TL;DR - all numbers defined in EML are computable (mainly because exp and log are computable for computable complex inputs, and the primary input ('1') is ofc computable) - this isn't as obvious as first thought, and you need some machinery from computable analysis. Ultimately, you get the canonical example of Chaitin's \Omega_U is inexpressible in EML (it's left-c.e. but not computable).
EML is also shown to be equivalent to the EL numbers due to Chow (1999). Additionally, the expressions for x*y, -x, and x^{-1} are optimal (there are no shorter EML expressions for those, by exhaustive search).
unprovable•1h ago
EML is also shown to be equivalent to the EL numbers due to Chow (1999). Additionally, the expressions for x*y, -x, and x^{-1} are optimal (there are no shorter EML expressions for those, by exhaustive search).