1 = x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + …
Find the sum of value(s) of x satisfying the equation above. Give your answer to 3 decimal places.
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.
Does there always exist a solution for x if 1 = x n + x n + 1 + x n + 2 + … for integer n ≥ 2 ?
In response to the Challenge Master's note, for n ≥ 2 we end up with the equation x n = 1 − x . Considering the graphs of the functions on each side of this equation, we have f ( x ) = x n as a continuous, strictly increasing function for x ≥ 0 with f ( 0 ) = 0 , and g ( x ) = 1 − x as a line with slope − 1 such that g ( 0 ) = 1 and g ( 1 ) = 0 . Thus f ( x ) and g ( x ) will have a unique point of intersection on the interval ( 0 , 1 ) , i.e., a unique solution exists for any n ≥ 2 . This solution approaches 1 as n → ∞ .
Log in to reply
Hm, not quite. The domain that you should be looking at is ( − 1 , 1 ) and not just ( 0 , 1 ) .
Log in to reply
For (-1,0), 1-x is always greater than or equal to zero, and x^n is never.
Log in to reply
@Aadil Bhore – That claim is not true if n is an even integer. x 2 ≥ 0 for all real x .
Could you please tell me why ∣ x ∣ < 1 ? Thanks in advance! @Abhishek Sharma @Prasun Biswas @Pranjal Jain
Log in to reply
The infinite series is converging iff |x|<1.
Log in to reply
OK, thanks a lot! But what about for an infinite geometric series (in general)? Are there any restrictions for the common ratio?
Log in to reply
@User 123 – Here's an explanation that might be simpler to understand. First, consider a finite geometric series with first term T 1 = a and common ratio r = x = 1 . Now, we know that, for sum upto n terms,
k = 1 ∑ n T k = a ⋅ x − 1 x n − 1
Now, consider the limit of this sum as n → ∞ for the infinite geometric series. Then, you have,
n → ∞ lim k = 1 ∑ n T k = x − 1 a ⋅ n → ∞ lim ( x n − 1 )
Now, the trick is to identify the domain of all possible values of x ( x = 1 ) such that the limit on RHS converges. We know that,
n → ∞ ⟹ { x n → 0 ⟺ ∣ x ∣ < 1 x n diverges ⟺ ∣ x ∣ > 1 ∨ x = ( − 1 )
This directly implies that for the limit (and hence the sum) to be finite, we need ∣ x ∣ < 1 . Hence, we need ∣ x ∣ < 1 for the infinite geometric series to converge where x = 1 is the common ratio (in the case we showed).
For the specific case of x = 1 where the GP sum formula can't be applied, you can manually show that the series will diverge using the ratio test.
Log in to reply
@Prasun Biswas – @Prasun Biswas Thanks so much!
@Prasun Biswas – @Prasun Biswas Just a small correction (I think you must have made a typo): for ∣ x ∣ = 1 , lim n → ∞ x n = 1 . So only for ∣ x ∣ > 1 , x n diverges.
Log in to reply
@User 123 – Note that the infinite GP series diverges for x = 1 too. The limit case I showed verifies only for the case when the absolute value of the common ratio = 1 .
The case of x = 1 is unique since the finite GP sum formula isn't valid for common ratio r = x = 1 . We show that case separately. When you have r = x = 1 , the sum becomes,
r = 2 ∑ ∞ x r = r = 2 ∑ ∞ 1 ⟹ The sum diverges
@User 123 – Ah yes, thanks for pointing it out! I have fixed it now. :)
Log in to reply
@Prasun Biswas – But what is lim n → ∞ − 1 n ? @Prasun Biswas
Log in to reply
@User 123 – That limit has no defined value because it oscillates among 1 and − 1 . Since n → ∞ , it has no defined parity (odd/even). Hence, the limit does not exist.
Log in to reply
@Prasun Biswas – OK, thanks. I was really confused due to the oscillation between 1 and − 1 .
You are right ! @Calvin Lin Sir please see this . :)
Log in to reply
Thanks, I've corrected it.
Log in to reply
Thanks. :)
Log in to reply
@Keshav Tiwari – Going by theory of equations the sum of roots should be equal to -1. Why is it not so
Log in to reply
@Nisshith Sharma – ^ indeed. The sum of the roots of the equation x 2 + x − 1 is -1. but the Infinite sum x + x 2 . . . . = 1 − x x iff ∣ x ∣ < 1 . Hence only The above said root is valid .The other one one is rejected, giving us the required sum .:)
Typo in 6th and 8th lines.
In 6th line, it should be x 2 + x − 1 = 0 .
In 8th line, it should be "The other solution is rejected as it is lesser than ( − 1 ) ".
Its such a easy problem and when u miss thia simple point of mod x less than 1....you just cant stop slapping yourself
I wonder why this problem is level 5? Not that hard lol...
Log in to reply
It was previously at level 5 because
- Purushottam Abhisheikh set it there initially
- The given answer was wrong, and so that pushed it up further.
I see that it has now come down to level 3, which is reasonable.
Log in to reply
I did not set it at level 5. I actually set this question at level 2. And I apologize for my mistake and thanks to your Brilliant team for its correction.
Log in to reply
@Purushottam Abhisheikh
–
Yes, sorry about that. I see that it was set level 2.
After we fixed the answer, we reset it at level 3.
We did some promotion to make it popular, and it seems like a lot of people are now answering -1, so the problem is rising in it's rating.
How did we get to step 3 where we replaced the value in braces to x2/1-x?
Log in to reply
This is an infinite Geometric Series with the common ratio as x . The formula for the summation of an infinite Geometric Series is 1 − r a where a is the first term and r is the common ratio. Hope this helps... @Sachin Vaya
Log in to reply
Important to note that this formula is only applicable when it has already been shown that the series converges. Using analysis you can show that this is when ∣ r ∣ < 1 (even for complex r )
please resolve my confusion , i am late but..... for this expression we can write without taking conditions te sum of GP as... x n + x n − 1 + . . . . . . . + x 2 = ( 1 − x ) x 2 ( 1 − x n + 1 ) . So, we get... x n + 3 − x 2 − x + 1 = 0 . taking all solutions real or imaginary , from this expression we get sum of solutions as 0 , why didn't we conclude as such. Please reply..
Log in to reply
After manipulating an equation, you should check if you introduced any additional roots.
For example, if you square an equation, then you have to watch out for negative values. Similarly, when you apply the GP formuka, you have to verify that all of the x values satisfy the condition ∣ x ∣ < 1 . Otherwise, they would not be valid solutions and hence have to be rejected.
We have 1=x²+ x^3+.... So 1=x²(1+x+x²+....) so 1=x²(1+x+1) so x^3 +2x²-1=0 so x take three values {-1.618; -1; 0.618} so the sum of value(s) of x satisfying the equation above is -2 not 0.618
Log in to reply
i agree with you....this is the best solution...
did the same thing but then i used sum of roots = -1 . now i am thinking like i couldn't get any more stupid :p
1 = x^2 +x^3 +x^4 +... 1 = x^2( 1+ x+ x^2+x^3 +x^4 +...) 1 = x^2 (1+ x + 1) 1 = 2x^2 +x^3 (x + 1) (x^2 + x - 1) = 0 can somebody please explain why I am getting an additional root x = -1 , I am unable to find out where I went wrong
Log in to reply
Because you manipulated the equation, you might have introduced an extraneous root. As such, you have to substitute them back in, and check if they satisfy the original equation.
As an explicit example, consider the equation 1 = x . In a similar manner, let's write 1 = x × 1 = x × x = x 2 and get ( x − 1 ) ( x + 1 ) = 0 so x = − 1 is a root. This is a false conclusion due to our manipulation. A solution of 1 = x will be a solution of 1 = x 2 but not vice versa.
1 = x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + . . . .
o r , 1 + 1 + x = 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + . . . .
O r , 2 + x = ( 1 − x ) − 1
O r , ( 2 + x ) ∗ ( 1 − x ) = 1
o r , x 2 + x − 1 = 0
S o , x = 2 5 − 1 or, x = 2 − 5 − 1
You can check to both be extraneous, and that leaves us with only x = 2 5 − 1
x = 0 . 6 1 8
I also did like this. It is very elegant.
I dont get what happens in the third row at all.
Log in to reply
The sum of the elements from the element "ar" to the element "as" of a geometric progession whose constant is k is: S=ar(k^(r-s+1)-1)/(k-1) Then we have the sum from the zeroth element to the infinitesimal element of a geometric progression whose constant is x. Then: S=(x^-infinite-1)/(x-1)=1/(1-x). That is what happens in the third row.
Extraneous??
We know that: x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + ⋯ = 1
So,
x 3 + x 4 + x 5 + ⋯ = x
Subtracting gives,
1 − x = x 2
Rearranging and imputting into the quadratic formula gives x = 0.618 or x < 0. We know that the other number does not lead the series tending to 1, so this is the only solution.
1 = x^2 +x^3 +x^4 +...
x^2 = x^4+x^5+x^6+...
1 = x^2 +x^3 +x^2
x^3 +2x^2 -1 = 0
Which has solutions of -1, (-1+sqrt(5))/2, (-1-sqrt(5))/2. -1 and (-1-sqrt(5))/2 you can check to both be extraneous, and that leaves us with only
(-1+sqrt(5))/2 = 0.618
That number is 1 / ϕ .
I did it like that:
I know that: 0 ∑ ∞ ( x x − 1 ) n = x x > 1
Let's call the sum of the problem f ( z ) = z 2 + z 3 + z 4 + . . . , and let's say z = x x − 1
By doing this, we have: 0 ∑ ∞ z n = x 1 + z + f ( z ) = x
Since z = x x − 1 and f ( z ) = 1 1 + x x − 1 + 1 = x x + ( x − 1 ) + x = x 2
The solution for x is 2.61803398874989...
Then z = x x − 1 = 0 . 6 1 8 0 3 3 9 8 8 7 . . .
You said to post the answer as the sum of the values of x, which is -1. Not "post a single value of x"
x^2 (1 + x^2 + x^3 + ...) = x^2/ (1 - x) = 1 {G.P. for x <> 1 or it is x^2 (1 - x)^(-1)}
=> x^2 + x - 1 = 0
=> x = (-1 + Sqrt(5))/ 2 = 0.618 {Modulus smaller than 1}
Answer: 0.618
what was difficult about it???
7/10 for difficultly
yeah, this question is really easy
<=>S * 1/x = x+1 (1)
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
( x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + … ∞ ) − 1 = 0 For solution to exist, ∣ x ∣ < 1 1 − x x 2 − 1 = 0 1 − x x 2 = 1 x 2 = 1 − x x 2 + x − 1 = 0 x = 2 5 − 1 The other solution is rejected as it is less than -1 that is it doesn't satisfy ∣ x ∣ < 1 .
Therefore, the answer should be 0 . 6 1 8
Interesting thing to note is that there exists a solution for x if 1 = x n + x n + 1 + x n + 2 + … for integer n ≥ 2 .
Proof:
x n + x n + 1 + x n + 2 + … converges to finite number only if ∣ x ∣ < 1 .
Using formula for infinite GP we have,
x n + x n + 1 + x n + 2 + … = 1 − x x n
1 − x x n = 1
x n = 1 − x
Let f ( x ) be x n and g ( x ) be 1 − x .
Plotting g ( x ) between − 1 and 1 is easy.
To plot f ( x ) we need to make cases.
Case 1
n is odd .
Plotting f ( x ) isn't that easy but we can surely plot f ( x ) for x = − 1 , x = 0 and x = 1 .
As f ( x ) is continuous for all x it will definitely intersect g ( x ) between 0 and 1 .
Between − 1 and 0 f ( x ) won't intersect g ( x ) as it is continuous for all x and possesses no maxima or minima between − 1 and 0 or you can simply say that f ( x ) is increasing between − 1 and 0 .
Case 2
n is even .
We plot f ( x ) for x = − 1 , x = 0 and x = 1 .
As f ( x ) is continuous for all x it will definitely intersect g ( x ) between 0 and 1 .
Between − 1 and 0 f ( x ) won't intersect g ( x ) as it is continuous for all x and possesses no maxima or minima between − 1 and 0 or you can simply say that f ( x ) is decreasing between − 1 and 0 .
Therefore, there exists a solution for x if 1 = x n + x n + 1 + x n + 2 + … for integer n ≥ 2 and to be more precise the solution of this equation lies between 0 and 1 .