Another maclaurin vs. taylor series question

AI Thread Summary
Understanding the distinction between Taylor and Maclaurin series is crucial, as a Maclaurin series is a specific case of a Taylor series centered at zero. When seeking a power series for a function without specifying a center, it is ambiguous whether a Taylor or Maclaurin series is intended. Different centers yield different approximations, which can explain why evaluating sin(x) at x=4 using both series results in different values. The uniqueness of a power series refers to its convergence to a function at a specific point, meaning that while multiple series can approximate a function, each point has a unique power series representation. Gaining clarity on these concepts enhances the understanding of how power series relate to functions.
eprparadox
Messages
133
Reaction score
2
Hey guys,

Struggling with understanding this taylor vs. maclaurin series stuff.

So a few questions. Let's say that we have some function f(x).

1. By saying that we want to find the power series of f(x) and nothing else, are we implicitly stating that we are looking for a maclaurin series or a taylor series? OR do we have to specify around what point we're looking for this power series?

2. I went on wolfram alpha and I found the taylor series of sin(x) at x =2 and the maclaurin series of sin(x) (at x = 0). and then I evaluated the answers at the same x value (x = 4). And I got different answers. I thought they should come out to the same value since we're still expanding the same initial function, sin(x). Ultimately, I'm finding it difficult to understand how these two seemingly different power series are converging to one function.

3. What does it mean for a power series to be centered around a value, other than for it to be the center of the circle of convergence.

Hope these questions made sense. I just want to get a really strong intuition for maclaurin vs. taylor series.

Thanks!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_series
A Maclearan series is a Taylor series, but not all Taylor series are Maclearan series.
Both are examples of power series.

Power series: $$f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n$$

Maclearan series: $$f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{f^{(n)}(0)}{n!}x^n$$

Taylor series:$$f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{f^{(n)}(a)}{n!}(x-a)^n$$

So:
1. if the type of series is not indicated, then it doesn't matter to the argument being made.
Where there may be confusion, following statements should clear it up.

2. the series expansion for sin(x) has infinitely many terms - you were evaluating two different approximations so you got different answers.

3. see the wikipedia article (above) for details.
The power series is most accurate close to the point x=a in the formula - the series is said to be centered around this value. The Taylor series makes that point explicit while for the general power series it may not be so clear.
 
Hey, thanks so much for the response. I'm reading Mary Boas' "Mathematical Guide in the physical sciences" and in it, she states a few theorems on power series. One of them is this:

"The power series of a function is unique, that is, there is just one power series of the form f(x)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_nx^n which converges to the given function."

So in our case, our function is the sin(x) but there is more than one power series that converges to that function (the maclaurin series and the taylor series). Are they saying there is only one unique power series for any given POINT on the function?

Thanks again for the help
 
The quote refers to the whole power series. There are many series which will sum to an approximation to the function.

The taylor series about a=4 and about a=0 are two ways of arriving at the same power series.
The steps are different.
 
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...
Back
Top