a long time ago, when watching a video about continued fractions, I saw something interesting, all continued fractions in that video (all that were non-transcendental) had a rational-looking fraction. In other words, when writing a continued fraction in terms of $a$, then made a decimal from all $a$ terms, then the number would be rational.
$$\text{Fraction:
}a_1+\cfrac1{a_2+\cfrac1{a_3+\cfrac1{a_4+\cfrac1{a_5+\cfrac1{a_6+\cfrac1{\ddots}}}}}}$$
$$\text{decimal: }\sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{a_k}{10^k}$$
but, all transcendental numbers shown in the video gave (I suspect) irrational decimals.
So, can you prove that an irrational, non-transcendental number, will always give a rational "continued fraction decimal"? or that a transcendental number sometimes has an algebraic "continued fraction decimal"?
is there a proof already?
PS: $a_k \in \Bbb Z$
and, if iterating the process (take the decimal you got and use it as your new number). could you create a tier list,(how many iterations does it take to get a transcendental number to become non-transcendental)?