Conditional vs unconditional convergence

Click For Summary
Conditional convergence allows for the rearrangement of terms in a series to yield different sums, which can be counterintuitive and problematic in mathematical analysis. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding infinity and warns against applying finitistic thinking to infinite series, as this can lead to errors in evaluation. The Reimann Series Theorem is highlighted as a significant concept that illustrates these challenges. The speaker expresses excitement about their analysis class and the depth of the material, noting that it has reshaped their understanding of fundamental concepts like convergence and limits. Overall, the conversation reflects a fascination with the complexities of infinite series and the nuances of mathematical analysis.
johnqwertyful
Messages
396
Reaction score
14
NOT talking about nonabsolute vs absolute convergence. I'm talking about conditional convergence. In my analysis text, this was a bit that was covered as enrichment and it straight up blew my mind. I don't get it. How can you simply rearrange terms and come up with a separate sum? They showed a few examples in the book, but it still blew my mind.

I don't really have a question. I just find this idea awesome. Also Reimann Series Theorem blew my mind.

Does anyone know much about it? The book I had, although clear, wasn't as deep as I would have liked.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey johnqwertyful.

It's basically what happens when you deal with infinity and this kind of thing is problematic in many areas of mathematics that analyze it.

In the conditional case, there are infinitely many terms and infinitely many ways to evaluate them but the crux is that you can't fall into the finitistic way of thinking.

The finitistic way of thinking is that you can divide an infinite series into finitely many terms whether its through sums, products or combinations thereof.

This is why when people try to decompose some series and evaluate it in a specific finitistic way (like say collecting terms and representing them as n objects) then you fall into trouble.

It's not just way arithmetic or series though: the same thing happens with trying to make sense of infinity wherever it's applied whether that include how you can decompose for example, an infinite linear space (like a Hilbert-Space): if you are not careful you can fall into the same trap.

It might help you to keep in mind of getting caught in the same trap of taking something infinite and trying to make it finite: in some cases you can, but in general you can't and if you're not careful you will run into the same mistakes yourself.
 
Interesting man. Thanks. I guess the main thing I've learned from analysis is that I really don't know squat about things I thought I knew. Infinity, convergence, limits, real numbers.

I'm super excited for my analysis class to start. I've already worked through a few chapters in my book, and now have been skipping around. It's a fantastic book. Crystal clear, challenging but doable problems, no problem is trivial.

http://books.google.com/books?id=Wlb-o7HBh2YC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
 
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
9K