Breaking this expressions into areas.

  • Thread starter Thread starter nhrock3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Areas Expressions
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression \(\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}r^{|n|}e^{inx}\) and its breakdown into different intervals based on the value of \(n\). Participants are exploring the implications of the absolute value function and how it affects the terms in the summation, particularly regarding the changes in the exponent when \(n\) is negative.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the breakdown of the summation into three parts for positive, zero, and negative \(n\). Questions arise about the reasoning behind using \(r^{|n|}\) and the change in the exponent sign for negative \(n\). Some participants express confusion about the treatment of indices and the concept of dummy variables.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants questioning the correctness of the original expression and the manipulation of indices. Some guidance has been offered regarding the treatment of the sums and the concept of dummy indices, but there is no explicit consensus on the interpretation of the expression.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the definitions and properties of absolute values and exponents in the context of infinite series. There is a noted lack of clarity regarding the assumptions made about the indices and the nature of the sums involved.

nhrock3
Messages
403
Reaction score
0
[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}r^{|n|}e^{inx}=[/tex][tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}e^{inx}[/tex]+ [tex]r^{0}e^{0}[/tex] +[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}r^{n}e^{-inx}[/tex]

if we look at the left side
i have been told that it was broken by intervals
the left most is for n=1.. infinity the central is for n=0
the right most for n=-1 ..-infinity

i know the definition of the |x| function
for some values its x for other its -x

but here the power of e changes too
why?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
nhrock3 said:
[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}r^{|n|}e^{inx}=[/tex][tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}e^{inx}[/tex]+ [tex]r^{0}e^{0}[/tex] +[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}r^{n}e^{-inx}[/tex]

if we look at the left side
i have been told that it was broken by intervals
the left most is for n=1.. infinity the central is for n=0
the right most for n=-1 ..-infinity

i know the definition of the |x| function
for some values its x for other its -x

but here the power of e changes too
why?

Hi nhrock3! :smile:

I suspect you've copied it wrong, is it …

[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}r^{|n|}e^{inx}\ =\[/tex] [tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}r^{n}e^{inx}[/tex]+ [tex]r^{0}e^{0}[/tex] +[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}}r^{n}e^{-inx}[/tex]
?​
 
why we always have [tex]r^n[/tex] why in the minus case we don't have [tex]r^{-n}[/tex]

and why the power of the exponent changes to minus in the negative case
?
 
Because it depends what the limits are.

Perhaps it's clearer if I write it …

[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}r^{|n|}e^{inx}\ =\[/tex] [tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}r^{n}e^{inx}[/tex]+ [tex]r^{0}e^{0}[/tex] +[tex]\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}}r^{m}e^{-imx}[/tex]

where m = -n, so |n| = m, and inx = -imx.

(and m and n are "dummy" indices, so you can then change m to n :wink:)
 
i can't see how the minus indexes changes the original expression

?

why the power of the exponent changes to minus in the negative case

they should be negative
and we don't need to change it to minus
 
Do you see that both sums are for positive n?
Your original sum is
[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty r^{|n|}e^{inx}[/tex]

You can break that into three parts, as you say:
[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1} r^{|n|}e^{inx}+ r^0e^{i0x}+ \sum_{n=1}^\infty r^{|x|}e^{inx}[/tex]

Now look at each of that first sum separately. For n< 0, |n|= -n so
[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1} r^{|n|}e^{inx}= \sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1} r^{-n}e^{inx}[/tex]
Change the index: let k= -n so n= -k:
[tex]= \sum_{-k= -\infty}^{-1} r^{k}e^{i(-k)x}= \sum_{k=1}^\infty r^k e^{-ikx}[/tex]

Since the index here is "dummy" we can use any letter we like, say "n", in place of k:
[tex]= \sum_{n= 1}^\infty r^n e^{-inx}[/tex]

Of course, [itex]r^0e^{i(0)x}= 1[/itex], and, for n> 0, |n|= n, so the entire sum becomes
[itex]\sum_{n= 1}^\infty r^n e^{-inx}+ 1+ \sum_{n=1}^\infty r^n e^{inx}[/tex].[/itex]
 
nhrock3 said:
i can't see how the minus indexes changes the original expression

Try changing m to -n in the right-hand term in my equation …

what do you get? :smile:
 
no you can't use is as dummy
if n=-k
and k=n
then n=-n

which works only for n=0
 
HallsofIvy said:
Do you see that both sums are for positive n?
Your original sum is
[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty r^{|n|}e^{inx}[/tex]

You can break that into three parts, as you say:
[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1} r^{|n|}e^{inx}+ r^0e^{i0x}+ \sum_{n=1}^\infty r^{|x|}e^{inx}[/tex]

Now look at each of that first sum separately. For n< 0, |n|= -n so
[tex]\sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1} r^{|n|}e^{inx}= \sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1} r^{-n}e^{inx}[/tex]
Change the index: let k= -n so n= -k:
[tex]= \sum_{-k= -\infty}^{-1} r^{k}e^{i(-k)x}= \sum_{k=1}^\infty r^k e^{-ikx}[/tex]

Since the index here is "dummy" we can use any letter we like, say "n", in place of k:
[tex]= \sum_{n= 1}^\infty r^n e^{-inx}[/tex]

Of course, [itex]r^0e^{i(0)x}= 1[/itex], and, for n> 0, |n|= n, so the entire sum becomes
[itex]\sum_{n= 1}^\infty r^n e^{-inx}+ 1+ \sum_{n=1}^\infty r^n e^{inx}[/tex].[/itex]
[itex] <br /> no you can't use it as dummy<br /> if n=-k<br /> and k=n<br /> then n=-n<br /> <br /> which works only for n=0<br /> and for n= -1 to -infinity[/itex]
 
  • #10
nhrock3 said:
no you can't use it as dummy
if n=-k
and k=n
then n=-n

which works only for n=0
and for n= -1 to -infinity
What that tells me is that you don't know what a "dummy" index is. If I had an equation that said k+ n= 3, then I could not replace k by either n or -n- they mean different things. But if my equation is [itex]\sum_{k=1}^5 \frac{1}{k}+ \sum{n=1}^5 \frac{(-1)^n}{n}[/itex] I could replace the "k" in the first sum by "n" because [itex]\sum_{k=1}^5 \frac{1}{k}= 1+ \frac{1}{2}+ \frac{1}{3}+ \frac{1}{4}+ \frac{1}{5}[/itex] and [itex]\sum_{n=1}^5 \frac{1}{n}= 1+ \frac{1}{2}+ \frac{1}{3}+ \frac{1}{4}+ \frac{1}{5}[/itex] are both numbers and do not depend upon either "n" or "k". Having changed from "n" to "k", I could now make the change from k to -n as well and have [itex]\sum_{n=-1}^{-5}\frac{1}{-n}= \frac{1}{-(-1)}+ \frac{1}{-(-2)}+ \frac{1}{-(-3)}+ \frac{1}{-(4)}+ \frac{1}{-(-5)}[/itex] which is exactly the same thing. This "n" has nothing to do with the original n. That does NOT imply "k= n" and "k= -n" for the same n!
 
  • #11
aahhh thanks :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K