Is this acceptable in recursive formulas?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Cloudless
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formulas
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the validity of representing a recursive formula for the sequence 2, 5, 9, 19, 37. The correct formulation is confirmed as an = 2an-1 + (-1)n, which simplifies to an = an-1 + 2an-2. This clarification is essential for accurately expressing recursive relationships in mathematical sequences.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of recursive formulas
  • Familiarity with mathematical notation
  • Basic knowledge of sequences and series
  • Experience with algebraic manipulation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study advanced recursive sequences and their applications
  • Explore mathematical induction techniques for proving recursive formulas
  • Learn about generating functions in combinatorics
  • Investigate the use of recursion in programming languages like Python
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, educators, students studying discrete mathematics, and programmers interested in algorithm design will benefit from this discussion.

Cloudless
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Say for the recursive formula 2, 5, 9, 19 , 37...Instead of writing it as an = an-1 + * 2 an-2

can you write it as:

an = 2an + (-1)nJust double checking. I encountered this earlier helping someone and I haven't done recursive formulas in a while..
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think you meant an = 2an-1 + (-1)n

Sure. Your formula is the same as

an = an-1 + (-1)n + an-1
= an-1 + (-1)n + 2an-2 + (-1)n-1
= an-1 + 2an-2
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K