Fill in the blank:
1 1 3 + + 2 2 3 + + 3 3 3 + + ⋯ ⋯ + + n n 3 = = 3 0 0 _______ .
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.
Bonus: It can be proven that 1 + 2 + 3 + ⋯ + n = 2 1 n ( n + 1 ) via the arithmetic progression sum formula. But how do we prove that 1 3 + 2 3 + 3 3 + ⋯ + n 3 = 4 1 n 2 ( n + 1 ) 2 ?
Log in to reply
I'd go with induction. We know that it's true for n = 1, so then we assume it's true for some n and see if that implies it's true for (n+1). I'm too spent to actually write out all the steps right now.
Log in to reply
Yeah, we can prove it by induction. But ever wondered how people derived this formula in the first place? How do we know that sum of cubes can be expressed as that polynomial? Sure we can confirm it, but how was it derived?
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – I'm guessing that someone was idly fooling around one day and decided to see what would happen if they added up 1 term in that series, 2 terms in that series, 3 terms in that series... and then discovered that if they added N terms, the sum was the square of the Nth triangular number.
Log in to reply
@Denton Young – Nope. Think about j = 1 ∑ n [ ( j + 1 ) 4 − j 4 ] and telescoping sum .
We know that, 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + … + n = 2 n ( n + 1 ) . Now,
2 n ( n + 1 ) ⇒ n 2 + n ⇒ n 2 + n − 6 0 0 ⇒ n 2 + 2 5 n − 2 4 n − 6 0 0 ⇒ n ( n + 2 5 ) − 2 4 ( n + 2 5 ) ⇒ ( n + 2 5 ) ( n − 2 4 ) = 3 0 0 = 6 0 0 = 0 = 0 = 0 = 0 .
We get n = 2 4 . Now,
1 3 + 2 3 + 3 3 + … + n 3 = 4 n 2 ( n + 1 ) 2 = 4 2 4 2 ( 2 4 + 1 ) 2 = 4 4 3 × 3 2 × 2 5 2 = 4 2 × 3 2 × 5 2 × 5 2 = ( 4 × 3 × 5 × 5 ) 2 = 3 0 0 2 .
Great. You can actually simplify your last few steps to ⋯ = 4 2 × 3 2 × 5 2 × 5 2 = ( 4 × 3 × 5 × 5 ) 2 = 3 0 0 2 .
Use the identity i = 1 ∑ n n 3 = ( i = 1 ∑ n n ) 2
1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n = i = 1 ∑ n n = 3 0 0
i = 1 ∑ n n 3 = ( 3 0 0 ) 2
Bonus: Prove that the only pair of integer solutions ( m , n ) satisfying 1 m + 2 m + ⋯ + j m = ( 1 n + 2 n + ⋯ + j n ) p for some integer p > 0 is ( m , n ) = ( 3 , 1 ) .
Log in to reply
How do we tackle this sir? I have the knowledge of the Faulhaber's formula but I think it's not enough to solve such a problem.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We know S 1 = 1 + 2 + 3 + ⋯ n = 2 n ( n + 1 )
and S 2 = 1 3 + 2 3 + 3 3 + ⋯ n 3 = 4 n 2 ( n + 1 ) 2
⟹ ( S 1 ) 2 = ( S 2 )
Now S 1 = 3 0 0 in question so
S 2 = 3 0 0 2