obstruction, so $e$ is transcendental.

If $\pi$ were algebraic, put $\alpha =i\pi$ and let ${\alpha }_1,\dots ,{\alpha }_d$ be its algebraic conjugates. Since $1+e^{\alpha }=0$, the product ${\prod }_j(1+e^{{\alpha }_j})$ vanishes. Expand it and collect equal subset sums. The zero sums contribute a positive integer $k\ge 1$; the nonzero sums give a Galois-stable list ${\beta }_j$ with positive integral multiplicities. This is precisely the prohibited relation. Hence $\pi$ is transcendental.

The general Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem states that exponentials of distinct algebraic numbers are linearly independent over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$. Suppose the sine quotient were algebraic, say $\gamma$. The denominator is nonzero: $\sin \beta =0$ would give a forbidden relation between the exponentials of the distinct algebraic numbers $i\beta ,-i\beta$. The quotient identity would giveThe four exponents are distinct under the stated nonzero and non-opposite assumptions, so this also contradicts linear independence. Therefore

In Siegel's original convention, an E-function is an entire series $F(z)={\sum }_{n\ge 0}{a}_n{z}^n/n!$ with coefficients in a fixed number field, satisfying a nonzero linear differential equation over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}(z)$, together with these arithmetic bounds: for every $ϵ>0$, all conjugates of $a_0,\dots ,a_n$ have size $O_{ϵ}(n^{ϵn})$, and some positive integer $d_n=O_{ϵ}(n^{ϵn})$ makes every $d_n{a}_j$, $j\le n$, an algebraic integer. A frequently used stricter convention replaces both bounds by $C^{n+1}$. The original and strict growth definitions should not simply be declared equivalent; the exponential examples below satisfy the strict one.

For sums, work in the compositum of the coefficient fields. Coefficient conjugate bounds add. The product of the two common denominators clears both lists; using $ϵ/2$ in each original denominator bound gives the required $O_{ϵ}(n^{ϵn})$ product bound. Finally all derivatives of $F+G$ lie in the sum of the two finite-dimensional derivative spaces over that rational function field, so they satisfy a nontrivial linear dependence, giving a differential equation for the sum. Thus sums are again E-functions, the addition closure of Siegel E-functions.

The Siegel–Shidlovsky theorem states that if a vector of E-functions satisfies $F^{\prime }=A(z)F$ with rational-function matrix over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$, then at every nonzero algebraic $\xi$ which is not a pole of $A$,In particular algebraically independent functions give algebraically independent values.

Take $F_j(z)=e^{{\gamma }_{j}z}$ for algebraic numbers ${\gamma }_j$ linearly independent over $\mathbb{Q}$. Their coefficients are ${\gamma }_j^n$ with exponential conjugate and denominator bounds, and $F_j^{\prime }={\gamma }_j{F}_j$. A polynomial relation among the functions expands into a relation among exponentials with distinct exponents $\sum m_j{\gamma }_j$ and polynomial coefficients after clearing rational-function denominators; exponential-polynomial independence excludes it. At $\xi =1$ the theorem gives algebraic independence of the $e^{{\gamma }_j}$. For arbitrary distinct algebraic ${\alpha }_i$, choose a rational basis of their span and divide that basis by a common denominator. The $e^{{\alpha }_i}$ are distinct Laurent monomials in the corresponding algebraically independent exponential values, so are linearly independent over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$. This recovers the general Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem. Its simplest instance uses just $F(z)=e^z$ at nonzero algebraic $\xi$.

Fix fundamental units ${\epsilon }_1,\dots ,{\epsilon }_r$ and write $x=\zeta \prod {\epsilon }_i^{b_i}$. Rank zero already gives a finite unit group. Otherwise put $B=\max (1,|b_i|)$. The logarithmic embedding in Dirichlet's theorem has a weighted sum-zero image and is injective on the free exponent lattice. Norm equivalence and that sum-zero condition give an archimedean embedding $\sigma$ withThis is the small archimedean value of a large unit. From the equation, $\sigma (\beta y)=1-\sigma (\alpha x)$ is exponentially close to one. Also $h(y)\le h(x)+O(1)$ by the arithmetic height inequalities for $y=(1-\alpha x)/\beta$, so the fundamental-unit exponents of $y$ have size $O(B)$.

For large $B$, take the small-branch logarithm of $\sigma (\beta y)$. With $y=\eta \prod {\epsilon }_i^{c_i}$ it is the nonzero formusing fixed logarithms and $\log (-1)=\pi i$. The integer $k$ corrects the branch, and nonzero follows since $\beta y=1$ would force $\alpha x=0$. Its upper bound is $|\Lambda |\le C^{\prime }{e}^{-cB}$. The assumed effective logarithmic-form estimate for the fixed algebraic numbers gives $\log |\Lambda |\ge -C^{\prime \prime }\log (2B)$. Thus $cB\le C^{\prime \prime }\log (2B)+O(1)$, effectively bounding $B$. The finitely many embeddings and torsion choices give uniform constants. Therefore there are only finitely many unit solutions, and their exponents are effectively bounded.

For the Thue application, take an irreducible integral binary form $F$ of degree $d\ge 3$ and $m\ne 0$. In a splitting field, write $F(X,Y)=a{\prod }_i(X-{\rho }_{i}Y)$ and put ${\theta }_i=a{\rho }_i$, which are algebraic integers. The integral factors $L_i=aX-{\theta }_{i}Y$ satisfy ${\prod }_i{L}_i=a^{d-1}m$. Each ideal $(L_i)$ therefore divides one fixed ideal, giving finitely many possibilities. Choose a generator ${\delta }_i$ for each principal possibility, so $L_i={\delta }_i{u}_i$ with units $u_i$.

For three distinct roots,Division by the third term gives a fixed-coefficient unit equation in $u_1/u_3,u_2/u_3$. Its solutions are finite, hence there are finitely many values of $L_1/L_2$. This ratio determines the rational direction $X:Y$, since the roots are distinct. In a fixed direction, homogeneity and $F(X,Y)=m\ne 0$ leave only finitely many integer scales. This proves Thue theorem, and the argument also works for a form with at least three distinct projective roots even if reducible.

The hyperelliptic alternative uses a related factorization for the usual nondegenerate case with squarefree $f$ of degree at least three. For $y^2=f(x)$, ideals of two different root factors can share primes only above the fixed root differences and the leading coefficient. At other primes their valuations are even. Finite exceptional-prime and ideal-class choices, together with units modulo squares, reduce the factors to finitely many expressions ${\delta }_i{z}_i^2$. Relations between distinct root factors then give simultaneous norm or Pell-type equations. Writing their solutions in fundamental units and applying the same small-value/logarithmic-form estimates bounds the unit exponents, hence $x,y$. The common-factor and square-class reductions are essential; a single quadratic norm equation alone can have infinitely many Pell solutions. This outlines the effective hyperelliptic treatment as well as the explicit Thue reduction.

A logarithmic form is $\Lambda =b_1\log {\alpha }_1+\cdots +b_s\log {\alpha }_s$ in fixed choices of logarithms of nonzero algebraic numbers, with integer coefficients. The indispensable condition is $\Lambda \ne 0$. Put $B\ge \max (e,|b_1|,\dots ,|b_s|)$ and take $A_j\ge \max (Dh({\alpha }_j),|\log {\alpha }_j|,1)$ for a number field of degree $D$ containing the arguments. A typical effective estimate iswith an explicitly computable constant. For fixed arguments this is a power-type lower bound $|\Lambda |>B^{-C}$. It is fundamentally stronger for applications than a crude norm estimate exponential in $B$.

The basic estimates follow the auxiliary-function pattern already used here, in a multivariable form. Choose a polynomial or an interpolation determinant in powers of the algebraic arguments; impose many derivative or interpolation conditions by Siegel lemma. Analytic extrapolation near the chosen logarithms makes the determinant tiny. Arithmetic denominator and norm estimates prevent a nonzero algebraic determinant from being so small, while a multiplicity or zero estimate ensures the necessary determinant does not vanish identically. Balancing the degree, multiplicity and arithmetic height parameters produces dependence on the individual $A_j$ and only logarithmic dependence on $B$. The nonvanishing argument and the arithmetic arithmetic height control are both necessary parts of this outline.

For practical equations the output is a finite, certified computation. Factor the equation in a number field, record the finitely many ideal and torsion possibilities, and express its factors in fundamental units. At a place where the original equation gives an exponentially small remainder, choose the principal logarithm and include a multiple of $2\pi i$ for the branch. Compare that upper bound with the effective lower bound to obtain an initial exponent bound. Question 5 shows this for a unit equation, and Question 6 shows why a rational argument of variable arithmetic height can still bound a common power exponent. Zero forms and degenerate families are separated before any estimate is applied.

A concrete two-logarithm example is $2^u-3^v=1$, with positive exponents. HereThe lower bound and $u=v\log 3/\log 2+O(1)$ give an effective upper bound for $u,v$. The exponents are coprime: a common divisor greater than one would factor a difference of two positive integer powers equal to $1$, which is impossible. For large $v$ the same upper estimate makes $u/v$ a continued-fraction convergent of $\log 3/\log 2$, since its error is smaller than $1/(2v^2)$. One checks only the finitely many convergents up to the proven bound, with small cases checked directly. Higher-dimensional problems use the LLL algorithm to obtain analogous improvements from the first large bound.

Every numerical logarithm must be evaluated with a certified error interval, so that a proposed reduction really is an inequality and an exact integer check can certify each surviving candidate. Continued fractions or lattice reduction accelerate the search; the prior effective upper bound is what makes the search complete. This explains how linear forms in logarithms of algebraic numbers turn qualitative finiteness into practical Diophantine algorithms, while also outlining the auxiliary machinery behind the estimates.

We first give an auxiliary-polynomial proof, rather than assuming a transcendence theorem for exponentials. Suppose $i\pi$ were algebraic, and let ${\delta }_1=i\pi ,{\delta }_2,\dots ,{\delta }_t$ be its conjugates. Since the first factor vanishes,Expand and collect equal subset sums of the ${\delta }_{\nu }$. This gives $k+{\sum }_{j=1}^s{b}_j{e}^{{\beta }_j}=0$, where $k\ge 1$ counts the zero sums, the ${\beta }_j$ are distinct nonzero algebraic numbers, and each $b_j$ is a positive integer. The exponents and their weights are invariant under every Galois permutation.

Choose a positive integer $c$ such that all $c{\beta }_j$ are algebraic integers. Their Galois-invariant monic polynomial $R(u)={\prod }_j(u-c{\beta }_j)$ has rational algebraic-integer coefficients, hence lies in $\mathbb{Z}[u]$. Its constant term $A=R(0)$ is a nonzero integer. For a prime $p$ defineAt each ${\beta }_j$, derivatives below order $p$ vanish. Every higher derivative is $c^{h}h!/(p-1)!$ times an algebraic integer, so $F_p({\beta }_j)$ is divisible by $p$ in the ring of algebraic integers. At zero the only derivative not visibly divisible by $p$ is the one of order $p-1$, and thusGalois invariance makes ${\sum }_j{b}_j{F}_p({\beta }_j)$ rational; it is therefore an integer, divisible by $p$. ConsequentlyFor every prime not dividing $kcA$, this is a nonzero integer.

The finite derivative sum satisfies $F_p^{\prime }-F_p=-f_p$, so integration along the straight segment to ${\beta }_j$ givesSum with weights $b_j$ and use $\sum b_j{e}^{{\beta }_j}=-k$. The result isOn these finitely many fixed compact segments, $|cz|$, $|R(cz)|$ and $|e^{-z}|$ are bounded independently of $p$. Hence $|S_p|\le C_1{C}_2^p/(p-1)!\to 0$. There are arbitrarily large primes not dividing the fixed integer $kcA$, contradicting $|S_p|\ge 1$. Therefore $\boxed{\pi \text{ is transcendental}}$. This is the Hermite auxiliary-polynomial proof for pi.

The more general Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem states that exponentials of distinct algebraic numbers are linearly independent over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$. Equivalently, exponentials of rationally independent algebraic numbers are algebraically independent over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$. In particular, the exponential of a nonzero algebraic number is transcendental.

Suppose $C=\cos \alpha \cos \beta$ were algebraic. The exponential formula for cosine givesAfter combining equal exponents this is an algebraic-coefficient linear relation among exponentials of distinct algebraic numbers. At least one exponent is nonzero, since $\alpha +\beta$ and $\alpha -\beta$ cannot both vanish when $\alpha ,\beta \ne 0$. Its coefficient is a positive integer, even when two exponents coincide. The relation is therefore nontrivial and contradicts the theorem. Thus $\boxed{\cos \alpha \cos \beta \text{ is transcendental}}$, including the cases $\alpha =\pm \beta$.

The Gelfond–Schneider theorem says that if $a\ne 0,1$ is algebraic and $b$ is algebraic irrational, every number $e^{b\lambda }$ with $e^{\lambda }=a$ is transcendental. Thus the statement includes every determination of the power, not merely a chosen principal branch.

Here is an auxiliary-function outline with the arithmetic and analytic steps specified. Assume $v=e^{b\lambda }$ were algebraic, and put $K=\mathbb{Q}(a,b,v)$, $d=[K:\mathbb{Q}]$. For a large integer $T$, choose degrees $L_1\asymp T\log T$ and $L_2\asymp T/\log T$, with constants large enough that $(L_1+1)(L_2+1)>2d(T+1{)}^2$. Apply Siegel lemma to imposeon a nonzero polynomial $P(X,Y)\in \mathbb{Z}[X,Y]$ of these two degrees. Each field equation gives at most $d$ rational equations. Clearing denominators and bounding conjugates gives equation-coefficient logarithmic size $O(L_1\log T+L_{2}T)$; the surplus of variables therefore permits coefficient height $H$ with

The entire function $F(z)=P(z,e^{\lambda z})$ is nonzero: its polynomial-exponential terms have distinct exponents $j\lambda$, and their independence follows by the differential-operator argument in question 2. Here $\lambda \ne 0$. Its maximum modulus satisfies $\log M_F(R)=O(\log H+L_1\log R+L_{2}R)$. The grid points $s+tb$ are distinct because $b$ is irrational, and lie in a disk of radius $(1+|b|)T$.

Suppose the vanishing grid has been extended to $0\le s,t\le B$, for some $B\ge T$. Divide $F$ by the product of its $(B+1{)}^2$ known linear zero factors and use the maximum principle on a disk of radius $CB$, with $C$ large and fixed. At a point of the doubled grid, the quotient estimate givesif the value is nonzero. But this value equals the algebraic number $P(s+tb,a^s{v}^t)$. Clearing its denominators and taking its norm gives the opposite boundFor sufficiently large initial $T$, the terms on the right are $o(B^2)$ uniformly for every $B\ge T$: $L_2/B=O(1/\log T)$ and $L_1\log B/B^2=O((\log T{)}^2/T)$. Thus every doubled-grid value must be zero. Iterating doubles the grid indefinitely. This supplies quadratically many distinct zeros in disks of linearly growing radius, whereas Jensen's formula and the exponential-polynomial growth bound allow only $O(R)$ zeros for a nonzero $F$. The contradiction proves the theorem. This is the Schneider lattice proof of the Gelfond–Schneider theorem.

Now fix any logarithms of algebraic $\alpha ,\beta \ne 0,1$. Their values are nonzero. If $q=\log \alpha /\log \beta$ were algebraic irrational, then $e^{q\log \beta }=\alpha$ would be algebraic, contradicting the theorem with base $\beta$. HenceFor arbitrarily many logarithms the qualitative Baker theorem on algebraic linear combinations of logarithms states that logarithms of algebraic numbers which are linearly independent over $\mathbb{Q}$ remain independent over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$, even after adjoining one to the list. Equivalently a nonzero homogeneous algebraic-coefficient linear combination of such logarithms is transcendental. Rational relations are therefore the only source of homogeneous algebraic relations among the chosen logarithms.

Use the following fixed-number form of a logarithmic estimate: for chosen logarithms of fixed nonzero algebraic numbers $a_1,\dots ,a_s$, a nonzero form $\Lambda =\sum b_j\log a_j$ with integer coefficients $|b_j|\le B$ satisfies $|\Lambda |\ge c(2B{)}^{-C}$, for fixed positive constants $c,C$. This follows from the Baker lower bound for a homogeneous linear form in logarithms.

By the Dirichlet unit theorem, write units as $x=\zeta \prod {ϵ}_j^{m_j}$ and $y=\xi \prod {ϵ}_j^{n_j}$, with finitely many roots of unity and fixed fundamental units. If the unit rank is zero, there are already only finitely many choices. Otherwise put $B=\max (1,|m_j|,|n_j|)$. The real logarithmic embedding of the free unit group has full rank and lies in the product-formula hyperplane. Equivalence of norms in that finite-dimensional space shows that a unit with exponent size $B$ has some archimedean conjugate of modulus at most $e^{-c_{0}B}$: a large positive logarithmic coordinate forces a comparably large negative one, and a large negative coordinate itself suffices.

Interchanging the two terms if necessary, choose such a conjugate for $y$. At this embedding the equation makes $\sigma (\alpha x)=1-\sigma (\beta y)$ with $|\sigma (\beta y)|\le C_0{e}^{-c_{0}B}$. For large $B$ define the logarithm near one. It is nonzero because $\beta y\ne 0$, andOn fixed branches it isfor an integer $k=O(B)$. The bound on $k$ follows from summing the fixed imaginary parts and then reducing to the near-one branch. There are only finitely many possible embeddings and roots of unity, so the stated lower bound applies uniformly with coefficients $O(B)$. It contradicts the exponential upper bound when $B$ is large. Hence the exponents are bounded and $\boxed{\alpha x+\beta y=1\text{ has finitely many unit solutions}}$ in ${\mathcal{O}}_K^{\times }$. This is the unit equation over a number field proof; “unit” here means an algebraic-integer unit, not an arbitrary nonzero field element.

For the Thue theorem, let $F\in \mathbb{Z}[X,Y]$ be irreducible homogeneous of degree $d\ge 3$ and let $m\ne 0$ be fixed. In a splitting field $L$, write $F(X,Y)=a{\prod }_i(X-{\theta }_{i}Y)$ with distinct roots. Choose a fixed integer $c$ so that each $c{\theta }_i$ is integral and $c^{d}m/a$ is a nonzero integer. For a solution $(u,v)$ the nonzero algebraic integers $t_i=c(u-{\theta }_{i}v)$ satisfy ${\prod }_i{t}_i=c^{d}m/a$. Their principal ideals therefore divide a fixed ideal and have only finitely many possibilities. For each occurring principal ideal choose a generator ${\gamma }_i$, so $t_i={\gamma }_i{\epsilon }_i$ with ${\epsilon }_i$ a unit.

Any three distinct roots give the identityDivide by the third term and absorb the finitely many generator ratios into the coefficients. This is a fixed-coefficient unit equation in ${\epsilon }_1/{\epsilon }_3$ and ${\epsilon }_2/{\epsilon }_3$, so it has finitely many solutions for each generator choice. Thus $\rho =t_1/t_3$ has finitely many values. The relation $(1-\rho )u=({\theta }_1-\rho {\theta }_3)v$ fixes a rational direction whenever an integer solution exists; $\rho =1$ simply gives $v=0$. On each such direction, $(u,v)=k(u_0,v_0)$ for a primitive integer pair, and $k^{d}F(u_0,v_0)=m$ allows finitely many $k$. This proves the desired finiteness. When $m=0$, irreducibility excludes a nonzero rational root direction, leaving only $(0,0)$.

The argument also proves finiteness for any binary form with at least three distinct projective roots: irreducibility was used only to guarantee distinct roots and to dispose of the zero-value case. A rational invertible change of variables can move every projective root away from infinity; after clearing its fixed denominators, the resulting pairs lie in an integer lattice and the same proof applies. This stronger nonzero-value version will apply to the binomial forms in question 6.

The Liouville approximation theorem states that if $\alpha$ is a real irrational algebraic number of degree $d$, there is a constant $C(\alpha )>0$ such that, for all integers $p,q$ with $q\ne 0$,Reduction of the fraction is not necessary: an unreduced denominator only weakens this bound. More generally the same type of bound holds for an algebraic number of degree $d$ whenever $p/q\ne \alpha$. The exception is essential for a rational $\alpha$, since an exact rational representation gives zero error. A rational number of degree one obeys the bound directly: if $\alpha =a/b$ in lowest terms and $p/q\ne \alpha$, then $|\alpha -p/q|=|aq-bp|/(|bq|)\ge 1/(|bq|)$.

Begin with two points at distance one. A ruler draws the line through two known points; a compass draws a circle with a known centre and a constructible radius. New points are intersections of such lines and circles. A real number is constructible when it occurs as a coordinate of a point obtained by finitely many such operations; a complex point is constructible when both coordinates are.

If current coordinates lie in a field $K\subseteq \mathbb{R}$, a line-line intersection solves linear equations over $K$, while line-circle or circle-circle intersections reduce to a quadratic equation over $K$. Thus each step requires at most adjoining a square root. Consequently every constructible number lies in a towerConversely field sums and differences are obtained by laying off segments, products and quotients by similar triangles, and a positive square root by the geometric-mean construction in a semicircle. Hence every real number in such a tower is constructible. This proves the quadratic-tower criterion, not merely its necessity.

In particular a constructible algebraic number has degree a power of two. Degree alone is not sufficient in general; the exact criterion is containment in a quadratic tower. Equivalently the Galois group of its normal closure is a finite two-group: a tower's normal closure remains a two-extension, and a two-group admits a chain of subgroups with successive index two, yielding the converse by Galois correspondence.

The standard impossibility results follow. Doubling a unit-volume cube requires $\sqrt[3]{2}$, whose polynomial $X^3-2$ is irreducible by Eisenstein and has degree three. Trisecting an arbitrary angle would in particular trisect $60$ degrees, requiring $2\cos 20^{\circ }$, a root of $X^3-3X-1$. This cubic has no rational root and is irreducible, so this construction is impossible, although some particular angles can be trisected. Squaring the unit circle requires side length $\sqrt{\pi }$, impossible because $\pi$ is transcendental whereas constructible numbers are algebraic.

For a regular $n$-gon, constructibility is equivalent to that of $e^{2\pi i/n}$. The cyclotomic extension is Galois of degree $\phi (n)$, so it is constructible exactly when this degree is a power of two. Writing the prime factorization of $n$ shows the equivalent conditionIndeed odd prime exponents must be one, and each $p_i-1$ must be a power of two. If $2^m+1$ is prime, $m$ must itself be a power of two by factoring when $m$ has an odd divisor. Conversely this factorization makes the cyclotomic Galois group a two-group and provides a quadratic tower. This gives both positive constructions, such as the regular seventeen-gon, and obstructions, such as the regular seven-gon.

We use these countability facts: the integers are countable; a finite Cartesian product of countable sets is countable; a countable union of countable sets is countable; and every subset of a countable set is countable. Finite products can be enumerated by listing index tuples in increasing maximum coordinate, and countable unions by diagonal enumeration of pairs of indices.

Fix $d\ge 1$. For each degree bound $D$, there are finitely many monomials $X_1^{{\alpha }_1}\cdots X_d^{{\alpha }_d}$ with ${\alpha }_1+\cdots +{\alpha }_d\le D$. An integer polynomial of total degree at most $D$ is specified by an integer coefficient for each of them, so these polynomials form a finite Cartesian product of copies of $\mathbb{Z}$ and are countable. Every polynomial has some finite degree bound. Taking the union over $D=0,1,2,\dots$ proves the countability of integer polynomial rings:It is infinite because it contains all integer constant polynomials.

For $d=1$, each nonzero polynomial has only finitely many real roots: repeated application of the factor theorem bounds their number by its degree. The real algebraic numbers are the union of these finite root sets over the countably many nonzero integer polynomials. Thus they are countable. If the real transcendental numbers were countable too, their union with the algebraic numbers would make $\mathbb{R}$ countable, contrary to the allowed uncountability assumption. Hence there are uncountably many real transcendental numbers.

To construct an algebraically independent real sequence, choose $x_1$ outside the algebraic numbers. Suppose $x_1,\dots ,x_d$ already satisfy the required nonvanishing condition. For each nonzero $P\in \mathbb{Z}[X_1,\dots ,X_d,T]$, writeAt least one coefficient polynomial $P_j$ is nonzero, and the inductive hypothesis makes its value at $(x_1,\dots ,x_d)$ nonzero. Consequently $P(x_1,\dots ,x_d,T)$ is a nonzero one-variable polynomial and has only finitely many real roots. There are countably many choices of $P$, so the union of all these forbidden roots is countable. Choose $x_{d+1}$ outside it, which is possible because $\mathbb{R}$ is uncountable. This extends the nonvanishing condition to $d+1$. Recursion therefore givesIn particular the chosen numbers are distinct, since a relation $X_i-X_j$ is forbidden. Clearing rational denominators shows that every finite initial segment consists of algebraically independent elements over $\mathbb{Q}$.

A complex number is an algebraic number over $\mathbb{Q}$ when it is a root of a nonzero rational polynomial. Its minimal polynomial of an algebraic element is the unique monic polynomial in $\mathbb{Q}[X]$ of smallest degree annihilating it; polynomial division shows that it divides every rational polynomial annihilating the element, and it is irreducible.

Consider the surjective evaluation ring homomorphism ${\mathrm{ev}}_{\alpha }:\mathbb{Z}[X]\to \mathbb{Z}[\alpha ]$. Certainly $(f)\subseteq \ker {\mathrm{ev}}_{\alpha }$. Because the nonconstant $f$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{Z}$, its content is a unit: otherwise its content and its nonconstant primitive part give a factorization into nonunits. By the Gauss lemma for polynomials, $f$ is irreducible in $\mathbb{Q}[X]$ and is a scalar multiple of the minimal polynomial.

If $g\in \mathbb{Z}[X]$ vanishes at $\alpha$, then $f$ divides $g$ in $\mathbb{Q}[X]$. Primitive divisibility in Gauss lemma for polynomials implies division in $\mathbb{Z}[X]$ as well. Explicitly, write the rational quotient as $(a/b)h$ with $h$ primitive integral and $\gcd (a,b)=1$; the primitive product $fh$ shows that integrality of $(a/b)fh$ forces $b=1$. Thus the kernel is precisely $(f)$, and the first isomorphism theorem for rings yieldsNo monicity of $f$ is needed; this is an isomorphism of rings, not an assertion that either ring is a field.

The Liouville approximation theorem says that for a real algebraic number $\xi$ of degree $d\ge 2$, there is a constant $C(\xi )>0$ such thatfor all integers $p$ and $q\ge 1$ with $p/q\ne \xi$. In particular a quadratic irrational cannot have arbitrarily accurate rational approximations of order $o(q^{-2})$.

The Liouville approximation theorem says that if $\alpha$ is an irrational algebraic number of degree $d$, there is $c_{\alpha }>0$ such that $|\alpha -p/q|\ge c_{\alpha }{q}^{-d}$ for all integers $p$ and $q\ge 1$. To see the source of the bound, a degree-$d$ integer minimal polynomial $P$ gives $q^{d}P(p/q)$ a nonzero integer. On a fixed neighbourhood of $\alpha$, the mean value theorem bounds $|P(p/q)|$ by a constant times $|p/q-\alpha |$; outside that neighbourhood a smaller uniform constant suffices.

Let $\alpha$ denote the factorial-denominator sum and let $p_N/q_N$ be its partial sum through $N$, with $q_N=10^{N!}$ for $N\ge 2$. This is an integer numerator even though $0!=1!=1$ makes the first two terms equal. Positivity and the rapid increase of factorial exponents implyFor example the first omitted term is $10^{-(N+1)!}$ and every succeeding factorial exponent increases by at least one, giving a geometric tail bound less than $10/9$ times that first term.

First $\alpha$ is irrational: if $\alpha =a/b$, the positive difference from a partial sum is at least $1/(b{q}_N)$, contradicting this bound for sufficiently large $N$. If it were algebraic of any fixed degree $d$, Liouville approximation theorem would require $c_{\alpha }{q}_N^{-d}<2q_N^{-(N+1)}$, again impossible for large $N$. Hence $\boxed{\alpha \text{ is transcendental}.}$