Square roots of square roots of

Algebra Level 2

Find the value of the infinitely nested expression below.

6 + 6 + 6 + \sqrt{6 + \sqrt{6 + \sqrt{6 + \ldots } }}

1 2.49 0 6 3

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

7 solutions

Akshat Sharda
Nov 14, 2015

x = 6 + 6 + 6 + x=\sqrt{6+\sqrt{6+\sqrt{6+\ldots}}}

x = 6 + x x 2 = 6 + x x=\sqrt{6+x}\Rightarrow x^2=6+x

x 2 x 6 = 0 x^2-x-6=0

( x 3 ) ( x + 2 ) = 0 (x-3)(x+2)=0

Because the answer must be positive, the only solution we're interested in is x = 3 . x = \boxed{3}.

Moderator note:

Simple standard approach for dealing with nested functions.

Neat solution!

kavya Ashok - 5 years, 6 months ago

Why can't the answer be negative?

Siddhant Modi - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

It can't be negative because the \sqrt{} function takes non-negative real numbers to non-negative real numbers, i.e. the \sqrt{} function never outputs a negative number.

Veritas De Vita - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

root always makes a non negative solution but remeber that the sign plus minus is before the root so it can also negative value but since there is no option as such, the answer is 3 only. If you put -2, even then the answer will be same but it is an extraneous root.

Satyajit Ghosh - 5 years, 6 months ago

: R + R + \sqrt{} : \mathbb{R}_{+} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_{+}

Valentin Michelet - 5 years, 6 months ago

Because no negative answers were among the choices.

Stacey Greenstein - 5 years, 6 months ago

Actually, it could be negative. In this case, x=-2 is an extranious solution intrudced by squaring both sides of the equation in the second step.

Alec Larsen - 5 years, 6 months ago

Because else, there will be a infinite number of complex solutions.

6 ± 6 ± 6 ± \sqrt { 6\pm \sqrt { 6\pm \sqrt { 6\pm \dots } } }

So only positive ones are considered when dealing with n \sqrt{n}

Arulx Z - 5 years, 5 months ago

We were looking for a "real" solution

Samuel Huckaby - 5 years, 6 months ago
Veritas De Vita
Nov 19, 2015

This question is not as straightforward to do properly as one might think.

All of the posted solutions are only valid once you know that the expression converges. For example, consider:

x = 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 + . . . . . x = 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 + .....

Obviously this series does not converge; however, using the method given in the other solutions:

x = 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 + . . . . . x = 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 + ..... = 1 + 2 ( 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 + . . . . . ) = 1 + 2(1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 + .....) = 1 + 2 x = 1 + 2 x

x = 1 \Rightarrow x = -1 , which is obviously not correct.


So first we need to prove that x = 6 + 6 + 6 + x=\sqrt{6+\sqrt{6+\sqrt{6+\dots}}} converges. What's meant by the expression is also not completely clear in a rigorous sense, so I'll define it as follows:

Suppose x 0 = 6 x_0=\sqrt{6} , and let x i = 6 + x i 1 x_i=\sqrt{6+x_{i-1}} , for i = 1 , 2 , i=1, 2, \dots . Then we define

x = 6 + 6 + 6 + = lim i x i x = \sqrt{6+\sqrt{6+\sqrt{6+\dots}}} =\lim_{i\rightarrow \infty} x_i

We want to show that this sequence is bounded and monotonic: in this case, we want to show that it is bounded above, and increasing. Then we will know that the limit exists and is finite (and that lim i x i = sup { x i : i = 0 , 1 , } \lim_{i\rightarrow\infty} x_i = \sup\{x_i:i=0,1,\dots\} ).

Let's look at the region in which the sequence is increasing, i.e. x i + 1 > x i x_{i+1} > x_i .

x i + 1 > x i x_{i+1}>x_i 6 + x i > x i \Rightarrow \sqrt{6+x_i} > x_i x i 2 x i 6 < 0 \Rightarrow x_i^2-x_i-6<0 2 < x i < 3 \Rightarrow -2 < x_i < 3

For x i > 2 x_i>-2 , we see that x i + 1 = 6 + x i > 4 = 2 > 2 x_{i+1}=\sqrt{6+x_i}>\sqrt{4}=2>-2 . For x i < 3 x_i<3 , we see that x i + 1 = 6 + x i < 9 = 3 x_{i+1}=\sqrt{6+x_i}<\sqrt{9}=3 . Thus if x i x_i is in an increasing region, so is x i + 1 x_{i+1} . Since 2 < x 0 < 3 -2<x_0<3 , by induction we see that 2 < x i < 3 i -2<x_i<3\hspace{0.5em} \forall i .

So we have bounded the sequence above by the value 3 3 , and checked that the sequence is increasing. Thus the limit exists and is finite. Thus we can solve x i + 1 = x i x_{i+1}=x_i to get the limit. Since the sequence is increasing, we of course want the higher of these solutions, x = 3 x=3 .


While my solution might seem like overkill, hopefully the first example I gave should show why it is necessary to prove that the limit exists and is finite before trying to find it!

I liked the proof of convergence. Just like to point out that there is an index wrong; namely when you claim that x i + 1 > x i 6 + x i 1 > x i x_{i+1} > x_{i} \implies \sqrt{6+x_{i-1}} > x_{i} , I think I has to be 6 + x i > x i \ldots \implies \sqrt{6+x_{i}} > x_{i} . Anyway, congratulations, nice demonstration.

Omar Monteagudo - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Thanks for that! Little bit late, but I've corrected that index :) cheers for pointing it out!

Veritas De Vita - 5 years, 3 months ago

Enjoyed the explanation. I knew that it had something to do with limits when I saw the ellipses. For ease of reading, please put one equation on one line. I don't remember. Were limits first covered in calculus or algebra?

David Lincenberg - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Thanks! I've tried to put things on separate lines, but this doesn't seem to be as flexible as LaTeX, so I'm not sure if I can do it more neatly.

I covered limits first in calculus, I think, although they weren't rigorously defined until I went to university. There we were given the definition:

lim n a n = a \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} a_n = a is equivalent to ϵ > 0 , N \forall \epsilon > 0, \exists N such that n N , a n a < ϵ \forall n \geq N, |a_n-a| < \epsilon .

Ultimately, things weren't covered properly until university!

Veritas De Vita - 5 years, 3 months ago

Thanks a lot for this explanation. Although I didn't get it all but I did get the fact u wanted to point out

kathakali mitra - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

You're welcome :)

Veritas De Vita - 5 years, 3 months ago
Hamza A
Nov 18, 2015

using the generalization sqrt(n+sqrt(n+sqrt(n+...)=s

s^2=n+sqrt(n+sqrt(n+...)

s^2=n+s

s^2-s=n

s(s-1)=n

in this case n=6

s(s-1)=6

s=3

Euan Zhang
Nov 18, 2015

I saw that √6 is 2.49–one of the answers–and knew that it would be a bit more than that, but not quite to 4, the square root of 16. The closest one had to be 3.

I did the same and knew I'd find better methods in the discussion!

Manjunath Sreedaran - 5 years, 6 months ago

Why does x=√(6+x) ? I dont understand this, cuz √(6+x) will be a different number or something, so it cant be x.

Roberto Mardero
Nov 24, 2015

Assuming as variable y => y = (6 + y) ^ 1/2> 6 + y> y^2 - 6 -2 = 0 >> y = 6 / -3 and y = 6/2; conclusion: a = 3. Given that y = -2 assumes the form of actual number in a square root, the answer is> 3. S = {3, -2}

Unmesh Nakulan
Nov 18, 2015

x= √(6 + √(6 + √(6 + .....)))

x=√(6 + x)

x^2= 6+x

x^2-x-6=0

x=3 (positive value)

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...