Does the Taylor series expansion for e^x converge quickly?

sandy.bridge
Messages
797
Reaction score
1
Hello all,
My question is in regards to the Taylor series expansion of
f(x)=e^x=1+x+x^2/(2!)+x^3/(3!)...
I calculated the value of
e^(-2)
using the first 4 terms, 6 terms, and then the first 8 terms. I then calculated the relative error to compare it to the true value, depcited by my calculator to 6 significant figures. Using the first four terms, I found an error of 2609%. Using the first 6 terms I found an error of 2905%, and lastly using the first 8 terms I found an error of 2952%.

What can I conclude from this? Does the error increase (at a decreasing rate) until it begins decreasing (at an increasing rate)?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
How did you get to 2609%?
If I take 4 terms I get an error of around 46%.

Are you sure you entered the even powers correctly? One of the most common mistakes is to enter (-2)2 as -22 = -(22).
 
Oops, I had a mistake.n However, upon doing it again, I get an error of 346.3.
relative error=100((e^(-2)-(sum of first four terms))/e^(-2))=100((e^(-2)-(-0.333333))/e^(-2))=346%
 
Yes the error after 4 terms is 346%. But in the next 4 terms the errors are 146%, -51%, 15% and 4%; after another 4 terms the error is only 5 parts in a thousand and another four, -2 in 1 million. The error decreases in magnitude with each successive term (except for the second term, x) and converges fast enough for me.
 
Last edited:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top