Which is larger?
A 0 B = 2 1 + 2 × 2 1 + 2 × 2 × 2 1 + 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 1 + ⋯ = 2 0 + 2 × 2 1 + 2 × 2 × 2 2 + 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 3 + ⋯
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.
We should first check that they both converge, though
Log in to reply
I agree with you, (the long post) The reason that A=B is because we « cheat » by using the property of the infinite terms (and the convergence to the same limite) but if the terms are equal the result may differ, another example of the use of this kind of logic : A= 1-1+1-1+1-...... infinitely so A=1-(1-1+1-1+1-......) so A=1-A therefore 2A=1 so A=1/2, well it is up to debate for the value of A (as I said earlier, we « cheat » by using « infinite terms », or else we won’t have the second A, but because the terms are infinite, we allow ourselves to use it, so I’d say that to arrive at this kind of result, we « abuse » the property of the infinite)
See, this is one thing I don’t like about mathematics. Yes using mathmatetic logic (or common sense) the formulas “work out” for A to be the same as B, but If you actually add the values up when both equations have the same amount of “components” (as stated, in each formula there are 4 components and more components are added on infinitely), A will always be more than B because A starts out with a higher value of .5 compared to that of 0 for B. It’s only when you add the “components” (which in this case are fractions) to each other on and on infinitely, will they ever be the same (A=#+#+#+... will be the same as B=#+#+#+... no matter if # are all different numbers because no matter what other math you put before the next, your increasing it forever to infinite so your basically saying A=infinite and also that B=infinite so therefore A=B). The problem for me though is that infinite is a construct in our minds and doesn’t exist in reality as far as we know or can prove without having to use or imaginations (because we ourselves have a limited amount of time and will never be able to witness something infinite to say for sure that it exist), so any math calculated using inifnite isn’t going to be realistically checkable because by definition, infinite goes on forever and never stops. The only way to actually (realistically) check the above formulas is to pause the infinite increment for a moment and to pick a point at which to compare the two formulas to each other, then do the math for each formula when both have the same amount of components and when you do so, you will find A will always be greater then B. I made an excel spreadsheet to verify this fact and B is always behind as far out as I cared to check but no matter how true what I say is, A will never be more than B according to mathematics that govern the solution to this equation. But I hope someone out there reads and maybe even partly agrees with the long winded reason about this one thing I don’t like about mathematics. :)
Log in to reply
I'm confused as to what you're trying to say. Neither A nor B is infinite, and if you keep adding terms you can see that while A is bigger, they get arbitrarily close together. What's the problem?
Log in to reply
The ... in the equation means to keep adding to infinite (or to keep adding and so on... for ever, therefore it is infinite even though the answer is less than 1 it becomes .99999 with never ending decimal places). The answer to the question of which is bigger, formula A or B is that they are equal but in reality if you check them, A is always bigger than B no matter how arbitrarily close they may be.
Log in to reply
@Christopher Fairbanks – Note that 0.999... = 1. You can see that here: https://brilliant.org/wiki/is-0999-equal-1/. So, if both reach 0.999..., then they must both be equal to 1, meaning that A=B.
@Christopher Fairbanks – Note that, you really don't need infotech number of terms to see that they both equal to one. Under double precision after the 10th element the difference becomes less then 1e-2, after 25th element it is less then 1e-7 and after 55th they are both basically one (i.e., their differences to each other and to 1 are both less then the smallest number double precision can represent).
At the end of the day A is that infinite sum and B is that infinite sum (and not partial sums) and they both add upto 1 (which is really cool, if you ask me).
But we aren't saying A=infinity, B=infinity therefore A=B. We are saying A=1, B=1 therefore A=B.
Log in to reply
They only =1 when you work the formula out to using mathematical logic. If you physically do the math and calculate the number numbers, they forever approach 1 but never reach it. Try it, you will see what I am talking about. For A Add .5 + .25 + .0625 + .03125 + ... as long as you want and do the same for B the exact amount of time you did for A and you will find B will always be less. That’s my point. In reality if you do these calculations side by side for infinite, A will be larger than B while they both forever approach 1. They are both mathematically equal and A is always larger when checked at the same time as B. I find this very interesting and weird. I love math and to me this shouldn’t happen if the logic that governs our math is sound. Also I’m not saying that anyone else is saying A=infinite I am personally saying that A=infinite simply because the ... means to continue on forever. That is infinite. Infinite doesn’t have to be whole integers 1,2,3,4,5... it can also be with decimals like 1.1, 1.2, 1.3,... and anything in between.
huh.. With math like that I sure hope you're not a carpenter. Because 1/2" + 1/4" + 1/16" = 8/16th + 4/16th + 1/16th = 13/16ths, whereas 0" + 1/4" + 2/8" + 3/16" = 11/16ths. You are buying that extra 1/8th inch somewhere. Measure twice, cut once. :-P
they represent no time scale or decision of length of equation and leave question to interpretation which means this question is void of any logical conclusion...
there are no convergences here. its an infinite set.. thus because it converges at one point means it is not c.... meaning a convergence is not a parallel factoring.
Log in to reply
We can talk about the sum of a series, if the series is convergent (meaning the partial sums tends to a limit..). Otherwise the series is divergent (i.e., the sums goes to infinity, and the manipulations would have been wrong).
You also gonna show that B also converges. Although it is well-known from the convergence of A
Log in to reply
Oh, I thought I have shown B = A , since A converges, B also converges.
Alternatively, we can split B into a (countably) infinite number of infinite geometric summations, each of which sum to a term in A :
B = 2 2 1 + 2 3 2 + 2 4 3 + ⋯ = 2 2 1 + ( 2 3 1 + 2 3 1 ) + ( 2 4 1 + 2 4 1 + 2 4 1 ) + ⋯ = ( 2 2 1 + 2 3 1 + 2 4 1 + ⋯ ) + ( 2 3 1 + 2 4 1 + ⋯ ) + ( 2 4 1 + ⋯ ) + ⋯ = 1 − 2 1 2 2 1 + 1 − 2 1 2 3 1 + 1 − 2 1 2 4 1 + ⋯ = 2 1 + 2 2 1 + 2 3 1 + ⋯ = A
(We can do this because the partial sums obviously converge uniformly to the overall series.) We conclude that A = B .
sadly you are wrong, but it doesn't take alot to understand why. except a wrong answer to explain here...
Log in to reply
How is this wrong, I like this solution the best.
Can you really decompose B without even knowing whether it converges? I am not quite sure about this
Since the first sum is geometrically increasing with common ratio ( r ) 2 1 which is evaluted as below. A = 2 1 + 4 1 + 8 1 + ⋯ A = n = 1 ∑ ∞ 2 n 1 = 1 − 2 1 2 1 = 1 ∣ r ∣ < 1 To evaluate the second sum we must note that Arithemetico-Geomertic Series . Rewriting the given sum as follows. B = 2 1 ( 0 + 2 1 + 4 2 + 8 3 + ⋯ ) 2 B = 0 + 1 . 2 1 + 2 . 4 1 + 3 . 8 1 + ⋯ 2 B = 0 + 2 1 + 4 2 + 8 3 + 1 6 4 + ⋯ 2 2 B = B = 0 + 4 1 + 8 2 + 1 6 3 + 3 2 4 + ⋯ Subtracting the above sums as follows. 2 B − B = ( 2 1 − 0 ) + ( 4 2 − 1 ) + ( 8 3 − 2 ) + ( 1 6 4 − 3 ) ⋯ B = 2 1 + 4 1 + 8 1 + 1 6 1 + ⋯ B = ⎝ ⎜ ⎛ 1 − 2 1 2 1 ⎠ ⎟ ⎞ = 1 Shows that sums are equal ie A = B .
Knew it was APGP but WASN'T able to frame the answer...still...thanx
dont worry guys, there is no real answer to this question because its an infinite set of equations that will never parallel.
B = k = 0 ∑ ∞ 2 k + 1 k = k = 0 ∑ ∞ n = 1 ∑ k 2 k + 1 1 = n = 1 ∑ ∞ k = n ∑ ∞ 2 k + 1 1 = n = 1 ∑ ∞ 2 n 1 k = 0 ∑ ∞ 2 k + 1 1 = n = 1 ∑ ∞ 2 n 1 ⋅ 1 = A . (And, of course, A = B = 1 .)
The trick lies in the switch from ∑ k = 0 ∞ ∑ n = 1 k … to ∑ n = 1 ∞ ∑ k = n ∞ … ; if you draw the range of addition in the ( k , n ) -plane, it will be a triangle, which may be described as an infinite number of finite rows, or an infinite number of infinite columns.
Someone said up there that A=B=1...
Log in to reply
They were right. My bad, my original solution worked with 2 B , to avoid the "+1" in the exponents.
First series is a geometric series ∑ n = 1 ∞ x n = 1 − x x . The second one is ∑ n = 0 ∞ n x n + 1 = x 2 ∑ n = 0 ∞ n x n − 1 = x 2 ( ∑ n = 0 ∞ x n ) ′ = x 2 ( 1 − x 1 ) ′ = ( 1 − x ) 2 x 2 . Evaluated at x = 1 / 2 both series give 1 , so A = B .
Many Mathematicians could see that a finite series of A 'gets closer and closer to 1 without reaching it', and so the infinite series tends to 1. Now to B which is a bit trickier. B can be written B = (1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + 1/64 + .....) + (1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + 1/64 + .......) + (1/16 + 1/32 + 1/64 + .....) + (1/32 + 1/64 + .....) + (1/64 + ...) + .... Note that the first part of this is one half of A. The 2nd part is 1/4 of A. The 3rd part is 1/8 of A etc. And A tended to 1, as explained in the first sentence. So B = (1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + .....) x 1. And the finite series of this has already been seen to 'get closer and closer to 1', so with an infinite number of terms the series tends to 1. So B = 1, the same as A. Regards, David
For me, I went with the approach of using the generating functions for the sequences for A and B (actually for 2A and 2B)
Let S ( x ) = 1 + 2 x + 2 2 x 2 + 2 3 x 3 + …
Notice that S ( 1 ) = 2 A .
Written with summation notation:
1
S
(
x
)
=
i
=
0
∑
∞
2
i
x
i
This sums to (sum of a geometric series with common ratio
2
x
, when
−
2
<
x
<
2
):
2
S
(
x
)
=
1
−
2
x
1
Therefore we get from 2 that 2 A = S ( 1 ) = 2 , or A = 1
Now taking the derivative of
S
(
x
)
wrt
x
gives on one hand, from
1
S
′
(
x
)
=
i
=
0
∑
∞
2
i
i
x
i
−
1
S
′
(
x
)
=
0
+
2
1
+
2
2
2
x
+
2
3
3
x
2
+
…
So again,
S
′
(
1
)
=
2
B
.
But we can also take the derivative another way, using the chain rule on
2
:
S
′
(
x
)
=
−
(
1
−
2
x
)
2
1
(
−
2
1
)
3
S
′
(
x
)
=
(
1
−
2
x
)
2
2
1
Therefore we get from 3 that 2 B = S ′ ( 1 ) = 2 , or B = 1
And so A = B
This is legitimate because the series are absolutely convergent.
A=1; 2(B-A)=-1+B; B-2A=-1; B=2A-1; B=1
Isn't this the (geometric) series you get when you solve last week's probability problem? Problem 1, 19 march
Yup! I got the idea from that problem
Taylor expend 4 ( 1 − x ) 2 1 and put x= 2 1 in , you'll meet the second series.
I just matched values from B to values from A. Since the sequences are infinite you will be able to say A = B. For example, the first number in B, 0/2 has no value so I added 1/2x2 and 2/2x2x2 to get 1/4 + 1/4 which equals 1/2. Which is the first value for A. The second value in A is 1/4 which can be matched by the fourth value in B ( 3/16 ) plus part of the fifth value (2/16). You have 1/16 left over in B. That matches the 4th value in A. The third value in A can be matched by the 6th and 7th values in B. You can continue matching in this way because your denominators are the same so some parts will always match up. Because both series go on to infinity you will always be able to find a match for the values in A thus they are approaching the same limit.
B= 1/2 2 +1/2 2 2 + 1/2 2 2 2.... +1/2 2 2 +1/2 2 2 2... . . . =1/2(1/2 +1/2 2 2 + 1/2 2 2 2 ...) +1/4(1/2+1/2 2 2+1/2 2 2*2....) +1/8(....) . . . =(1/2 +1/4 +1/8 +1/6..)A =A
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
A B 2 B 2 B − A 2 B − A ⟹ B = 2 1 + 2 2 1 + 2 3 1 + 2 4 1 + ⋯ = 2 0 + 2 2 1 + 2 3 2 + 2 4 3 + ⋯ = 2 1 ( 2 1 + 2 2 2 + 2 3 3 + 2 4 4 + ⋯ ) = 2 1 + 2 2 2 + 2 3 3 + 2 4 4 + ⋯ = 0 + 2 2 1 + 2 3 2 + 2 4 3 + ⋯ = B = A
⟹ They are equal .
We note that A is a geometric progression and it converges as A = n = 1 ∑ ∞ 2 n 1 = 2 1 n = 0 ∑ ∞ 2 n 1 = 2 1 ( 1 − 2 1 1 ) = 1 . Therefore, the answer is valid.