If one of the two series below is equal to 2, what is the value of the other one?
⎩ ⎪ ⎨ ⎪ ⎧ 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + ⋯ x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 4 x 4 + ⋯
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.
As pointed out in the comments, we have to ensure that S = 2 implies that the first series is equal to 2.
The steps here are not bi-directional. Do you see why?
Hint: Find an equation that relates the values of these 2 series.
Shouldn't you also check that if the second series is equal to 2, then it immediately follows that the first series is equal to 2?
Log in to reply
I have shown that if the first series is 2 then the second series is also 2. So their is no need to check.
Log in to reply
But still, for another value of x, the second series could equal to 2, but the first one equal to something different. It would mean that information is insufficient.
you're correct. while the most upvoted solution is not, how funny is that?
Log in to reply
Hey see I have converted the second equation in terms of 1st so instead of checking we will just reverse that process. But even after that we willn't get anything new.
It's quite easy to show that : If we call first series 'P' then the second series by Shreyansh's method can be written as S = P(P-1). Putting S = 2, we get P = 2 or P = -1. But as P = (1-x)^(-1) (x<1 for the series to be convergent) we get x = 2 if P = -1 which is not possible if S is convergent. Hence P = 2.
http://www.cargalmathbooks.com/31%20%20Geometric%20Series%20.pdf
Relevant wiki: Arithmetic-Geometric Progression
Let S = 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + . . . . and T = x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 4 x 4 + . . . . . We know that as a geometric series, S will converge for ∣ x ∣ < 1 . Using the ratio test on T ,
n → ∞ lim ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ a n a n + 1 ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ = n → ∞ lim ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ n x n ( n + 1 ) x n + 1 ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ = ∣ x ∣ ⋅ n → ∞ lim ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ n n + 1 ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ = ∣ x ∣
so T will also converge for ∣ x ∣ < 1 , and since T will clearly not converge for x = ± 1 , S and T will converge for the same values of x .
We know that for ∣ x ∣ < 1 , S = 1 − x 1 . We can develop a similar formula for T .
x S T − x S T − x T T ( 1 − x ) T = x + x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + . . . . = x 2 + 2 x 3 + 3 x 4 + 4 x 5 + . . . . = x T = x S = 1 − x x = ( 1 − x ) 2 x
Now we are ready to prove that S = 2 ⟺ T = 2 .
S = 2 T = 2 ⟺ 1 − x 1 = 2 ⟺ 1 = 2 − 2 x ⟺ x = 2 1 ⟺ ( 1 − x ) 2 x = 2 ⟺ x = 2 ( 1 − x ) 2 ⟺ 2 x 2 − 5 x + 2 = 0 ⟺ ( 2 x − 1 ) ( x − 2 ) = 0 [But we can disregard the solution x = 2 as ∣ x ∣ < 1 ] ⟺ x = 2 1
Since S = 2 and T = 2 are both equivalent to x = 2 1 , it must be true that S = 2 ⟺ T = 2
Such a clear explanation. Even an average student can understand.
Relevant wiki: Arithmetic-Geometric Progression
Let us call the first series A. Therefore A = 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + …
Let us call the second series B. Therefore B = x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + …
Intuitively, I found a nice equation relating the 2 series. That is A 2 − A = B (Proof is below)
A 2 = 1 + 2 x + 3 x 2 + 4 x 3 + …
Subtracting A from A 2 ,
A 2 − A = ( 1 + 2 x + 3 x 2 + 4 x 3 + … ) − ( 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + … )
A 2 − A = x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 4 x 4 + … = B
Therefore A 2 − A = B
Using this equation, if we put the value of A=2, the value of B = 4 − 2 = 2
If we put the value of B=2, the value of A = 2
Therefore the correct answer is 2
If we put the value of B=2, we get also second solution: B=2, A=-1. But there's no x, that the series would converge to this values.
Log in to reply
We can see by looking at the series that if B is positive(2, in this case) then A is also positive.(Basically,value of A and B have the same sign). So, we can ignore the -1 and take the value of B as 2.
Log in to reply
The claim that "A and B have the same sign" is not true.
As a counterexample, if x = − 0 . 5 , then A = 1 − ( − 0 . 5 ) 1 = 3 2 , and B = A ( A − 1 ) = 3 2 ( 3 2 − 1 ) = − 9 1 .
How did you get A^2?
Log in to reply
@Siddhant Singh Using grid multiplication. Hint- Add the diagonals and see the pattern.
Suppose that n = 0 ∑ ∞ x n = 1 + x 2 + x 3 + ⋯ = 1 − x 1 = 2 c c c ∣ x ∣ < 1 Solving we get x = 2 1 Then plugging back to the next series we find it as arithmatics geometric series as follows S 2 = 2 1 + 4 2 + 8 3 + ⋯ = 2 Note
Note:
S 2 = 2 1 + 4 2 + 8 3 + ⋯ = 2 1 + 4 1 + 1 + 8 1 + 1 + 1 + ⋯ S 2 = ( 2 1 + 4 1 + 8 1 + ⋯ ) + ( 4 1 + 8 1 + 1 6 1 + ⋯ ) + ( 8 1 + ⋯ ) + ⋯ S 2 = 1 + 2 1 + 8 1 + 1 6 1 + ⋯ = 1 − 2 1 1 = 2
For x < 1 ,
y = 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + ⋯ = 1 − x 1 = 2 ,
which yields x = 1 / 2 . Differentiating both sides,
d x d y = 1 + 2 x + 3 x 2 + 4 x 3 + ⋯ = ( 1 − x ) 2 1 .
Finally, multiply both sides by x and plug x in to get the result.
x d x d y = x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 4 x 4 + ⋯ = ( 1 − x ) 2 x = 2
Let us suppose the first series sums to 2. Then we have: 1 + x 2 + x 3 + . . . = 1 − x 1 = 2 ⟹ x = 2 1 .
Now consider the second series. Notice how it may be written as x times the derivative of the first series.
x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 4 x 4 + . . . = x d x d ( 1 − x 1 ) = ( 1 − x ) 2 x = ( 1 − 1 / 2 ) 2 1 / 2 = 2
Now suppose the second series sums to 2. By the same manipulation above, this leads to a quadratic equation with solutions x = 2 or x = 1 / 2 . We can dismiss the first solution because it leads to a divergent sum when substituted into the first series. The second solution yields a sum of 2 when substituted into the first sum. Therefore, the first series sums to 2 if and only if the second series sums to 2.
This is a more sophisticated version of my own method - I too started out by using the information from the first series to tell me that x is equal to 1/2. I then substituted this value into the second series and added up the first few terms establishing to my satisfaction that they were also converging on 2.
Let S 1 be the first series, and S 2 the second series. S 1 is a geometric series and converges only if abs(x) less than 1. One find easily that S 2 = S 1 ( S 1 − 1 ) by making a table and summing in diagonal (the first row is S 1 , the first column is ( S 1 − 1 ) : the product starts from row2col2)
1 | x | x 2 | x 3 | x 4 | |
x | x | x 2 | x 3 | x 4 | x 5 |
x 2 | x 2 | x 3 | x 4 | x 5 | x 6 |
x 3 | x 3 | x 4 | x 5 | x 6 | x 7 |
x 4 | x 4 | x 5 | x 6 | x 7 | x 8 |
x 5 | x 5 | x 6 | x 7 | x 8 | x 9 |
x 6 | x 6 | x 7 | x 8 | x 9 | x 1 0 |
Hence if S 1 = 2 , then S 2 = 2 for x = 2 1 . But the reverse problem: if S 2 = 2 , from S 2 = S 1 ( S 1 − 1 ) one obtains two values for S 1 : S 1 = 2 for x = 2 1 or S 1 = − 1 for x = 2 : but the second solution is impossible because the series would not converge. Sorry, I do not know how to write in LaTex
The first series is a decreasing geometric series and if it's sum is 2 then using the decreasing geometric series sum formula we get a common ratio of x=1/2. But you could also look at the first series as the Maclaurin Series for 1/(1-x). You can turn it into the Maclaurin Series for the second series by taking the first derivative and multiplying by x. The second series is then x/(1-x)^2. Simply let x=1/2 to yield 2.
I could solve this question anyway but I have a doubt.
Let's say 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 . . . . . = 2
Therefore, x + x 2 + x 3 . . . . . = 1 ...... ( i )
Let's take the second expression and write it as x ( 1 + 2 x + 3 x 2 + 4 x 3 . . . . . . . )
Further write it as x ( d / d x ( x ) + d / d x ( x 2 ) + d / d x ( x 3 ) . . . . . )
= x d / d x ( x + x 2 + x 3 + x 4 . . . . . . . )
From ( i ) , we get x d / d x ( 1 )
= 0 [as d / d x ( 1 ) = 0 ]
Where is the flaw in this procedure?
Your error is when you substituted (x+x^2+x^3+.... =1).
Note that x + x 2 + x 3 + ⋯ = 1 is an equation, not a function of x . So it is a fallacy to differentiate an equation with respect to some variable.
For example, x = 5 is an equation. Differentiating with respect to x gives 1 = 0 . That doesn't sound right, does it?
Let ∣ x ∣ < 1 .
∑ n = 1 ∞ n x n = ∑ j = 1 ∞ ∑ n = j ∞ x n = 1 − x 1 ∑ j = 1 ∞ x j = 1 − x 1 ( x ) 1 − x 1 = ( 1 − x ) 2 x
and,
∑ n = 0 ∞ x n = 1 − x 1
1 − x 1 = 2 ⟹ x = 2 1 ⟹ ( 1 − x ) 2 x = 2 .
Now if we let ( 1 − x ) 2 x = 2 ⟹ 2 x 2 − 5 x + 2 = 0 ⟹ x = 2 , 2 1 since ∣ x ∣ < 1 we choose x = 2 1 ⟹ 1 − x 1 = 2 .
Let y=1+x+x^x+..... Now, y=1/(1-x) y=2, therefore x=1/2 derivative of y w.r.t x ={1/(1-x)}^2=1+2 x+3 x^2+......=(x+2x^2+3x^3+...)/x Hence, x+2x^2+3x^3+....=x*{1/(1-x)^2}=2
Let A = 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + … and B = x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 4 x 4 + … .
A is a geometric series, which means that A is convergent if and only if ∣ x ∣ < 1 , in which case one can write:
A = 1 − x 1 .
Let's now write B as a function of x and A :
B x B B ( 1 − x ) B ( 1 − x ) = = = = x x x A + + 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 + + + 3 x 3 2 x 3 x 3 + + + … … …
Replacing A with its expression: B = ( 1 − x ) 2 x
From a given value of either A or B , it is now straightforward to calculate a value for x and then compute a value for the remaining series. Let's conclude by splitting the problem in two cases:
To sum up, either series being equal to 2 implies that the other series equals 2 as well.
for the first series it is easily to get S1=1/1-x then use it it to solve the sum for the second series . first time x on both side to xS2 = x^2 +2x^3+3x^4 ....... then get the xS2 = S2 -S1 +1 and from the equation above solve S2 = x/(1-x)^2 so if S1=2 then S2=2 and if S2=2 then S1 = 2 or -1 and since they don't have the answer of -1 thus the answer is 2
1 + x + x 2 + x 3 . . . = n = 0 ∑ ∞ x n = 1 − x 1 x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 4 x 4 . . . = n = 0 ∑ ∞ ( n + 1 ) x n + 1 = n = 0 ∑ ∞ ( n + 2 ) x n + 1 − n = 0 ∑ ∞ x n + 1 f ( x ) = n = 0 ∑ ∞ ( n + 2 ) x n + 1 ∫ f ( x ) = n = 0 ∑ ∞ x n + 2 = 1 − x x 2 f ( x ) = ( 1 − x ) 2 2 x − x 2 n = 0 ∑ ∞ ( n + 1 ) x n + 1 = ( 1 − x ) 2 2 x − x 2 − 1 − x x = ( 1 − x ) 2 x
If the first one is two, x = 0 . 5 , therefore the second one is also two.
If the second one is two, x = 0 . 5 also. The other solution x = 2 is outside the radius of convergence of the second series. Therefore, the first one is also two.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Let us assume that the first series is equal to 2 .
1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + ⋯ = 2
Now, let us try try to convert the second series into known values from the first.
Let x + 2 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 4 x 4 + ⋯ = S
S = ( x + x 2 + x 3 ⋯ ) + ( x 2 + x 3 + x 4 ⋯ ) + ( x 3 + x 4 + x 5 ⋯ ) + ⋯
From the first series we know that 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 ⋯ = 2
⇒ x + x 2 + x 3 ⋯ = 1 . Now putting this in S we get
⇒ S = ( 1 ) + ( 1 x ) + ( 1 x 2 ) + ⋯
⇒ S = 1 + x + x 2 + x 3 + ⋯
So we find that the value of the first and second series is same.
So the answer is 2