Conjecturing Patterns for Sum of Powers Series

  • Thread starter Thread starter Link
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving a conjecture for the series of the sum of powers, specifically the expression 1^k + 2^k + 3^k + ... + n^k. Participants are exploring various mathematical approaches to identify patterns and formulate conjectures based on known results for specific values of k.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss polynomial curve fitting and Lagrange Interpolating Polynomials as methods for deriving the sum of powers. There are inquiries about simpler methods, with some suggesting the use of Faulhaber's formula. Others propose examining derivatives and specific values to identify patterns.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with various methods being proposed and explored. Some participants express a desire for simpler approaches, while others provide detailed mathematical frameworks. There is no explicit consensus on a single method or conjecture at this stage.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that certain advanced methods, such as those involving Bernoulli numbers, may not be suitable given the educational context, as they are not part of the high school syllabus.

Link
Messages
132
Reaction score
1
I am supposed to derive a conjecture for the series:

1^k + 2^k + 3^k +...+n^k

I know and have proved that the following are valid:

sum of n^1 = (1/2)(n^2 + n)

sum of n^2 = (1/6) (2n^3 + 3n^2 + n)

Sum of n^3 = (1/4)(n^4 +2n^3 + n^2)

sum of n^4 = (1/30) (6n^5 + 15n^4 + 10n^3 - n)

Anyone spot any patterns? I cant!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can use polynomial curve fitting (eqivalent to using Lagrange Interpolating Polynomials) to solve it:

Recall that there is precisely one polynomial of degree n that passes through n+1 distinct points. It's simple in concept, but the formula is somewhat ugly, where: Suppose you are given three points, say

[tex]\left( x_{1}, y_{1}\right) ,\mbox{ } \left( x_{2}, y_{2}\right) ,\mbox{ and } \left( x_{3}, y_{3}\right)[/tex]

then the polynomial that interpolates (that is fits) those points is of degree 3-1=2, and will consist of three terms. It is

[tex]P(x) = y_{1}\frac{\left( x-x_{2}\right) \left( x-x_{3}\right) }{\left( x_{1}-x_{2}\right) \left( x_{1}-x_{3}\right)} + y_{2}\frac{\left( x-x_{1}\right) \left( x-x_{3}\right) }{\left( x_{2}-x_{1}\right) \left( x_{2}-x_{3}\right)} + y_{3}\frac{\left( x-x_{1}\right) \left( x-x_{2}\right) }{\left( x_{3}-x_{1}\right) \left( x_{3}-x_{2}\right)}[/tex]

since we wanted it to have the value [tex]y_{1}[/tex] at [tex]x_{1}[/tex], the first term does this and it is zero at [tex]x_{2}\mbox{ and } x_{3}[/tex] (this is the numerator) and the denominator ensures that at [tex]x_{1}[/tex] the numerator terms are corrected for so that it is still [tex]y_{1}[/tex] there. The other terms likewise.

To sum the k-th powers of the first n integers first note that the sum is a polynomial in n of degree k+1 (you have proved this for k=1,...,5 already), which can thus be completely specified by k+2 points, say the first k+2 points. Then find the polynomial in terms of n for (each k) by polynomial curve fitting as such:

[tex]\sum_{i=1}^{n} i^{k}=\sum_{i=1}^{k+2}\left(\sum_{m=1}^{i} m^{k} \prod_{j=1}^{k+2} \frac{n-j}{i-j} \right)[/tex]

where the terms in the product corresponding to j=i are omitted.

The [tex]\sum_{m=1}^{i} m^{k}[/tex] for i=1,..., k+2 terms are the [tex]y_{i}\mbox{'s}[/tex] , the "the first k+2 points" mentioned above.

I hope this was clear enough for you to follow. There's also a way using the Bernoulli numbers, I wasn't fond of it though.

-Ben
 
Thank you, but isn't there some simpler way of doing this? Lagrange theorem and bernoulli numbers are not in our high school syllabus:frown:

I looked around mathworld and found that the Faulhabers formula is the correct generalization for the series?
 
Hmm. Let f(k) be the required sum. Then

[tex]f'(k) = kf(k-1)[/tex].

Now f(0) = 0 and f(1) = n. Does this help? Maybe you should write out some actual numbers and look for patterns.

Carl
 
Link said:
I looked around mathworld and found that the Faulhabers formula is the correct generalization for the series?

Yes.

Given that this is a high school problem, you might consider going for a weaker conjecture than trying to guess (or look up) an explicit formula for all values of k. What can you say about the formulas you've found so far? What kind of functions are they?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K