This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science
related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should
explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments
should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.
Markdown
Appears as
*italics* or _italics_
italics
**bold** or __bold__
bold
- bulleted - list
bulleted
list
1. numbered 2. list
numbered
list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
P.s. It must be remembered that this is just an analytic contiuation. The Euler zeta function is actually only valid for x>1. So it can be regaurded as a fallacy.
1/2 = 1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1...... (which is awesome because at any finite point if u stop the series, u get 1 or -1 or 0, but at infinity u get 1/2, this is weird because it is not even the limiting case that some calculator can check)
First of all, the following series: 1+x1=1−x+x2−x3+x4−…∞ is the Maclaurin series of f(x)=1+x1 and is valid (converges) iff ∣x∣<1.
When x=1, then the infinite series becomes equivalent with the Grandi's series which is divergent and thus technically has no value. But, one can use Caesaro Summation to provide a value to this divergent sum by checking what value does the partial sums approach.
The partial sums for the series are:
11,21,32,42,53,63,…
It's not hard to see that the partial sums approach to 21, and as such, the Caesaro summation value of this divergent sum is 21, although the series has no value in the technical sense.
Yes bro i have a doubt regarding it, when we prove the taylor series, where exactly do we assume that the series must be convergent for the series to work, ?
Definitely i understand that it is necessary for it to be convergent and after we derive the taylor series, we check that it is convergent, but we dont need to assume that to prove taylor series,
@Mvs Saketh
–
In this case though, note that the expansion on RHS is an infinite geometric progression with a=1 and r=(−x). As such, we know that an infinite GP converges iff ∣r∣<1. So, we must have,
If you want to sum that series, you need to restrict yourself a bit.
Call the sum S. Thus:
−2S=1+2+3+4+5+16+⋯
−2S=1−2−4−6−8−10−⋯
−2S=1+2+1+2+3+14+⋯
Adding down the columns, we arrive at 0=1! The only conclusion is that, if we want to attribute this sum any finite value, we can't shift over the summands like that — either that, or we can't distribute, or we can't add down. In any case, if we were to sum this, we'd have to either give up some rules on how infinite sums behave, or get a contradiction.
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*or_italics_**bold**or__bold__paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)> This is a quote# I indented these lines # 4 spaces, and now they show # up as a code block. print "hello world"\(...\)or\[...\]to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 32^{34}a_{i-1}\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{2}\sum_{i=1}^3\sin \theta\boxed{123}Comments
This is a result of the Riemann zeta function where: ζ (−1)=i=1∑∞n=−121
What do you want to say ? Are you thinking of a fantasy world of Mathematics ? @Mayank Singh
Log in to reply
It is just a logical extension of the Riemann zeta function in calculus. In string theory the result of (is thought to be)1∑∞n=−121
You might want to see this
P.s. It must be remembered that this is just an analytic contiuation. The Euler zeta function is actually only valid for x>1. So it can be regaurded as a fallacy.
These formulas were given by Ramanujan for divergent series like the one mvs & mayank shared.
but how?
i do have a very interesting case
1/(1+x) = 1-x+x^2-x^3+x^4 ...
putting x=1
1/2 = 1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1...... (which is awesome because at any finite point if u stop the series, u get 1 or -1 or 0, but at infinity u get 1/2, this is weird because it is not even the limiting case that some calculator can check)
Log in to reply
First of all, the following series: 1+x1=1−x+x2−x3+x4−…∞ is the Maclaurin series of f(x)=1+x1 and is valid (converges) iff ∣x∣<1.
When x=1, then the infinite series becomes equivalent with the Grandi's series which is divergent and thus technically has no value. But, one can use Caesaro Summation to provide a value to this divergent sum by checking what value does the partial sums approach.
The partial sums for the series are:
11,21,32,42,53,63,…
It's not hard to see that the partial sums approach to 21, and as such, the Caesaro summation value of this divergent sum is 21, although the series has no value in the technical sense.
Log in to reply
Yes bro i have a doubt regarding it, when we prove the taylor series, where exactly do we assume that the series must be convergent for the series to work, ?
Definitely i understand that it is necessary for it to be convergent and after we derive the taylor series, we check that it is convergent, but we dont need to assume that to prove taylor series,
Log in to reply
In this case though, note that the expansion on RHS is an infinite geometric progression with a=1 and r=(−x). As such, we know that an infinite GP converges iff ∣r∣<1. So, we must have,
∣r∣<1⟹∣(−x)∣<1⟹∣x∣<1
If you want to sum that series, you need to restrict yourself a bit.
Call the sum S. Thus:
−2S=1+2+3+4+5+16+⋯
−2S=1−2−4−6−8−10−⋯
−2S=1+2+1+2+3+14+⋯
Adding down the columns, we arrive at 0=1! The only conclusion is that, if we want to attribute this sum any finite value, we can't shift over the summands like that — either that, or we can't distribute, or we can't add down. In any case, if we were to sum this, we'd have to either give up some rules on how infinite sums behave, or get a contradiction.