Thread Closed

Incorrect Wikipedia Article?

 
Share Thread Thread Tools
Mar12-06, 10:46 PM   #1
 

Incorrect Wikipedia Article?


Hey folks,

I'm currently studying sequences and the like in Calc 2, and I went to Wikipedia for another explaination about them. The example given in the article located here seems to be incorrect to me.

The example is this:

[latex]\sum _{n=0}^{\infty }{2}^{-n} = 2[/latex]

I was thinking it's equal to zero though, since when n is really large, then the bottom gets really big so the whole fraction would head to zero.

Am I wrong or is the author wrong?
PhysOrg.com
PhysOrg
science news on PhysOrg.com

>> King Richard III found in 'untidy lozenge-shaped grave'
>> Google Drive sports new view and scan enhancements
>> Researcher admits mistakes in stem cell study
Mar12-06, 10:57 PM   #2
 
This is a series, and not a sequence.
Mar12-06, 11:04 PM   #3
 
Yeah, that's what I meant to say ... but should that change the answer?
Mar12-06, 11:11 PM   #4
 
Recognitions:
Gold Membership Gold Member
Science Advisor Science Advisor
Retired Staff Staff Emeritus

Incorrect Wikipedia Article?


Well, yes. A "series", a "sum of a series", a "sequence", and a "limit of a sequence" are all very different things.
Mar12-06, 11:19 PM   #5
 
You're thinking of [itex]\lim_{n \to \infty} 2^{-n}[/itex], which is zero. However [itex]\sum 2^{-n} = 1 + \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{4} + \cdots[/itex] isn't zero.
Mar12-06, 11:47 PM   #6
 
Yes, that answer is correct. [tex]1 + \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{4} + \cdots[/tex] does indeed equal 2.

I probably solve simple series like this in a unique way, but I tend to imagine it in the number base 2 (binary). This would essentially be 1.11111111 repeating. This is like our 9.9999 repeating = 10, only that in binary is 2.
Mar13-06, 07:07 AM   #7
 
Recognitions:
Homework Helper Homework Help
Quote by Weather Freak
Am I wrong or is the author wrong?
Uhmmm, I am sorry to tell you this, but you are wrong, not the author...
This is a geometric series with the first term 1, and the common ratio r = 1 / 2.
So apply the formula to find the sum of the first n terms of a geometric series, we have:
[tex]S_n = a_1 \frac{1 - r ^ n}{1 - r}[/tex]
Now r = 1 / 2. So |r| < 1, that means:
[tex]\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} r ^ n = 0[/tex]
Now let n increase without bound to get the sum:
[tex]\sum_{n = 0} ^ {\infty} 2 ^ {-n} = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} S_n = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_1 \frac{1 - r ^ n}{1 - r} = \frac{a_1}{1 - r} = \frac{1}{1 - \frac{1}{2}} = 2[/tex].
Can you get this? :)
-------------
@ KingNothing: Have you leant geometric series? We don't need to complicate the problem in binary, though. Just my $0.02.
Mar13-06, 11:52 PM   #8
 
Doh!! I get it now! Thanks folks... and I apologize for my confusion :(... it's all a little complicated when you first learn it.
Thread Closed
Thread Tools


Similar Threads for: Incorrect Wikipedia Article?
Thread Forum Replies
Why is the Wikipedia article about Bell's spaceship "paradox" disputed at all? Special & General Relativity 109
Homogeneous but incorrect? General Physics 7
incorrect calculator? Introductory Physics Homework 3
Hunger Molecule Promotes Cocaine Cravings (news article and journal article) Medical Sciences 2
Neutronium article @ Wikipedia in need of experts and knowledgeables General Astronomy 5