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.
The second to third line needs some justification. You have to be careful with the number of terms that you are summing up, and ensuring that lim n → 0 ∑ k = 1 n n 2 k × n 2 k = 0 .
Can you please solve this question by converting s u m m a t i o n into i n t e g r a l ?
Log in to reply
Sorry, I didn't notice it is a calculus problem.
You don't have to convert it to an integral. It's in calculus, because it has the concept of infinity. In this case, it's just a convergent geometric series. Plus, it's not possible to convert to Riemann Sum, so integration is out of the question.
Log in to reply
But mostly in these type of questions,
We convert our question in the form of integral,but i am not able to do so in this question..
I got the way to solve this question using integration.... 😊
We use the squeeze theorem to compute this limit.
As a lower bound, since k ≤ n , we have:
k = 1 ∑ n n 2 + k k ≥ k = 1 ∑ n n 2 + n k = n ( n + 1 ) ∑ k = 1 n k = n ( n + 1 ) 2 n ( n + 1 ) = 2 1
As an upper bound, since k ≥ 0 , we have: k = 1 ∑ n n 2 + k k ≤ k = 1 ∑ n n 2 k = n 2 ∑ k = 1 n k = n 2 2 n ( n + 1 ) = 2 n n + 1 = 2 1 + 2 n 1
The lower bound is constant at 2 1 . The upper bound tends to 2 1 as n goes to infinity. By the squeeze theorem, the number between them, k = 1 ∑ n n 2 + k k , also tends to 2 1 = 0 . 5 .
n
→
∞
lim
k
=
1
∑
n
n
2
+
k
k
=
n
→
∞
lim
k
=
1
∑
n
n
1
⎝
⎜
⎛
1
+
n
2
k
n
k
⎠
⎟
⎞
We will put
n
k
=
x
and
n
1
→
dx
as ( n
→
∞
).
Therefore,given sum will convert into integral with limits 0 to 1.
∫
0
1
x
dx
(
n
2
k
→
0
)
.
⇒ 2 x 2 ∣ 0 1 = 0 . 5
Can you explain the first line? I do not understand how the limit of a summation ends up being dependent on some (random?) value of k .
Wrong. There's k/n and k/n^2. Your whole Riemann Sum working is not justified.
Reply to Challenge Master note : I have edited the solution l'll bit,Now is it right??
Log in to reply
Can you explain the integration? Right now it looks like
∫ 0 1 x dx &&& ( n 2 k → 0 ) .
Log in to reply
I have added "&&&" just to add spaces..
As n → ∞ , then n 2 k → 0
Log in to reply
@Akhil Bansal – To add space, just use \quad in Latex.
I have absolutely no idea what you mean in that Integration Latex expression. Note that you cannot randomly interchange the integration and limit signs, which is what you seem to be doing in order to conclude that lim ∫ 1 + n x x d x = ∫ x d x .
Log in to reply
@Calvin Lin
–
I also think there's flow on my solution.
But how do i am getting right answer,from this?
@Calvin Lin – Sir,Please tell me why latex is not appearing correctly in my solution,Please help!!
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
n → ∞ lim k = 1 ∑ n n 2 + k k = n → ∞ lim k = 1 ∑ n 1 + n 2 k n 2 k = n → ∞ lim k = 1 ∑ n n 2 k ( 1 − n 2 k + n 4 k 2 − n 6 k 3 + . . . ) = n → ∞ lim n 2 1 k = 1 ∑ n k = n → ∞ lim n 2 1 ( 2 n ( n + 1 ) ) = n → ∞ lim 2 1 + n 1 = 2 1 = 0 . 5 Taylor’s expansion on 1 + n 2 k 1 As n → ∞ , ( 1 − n 2 k + n 4 k 2 − . . . ) → 1