Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2005 iii Paper 29 1 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
We first give an auxiliary-polynomial proof, rather than assuming a transcendence theorem for exponentials. Suppose were algebraic, and let be its conjugates. Since the first factor vanishes,Expand and collect equal subset sums of the . This gives , where counts the zero sums, the are distinct nonzero algebraic numbers, and each is a positive integer. The exponents and their weights are invariant under every Galois permutation.
Choose a positive integer such that all are algebraic integers. Their Galois-invariant monic polynomial has rational algebraic-integer coefficients, hence lies in . Its constant term is a nonzero integer. For a prime defineAt each , derivatives below order vanish. Every higher derivative is times an algebraic integer, so is divisible by in the ring of algebraic integers. At zero the only derivative not visibly divisible by is the one of order , and thusGalois invariance makes rational; it is therefore an integer, divisible by . ConsequentlyFor every prime not dividing , this is a nonzero integer.
The finite derivative sum satisfies , so integration along the straight segment to givesSum with weights and use . The result isOn these finitely many fixed compact segments, , and are bounded independently of . Hence . There are arbitrarily large primes not dividing the fixed integer , contradicting . Therefore . 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 . Equivalently, exponentials of rationally independent algebraic numbers are algebraically independent over . In particular, the exponential of a nonzero algebraic number is transcendental.
Suppose 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 and cannot both vanish when . Its coefficient is a positive integer, even when two exponents coincide. The relation is therefore nontrivial and contradicts the theorem. Thus , including the cases .