Is it not divergent?

S = x = 1 ( 2 1 / x 2 2 1 / x 3 ) \large S=\sum _{ x=1 }^{ \infty } \left( 2^{1/x^2 } - 2^{ 1/x^3 } \right)

Find 100 S \left\lfloor 100S \right\rfloor .

Details and Assumptions

If you believe that the sum is divergent, put zero as your answer.


This problem is original.


The answer is 32.

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.

2 solutions

Abhishek Sinha
Dec 16, 2015

For a given integer m = 1 0 3 + 1 m=10^3+1 , we can upper-bound the tail of the series n = m ( 2 1 / n 2 2 1 / n 3 ) \sum_{n=m}^{\infty}(2^{1/n^2}-2^{1/n^3}) as follows n = m ( 2 1 / n 2 2 1 / n 3 ) n = m ( 2 1 / n 2 1 ) = n = m ( exp ( ln ( 2 ) / n 2 ) 1 ) ( a ) n = m 2 ln ( 2 ) / n 2 ( b ) 2 ln ( 2 ) / 1 0 3 0.0014 \sum_{n=m}^{\infty}(2^{1/n^2}-2^{1/n^3}) \leq \sum_{n=m}^{\infty}(2^{1/n^2}-1) = \sum_{n=m}^{\infty} (\exp(\ln(2)/n^2)-1) \stackrel{(a)} {\leq} \sum_{n=m}^{\infty}2\ln(2)/n^2 \stackrel{(b)}{\leq} 2 \ln(2)/10^3 \leq 0.0014 Where in (a), we have used the inequality that exp ( x ) 1 + 2 x , 0 x 1 \exp(x)\leq 1+2x, 0\leq x\leq 1 and the summation in (b) has been upper-bounded by the corresponding integral. Thus it follows that to evaluate 100 S \lfloor 100S\rfloor , it is enough to evaluate the series up to m = 1 0 3 m=10^3 and then take the floor. This finite summation has been evaluated by a computer program.

I used plain knowledge of CS to solve the problems. It was pretty easy to see that the series converges.

After trying a few values, resorted to the following solution -

1
sum(2 ** (1.0 / (x * x)) - 2 **(1.0 / (x * x * x)) for x in xrange(1, 10000000))

Arulx Z - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

It is not at all obvious that the series converges. As an example, consider the slightly modified series n = 1 ( 2 1 / n 2 1 / n 3 ) \sum_{n=1}^\infty\big(2^{1/n} - 2^{1/n^3}\big) I claim that this series diverges. Can you show that ?

Abhishek Sinha - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

Yes you are correct.

Here are the results of my test -

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
>>> sum(2 ** (1.0 / (n)) - 2 **(1.0 / (n ** 3)) for n in xrange(1, 10000))
6.113664778237755
>>> sum(2 ** (1.0 / (n)) - 2 **(1.0 / (n ** 3)) for n in xrange(1, 100000))
7.709747954059205
>>> sum(2 ** (1.0 / (n)) - 2 **(1.0 / (n ** 3)) for n in xrange(1, 1000000))
9.305783600458057
>>> sum(2 ** (1.0 / (n)) - 2 **(1.0 / (n ** 3)) for n in xrange(1, 10000000))
10.901814493794653

I cannot be sure if it converges or diverges. I need to improve my math skills :p.

Thanks a lot for replying!

Arulx Z - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

@Arulx Z Well, you can see that a pattern emerges. The partial sum up to m m terms grows like log m \sim \log m . It can indeed easily be shown by the estimate 1 + x exp ( x ) 1 + 2 x , 0 x 1 1+x \leq \exp(x) \leq 1+2x, 0\leq x\leq 1 .

Abhishek Sinha - 5 years, 5 months ago
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
#include<iostream>
#include<cmath>
using namespace std;

int main()

{
    int i=1;
    float s=0;
    do{
        s=s + pow(2,pow(i,-2)) - pow(2,pow(i,-3));
        i++;
    }
    while(i<=10000);
    cout<<floor(100*s);
    return 0;
}

When i i was set till 100 100 , it returned 31 31 .

When i i was set till 1000 1000 , it returned 32 32 .

When i i was set till 10000 10000 , it again returned 32 32 .

So it is apparent that the sum has converged enough till then. So, 32 \boxed{32} is the final answer.

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...