For example, I could write this: $$(e+i\pi)^0=1$$ It has all the five constants and all the addition, multiplication, and exponentiation operators.
Why is Euler's identity considered so miraculous and beautiful?
-
0You achieve the same degree of beauty but with less economy of symbols. – 2017-02-24
3 Answers
In your identity we can substitute the constants $e,i,\pi$ with any other number, because it is a proposition always true as a consequence of the axioms that define the operations ($x^0=1 \quad \forall x$).
The Euler identity is true only for the given numbers and expresses a property of these numbers.
Your equation only tells you $x^0 = 1$ which is not especially interesting. The equation $e^{i \pi}+1=0$ could be considered neither trivial nor artificial and for the reasons you mention is considered, by some, to be beautiful. Beauty is of course subjective.
As a side note $e$ is not Euler's constant. See here
Edit: my side note was motivated by the original un-edited question having the tag 'eulers-constant'
-
0About the side note, I think symbol $e$ comes from the name Euler, but yes Euler's constant is $\gamma$. +1 for the answer – 2017-02-24
-
0The reason we use $e$ is because in Euler's original paper he had already used a-d and needed to call it something. – 2017-02-24
It has all the five constants and all the addition, multiplication, and exponentiation operators.
Indeed it does ! Unfortunately, it is not particularly meaningful, as has already been pointed out. But why are Euler's identity and formula considered meaningful in the first place ?, you might legitimately ask me in return. To which I would like to respond by referring you to the following
seven posts:
Has anyone talked themselves into understanding Euler's identity a bit?
Why are $e$ and $\pi$ so common as results of seemingly unrelated fields?
Am I wrong in thinking that $e^{i \pi} = -1$ is hardly remarkable?
What could the ratio of two sides of a triangle possibly have to do with exponential functions?
Factorial in power series; intuitive/combinatorial interpretation?