9
$\begingroup$

As we can read in Wolfram Mathworld's article on approximations of $e$, the base of natural logarithm,

An amazing pandigital approximation to e that is correct to $18457734525360901453873570$ decimal digits is given by $$\LARGE \left(1+9^{-4^{6 \cdot 7}}\right)^{3^{2^{85}}}$$ found by R. Sabey in 2004 (Friedman 2004).

The cited paragraph raises two natural questions.

  1. How was it found? I guess that Sabey hasn't used the trial and error method.
  2. Using which calculator can I verify its correctness "to $184\ldots570$ decimal digits"?
$\endgroup$
13
$\begingroup$

$$\begin{aligned} (1+9^{-4^{42}})^{3^{2^{85}}} &=(1+9^{-4^{42}})^{3^{2*2^{84}}}\\ &=(1+9^{-4^{42}})^{9^{2^{84}}} \\ &=(1+9^{-4^{42}})^{9^{4^{42}}}\\ &=\Bigl(1+\frac1{9^{4^{42}}}\Bigr)^{9^{4^{42}}}\qquad\text{where }=\left(1+\frac1n\right)^n. \end{aligned}$$ This is just the limit definition of $e$ with a large number as an approximation for $\infty$.

Edit: Numberphile just did a video on this, which also gives a pandigital approximation for $\pi$, but it's only accurate up to ten digits.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Wow! So it is just a joke..? $\endgroup$ – Eric Sep 28 '16 at 14:54
  • $\begingroup$ @Eric It’s like a party trick. $\endgroup$ – AlgorithmsX Sep 28 '16 at 14:56
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Eric No, it's not easy at all to make it pandigital, all digits from $1$ to $9$ are used exactly once. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Sep 28 '16 at 14:57
  • $\begingroup$ @Daniel Fischer Fair enough. Its freaky accuracy isn't a mystery, though. $\endgroup$ – AlgorithmsX Sep 28 '16 at 14:59
  • $\begingroup$ That's right, all you need is a large $n$ for that. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Sep 28 '16 at 14:59

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.