4 ms·
This is more-or-less my point. Once you allow sqrt and ln (or sqrt, log, and e) the problem is silly. He explicitly allows, see the bottom of the article, sqr
by kdavis 14y ago
This is more-or-less my point.
Once you allow sqrt and ln (or sqrt, log, and e) the problem is silly. He explicitly allows, see the bottom of the article, sqrt, log, and irrational numbers.
- scott_s 14y agoI think it's reasonable to assume he did not introduce imaginary and transcendental numbers.
- kdavis 14y agoNot really. Once he introduces the square root he introduces imaginary numbers, sqrt(-1), and transcendental numbers, for example the Gelfond–Schneider constant 2^sqrt(2).
- scott_s 14y agoNow we're really down the rabbit hole of someone else's intent, but personally, I assumed he was still trying to maintain some restriction. So, no imaginary numbers, no trascendental numbers. It's easy to restrict what we take the root of, and what we do with the potential irrational result of such roots, to ensure that. As you pointed out, to not do so defeats the purpose of the exercise, and I think my assumption is both reasonable and charitable.