General Formulas for Sequences

Pupil
Messages
165
Reaction score
0
Suppose I give you a sequence of numbers such as 2, 4, 6, 8, 10... and ask you to find the next integer. You would probably tell me 12, because the sequence follows the rule 2n where n is the ordinal number. But if I told you the next number in the sequence is 42, your rule wouldn't work, and you'd have to find a new one. Suppose you find this said rule, and I tell you, "nope," because the next integer is 8379356 and the your new rule won't work for this new sequence 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 42, 8379356... But when we think about the original sequence I gave (2, 4, 6, 8, 10...), you found 3 general rules that would work, not just 2n! So my question is then: for any finite list of numbers in a sequence, is there always one or more than one general rule that will work for the series?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top