B Higher Roots of Positive Numbers

dom_quixote
Messages
50
Reaction score
9
Playing around with my calculator, I realized that if I do successive rooting operations on any positive non-zero number, I always get the number one.
Can I conclude that the infinite root of any positive number will always be zero?
If the statement is true, is there any synthesized formula to prove this property?

P.S.:
Sorry if my way of expressing myself sounds strange, because I'm Brazilian and I use the automatic translator to communicate with all of you. It is a pleasure to observe the interest of the contributors to this Site, who strive to understand the questions I post on the Physics Forums.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
$$\lim_{n\to \infty} a^{1/n} = 1$$ for all positive a. You can show this e.g. using ##a^{1/n} = e^{\log(a)/n}## and continuity of the exponential function to bring the limit into the exponent, but you can also show it for successive square roots in more elementary ways by showing that e.g. the distance to 1 decreases at least by a factor 2 each time.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes mcastillo356, FactChecker, PeroK and 1 other person
dom_quixote said:
Playing around with my calculator, I realized that if I do successive rooting operations on any positive non-zero number, I always get the number one.
Can I conclude that the infinite root of any positive number will always be zero?
No, you cannot conclude anything from trying out a couple of numbers. And there is no such thing like an infinite root. However, you can pose the hypothesis that
$$
\lim_{n \to \infty} \sqrt[n]{x} = 1 \text{ for }x>0
$$
dom_quixote said:
If the statement is true, is there any synthesized formula to prove this property?
You can define a sequence ##a_n:=\sqrt[n]{x}## and prove that ##|a_n-1|## get's arbitrary small for large ##n##.
 
  • Like
Likes dom_quixote
mfb said:
$$\lim_{n\to \infty} a^{1/n} = 1$$ for all positive a. You can show this e.g. using ##a^{1/n} = e^{\log(a)/n}## and continuity of the exponential function to bring the limit into the exponent, but you can also show it for successive square roots in more elementary ways by showing that e.g. the distance to 1 decreases at least by a factor 2 each time.
You can also do an indirect proof. For any ##a > 1##, the sequence ##a^{1/n}## is monotone decreasing and bounded below by ##1##. Therefore, the limit exists.

However, for any number ##l > 1##, the sequence ##l^n## in unbounded; and so ##l \ne lim_{n \to \infty} a^{1/n}##. That leaves the only possibility that ##lim_{n \to \infty} a^{1/n} = 1##.
 
  • Like
Likes JFerreira, mfb and dom_quixote
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