Numbering the Rationals for Convergence for Infinite Sum Calculation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lukepeterpaul
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenge of numbering the rational numbers in a way that allows the infinite sum of the squared differences between successive terms, specifically \(\sum (x_n - x_{n+1})^2\), to converge. Participants explore various approaches to this problem, including the implications of distinct versus non-distinct terms and the conditions under which convergence might be achieved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests clarification on the formulation of the sum, indicating that the expression provided is not a complete infinite sum.
  • Another participant suggests breaking the sequence into blocks with small differences between successive terms to facilitate convergence.
  • A proposed method involves recursively defining a sequence that includes both the original ordering of rationals and additional points to ensure convergence.
  • Some participants question whether the sum can converge if all \(x_n\) are distinct or if the integers are included in the sequence.
  • There is a claim that including integers leads to divergence due to an infinite number of terms being greater than or equal to one.
  • One participant argues that it is possible to order the rationals in a way that allows the sum to converge, countering the previous claim.
  • Another participant presents calculations to support their approach to bounding the sum, suggesting a specific upper bound for the series.
  • Concerns are raised about whether the proposed enumeration of rationals covers all possible rational numbers, with a clarification that it does include all rationals by construction.
  • A later post introduces a new question about the convergence of the series of cubes of the terms, speculating on the conditions under which this might fail.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions necessary for convergence, particularly regarding the inclusion of distinct terms and integers. There is no consensus on whether the sum can converge under all proposed conditions, and several competing models for numbering the rationals are presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their assumptions about the ordering of rationals and the implications of including integers in the sequence. The discussion also highlights the complexity of establishing convergence criteria for infinite sums involving rational numbers.

lukepeterpaul
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
hi, i would be very grateful if someone could start me off me in the right direction in numbering the rationals such that the infinite sum of (x_n - x_n+1)^2 (where x_n are rationals) converges.
thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you be more specific? This alone is not an infinite sum:
[tex](x_n-x_{n+1})^2[/tex]

Is it one of the terms in the sum? What exactly does the sum look like? Is there a relation between xn and xn-1 and xn-2 etc?
Is x1 (Or eventually x0) described in any way?

Could you describe the problem more detailed?
 
[tex]\sum(x_n - x_n+1)^2[/tex] over n, where n ranges from 1 to infinity
this is all the info I've got...
 
lukepeterpaul said:
[tex]\sum(x_n - x_n+1)^2[/tex] over n, where n ranges from 1 to infinity
this is all the info I've got...
I think you mean [tex]\sum (x_n-x_{n+1})^2[/tex].
 
If repeats are allowed, try breaking up the sequence into a number of blocks where for the kth block the difference between successive terms is small, say 1/k^4. Say block 1 goes from 0 to 1, block 2 goes from 1 to -2, block 3 goes from -2 to 3, etc (so the sequence is 0,1,1-1/16,1-2/16,...,-2,-2+1/81,...; the contribution of the kth block to the sum of squares is (2k-1)*k^4/k^8 so the overall sum converges (and every rational is visited infinitely often).
 
lukepeterpaul said:
hi, i would be very grateful if someone could start me off me in the right direction in numbering the rationals such that the infinite sum of (x_n - x_n+1)^2 (where x_n are rationals) converges.
thanks!

Ok, here is my idea: Take any ordering of the rationals y_1,y_2,... You can recursively weed out duplicates, so we assume this.

If you just want a tip: Try to cut up each interval [tex](y_n,y_{n+1})[/tex] with increasingly fine intervals in an appropriate way, and extend the ordering with the cut points between the y_n's, and find an upper bound of the sum. And don't read further.

If you are stuck:
For each n: If [tex]y_n<y_{n+1}[/tex], define [tex]z_{kn}=y_n+2^{-n}\sum^k_{i=1}\frac{1}{i}[/tex], for k ranging from 1 to the smallest K_n such that [tex]y_{n+1}-z_{K_nn} \leq 2^{-n}[/tex], K_n exists since [tex]\sum^{N}_{i=1}\frac{1}{i}[/tex] grows without bound, and [tex]z_{k+1n}-z_{kn} \leq 2^{-n}[/tex]. If [tex]y_n>y_{n+1}[/tex], then do the same by switching the plus-sign to a minus-sign in from of the [tex]2^{-n}[/tex]*etc when defining [tex]z_{kn}[/tex]. What we are doing is chopping up the interval [tex](y_n,y_{n+1})[/tex] into small parts by the [tex]z_{kn}[/tex]'s.

Now define [tex]x_1 = y_1, x_2 = z_{11},x_2=z_{21}, ..., x_{K_n+1}=z_{K_n1},x_{K_n+2}=y_2, x_{K_n+3}=z_{12}[/tex], and so on. We are enumerating the rationals by picking each [tex]y_n[/tex] and then each consecutive [tex]z_{kn}[/tex] until we reach the last, then continuing similarly with [tex]y_{n+1}[/tex].

Now, find (an upper bound of) the sum!
 
Last edited:
Some interesting follow-up questions:

Can the sum exist if the x_n's are all distinct?
Can the sum over |x_n-x_{n+1}| exist (distinct or not)?
 
Last edited:
The sum can not converge as I've understood the problem. If you include the integers then there will be an infinite number of terms which are greater than or equal to one and the series can't converge. Do you mean the rationals in (0,1) or something like that?
 
dimitri151 said:
The sum can not converge as I've understood the problem. If you include the integers then there will be an infinite number of terms which are greater than or equal to one and the series can't converge. Do you mean the rationals in (0,1) or something like that?

This is wrong, you could order the rational in such a way that the sum converges. Try to sum up the rationals ordered as I have defined.
 
  • #10
I might as well post my saved calculations which I decided to hold. It seems OP is no longer here and it might be interesting for others.

Using the previous definition of x_n :
[tex]\sum_n(x_n-x_{n+1})^2 = \sum_n (y_n-z_{1n})^2+\left( \sum_{k=1}^{K_n-1}(z_{kn}-z_{k+1n})^2 \right) +(z_{K_nn}-y_{n+1})^2[/tex]
[tex]\leq \sum_n (2^{-n})^2+\left( \sum_{k=1}^{K_n-1}(\frac{2^{-n}}{k+1})^2 \right) +(2^{-n})^2=\sum_n 2^{-2n+1}+2^{-2n}\sum_{k=1}^{K_n-1}\frac{1}{(k+1)^2}[/tex]
[tex]\leq \sum_n 2^{-2n+1}+2^{-2n}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(k+1)^2} = \sum_n 2^{-2n+1}+2^{-2n}(\frac{\pi^2}{6}-1)[/tex]
[tex]=\sum_n 2^{-2n}(\frac{\pi^2}{6}+1) \\ =\frac{\frac{\pi^2}{6}+1}{1-2^{-2}}=\frac{2\frac{\pi^2}{3}+4}{5}[/tex]
 
  • #11
jarle, thanks for your solution. however, would i be right in thinking that the proposed way of enumerating the rationals does not cover all the rationals? e.g. y1+1/1000, say, won't be included...? i apologize if I'm mistaken...
 
  • #12
lukepeterpaul said:
jarle, thanks for your solution. however, would i be right in thinking that the proposed way of enumerating the rationals does not cover all the rationals? e.g. y1+1/1000, say, won't be included...? i apologize if I'm mistaken...

By assumption y_1,y_2, ... is a numeration of the rationals, which can be defined in various ways. The most common one I believe is considering every integer lattice point in the plane. Since x_1,x_2,... contains y_1,y_2,... by construction, the sequence will contain y_1+1/1000 (there is an N such that y_N=y_1+1/1000), and any other rational number.

(I spot a slight typo while I was defining the sequence x_1,x_2,... Of course I mean K_1 where I wrote K_n)
 
Last edited:
  • #13
ah, so double counting is allowed
thanks again, that is very helpful
i've got another question: "given that sum x_n converges, where x_n are real, does sum (x_n)^3 necessarily converge?
my gut feeling is "no" when considering conditional convergent series. it may be that the cubing can increase the ratio of consecutive "groups of terms" (ie the terms in the series we consider as one during the ratio test) s.t. the series is no longer convergent.
m i right?
if so, how might i go about constructing an example?
thanks!
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K