A135611

[Robert Israel]

OK, then, the value is approximately

.003434765697460300395957700204142551072047420446447776276569263558116014

Cheers,
Robert

On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Alexander Povolotsky wrote:

> Sorry -  I made a typo in my previous email ;-)
>
> and that is why connection to A135611 was lost ...
>
> I meant
>
> (2-x)^(1/(2+x)) + (3-x)^(1/(2+x)) = Pi
>
> AP
>
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Olivier Gerard <olivier.gerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear Alexander,
>>
>> There are at least 2 solutions for your equations, and they are
>> quite easy to approximate at a given precision
>>
>> x= 1.632749856906240069978502579231322509272902738227...
>>
>> and
>>
>> x= -1.68336766284100539169447095157122597748337195563...
>>
>> but there can be none, real, of smaller absolute value.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Alexander Povolotsky <apovolot at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Neal,
>>>
>>>  - re A135611
>>>
>>> I presume that a quite small fractional (considerably less than 1)
>>> transcendental number "x" exists such that:
>>>
>>> (2-x)^(2+x) + (3-x)^(2+x) = Pi
>>>
>>> Was it ever calculated to reasonable number of digits accuracy ?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alexander R. Povolotsky
>>>
>>
>>
>