Talk:Transcendental number

message: I've opened a discussion of this move at Talk:Transcendental_number_theory, but I know that far more people follow this article than Transcendental number theory, so I wanted to mention it here too. Will Orrick (talk) 21:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I should add that I'm not trying to get other people to do all the work. I'm happy to do the grunt work once it is decided what should be done. Will Orrick (talk) 17:22, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move of Mahler's classification material 

message: Not sure if this is something that falls under the purview of this community to do anything about, but here we go. The result of the LaTeX (or whatever equivalent is actually used) markup for the infinite sum representation of the Liouville constant renders poorly in Google Chrome when the page is viewed at 100% zoom. Here it is:
:
\begin{align}
L_b &= \sum_{n=1}^\infty 10^{-n!} \\ &= 10^{-1} + 10^{-2} + 10^{-6} + 10^{-24} + 10^{-120} + 10^{-720} + 10^{-5040} + 10^{-40320} + \ldots \\
&= 0.\textbf{1}\textbf{1}000\textbf{1}00000000000000000\textbf{1}00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\ \ldots \\
\end{align}
On my machine, the equal sign in the n=1 under the \sum symbol is missing its top bar, so it appears to be a minus sign. It doesn't seem to be the case here in the talk page, so I dunno if it has something to do with the way that the rendered image is being formatted or laid out in the page or what. I don't know if this is just my computer, but I thought I'd mention it. Does anyone else have this problem with the same browser? Modus Ponens (talk) 16:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have tried this on four browsers: on my computer, Firefox and Brave, and on my phone Privacy Wall and Samsung Internet. In both of the browsers on my phone it is absolutely fine. In both of the browsers on my computer at first glance it looks fine, but looking more closely reveals that the top bar of the equals sign is there, but somewhat fainter than the rest of the text, including the bottom bar of the same equals sign. Unfortunately I have no idea how to correct the problem, but that certainly shows that there is some kind of problem which goes beyond your computer, and indeed beyond Chrome. You may be able to find someone who knows enough to be able to help if you post a query at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). JBW (talk) 21:35, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @JBW: You know what, I just tried it on the same browser on my work computer and it's rendering correctly here. Not sure what's causing it to happen on my home computer. Modus Ponens (talk) 02:41, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

text: I can't verify this in Chrome on my macOS Monterey system. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:56, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liouville constant infinite sum renders poorly in Chrome 

message: Why is there no c_{0} term in Q? Why it starts with c_{1} for this reason?
  \begin{align}
    P &= c_{0} \left( \int^{\infty}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
    + c_{1} e \left( \int^{\infty}_{1} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
    + c_{2} e^{2} \left( \int^{\infty}_{2} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right) 
    + \cdots 
    + c_{n} e^{n} \left( \int^{\infty}_{n} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right) 
  \\
    Q &= c_{1} e \left(\int^{1}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
    + c_{2}e^{2} \left( \int^{2}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right)
    + \cdots+c_{n} e^{n} \left( \int^{n}_{0} f_k(x) e^{-x} \,\mathrm{d}x \right) 
  \end{align}
 Euglenos sandara (talk) 20:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: In the expression for Q, c_{1} is the coefficient of a term involving an integral from 0 to 1, c_{2} is the coefficient of a term involving an integral from 0 to 2, and so on. Presumably c_{0} would be the coefficient of a term involving an integral from 0 to 0, which would simply be 0. JBW (talk) 00:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about the proof