Quickly Estimate Apery's Constant Using Partial Sums and Integrals

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter snipez90
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant Estimate
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on estimating Apery's constant using the series 1 + 1/2³ + 1/3³ + 1/4³ + ... through partial sums and integrals. The user proposes a method to approximate the infinite series by summing a finite number of terms and estimating the remainder with an integral. Specifically, they suggest using the formula Ʃ_{n=1}^{m} n^{-3} + ∫_{m+1}^{∞} x^{-3} dx, leading to estimates of approximately 1.18 for m=2 and 1.19 for m=3, ultimately concluding that the value is around 1.2.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of infinite series and convergence
  • Familiarity with integral calculus, specifically improper integrals
  • Knowledge of Apery's constant and its significance in mathematics
  • Basic skills in numerical estimation techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of Apery's constant and its applications in number theory
  • Learn about convergence tests for infinite series
  • Explore numerical integration methods for estimating series
  • Investigate other techniques for estimating constants in mathematical analysis
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying calculus and series, and anyone interested in numerical methods for estimating mathematical constants.

snipez90
Messages
1,095
Reaction score
5
Estimate 1 + \frac{1}{2^3} + \frac{1}{3^3} + \frac{1}{4^3} + \frac{1}{5^3} + ... in 1 minute (See "[URL constant[/URL]).

I couldn't think of a clever way to quickly do this. Any ideas?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
after thinking about this for more than one minute :rolleyes: I am convinced that the best I could hope to do was sum a few terms and estimate the remainder using an integral. Something like
<br /> Ʃ_{n=1}^{\infty} n^{-3} \approx Ʃ_{n=1}^{m} n^{-3} + ∫_{m+1}^{\infty} x^{-3} dx = Ʃ_{n=1}^{m} n^{-3} + (m+1)^{-2}/2.

m=2 yields the sum is about 1.18, m=3 yields 1.19, so I would guess 1.2 for at most two significant figures. Hopefully someone else has something more interesting than that ...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K