Can someone double check this, or tell me happened?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter JasonRox
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the handling of negative signs and absolute values in a mathematical expression related to series, specifically focusing on the manipulation of terms involving absolute values and the implications of removing negative signs. Participants explore the implications of these manipulations in the context of a specific equation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how a negative sign was eliminated in their calculations involving absolute values.
  • Another participant notes that the absolute value will negate the negative sign, suggesting that it is not a concern.
  • A third participant explains the property of absolute values, indicating that the negative sign does not affect the outcome when absolute values are applied.
  • Some participants argue about the necessity of using absolute values and whether they were correctly applied in the calculations.
  • One participant attempts to clarify their mistake in factoring and how it relates to the overall expression, indicating a misunderstanding of the terms involved.
  • Another participant reiterates that the negative sign is irrelevant when absolute values are used, emphasizing that it simplifies the expression.
  • One participant reflects on the use of absolute values, stating that they should not have been included initially, as they do not change the outcome.
  • Another participant discusses the equivalence of negative and positive values in absolute terms, suggesting that the negative sign can be dropped for simplicity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the handling of negative signs and absolute values, with some asserting that the negative sign can be disregarded while others question the initial application of absolute values. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views on the necessity and implications of these mathematical manipulations.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions about the initial conditions of the problem and how absolute values were intended to be used, which may affect the clarity of the discussion.

JasonRox
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
2,394
Reaction score
4
I don't understand how they got rid of the negative.
l = absolute, but they aren't used anyways.

[tex]\mid \S_n - frac{a}{1 - R} \mid = \mid a( \frac{1 - r^n}{1-r} ) - \frac{a}{1-r}\mid[/tex]

[tex]= \mid \frac{a r^n}{1-r} \mid[/tex]

I'm getting...

[tex]= \mid \frac{-a r^n}{1-r} \mid[/tex]

I always miss negatives, but I don't think I did this time.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The absolute value's going to kill the negative either way.

cookiemonster
 
Did you know that [itex]|ab|=|a||b|[/itex]? Therefore [itex]|-b|=|-1||b|=|b|[/itex].
 
The negative is gone after we use the absolutes.

We haven't used them, so where did it go?
 
I see what you did wrong. When you factor out the _a_ at the beginning, you get Sn -1, which is r^n -1, and that should solve your problem.
 
Sn isn't even involved.
 
I'll break it down even more, and I hope I find my mistake.

[tex]\mid S_n - \frac{a}{1 - R} \mid = \mid a( \frac{1 - r^n}{1-r} ) - \frac{a}{1-r}\mid[/tex]

[tex]= \mid \frac{a - ar^n}{1 - r} - \frac{a}{1 - r} \mid[/tex]

...same denominator...

[tex]= \mid \frac{a - ar^n - a}{1 - r} \mid[/tex]

[tex]= \mid \frac{-ar^n}{1 - r} \mid[/tex]
 
JasonRox said:
The negative is gone after we use the absolutes.

We haven't used them, so where did it go?

And you said before
JasonRox said:
l = absolute, but they aren't used anyways.

What do you mean "we haven't used them"? You certainly are using the absolute value. That's why it's there and that's why
[tex]= \mid \frac{-ar^n}{1 - r} \mid = \frac{ar^n}{1-r}[/tex]

If you mean that there is still an absolute value sign in the answer, that doesn't mean they haven't been used ||a||= |a| (absolute value of the absolute value of a is the same as the absolute value of a).
 
Nevermind.

I shouldn't have put the absolutes into begin with. It changes nothing!

It's like we right the number 4 instead of 4^1, which is the way it should be done.

There is no reason for the negative to "disappear" on its own.

Yes, I understand absolutes, but they only work if you use them.
 
  • #10
I think the point is that |-a| is equivalent to |a|. If a can take both positive and negative values, then the absolute value sign is still present. But since the presence of the negative sign in the absolute value is useless (it's going to end up positive anyway), we drop it because it's less work to write it without.

On a similar note, you could have taken that negative sign and distributed it into the denominator if the r - 1 form was more convenient to work with. Or, if the negative weren't there, you could create it and then distribute it anyway because it's still equivalent.

All in all, the negative isn't a big deal.

cookiemonster
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K