Need a hint for calculating the integer part of

  • Thread starter Thread starter holezch
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integer
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the integer part of the sum of the series 1 + 1/sqrt(2) + 1/sqrt(3) + ... + 1/sqrt(1,000,000), which falls under the subject area of series and integrals in calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss using integral estimates to bound the sum, with some suggesting a lower bound and others questioning how to establish an appropriate upper bound. There is also a focus on the definition of the "whole number part" and its implications for the problem.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring various methods to estimate the sum, including bounding techniques and integral comparisons. Some have shared their calculations and reasoning, while others are seeking clarification on the definitions and methods being used. There is no explicit consensus on a single approach, but several productive ideas have been exchanged.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the use of calculators for integral evaluations, and there is discussion about the precision needed for the bounds used in the estimation.

holezch
Messages
251
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Calculate the integer part ( whole number part ) of

1 + 1/sqrt ( 2 ) + 1 / sqrt ( 3 ) + 1 / sqrt ( 4 ) + 1 / sqrt ( 5 ) + ... + 1 / sqrt ( 1 000 000 )


Any hints? Thanks, I'd appreciate the help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is a whole number part?
 
I was thinking, that you can get a lower bound from
[tex]\int_{1}^{1000000} \frac{1}{\sqrt{x}} \, dx < \sum_{i = 1}^{1000000} \frac{1}{\sqrt{i}}[/tex]
Can't think of an appropriate upper bound estimation though.
 
Hm, if we go for an estimation, we will have to be sure that our estimation is an integer estimate z that is z <= v or z >= v if v is the actual value and z is the closest integer? I didn't think of coming up with bounds because I thought that the answer would need some sort of precision
thanks
 
Last edited:
dacruick said:
What is a whole number part?

the integer part
 
anyone have any more ideas? :(
 
holezch said:
anyone have any more ideas? :(

It's pretty much what CompuChip gestured at in post 2, though being careless about being exact. You need to bound the sum by integral estimates. Draw a bunch of rectangles representing the sum as though you were doing an upper Riemann sum of the integral of 1/sqrt(n) on the interval [1,10^6+1] with rectangles of width 1. Since it's an upper sum, the integral gives you a lower bound, right? To get an upper bound, use the function 1/sqrt(n-1). I know that goes to infinity at n=1, so you'd better use a different approximation between the first two points. Be more careful of the endpoints than CompuChip was, ok? I tried it and I THINK I got estimates close enough to get the integer part of the sum. See if you think so.
 
thanks, I got the answer to be 1998 and I believe that it is correct :)
I initially used 1 to a million for both end points, on 1/sqrt ( x ) and 1 / sqrt ( x - 1 ) integrals, but then I couldn't integrate 1 / sqrt ( x - 1 ) with that end point, so I started from 2 instead of 1. 1/ sqrt ( 1 ) = 1 which is an integer anyway, so I could exclude that from my approximation.
Then I got
2sqrt(million ) - 2*sqrt ( 2 ) < original sum < 2*sqrt( million -1 ) - 2. Then showed that the difference between both bounds is < 1 but > 0 , which means they are closer than adjacent integers ( which means if the original sum is in between that, I will indeed get the integer part by finding the integer part of either bound ). Well, I found the integer part of either bound and added the 1 back in of course
I had to use a calculator though :S, to calculate 2*sqrt( 1 000 000 - 1 ) - 2 , is that still fair game?
 
Last edited:
holezch said:
thanks, I got the answer to be 1998 and I believe that it is correct :)
I initially used 1 to a million for both end points, on 1/sqrt ( x ) and 1 / sqrt ( x - 1 ) integrals, but then I couldn't integrate 1 / sqrt ( x - 1 ) with that end point, so I started from 2 instead of 1. 1/ sqrt ( 1 ) = 1 which is an integer anyway, so I could exclude that from my approximation.
Then I got
2sqrt(million ) - 2*sqrt ( 2 ) < original sum < 2*sqrt( million -1 ) - 2. Then showed that the difference between both bounds is < 1 but > 0 , which means they are closer than adjacent integers ( which means if the original sum is in between that, I will indeed get the integer part by finding the integer part of either bound ). Well, I found the integer part of either bound and added the 1 back in of course
I had to use a calculator though :S, to calculate 2*sqrt( 1 000 000 - 1 ) - 2 , is that still fair game?

That sounds right. Sure, I would say you could use a calculator to find the value of the integral. Though you could do it without the calculator if you really HAD to, right? The point is just to do it without summing the whole series.
 
  • #10
sqrt(1 000 000) = 1 000
So sqrt(1 000 000 - 1) is a little (but certainly not more than 0.5) smaller (since the square root function is monotonous) and therefore
2 * sqrt(1 000 000 - 1) is just a little smaller (but certainly not more than 1) than 2 * 1000 = 2000.
So
[tex]1997 < 2 \sqrt{1000000 - 1} - 2 < 1998[/tex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
5K