Find the sum of 1/((n)(n-1)) from n = 1 to 100

  • Thread starter Thread starter PrudensOptimus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sum
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the sum of the series 1/((n)(n-1)) from n=1 to 100, with initial concerns about the undefined nature of the fraction at n=1. Participants suggest using partial fractions and alternative methods to derive the sum, including a logarithmic approach that simplifies the series. The general formula derived indicates that the sum can be expressed as 1 - (1/n), which holds true for all n greater than 1. The conversation also touches on the application of inhomogeneous sequences to confirm the derived formula. Overall, the sum converges to a clear expression that can be applied to various values of n.
PrudensOptimus
Messages
641
Reaction score
0
Find the sum of 1/((n)(n-1)) from n = 1 to 100.

Any idea?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Partial fractions!
 
write 1= n-(n-1)
 
One "idea" I have is that the sum does not exist. The fraction is undefined when n= 1. Did you mean to start at n= 2 or would you prefer to use 1/n(n+1)? (which would be the same thing)
 
Let SUM=∑k=2 to n [1/(k(k-1)] (1)


Apart from the straightforward method using partial fractions the seeked sum can be found from a more general approach (as a particular solution).

Let

S=ln[(x+2)/(x+3)]+ln[(x+3)/(x+4)]+...+ln[(x+n)/(x+n+1)]

S=ln{[(x+2)/(x+3)]*[(x+3)/(x+4)]*..*[(x+n-1)/(x+n)]*[(x+n)/(x+n+1]}


S=∑k=2 to n [ln(x+k)-ln(x+k+1)]=ln(x+2)-ln(x+n+1)


By deriving both members --->


S'=∑k=2 to n [1/(x+k)(x+k+1)]=[(n-1)/(x+2)(x+n+1)]


If we put now x=-1 results:


SUM=∑ k=2 to n [1/(k(k-1)]=(n-1)/n=1-(1/n) (2)


The adavantage of this method is clear,the general formula depending on x can be particularized to find other sums,∑ k=1 to n [1/(k(k+1)] for example,and so on.
 
Last edited:
There is another solution based on the theory of inhomogeneous sequences.The sum (depending only by 'n') must be seeked in the form:

SUM=(A/n2)+(B/n)+C (1)

A,B,C=constants

We know that:

S[n=2]=1/2 (2)

S[n=3]=2/3 (3)

S[n=4]=3/4 (4)

s[n=5]=4/5 (5)

S[n=6]=5/6 (6)

Introducing (1) in (2) (3) & (4) and solving the system --->

A=0
B=-1
C=1

Therefore SUM=(-1/n)+1=1-(1/n) (7)

Introducing now in (7) n=5 ---> S[n=5]=4/5 that is exactly (5) (for n=6 we obtain again an equality).The solution obtained is exact and holds for all values of 'n' (actually the inhomogeneous theory requires to prove that the sequence made with the free terms-here the general terms in 'n'=[1/(n(n-1))]-constitute a linear sequence but in practice it is enough to show that the obtained equation S=f(n) holds exactly for n greater than the values used to calculate the constants).
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top