Finding the Sum of Series: 1^2+2^2+3^2+4^2+5^2...

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter shintashi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Series Sum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the formula for calculating the sum of the squares of the first n integers, specifically the series 1^2 + 2^2 + 3^2 + 4^2 + 5^2, and the potential discrepancies in a formula presented in a book. Participants explore the established formula, its derivation, and the implications of a possible error in the book's equation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion over the formula for the sum of squares and requests clarification on how to find the total sum given a base sum.
  • Another participant asserts that the sum of the squares from 1 to n is well-known to be (1/6)[n(n+1)(2n+1)], providing examples for n=1, 2, and 3.
  • A later reply reiterates the established formula and introduces the Riemann zeta function in a humorous context, suggesting that the sum approaches zero as n approaches infinity.
  • One participant suggests that the original poster should share the formula from their book, implying that it may be incorrect, and proposes a geometric interpretation of the sum of squares using pyramids.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of Gauss's formula for the sum of the first n natural numbers as part of the derivation process.
  • One participant identifies a potential typo in the book's formula, noting that changing n+1 to n+2 leads to incorrect results, thus questioning the validity of the book's claims.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the established formula for the sum of squares, but there is disagreement regarding the formula presented in the book, with some participants suggesting it may be flawed.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the reliance on specific mathematical definitions and the potential for errors in published materials, as well as the need for careful interpretation of formulas.

shintashi
Messages
117
Reaction score
1
I was reading book on numbers and it had an equation for

1^2+2^2+3^2+4^2+5^2...

but I worked out the equation several times with different integers and they didn't appear to work at all. Does anyone know the equation for finding the total sum if the base sum (such as 5 above) is known?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
huh? the sum of the squares of the integers from 1 to n is well known (say to archimedes) to be (1/6)[n(n+1)(2n+1)].

e.g. if n=1 we get 1,

if n = 2 we get (1/6)(2+3+5] = 5 = 1^2 + 2^2.

if n = 3 we get (1`/6)[3(4)(7)] = 14 = 1^2 + 2^2+ 3^2.

if n=4, we get 30 = (1/6)[4(5)9].
...

im not sure i understood your base sum remark, but since this is a cubic formula it is determined by the lagrange interpolation method, by the above results for n=1,2,3,4.

i.e. there is only one cubic polynomial that comes out 1,5,14,30, when we plug in 1,2,3,4.

namely 1[(x-2)(x-3)(x-4)/(1-2)(1-3)(1-4)] + 5[(x-1)(x-3)(x-4)/(2-1)(2-3)(2-4)] + ... you get it...
 
Last edited:
As mathwonk already said, the sum of the squares of the integers from 1 to n is \frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6}.

Thats all you want to know, if you want to get confused, read forward :

When n is infinity, the sum is actually zero :D Look up the Riemann zeta function if your interested.
 
Hi shintashi,

write down here what formula is given in your book, maybe
the formula in the book is wrong.

As you indicated in your title "square pyramid", you can indeed
derive the formula for the sum of the square numbers from 1 to n
by considering the problem in a geometric view.

1 + 4 + 9 can be interpreted as a pyramid made up of
square layers:
9-layer at the bottom
4-layer in the middle
1-layer at the top

Have a look at here: http://www.sciface.com/education/data/web/SummeDerQuadrate_images/plt1.png

Look at the section Sum of the first n squares of Natural Numbers S[Q] http://www.mav.vic.edu.au/PSTC/cc/pyramids.htm .

Look at the bottom of the website http://did.mat.uni-bayreuth.de/geonet/beispiele/kugel3/scheib6.html.

As an exercise try to figure out the formula by using the the pyramid picture.
Hint: Start by asking yourself how many times the 1-layer fits into the pyramid.
If you substract the 1-layer from all the other layers, what is left?

You will need Gauss's formula:

\sum_{k=1}^{n} k = \frac{n(n+1)}{2}
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thank you much ^^

mathwonk said:
huh? the sum of the squares of the integers from 1 to n is well known (say to archimedes) to be (1/6)[n(n+1)(2n+1)].

e.g. if n=1 we get 1,

if n = 2 we get (1/6)(2+3+5] = 5 = 1^2 + 2^2.

if n = 3 we get (1`/6)[3(4)(7)] = 14 = 1^2 + 2^2+ 3^2.

if n=4, we get 30 = (1/6)[4(5)9].
...

im not sure i understood your base sum remark, but since this is a cubic formula it is determined by the lagrange interpolation method, by the above results for n=1,2,3,4.

i.e. there is only one cubic polynomial that comes out 1,5,14,30, when we plug in 1,2,3,4.

namely 1[(x-2)(x-3)(x-4)/(1-2)(1-3)(1-4)] + 5[(x-1)(x-3)(x-4)/(2-1)(2-3)(2-4)] + ... you get it...

(1/6)[7(7+1)(14+1)] =

7x8x15 = 140.

(1/6)[n(n+1)(2n+1)].

the book said:
1/6n(n+2)(2n+1)

as you can clearly see, the equation (page 127 of kingdom of infinite number) is flawed, perhaps a typo, but changing n+1 to n+2 screwed up all the results I got from it and was obviously wrong.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
230K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K