Find the expression for the sum of this power series

Kqwert
Messages
160
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


Hello,

I need to find an expression for the sum of the given power series
gif.gif


The Attempt at a Solution


I think that one has to use a known Maclaurin series, for example the series of e^x. I know that I can rewrite

gif.gif
, which makes the expression even more similar to the Maclaurin series for e^x. Any help?
 

Attachments

  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    754 bytes · Views: 676
  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    534 bytes · Views: 411
Physics news on Phys.org
Kqwert said:
I think that one has to use a known Maclaurin series, for example the series of e^x.
This is a good idea. You may want to use the fact that ##n = (n-1) + 1## rather than going for getting ##n!## in the denominator though.
 
Orodruin said:
This is a good idea. You may want to use the fact that ##n = (n-1) + 1## rather than going for getting ##n!## in the denominator though.
How does that help me?
 
Kqwert said:
How does that help me?
Did you try doing it?
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
Orodruin said:
Did you try doing it?
Yes, but not sure what it helps me? Should I replace all n's in the expression by n = (n-1)+1?
 
No, just in the numerator to split your sum into two.

It also helps if you state what you get when you do so - otherwise I have to guess what stage you are at.
 
So I get this expression?

gif.gif
 

Attachments

  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    1 KB · Views: 383
I assume you mean ##x^n##. So split it into two sums and treat each sum separately. You may want to simplify the second term change the summation variable in both sums.
 
Orodruin said:
I assume you mean ##x^n##. So split it into two sums and treat each sum separately. You may want to simplify the second term change the summation variable in both sums.
Yeah, I mean x^n! What do you mean by change the summation variable. Is it like write k = n-1?
 
  • #10
Kqwert said:
Is it like write k = n-1?
Yes, that could be a reasonable substitution for one of the terms.
 
  • #11
Orodruin said:
Yes, that could be a reasonable substitution for one of the terms.
What about the last term though? Not sure what the best simplification of that is.
 
  • #12
Kqwert said:
What about the last term though? Not sure what the best simplification of that is.
What is ##(n-1)/(n-1)!##?
 
  • #13
Orodruin said:
What is ##(n-1)/(n-1)!##?
You can split that expression into two as well..?
 
  • #14
What is ##(n-1)!##?
 
  • #15
(n-1)(n-2)(n-3)(n-4) etc.. I guess you can write 1/(n-2)!, but doubt that is it?
 
  • #16
Kqwert said:
(n-1)(n-2)(n-3)(n-4) etc.. I guess you can write 1/(n-2)!, but doubt that is it?
Why do you doubt that?
 
  • #17
Orodruin said:
Why do you doubt that?
Hm, I guess I can substitute k = n-2, which makes it into the exponential Maclaurin Series?
 
  • #18
Kqwert said:
Hm, I guess I can substitute k = n-2, which makes it into the exponential Maclaurin Series?
Does it? What exactly do you obtain?
 
  • #19
So i am getting a little lost here.
gif.gif

This is where we are right?
By substituting k = n-1 into the first expression we get a very similar expression to the e^x series,
gif.gif


in the second expression we can do q = n - 2 and get..

gif.gif


is this the way?
 

Attachments

  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    1.1 KB · Views: 331
  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    561 bytes · Views: 338
  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    497 bytes · Views: 344
  • #20
You are making good progress. So what is the difference between the two series that you have obtained and the expansion of ##e^x##?
 
  • #21
Just x and x^2, respectively, which are not dependent on n. However, what happens when I do the variable changes and calculate the sums? For k = n-1 we get k = 0 as the lower sum and k = inf. as the upper sum, while we get q = -1 as the lower and q = inf as the upper for the second expression?
 
  • #22
Kqwert said:
Just x and x^2, respectively, which are not dependent on n. However, what happens when I do the variable changes and calculate the sums? For k = n-1 we get k = 0 as the lower sum and k = inf. as the upper sum, while we get q = -1 as the lower and q = inf as the upper for the second expression?
Yes, this is indeed the next thing you must check. For the k sum, you are already fine since the exponential series expansion is a sum from zero. For the q sum, what is ##(n-1)/(n-1)!## when ##n = 1##? Does that term contribute?
 
  • #23
Orodruin said:
Yes, this is indeed the next thing you must check. For the k sum, you are already fine since the exponential series expansion is a sum from zero. For the q sum, what is ##(n-1)/(n-1)!## when ##n = 1##? Does that term contribute?
It´s just zero. But, the way I have done it. I´m left with

gif.gif


WolframAlpha gave me x^2*e^x, but why..? I know that we must get q = 0, which results in x^2*e^x, but doesn't the q = -1 term contribute?
 

Attachments

  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    785 bytes · Views: 326
  • #24
You have to treat that term separately. Before cancelling (n-1)/(n-1)! to 1/(n-2)!, note that the n = 1 term reads 0/0!
 
  • #25
Orodruin said:
You have to treat that term separately. Before cancelling (n-1)/(n-1)! to 1/(n-2)!, note that the n = 1 term reads 0/0!
But why does that matter when the expression has been re-written? isn't is possible to solve it from the re-written series?
 
  • #26
Because the rewriting is not correct for ##n = 1##.
 
  • #27
Orodruin said:
Because the rewriting is not correct for ##n = 1##.
Not sure If I understand what you mean?
 
  • #28
For ##n = 1##, the term reads ##0/0!## but with the "cancellation" you did, it would be ##-1/(-1)!##, which you would need to interpret in terms of the Gamma function ##\Gamma(x)## in the limit ##x \to 0##, where ##\Gamma(x) \to \infty##. It is much easier to just remove that term from the beginning since 0! = 1 and therefore 0/0! = 0/1 = 0.
 
  • #29
Orodruin said:
For ##n = 1##, the term reads ##0/0!## but with the "cancellation" you did, it would be ##-1/(-1)!##, which you would need to interpret in terms of the Gamma function ##\Gamma(x)## in the limit ##x \to 0##, where ##\Gamma(x) \to \infty##. It is much easier to just remove that term from the beginning since 0! = 1 and therefore 0/0! = 0/1 = 0.
Ok thanks, but how does that relate to the "q-series" I´ve found which starts at q = -1? Wrong way of doing it?
 
  • #30
Kqwert said:
Ok thanks, but how does that relate to the "q-series" I´ve found which starts at q = -1? Wrong way of doing it?
You only found that particular series by making the cancellation. Alternatively you can do the replacement before cancellation, you will then get ##(q+1)/(q+1)!## and you can note that the ##q = -1## term is zero because ##q+1 = 0## so you can remove it. After that the cancellation is fine for all terms.
 
  • #31
Thank you, but what cancellation? Re-writing (n-1)/(n-1)! to 1/(n-2)! ? Not sure if I understand exactly what happens and why.
 
  • #32
Kqwert said:
Thank you, but what cancellation? Re-writing (n-1)/(n-1)! to 1/(n-2)! ? Not sure if I understand exactly what happens and why.
Yes, that cancellation. Because, as I said in #24, for ##n = 1##, that term reads ##0/0!## and the terms you would cancel are 0 and 0, which you cannot do. You have to look at that term separately and realize that it is actually zero so that it gives no contribution.
 
  • #33
Orodruin said:
Yes, that cancellation. Because, as I said in #24, for ##n = 1##, that term reads ##0/0!## and the terms you would cancel are 0 and 0, which you cannot do. You have to look at that term separately and realize that it is actually zero so that it gives no contribution.
I understand that, but I don't understand the order of things. When we start from
gif.gif


Should we first say that

gif.gif


and then do the change of variables? I am becoming a bit confused re. the best way of solving this.
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    853 bytes · Views: 315
  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    867 bytes · Views: 344
  • gif.gif
    gif.gif
    1.7 KB · Views: 342
  • #34
What you had from the beginning was
$$
\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{(n-1)x^n}{(n-1)!},
$$
not the sum from ##n = 0##. It does not matter if you change variables first or if you do the cancellation first. The only thing you must do is to remove the term ##n = 1## (or equivalently ##q = -1##) before you do the cancellation because that step is not valid for that term.
 
  • #35
And by removing the n = 1 term we end up starting at n = 2, right?
 
  • #36
Yes, which means ##q = 0##.
 
  • #37
Excellent, thanks a lot for the help!
 
  • #38
So now that you have worked through it, let me just mention an alternative approach, which is how I initially did it but it involves some extra trickery using derivatives. The aim is to reduce the remaining series to that of the exponential function by extracting powers of ##x## and using a derivative relation.

The point is to note that ##n x^{n-1}## is the derivative of ##x^n##. We have
$$
\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{nx^n}{(n-1)!} = x \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{n x^{n-1}}{(n-1)!} = x \frac{d}{dx} \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{x^{n}}{(n-1)!}
$$
where in the first step we have just factorised out an ##x## and in the second we applied the derivative relation. Now we can extract another factor ##x## from the sum and end up with
$$
\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{nx^n}{(n-1)!} = x\frac{d}{dx}\left(x \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{x^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}\right)
= x\frac{d}{dx}\left(x \sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{x^{m}}{m!}\right) = x \frac{d}{dx}(x e^x) = x (x e^x + e^x) = x(1+x) e^x,
$$
where in the middle we did the substitution ##m = n-1## then used the power series for ##e^x## and regular differentiation. Luckily, this is the same result as you got.
 
  • Like
Likes QuantumQuest and PeroK
  • #39
Kqwert said:
Excellent, thanks a lot for the help!
I notice that you were getting all mixed up with summations (what terms should be removed, how should the sums be re-indexed, etc?). When I solve such problems I try to avoid all that by writing out a few terms explicitly:
$$S = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{n x^n}{(n-1)!} = x + \frac{2 x^2}{1!}+\frac{3 x^3}{2!} + \frac{4 x^4}{3!} + \cdots + \frac{n x^n}{(n-1)!} + \cdots $$ This can be written as
$$S = x + \frac{(1+1) x^2}{1!} + \frac{(2+1) x^3}{2!} + \frac{(3+1)x^4}{3!} + \cdots + \frac{((n-1)+1) x^n}{(n-1)!)} + \cdots, $$ so ##S = S_1 + S_2,## where
$$S_1 = x^2 + \frac{2 x^3}{2!} + \frac{3 x^4}{3!} +\cdots + \frac{(n-1) x^{n-1}}{(n-1)!} +\cdots\\ = x^2 \left(1 + x + \frac{x^2}{2!} + \cdots + \frac{x^{(n-2)}}{(n-2)!} + \cdots \right), $$ and
$$S_2 = x + x^2 + \frac{x^3}{2!} + \frac{x^4}{3!} + \cdots + \frac{x^n}{(n-1)!} + \cdots \\= x \left (1 + x + \frac{x^2}{2!} + \frac{x^3}{3!} + \cdots+ \frac{x^{n-1}}{(n-1)!} + \cdots \right).$$ The rest is easy now.

When I say that I, personally, write out a few terms (as above) I really mean it; I have found over the years that doing that eliminates a lot of confusion and is a good way of avoiding a headache.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes StoneTemplePython and stevendaryl
Back
Top