How to write this function in series form?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on expressing a function in series form, specifically f(n) = (z^n * s / 100^n) + 2*(z^(n-1) * s / 100^(n-1)) + ... with a desire to generalize it for a variable number of terms. The general j-th term is identified as s*(z^(n-j) / 100^(n-j)), and participants discuss how to sum this over a specified range of j. Clarification is sought regarding the presence of a coefficient of 2 in the second term and its implications for the overall series. Additionally, there is a query on determining how many terms are needed for the function to equal 100,000 given specific values for z and s. The conversation emphasizes the need for a concise representation of the series to avoid manually writing out numerous terms.
nickadams
Messages
182
Reaction score
0
How can I write this is series form?

f(n) = \frac{z^n * s}{100^n} + 2*\frac{z^(n-1) * s}{100^(n-1)} + \frac{z^(n-2) * s}{100^(n-2)} + \frac{z^(n-3) * s}{100^(n-3)} + \frac{z^(n-4) * s}{100^(n-4)}I stopped at this amount of terms arbitrarily, but really I want the series to stop adding terms when n is equal to x in "z^(n-x)" and "100^(n-x)". How can I say that in a general form?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
EDIT: it is supposed to be z^(n-1), 100^(n-1), z^(n-2) and 100^(n-2) etc..

not 100(n-1), 100(n-2) etc.. as it shows up in the OP
 
I don't even know if it is called series form, but I was just wondering if there was a more general way to write it? Like if n is equal to 100, I don't want to have to write out 100 terms of the equation so it would be simpler if there were a generalized form...
 
Well, the general j^th term looks like

s\frac{z^{n-j}}{100^{n-j}},

so you'll just need to sum over the range of j you want. However, in your original post you had a 2 in your second term - is that is really supposed to be there? If yes, should there be similar factors in front of the other terms? If so you will need to modify the above general term accordingly. If the term with the two is the only one like that, then summing over the above general term will leave you short a sz^{n-1}/100^{n-1}, so you'd have to add that separately.
 
Mute said:
Well, the general j^th term looks like

s\frac{z^{n-j}}{100^{n-j}},

so you'll just need to sum over the range of j you want. However, in your original post you had a 2 in your second term - is that is really supposed to be there? If yes, should there be similar factors in front of the other terms? If so you will need to modify the above general term accordingly. If the term with the two is the only one like that, then summing over the above general term will leave you short a sz^{n-1}/100^{n-1}, so you'd have to add that separately.

Thank you so much! And yes, the 2 was supposed to be there. So how can I find out how many terms it will take for my function in the OP to equal 100,000 if z=5 and s=500?
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top