Convergence of a geometric series

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers around the convergence of geometric series as presented in the economics paper by Becker & Tomes (1979). The key equations discussed are $$\sum_{j=0}^{k} \beta^{j} h^{k-j} = \beta^{k}(k+1)$$ for the case when $\beta = h$, and $$\sum_{j=0}^{k} \beta^{j} j^{k-j} = \frac{\beta^{k+1}-h^{k+1}}{\beta-h}$$ when $\beta \neq h$. The participants clarify the conditions under which these equations hold and provide a method for proving the convergence using synthetic division and telescoping sums.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of geometric series and convergence
  • Familiarity with synthetic division in algebra
  • Knowledge of telescoping sums
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical notation and LaTeX formatting
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of geometric series and their convergence criteria
  • Learn about synthetic division and its applications in polynomial equations
  • Explore the concept of telescoping sums and their proofs
  • Investigate advanced topics in series convergence, including power series
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, economics researchers, students studying series convergence, and anyone interested in advanced algebraic techniques.

Manfred1999
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,

I am generally familiar with convergent series. However, in one economics paper (Becker&Tomes 1979), I found the following that confuses me:$$\sum_{j=0}^{k} \beta^{j} h^{k-j} = \beta^{k}(k+1)\quad \text{if} \quad\beta =h$$

however,

$$\sum_{j=0}^{k} \beta^{j} j^{k-j} = \frac{\beta^{k+1}-h^{k+1}}{\beta-h}\text{if} \quad\beta \ne h$$In short, I do not understand how they derived at these convergences. Who has any idea that are they referring to? The text itself does not provide more information. And despite having consulted those maths references I can access, I could not find an answer.

Thank you very much for any hint.

Man

PS
I hope the formulae are depicted properly
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Manfred1999,

I corrected the formatting of the equations you presented, and I hope what you see is what you intended to write. But, in the first equation, you did not complete the condition on $\beta$; $\beta$ equals what exactly?
 
Hi Euge,

Thanks so much for doing this. Much appreciated. I think now I know what I did do wrong. I forgot the $ signs. Also, I did not notice that the conditions where not depicted properly. I hope it is clear now. Do you have any idea how do prove the convergence of the series in both cases? Maybe I should that k goes to \infty!
Man
Euge said:
Hi Manfred1999,

I corrected the formatting of the equations you presented, and I hope what you see is what you intended to write. But, in the first equation, you did not complete the condition on $\beta$; $\beta$ equals what exactly?
 
I am an idiot! I just solved the case case. The one where beta goes to infinity! I am an idiot. I am happy to jot down my steps if that helps!

Manfred1999 said:
Hi Euge,

Thanks so much for doing this. Much appreciated. I think now I know what I did do wrong. I forgot the $ signs. Also, I did not notice that the conditions where not depicted properly. I hope it is clear now. Do you have any idea how do prove the convergence of the series in both cases? Maybe I should that k goes to \infty!
Man
 
Manfred1999 said:
$$\sum_{j=0}^{k} \beta^{j} j^{k-j} = \frac{\beta^{k+1}-h^{k+1}}{\beta-h}\quad\text{if} \quad\beta \ne h$$

The expressions $j^{k-j}$ should be $h^{k-j}$. To prove the corrected formula, perform synthetic division. Alternatively, multiply the sum $\sum\limits_{j = 0}^n \beta^j h^{k-j}$ by $\beta - h$; this gives

$$(\beta - h)\sum_{j = 0}^k \beta^j h^{k-j} = \sum_{j = 0}^k (\beta - h)\beta^j h^{k-j} = \sum_{j = 0}^k [\beta^{j+1}h^{k-j} - \beta^j h^{k-(j-1)}] = \sum_{j = 0}^k (x_{j+1} - x_j),$$

where $x_j = \beta^{j}h^{k-(j-1)}$. The sum you see at end is known as a telescoping sum. When you expand the sum, the only term that "survive" are $x_{n+1}$ and $x_0$, because all other terms cancel. So we'll have

$$\sum_{j = 0}^k (x_{j+1} - x_j) = x_{k+1} - x_0 = \beta^{k+1} - h^{k+1}.$$

Finally, since $\beta \neq h$ (so $\beta - h \neq 0$), we conclude

$$\sum_{j = 0}^k \beta^k h^{j-k} = \frac{\beta^{k+1} - h^{k+1}}{\beta - h}.$$
 
Manfred1999 said:
The one where beta goes to infinity!

What do you mean by this?
 
Dear Euge,

Thank you very much for your very detailed answer. I eventually could answer the question myself. However, your explanations were still really useful. Much appreciated.

Manfred
Euge said:
The expressions $j^{k-j}$ should be $h^{k-j}$. To prove the corrected formula, perform synthetic division. Alternatively, multiply the sum $\sum\limits_{j = 0}^n \beta^j h^{k-j}$ by $\beta - h$; this gives

$$(\beta - h)\sum_{j = 0}^k \beta^j h^{k-j} = \sum_{j = 0}^k (\beta - h)\beta^j h^{k-j} = \sum_{j = 0}^k [\beta^{j+1}h^{k-j} - \beta^j h^{k-(j-1)}] = \sum_{j = 0}^k (x_{j+1} - x_j),$$

where $x_j = \beta^{j}h^{k-(j-1)}$. The sum you see at end is known as a telescoping sum. When you expand the sum, the only term that "survive" are $x_{n+1}$ and $x_0$, because all other terms cancel. So we'll have

$$\sum_{j = 0}^k (x_{j+1} - x_j) = x_{k+1} - x_0 = \beta^{k+1} - h^{k+1}.$$

Finally, since $\beta \neq h$ (so $\beta - h \neq 0$), we conclude

$$\sum_{j = 0}^k \beta^k h^{j-k} = \frac{\beta^{k+1} - h^{k+1}}{\beta - h}.$$
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K