Calculating the Riemann Sum of (cos1)^x

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the Riemann sum of the function (cos(1))^x, which is identified as a geometric series rather than a Riemann sum. Participants clarify that the series converges due to the absolute value of cos(1) being less than 1, leading to the formula for the sum S = a/(1-r), where a = cos(1) and r = cos(1). The correct expression for the sum is cos(1)/(1-cos(1)), which approximates to 1.175, although some participants debate the significance of significant figures in the result.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of geometric series and convergence criteria
  • Familiarity with trigonometric functions, specifically cosine
  • Knowledge of limits and their application in series
  • Basic calculus concepts related to series and sums
NEXT STEPS
  • Study geometric series convergence criteria in detail
  • Learn how to apply the formula S = a/(1-r) for different series
  • Explore the implications of significant figures in mathematical results
  • Investigate the differences between Riemann sums and geometric series
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in series convergence, trigonometric functions, and the nuances of mathematical notation and terminology.

  • #31
nick727kcin said:
so arctan2n doesn't have a sum right? because its divergent?

{arctan(2n)} is a convergent sequence, \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\arctan{2n}=\pi/2, not 1.57 as you said. 1.57 is an approximation to pi/2. If you are to learn one thing from this thread, make it to stop rounding and calling things equal. Or be prepared to have arildno point out this error everytime.

You mean to ask about the convergence of the series \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\arctan{2n}, or possibly some other starting point (which won't affect convergence/divergence). This series is divergent, see d_leet's post.

It wasn't always clear whether you were asking about the convergence of the sequence or the corresponding series. You might want to make it more clear in the future by using latex to write the mathematical notation. If you click on the pretty graphics above, you can see how they were made. You don't have to know much about latex for stuff like this, and it let's you avoid using paint to post images.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
finchi_88 said:
does it really matter

It may matter to professors who are looking for the best possible answer. You should always try and settle for the best answer if there is one :).
 
  • #33
finchie_88 said:
Yes it is, the method I used:
1. Put calculator in radian mode.
2. calculate cos1.
3. calculate 1-ans.
4. calculate cos1/previous ans.

That's not a good method to use. What would you have done if you had been given the following sum?

\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(\cos(k))^n

(where k is in radians and is not equal to an integer multiple of \pi)
 
  • #34
One might, of course, object that it is too "trivial" to point out the error in calling a rounded number exact.
However, it is quite evident that for the OP at least, this error seems symptomatic of his confusion of terms, for example using the inappropriate term "Riemann sums" in the title, and mixing up the concepts of sequences and series.

My advice is that you start paying attention to definitions in maths, and try to understand them, rather than trying to memorize them.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K