Integral Test for \sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} - 0.01

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around determining how many terms of the series \(\sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(\ln n)^{2}}\) are needed to approximate its sum within 0.01. Participants explore the use of the integral test for convergence and the implications of the series' convergence behavior.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes using the integral test, stating that since \(f(n) = \frac{1}{n(\ln n)^{2}}\) is continuous, positive, and decreasing, the series can be evaluated as \(\sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(\ln n)^{2}} = \lim_{b \to \infty} \int_{2}^{b} \frac{1}{n(\ln n)^{2}} = \frac{1}{\ln n}\).
  • Another participant notes that the series is barely convergent and suggests that without the \((\ln n)^{2}\) term, it would diverge.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the validity of the large value \(n = e^{100}\) derived from the inequality \(R_{n} \leq 0.01\), questioning whether such a large \(n\) is reasonable.
  • One participant mentions that sequences can converge very slowly, referencing the series \(\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n \ln n}\), which converges more slowly than the original series.
  • Another participant corrects the original claim about the equality of the sum and the integral, stating that the evaluation of the limit and/or integral is incorrect and suggesting a different formulation for the integral.
  • There is a suggestion to use Zone Ranger's correction to estimate \(R_n\) and a request for justification on bounding \(R_n\) using the integral.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the mathematical steps involved in applying the integral test and the evaluation of the series. There is no consensus on the validity of the original calculations or the implications of the derived results.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight potential errors in the translation of mathematical expressions from paper to screen, indicating that the evaluation of limits and integrals may not be straightforward. The discussion also reflects uncertainty regarding the convergence behavior of the series and the implications of the integral test.

3.14159265358979
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
How many terms of the series [tex]\sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}}[/tex] would you need to add to find its sum to within 0.01?

Here's what i got:

let [tex]f(n) = \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}}[/tex]. Since [tex]f(n)[/tex] is continuous, positive and decreasing for all n over the interval [tex][2,\infty][/tex], we can use the integral test to evaluate the series.

[tex]\sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} = \lim_{b \to \infty} \int_{2}^{b} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} = \frac{1}{ln\;n}[/tex]

thus,

[tex]R_{n} \leq \frac{1}{ln\;n}[/tex]

since we want [tex]R_{n} \leq 0.01[/tex],

[tex]\frac{1}{ln\;n} \leq 0.01[/tex]

implying [tex]n = e^{100}[/tex].


but that can't be right...e^100 is way too big, isn't it? thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It may not be. The series you have is just barely convergent. Without the (ln n)2 term, it would diverge.
 
So it's right?
 
3.14159265358979 said:
but that can't be right...e^100 is way too big, isn't it? thanks in advance.

I haven't followed the math, but I don't see why it should be. You can have sequences that converge *very* slowly like, apparently, the one you cite, and the series definitely looks like a slowly converging one. Consider the sequence:
[tex]\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n \ln n}[/tex]
which converges significantly more slowly. And that makes sense considering that [itex]\ln x[/itex] grows very slowly, and
[tex]\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n}[/tex]
is divergent.
 
NateTG said:
I haven't followed the math, but I don't see why it should be. You can have sequences that converge *very* slowly like, apparently, the one you cite, and the series definitely looks like a slowly converging one. Consider the sequence:
[tex]\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n \ln n}[/tex]
which converges significantly more slowly.

This actually diverges by the integral test, [tex]\int_{2}^{b}\frac{1}{t \ln t}dt=\ln\ln b-\ln\ln 2[/tex], which goes to infinity as b does (though obviously very slowly).


For the OP,the result is fine, but the process seems garbled:

[tex]\sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} = \lim_{b \to \infty} \int_{2}^{b} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} = \frac{1}{ln\;n}[/tex]

This isn't correct, the sum and the integral are not equal, and the evaluation of the limit and/or integral is off. This may be a translation error from paper to screen though?
 
it should be [tex]\sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} = \lim_{b \to \infty} \int_{n}^{b} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} = \frac{1}{ln\;n}[/tex]
right?
 
(noting that the lower limit is n now, instead of 2)
 
3.14159265358979 said:
it should be [tex]\sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} = \lim_{b \to \infty} \int_{n}^{b} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} = \frac{1}{ln\;n}[/tex]
right?

what you have above is wrong.



[tex]\sum^{\infty}_{n=2} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} \neq \lim_{b \to \infty} \int_{2}^{b} \frac{1}{n(ln\;n)^{2}} dn= \frac{1}{ln\;2}[/tex]

if you want it to be equal to [tex]\frac{1}{ln\;n}[/tex]
then write


[tex]\lim_{b \to \infty} \int_{n}^{b} \frac{1}{t(ln\;t)^{2}} dt= \frac{1}{ln\;n}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
3.14..., do you know how to use Zone Ranger's correction to get an estimate for [tex]R_n[/tex]? Remember that [tex]R_n[/tex] is the 'tail' of your series.

edit-What I'm hoping is that you can justify why [tex]R_n[/tex] can be bounded using that integral.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K