0
$\begingroup$

The definition of the Euler–Mascheroni constant is the limit of $$H_n - \log(n)$$ as n approaches infinity. So, why is it so hard to prove the irrationality of this constant? $H_n$ is defined only for integers and for any integer $n > 1$ , $\log(n)$ is irrational.

On the other hand, $H_n$ is always a rational number. Subtracting an irrational number from a rational one doesn't make the constant an irrational number?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Yes, but why exactly would this argument holds after taking the limit on $n$ ? Consider for instance the sequence $\frac{1}{n}+\frac{\pi}{n}$. It is a sum of a sequence of rational numbers, and of a sequence of irrational numbers. Both sequence go to $0$, as well as their sum, and $0$ is a rational number. $\endgroup$ – Suzet Jun 28 '18 at 14:04
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ A sequence of irrational numbers does not necessarily converge to an irrational number. $\endgroup$ – D. Brogan Jun 28 '18 at 14:05
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ $\sqrt{2}/n$ is irrational for each $n$- can I conclude that its limit, $0$, must be irrational too? $\endgroup$ – user281392 Jun 28 '18 at 14:06
6
$\begingroup$

Consider the sequence $(x_n)_{n\in\mathbb N}$ defined by$$x_n=\log(2)-\sum_{k=1}^n\frac{(-1)^{k+1}}k.$$Each $x_n$ is an irrational number minus a rational number. However, $\lim_{n\to\infty}x_n=0$ and $0$ is rational.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.