Is the convergence of an infinite series mere convention?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of convergence in infinite series and its implications for understanding reality and mathematics. Participants explore whether convergence is merely a convention and how it relates to the existence of a smallest constituent part of reality, touching on philosophical aspects of mathematics and its application to physical concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Philosophical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that convergence suggests there is no smallest constituent part of reality, as seen in the example of the series 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8, which approaches 1 but never reaches it.
  • Others argue that convergence is a precisely defined mathematical concept that operates independently of physical reality.
  • A participant questions the mixing of reality-based mathematics with abstract mathematical concepts, citing Zeno's paradox as an example of this tension.
  • Some express uncertainty about whether infinity is merely a convention or an axiomatic definition, raising questions about the implications for algebraic manipulation.
  • There is a discussion about the clarity of language used in mathematical expressions, with some participants suggesting that terms like "mixing of axioms" may lead to ambiguity.
  • A later reply challenges the notation used in the series, suggesting that it could be misleading if not properly defined.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of convergence and its implications, with no clear consensus reached. Some agree on the abstract nature of mathematical concepts, while others emphasize their connection to physical reality.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential ambiguity in language and notation, as well as unresolved questions about the relationship between finite and infinite concepts in mathematics.

  • #31
votingmachine said:
Even though it is an infinitely long sum, and at what ever finite level you look, there is always another "3".
It is a convention to call this a "sum", and in many ways it acts like one, but it is not an infinitely long sum. Instead it is the limit of the sequence of partial sums.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pat8126
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
lurflurf said:
Where is this from?
"Is this simply because infinite series are *defined* by their converged limit even though they only become infinitesimally close to it?"

That was from a previous posting that I deleted. It was starting to explore the philosophy of mathematics so I removed it accordingly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K