To read Method One click here.
What is \(1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - ...\) equal?
Let's call the sum s.
2s=(1−2+3−4+...)+(1−2+3−4+...)
2s=1+(−2+3−4+5−...)+1−2+(3−4+5−6+...)
2s=0+(−2+3)+(3−4)+(−4+5)+...
2s=1−1+1−1+1...
2s=1+(−1+1)+(−1+1)+...
2s=1+0+0+0+...
s=21
But, from my previous method, the answer was 41!
How is this possible?
#Summation
#NumberFallacy
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
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
Note that 1−1+1−1+⋯=21, via another famous summation. Therefore 2s=21, and s=41 as desired. □
This is because of Rienmann series thereom. This sequence is conditionally convergent so rienmann series theorem states that it could be rearranged in order to get any number. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemannseriestheorem
What you have done here is mathematically incorrect. You can't pair up terms like that. As a matter of fact on the line 2s=1−1+1−1+1+...+(−1)n is a geometric series with r=−1 and the sum diverges, i.e. it does not sum up to a specific value (A geometric series only converges when ∣r∣<1). The correct method to solve this problem is to pair up the terms as:
s=1−2+3−4+5...=limn→∞(1+3+5+...+(2n+1))−(2+4+6+...+(2n))=
limn→∞(n2)−(n2+n)=limn→∞−n=−∞.
As you can see the sum diverges (tends to −∞) and so is undefined.
Log in to reply
I'd like to add that the way your summing the series, it is even possible to get 1/8/, 1/16....and so on as the answer which is clearly absurd.
Log in to reply
However, this series yields a finite sum, which is clearly defined, because of a unique property of infinity.
yes it is possible . you should search rienmann series theorem which states that if a series is conditionally convergent it can always be re arranged to get any number.
The series of 1−1+1−1+1… is the infamous Grandi series, which yields the sums 0,1 and 21. However, for practical purposes, 21 is the accepted value, as 1 and 0 can be yielded by just changing the parentheses.
Again, using the same method in your previous link that I mentioned, the partial sums diverge, so the sum also diverges. The partial sums for the first 2k terms is -1, for the first 2k+1 terms is (k+1)/2. Clearly the partial sums diverge.
Log in to reply
Hey Yong See, you remember me from camp?
There are two possibilities:1)the one shown in the note.2)the,series of( 1s )(-1s) ending with a -1 then the answer would be 0.