Help Needed: Struggling to Get Started with Physics

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mynameisfunk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem that involves sequences, convergence, and the application of mathematical theorems. Participants are seeking clarification on how to approach the problem, which includes proving certain properties of sequences and understanding their convergence behavior.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses uncertainty about how to start the problem and requests help.
  • Another participant suggests a method involving trying values like 1/2, 1/4, and 3/4 to converge on a solution, emphasizing the need for axioms regarding converging sequences.
  • A participant thanks the previous contributor for clarification and indicates they will work on the problem further.
  • One participant finds the initial parts of the problem trivial but struggles with a specific part, questioning how to determine the distance between two sequences.
  • Another participant recalls that the next numbers in the sequence are averages of previous ones, suggesting they converge closer together over iterations.
  • There is a discussion about the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem and its relevance to the problem, particularly regarding the convergence of bounded sequences.
  • A participant outlines their approach to the problem, detailing the steps they have taken and the conditions they are considering.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of proving that the intersection of certain sequences is non-empty and that the sequences converge to the same limit.
  • One participant refers to the method being discussed as the bisection method.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and approaches to the problem, with some agreeing on the methods to use while others remain confused about specific aspects. No consensus is reached on the best approach or the correctness of certain claims.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention axioms related to convergence and the properties of sequences, but there are unresolved assumptions about the definitions and implications of these axioms in the context of the problem.

mynameisfunk
Messages
122
Reaction score
0
https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/28380Have really no idea where to start with this one. Anyone want to help me get started?
 

Attachments

  • HW4Q1.JPG
    HW4Q1.JPG
    37 KB · Views: 506
Physics news on Phys.org
well that is about as complicated a problem i have seen, to bash out a simple idea.

basically it says to try 1/2. if that doesn't work then you try next either 1/4 or 3/4, and more precisely you try 1/4 if 1/2 was too big, and you try 3/4 if 1/2 was too small.

say 1/2 was too small and you next try 3/4. then eiother it works or it doesn't.

if 3/4 is too small you try next 7/8, and if 3/4 is too big try next 5/8.get it? eventually (after the end of the world that is) you have an infinite number of tries x all getting nearer each other and also ll values x^n getting nearer to y.
so you work to prove that the x's converge to something whose mth power must converge to y.

for this you need an axiom that tells yiou when a sequence of =reals converges.

or as this problem puts it, you need an axiom that says a shrinking sequence of nested, bounded, closed intervals contains at least one common point, and exactly one point if they shrink to zero in length.

or maybe it is rigged to use the fact that a bounded monotone sequence of reals converges.
.

to do the problem as asked just put your nose down and try to follow the steps one at a time blindly.

i myself dislike such problems. i mean what do you learn from them? maybe a little technical skill.
 
THANK YOU. You have made that much clearer. Tomorrow I will work on it and post my work.
 
OK, I am confused, the first 3 parts seem trivial and i can't imagine doing anything but going through the process a few times and showing that they are all true by induction...
Part (d) however, i do not see how this is true. How am I to know how far away an and bn are from each other? I would have thought they could be anything. I specifically don't see how/why |a1-b1|=1/2
 
well without looking back i recall the next numbers ere the average of the previous ones so they seem to get closer by one half each time.
 
mathwonk said:
eventually (after the end of the world that is) you have an infinite number of tries x all getting nearer each other and also ll values x^n getting nearer to y.
so you work to prove that the x's converge to something whose mth power must converge to y.

for this you need an axiom that tells yiou when a sequence of =reals converges.

or as this problem puts it, you need an axiom that says a shrinking sequence of nested, bounded, closed intervals contains at least one common point, and exactly one point if they shrink to zero in length.

or maybe it is rigged to use the fact that a bounded monotone sequence of reals converges.


Would this theorem be the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem??(Every bounded infinite subset of R^k has a limit point in R^k). Specifically for part (e).
 
mynameisfunk said:
|a1-b1|=1/2

You start with b0=1 and a0=0. Then we check to see if [tex]\left( \frac{1}{2}^n\right)=y[/tex]. If so, we're done. If not, there are two possibilities: we make a1=1/2 or we make b1=1/2, and leave the other number alone depending on whether [tex]\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^n[/tex] is too big or too small.

Then |a1-b1| is either |0-1/2| or |1/2-1|
 
I would like to post my work on this and see if anybody has a problem. I am very unsure on how to do this...
(a)initially, an[tex]\leq[/tex]bn and an[tex]\leq[/tex]c[tex]\leq[/tex]bn. If cm>y we set an=an-1 and bn=c so that we still have an-1[tex]\leq[/tex]an[tex]\leq[/tex]bn[tex]\leq[/tex]bn-1. If cm<y then we we set an=c and bn=bn-1 so that we still have an-1[tex]\leq[/tex]an[tex]\leq[/tex]bn[tex]\leq[/tex]bn-1 and the sequence satisfies part (a).

(b)Since all bn and an are reals, they are ordered. Since a0[tex]\leq[/tex]a1[tex]\leq[/tex]...[tex]\leq[/tex]an[tex]\leq[/tex]bn[tex]\leq[/tex]...[tex]\leq[/tex]b1[tex]\leq[/tex]b0, then [an,bn][tex]\subseteq[/tex][an-k,bn-k] for any positive integer k[tex]\leq[/tex]n.

(c) Note that an<c and bn>c. Since in our process, if cm[tex]\neq[/tex]y, we shift our nested intervals(infinitely many times if necessary) so that y1/m is contained in all of them, then the bounds of these sequences, namely an and bn for all n satisfy an<y1/m<bn[tex]\Rightarrow[/tex] amn<y<bmn for all n.

(d)Our process of setting either bn=c or an=c depending on whether ym>c or ym<c makes our interval smaller by 1/2 each time, where initially, the interval is of length 1 ( |0-1| ). Hence |bn-an|=2-n

(e) I would like to just use the Bolzano Weierstrass Theorem here... This is as far as I have done..
 
There are two parts to point e: First is that the intersection is non-empty, and the second is that there is only one point. You can use a convergence argument to get that it's not empty: the sequence an is bounded above and increasing, so converges to something we'll call a; the sequence bn is bounded below and decreasing, so has a limit also called b. By preservation of weak inequalities, [tex]a\leq b[/tex] (make sure this is true! otherwise you're stuck in the mud)

Prove that [a,b] is in the infinite intersection, and use that to prove that a=b also
 
  • #10
I think the buzzword for this kind is the bisection method.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K