If a + a 2 + a 3 + a 4 + a 5 + ⋯ is a positive number, then which of the following is larger,
a + a 3 + a 5 + a 7 + ⋯ or a 2 + a 4 + a 6 + a 8 + ⋯ ?
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.
It was not stated that the series converged, merely that a was a positive number. Therefore for most values of a, a>=1, the series diverge, and are therefore equal in value (infinity). An unusually poorly worded question.
Log in to reply
If an infinite sum is a positive number, the series is convergent. Infinity is not a number, positive or otherwise.
My apologies - I misread the question as saying that a was a positive number, whereas of course it states that the SERIES is a positive number, which - as others have stated - implies convergence. My silly mistake.
A quibble that is not a problem here "is a positive number" can be reasonably taken to mean "converges" here. At least I so took it without offense.
@Marta Reece - If infinite is neither positive or negative, then why is it marked on the axis' extremities with + and - before them?
Log in to reply
Infinity can be positive or negative, but it still is not a number.
To me, as mathematical non-expert, "a" must be a positive number, and it is not made clear from the wording that a has to be between zero and 1. Not to me. If you want to make that clear, then you should have spelled it out. This is supposed to be a math puzzle, not a "legalistic masterpiece contract" with "invisible fine print".
So, when I assume "a" to be 0.25, then the first series is always bigger. When I assume "a" to be 1, the series are equal, and when I assume "a" to be bigger than 1, then the second series is always bigger. I, being simple-minded, of course consider a "positive infinity" to be still "a positive number". (And a negative infinity is still a negative number, likewise. Just because I don't know HOW big it is, I can still assign positive and negative values. What law of math can forbid me that? ) So depending on the input, and the non-existence of constraints, I can come up with three answers: Bigger, equal and lower. Real life comparisons can only be made when one makes a specific point in time evaluation. (I know, that's why they say "put three accountants in a room, and you get six different answers".)
I calculated out the value of a compared to a^2, a+a^3 compared to a^2+a^4, and so forth, because I simply and idealistically assumed an invisible and unprovable "fairness in the mathematical universe", such that each of these two series each would have to have the same number of terms to be comparable.
If I am assuming too much, then the writer of this puzzle likewise assumed too much.
My math teacher in high-school always was annoyed when I calculated things out, in order to get a feel for where I was getting at with the result. I guess that's why I ended up as tax guy, because the answers have to make sense, to me, the client and the IRS. Infinite tax bills or infinite refunds are just never the right answer.
Thank you for your patience!
How is each term of the first series larger than each term of the second series?
Log in to reply
If a is a positive number less than 1 , multiplying by a will make any positive number smaller. Each term by term comparison will compare a n to a n + 1 = a n × a . The second number is the same as the first, except for being multiplied by a . It is therefore smaller.
I failed to see that the dots indicated an infinite series, which therefore had to have |a|<1 for it to converge. In a broader sense of the terms, the dots could have meant that this was just a simple sum of finite length up to the nth term, which in turn would have meant that for every a such that |a|>1, the even powers sum diverges faster than the other one. which means that in all probability the answer was the other one. But then again, these are maths, so there cannot be a 'mostly true answer' for such problems therefore I should have gotten the point that the sums were infinite
Log in to reply
Continued dots is a standard maths notation for a series containing an infinite number of elements
No. You have neglected to consider solutions where a<1. All even powered terms will be positive, but odd powered terms of negative values of a will be negative. There the answer is the even powered series is larger.
Log in to reply
I have handled the possibility. I have factored the entire sum into a product of an obviously positive one - one make of the number 1 and only even powers of a - times a + a 2 . If ∣ a ∣ < 1 , then ∣ a 2 ∣ < ∣ a ∣ . So for a + a 2 to be positive, a has to be positive.
Since "depends on sign of a" is not one of the choices, it is sufficient to work it out with a positive value of a, 0 < a < 1 (so bounded by the implied convergence "is a positive number" to eliminate "equal". If the other case did not work out, THEN it is a poorly worded problem. The quick and dirty tactical approach.
First thing you should conclude is that 0 < a < 1 . Why? Well, first sentence says that the sum of a + a 2 + a 3 + a 4 + . . . is a positive number, and that means that this infinite series converges to some positive value. If a > 1 , then the sum would go to the infinity. Also, a can't be negative. Here is the math:
a + a 2 + a 3 + a 4 + a 5 + . . . = 1 − a a > 0
⇒ ( a > 0 ∧ 1 − a > 0 ) or ( a < 0 ∧ 1 − a < 0 ) - both numerator and denominator must have the same sign.
Solution of the system a > 0 ∧ 1 − a > 0 is set of numbers 0 < a < 1 , and the system a < 0 ∧ 1 − a < 0 has no solutions.
Hence 0 < a < 1 .
Now, once we cleared that, we can move on with our problem:
a + a 3 + a 5 + a 7 + . . . = 1 − a 2 a and
a 2 + a 4 + a 6 + . . . = 1 − a 2 a 2
We can notice that they have the same denominator, so the one with greater numerator will be greater. Since 0 < a < 1 , then a > a 2 .
Hence, a + a 3 + a 5 + a 7 + . . . > a 2 + a 4 + a 6 + . . . .
When I attempted this I didn't realise that "A positive number" excludes infinity.
Log in to reply
Yeah, that's a common mistake, but, one must realize that infinity is not a number! It's just a concept of unbounded limit, when you have ∑ i = 0 ∞ f ( i ) = ∞ that doesn't mean that this sum converges to some value (infinity as a number), but that it grows without bound never reaching any final value. I hope you understand what I'm saying. :)
as they are BOTH infinite series, they are (for all practical purposes) equal...
Log in to reply
It's true that they are both infinite series, but that doesn't mean that they are the same. The crucial thing is to see that 0 < a < 1 . If you aren't still convinced, use the calculator, plug in value of a such that 0 < a < 1 and then compare the sums of e.g. first 3 terms.
I believe you typed a-1 instead of 1-a 4 times in your solution when showing that 0 < a < 1
Log in to reply
You are right, I've just corrected it. Thanks for the note!
The original infinite geometric series sums to:
a + a 2 + a 3 + a 4 + a 5 + . . . = 1 − a a = N ⇒ a = N + 1 N , where N ∈ R + .
Let S o d d and S e v e n be the sum of the odd and the even exponent terms respectively. These yield:
S o d d = a + a 3 + a 5 + . . . = a 1 ⋅ 1 − a 2 a 2 and S e v e n = a 2 + a 4 + a 6 + . . . = 1 − a 2 a 2 .
Since S o d d = a 1 ⋅ S e v e n = N N + 1 ⋅ S e v e n = ( 1 + N 1 ) ⋅ S e v e n , we conclude S o d d > S e v e n .
Who said it has to be convergent? If it isnt then the answer is wrong.
Rodion, By assumption from the problem statement: "If [series] is a positive number..."
I believe it is a tricky question. If the number is 0<a<1 yes then the a+a3.. converges and the value is indeed larger than a2+a4 But if a=1 then they are the same as S odd - S even =0
If we want a + a 2 + a 3 + a 4 + . . . to be a positive number but no diverge to infinity, we must assume 0 < a < 1
So,
S e v e n = a S o d d
S e v e n < S o d d
using a=1 they are equal and using a=2 the other awnser is correct... a is not given as 0<a<1 so there is no reason to suppose this
Log in to reply
It is a infinity geometric expression, if the result is a positive number that means converge, so must have 0<a<1.
Since the geometric series' sum is a number, it has to converge and since it is a positive number, 0 < a < 1 .
Looking at the two sums in question, we can rewrite the second as a product of the first: a ( a + a 3 + a 5 + … ) . Since a is smaller than 1, the second sum must be smaller than the first.
Why must 0<a<1 be true? We only know that -1<a<1 is true (because the GP converges), so why can't -1<a<0 be true as well?
Log in to reply
The sum can't be positive if a is negative.
Log in to reply
Why is that the case?
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – The leading term will dominate the sum. If you want a proper proof of this, Marta and Uroš have two variants included.
Let A = a 2 + a 4 + a 6 + . . . = a ( a + a 3 + a 5 + . . . ) and B = a + a 3 + a 5 + . . .
B A = a . Since a + a 2 + a 3 + . . . > 0 , 0 < a < 1 ; therefore, 0 < B A < 1 ⇒ B > A
Yes, A/B > 0 is a positive number, but is it possible that A<0 and B<0 as well? If so, then maybe it's still possible that A<B, no?
Wrote a bit of python code:
x = 2
b = 0
c = 1
for i in range(1,10):
a = x ** b
print a
c += 2
for i in range(1,10):
a = x ** c
print a
c += 2
Plugging in a few values for x, we can see that the system with the odd exponents is always larger.
This is wrong. You have only compare the values of 2 finite sums, whereas the question asked you to compare the values of 2 infinite sums.
Use the formula ∑ i = 0 ∞ r i = 1 − r 1 , which is valid for ∣ r ∣ < 1 .
Since the original series converges, its sum is S 1 = 1 − a a . We are also told that it is positive, which implies that a > 0 .
We are next asked to compare two sums, each of which is a geometric series with ratio a 2 . Since ∣ a ∣ < 1 it follows that ∣ a 2 ∣ < 1 , so we know both of these series must also converge. Their sums are S 2 = 1 − a 2 a and S 3 = 1 − a 2 a 2 . Thus we see that S 3 = a ∗ S 2 . Since 0 < a < 1 , this implies that S 3 < S 2 .
How do you know that 0<a<1 is true? Or how did you rule out -1<a<0?
For the original series to converge to a positive number, 0<a<1. You get the second series by multiplying the first by a, so the second series converges to a smaller number.
How did you immediately know that 0<a<1 is true? We know that -1<a<1 forces the original series to converge, but how do you know that -1<a<0 cannot be fulfilled either?
let U n = ∑ i = 0 n a 2 i + 1 and V n = ∑ i = 1 n a 2 i with n \in N U n − V n = ∑ i = 0 n a 2 i + 1 − ∑ i = 1 n a 2 i = ∑ i = 0 n a 2 i + 1 − ∑ i = 0 n a 2 i + 1 = ∑ i = 0 n a 2 i + 1 − a 2 i + 1 = ∑ i = 0 n a 2 i ( a − 1 ) + 1 Therefore: If a > 1 then U n − V n is positive. so U n > V n
But if you substitute any value of a such that a > 1 , then the original series diverges to infinity, so your solution is invalid.
For the value of the infinite series to be a real number (i.e. converge) the ∗ ∗ ∣ r ∣ < 1 ∗ ∗ . Because both series (one of even exponents, one of odd exponents) have real values, it's fair to assume they have a real number sum. Hence a 2 + a 4 + a 6 . . . = ( a + a 3 + a 5 . . . ) ∗ a . Because we know ∣ a ∣ < 1 and that a proper (positive) fraction of a (positive) value has to be less than that same value, we conclude that ( a + a 3 + a 5 . . . ) > ( a 2 + a 4 + a 6 . . . )
Because both series (one of even exponents, one of odd exponents) have real values, it's fair to assume they have a real number sum.
It's a good (and correct) assumption, but for rigor, can you prove that it's true?
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
For the original geometric series to be convergent, it has to have a common ratio ∣ r ∣ = ∣ a ∣ < 1 .
This means that each term in the series is smaller in absolute value than the preceding term.
For the expression
( a + a 2 ) + ( a 3 + a 4 ) + ( a 5 + a 6 ) + ⋯ = ( a + a 2 ) + a 2 ( a + a 2 ) + a 4 ( a + a 2 ) + ⋯ = ( a + a 2 ) ( 1 + a 2 + a 4 + ⋯ )
to be positive, a , which is larger in absolute value than a 2 , has to be positive.
The two series in question
a + a 3 + a 5 + a 7 + ⋯
a 2 + a 4 + a 6 + a 8 + ⋯
can now be compared term by term. All of the terms in both series are positive, and each term of the first series is larger than the corresponding term of the second series.
The sum of the first series is therefore larger than the sum of the second series.