How Do You Rewrite a Power Series for Radius of Convergence?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on rewriting the power series \(\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} 2^{-n}x^{3n}\) to determine its radius of convergence. The correct approach involves recognizing that \(x^{3n}\) can be expressed as \((x^3)^n\), allowing the application of D'Alembert's ratio test. By applying the test, the radius of convergence is found to be \(|x| < \sqrt[3]{2}\). The confusion regarding the powers of 2 and the substitution \(n=3k\) is clarified, emphasizing the importance of rewriting the series appropriately.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of power series and their convergence
  • Familiarity with D'Alembert's ratio test
  • Knowledge of manipulating series expressions
  • Basic algebraic skills for handling exponents
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of D'Alembert's ratio test in various contexts
  • Learn about convergence intervals and their endpoints
  • Explore the implications of rewriting power series in different forms
  • Investigate other convergence tests for power series, such as the root test
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone studying series convergence in calculus or advanced mathematics courses.

Artusartos
Messages
236
Reaction score
0
If we have the series [itex]\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} 2^{-n}x^{3n}[/itex]. We need to calculate the radius of convergence...the textbook says that, since the power of x is 3n instead of 3, we need to rewrite it in the form [itex]\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a^{n}x^{n}[/itex]..and we say that [itex]a_{3k}=2^{-k}[/itex]. I'm not sure if I understand this...so are they setting n=3k? But we know that the power of 2 is -n, so if n=3k then doesn't the power of 2 need to be -3k?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Artusartos said:
If we have the series [itex]\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} 2^{-n}x^{3n}[/itex]. We need to calculate the radius of convergence...the textbook says that, since the power of x is 3n instead of 3, we need to rewrite it in the form [itex]\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a^{n}x^{n}[/itex]..and we say that [itex]a_{3k}=2^{-k}[/itex]. I'm not sure if I understand this...so are they setting n=3k? But we know that the power of 2 is -n, so if n=3k then doesn't the power of 2 need to be -3k?

Thanks in advance


Bah. Apply directly D'Alembert's (quotient or ratio) test with [itex]\,a_n=2^{-n}x^{3n}\,[/itex]:

$$\left|\frac{a_{n+1}}{a_n}\right|=\left|\frac{x^{3n+3}}{2^{n+1}} \cdot \frac{2^n}{x^{3n}}\right|=\frac{|x|^3}{2} \xrightarrow [n\to\infty] {}\frac{|x|^3}{2}<1\Longleftrightarrow |x|<\sqrt [3] 2$$

and there you have your convergence radius. There's only left to know whether either of the convergence interval's extreme

points are contained in it.

DonAntonio
 
Artusartos said:
If we have the series [itex]\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} 2^{-n}x^{3n}[/itex]. We need to calculate the radius of convergence...the textbook says that, since the power of x is 3n instead of 3, we need to rewrite it in the form [itex]\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a^{n}x^{n}[/itex]..and we say that [itex]a_{3k}=2^{-k}[/itex]. I'm not sure if I understand this...so are they setting n=3k?
No. They are thinking of [itex]x^{3n}[/itex] as [itex](x^3)^n[/itex] so that they will get the radius of convergence in terms of [itex]x^3[/itex] rather than just x. You can then take the cube root.

But we know that the power of 2 is -n, so if n=3k then doesn't the power of 2 need to be -3k?

Thanks in advance
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K