9.2. TRANSCENDENTAL NUMBERS 207

Then consider the big product

∏(i1,··· ,in)

ik∈{1,··· ,mk}

(a(1)i1 eα(1)+a(2)i2 eα(2)+ · · ·+a(n)in eα(n)

)(9.18)

the product taken over all ordered lists (i1, · · · , in) . Since one of the factors in this productequals 0, this product equals

0 = b1eβ (1)+b2eβ (2)+ · · ·+bNeβ (N) (9.19)

where the β ( j) are the distinct exponents which result and the bk result from combiningterms corresponding to a single β (k). The β (i) are clearly algebraic because they are thesum of the α (i). I want to show that the bk are actually rational numbers. Since theproduct in 9.18 is taken for all ordered lists as described above, it follows that for a givenk,if a(k)i is switched with a(k) j , that is, two of the roots of vkxmk + · · ·+uk are switched,then the product is unchanged and so 9.19 is also unchanged. Thus each bl is a symmetricpolynomial in the a(k) j , j = 1, · · · ,mk for each k. Consider then a particular bk.It follows

bk = ∑( j1,··· , jmn )

A j1,··· , jmn a(n) j11 · · ·a(n)

jmnmn

and this is symmetric in the{

a(n)1 , · · · ,a(n)mn

}(note n is distinguished) the coefficients

A j1,··· , jmn being in the commutative ring Q [A(1) , · · · ,A(n−1)] where A(p) denotes

a(k)1 , · · · ,a(k)mp

and so from Theorem 9.1.4,

bk = ∑( j1,··· , jmn )

B j1,··· , jmn p j11

(a(n)1 · · ·a(n)mn

)· · · p jmn

mn

(a(n)1 · · ·a(n)mn

)where the B j1,··· , jmn are symmetric in

{a(k) j

}mk

j=1for each k ≤ n− 1. and the pl

k are el-

ementary symmetric polynomials. Now doing to B j1,··· , jmn what was just done to bk andcontinuing this way, it follows bk is a finite sum of rational numbers times powers of el-ementary polynomials in the various

{a(k) j

}mk

j=1for k ≤ n. By Theorem 9.1.6 this is a

rational number. Thus bk is a rational number as desired. Multiplying by the product of allthe denominators, it follows there exist integers ci such that

0 = c1eβ (1)+ c2eβ (2)+ · · ·+ cNeβ (N)

which contradicts Lemma 9.2.7. ■This theorem is sufficient to show e is transcendental. If it were algebraic, then

ee−1 +(−1)e0 ̸= 0

but this is not the case. If a ̸= 1 is algebraic, then ln(a) is transcendental. To see this, notethat

1eln(a)+(−1)ae0 = 0

9.2, TRANSCENDENTAL NUMBERS 207Then consider the big product(a (1);, eV 44 (2);, et) 4.0.44 (n);, e”) (9.18)(i veyin)ine ng}the product taken over all ordered lists (i1,--- ,i,). Since one of the factors in this productequals 0, this product equals0 = dy eB) + dye) +... + dy eB) (9.19)where the B (j) are the distinct exponents which result and the b, result from combiningterms corresponding to a single B (k). The B (i) are clearly algebraic because they are thesum of the a@(i). I want to show that the b, are actually rational numbers. Since theproduct in 9.18 is taken for all ordered lists as described above, it follows that for a givenk,if a(k); is switched with a(k) pp that is, two of the roots of vgx’"* +---+ uz are switched,then the product is unchanged and so 9.19 is also unchanged. Thus each ; is a symmetricpolynomial in the a (k) pial sme for each k. Consider then a particular b;.It followsbp = y Aj (Mt «a (n)yinn(iis imp)and this is symmetric in the {a(n),,--- ,a(n),,, } (note n is distinguished) the coefficientsAj ,jm, being in the commutative ring Q[A (1) ,--- ,A(m—1)] where A (p) denotesa(k), we (km,and so from Theorem 9.1.4,be = YL Biyori Pl! (a(n) + 4(0)m,) --- Dittt (a (1), +4 (yn,(its sJmn )MEwhere the B;,....,;,,, ate symmetric in {a(x),} | for each k <n—1. and the pi, are el-jcmnementary symmetric polynomials. Now doing to Bj,....,;,,, what was just done to b, andcontinuing this way, it follows by is a finite sum of rational numbers times powers of el-mM,ementary polynomials in the various {a(k) i} 7 for k <n. By Theorem 9.1.6 this is aJ=rational number. Thus b, is a rational number as desired. Multiplying by the product of allthe denominators, it follows there exist integers c; such that0O= ce) + ceB2) +... + eye)which contradicts Lemma 9.2.7.This theorem is sufficient to show e is transcendental. If it were algebraic, thenee! +(-1)e° 40but this is not the case. If a £ 1 is algebraic, then In (a) is transcendental. To see this, notethat1e™™ + (—1)ae® =0