Remainder Estimate for Integral Test

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Remainder Estimate for the Integral Test applied to the series $$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{{n}^{1.01}}$$. Participants express confusion regarding the application of series approximations and the estimation of errors involved in their calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about the series and seek validation of their approach to the problem.
  • One participant introduces the Laurent series expansion and suggests that for $s$ close to 1, the dominant term can be approximated, leading to a rough estimate of $\zeta(1.01) \sim 100.577...$
  • Another participant critiques the use of the Laurent series, emphasizing the need to apply the Remainder Estimate for Integral Test instead, and points out errors in the initial calculations.
  • It is noted that the integral approximation for $R_n$ should be computed correctly, with bounds established for $R_n$ based on integrals of the function $f(x) = \frac{1}{x^{1.01}}$.
  • One participant provides a detailed explanation of how to estimate $R_n$ using integrals and suggests that the correct approximation for $s$ should yield $s \approx 100.65$.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct approach to the problem. There are competing views on the use of the Laurent series versus the Remainder Estimate for Integral Test, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best method for estimating the series.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention specific values and approximations that may depend on the accuracy of integral calculations, and there are indications of potential errors in earlier claims about the series' sum and remainder estimates.

Pull and Twist
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
I'm working on the following problem and I have made it this far... am I on the correct path or am I doing this incorrectly?? I find series extremely confusing. Also... how do I find the error involved in the improved approximation?

This is the series I am working with: $$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{{n}^{1.01}}$$

View attachment 4249
 

Attachments

  • mathproblem.jpg
    mathproblem.jpg
    32.9 KB · Views: 118
Physics news on Phys.org
PullandTwist said:
I'm working on the following problem and I have made it this far... am I on the correct path or am I doing this incorrectly?? I find series extremely confusing. Also... how do I find the error involved in the improved approximation?

This is the series I am working with: $$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{{n}^{1.01}}$$

Take into account the Laurent series expansion discovered by the Dutch mathematician Thomas Joannes Stieltjes in the XIX century...

$\displaystyle \zeta (s) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n^{s}} = \frac{1}{s-1} + \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^{n}}{n!} (s - 1)^{n},\ |s|>1\ (1) $

It is clear that if s is close to 1 the first term will be dominant, so that $\displaystyle \zeta (1.01) \sim 100$ ... if You want to take into account the term of order 0, the coefficient $\gamma_{0}$ in (1) is known as the Euler's constant $\gamma = .57721566...$ so that is $\displaystyle \zeta (1.01) \sim 100. 57721566... $

... it is clear that also adding other terms the result will not deviate too much...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
chisigma said:
Take into account the Laurent series expansion discovered by the Dutch mathematician Thomas Joannes Stieltjes in the XIX century...

$\displaystyle \zeta (s) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n^{s}} = \frac{1}{s-1} + \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^{n}}{n!} (s - 1)^{n},\ |s|>1\ (1) $

It is clear that if s is close to 1 the first term will be dominant, so that $\displaystyle \zeta (1.01) \sim 100$ ... if You want to take into account the term of order 0, the coefficient $\gamma_{0}$ in (1) is known as the Euler's constant $\gamma = .57721566...$ so that is $\displaystyle \zeta (1.01) \sim 100. 57721566... $

... it is clear that also adding other terms the result will not deviate too much...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$

I have never learned about the Laurent series expansion... I'm supposed to be using the Remainder Estimate for Integral Test... I am assuming that I am not using it correctly since I am not getting the same answer.
 
PullandTwist said:
I'm working on the following problem and I have made it this far... am I on the correct path or am I doing this incorrectly?? I find series extremely confusing. Also... how do I find the error involved in the improved approximation?

This is the series I am working with: $$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{{n}^{1.01}}$$

Hi PullandTwist,

There are many errors in your work. While you can approximate $s$ using $\int_1^\infty dx/x^{1.01}$, it is not the case that $s = \int_1^\infty dx/x^{1.01}$, which is what your work shows on the left side of the paper. The main point though is that it has nothing to do with the problem; you should remove it. In the problem, you must approximate $s$ with $s_1$ (which you did -- you have $s_1 = 1$) and then use the estimates for $R_1$ to give the error of approximation (it should be fine to give the order of magnitude of $R_1$). In your analysis, you gave an approximation of $s$ of about $75.827$. This should be a red flag, because the checkpoint was $s \approx 100.65$. Knowing that $\int_{n+1}^\infty x^{-1.01}\, dx \le R_n \le \int_n^\infty x^{-1.01}\, dx$, after computing the integrals we obtain $100 (n+1)^{-0.01} \le R_n \le 100n^{-0.01}$. Substituting $n = 1$, we get $100(0.5)^{-0.01} \le R_1 \le 100$. What does this tell you about the order of magnitude of $R_1$?
 
PullandTwist said:
I have never learned about the Laurent series expansion... I'm supposed to be using the Remainder Estimate for Integral Test... I am assuming that I am not using it correctly since I am not getting the same answer.

... what You can obtain from integral test is...

$\displaystyle |R_{n}| \le \int_{n}^{n+1} x^{-1.01}\ d x = \frac {100}{99}\ \{ (n+1)^{\frac{99}{100}} -n^{\frac{99}{100}}\}\ (1) $

... so that if $s_{0}=100$ You have $|R_{1}|\le .996...,\ |R_{2}| \le .9909..., |R_{3}|\le .9875...$ and so on...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
PullandTwist said:
I'm working on the following problem and I have made it this far... am I on the correct path or am I doing this incorrectly?? I find series extremely confusing. Also... how do I find the error involved in the improved approximation?

This is the series I am working with: $$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{{n}^{1.01}}$$
You may find these notes helpful – see the section headed Integral Test.

The setting is as follows. Suppose that $f(x)$ is a positive, decreasing function defined for $x>0$ and let $a_n = f(n).$ Let $$s = \sum_{j=1}^\infty a_j$$ and let $$s_n = \sum_{j=1}^n a_j.$$ So $s$ denotes the sum of the whole series, and $s_n$ is the sum of the first $n$ terms. Finally, let $R_n = s-s_n$ be the remainder after summing the first $n$ terms. Then it is shown in the above link that $R_n$ lies between $$\int_n^\infty \!\!\!f(x)\,dx$$ and $$\int_{n+1}^\infty \!\!\!f(x)\,dx.$$ It suggests that a good estimate for $s$ would be to approximate $R_n$ by the midpoint of those two bounds. In other words, you should use $$\frac12\biggl(\int_n^\infty \!\!\!f(x)\,dx + \int_{n+1}^\infty f(x)\,dx\biggr)$$ as an approximation for $R_n$, getting $$s \approx s_n + \frac12\biggl(\int_n^\infty \!\!\!f(x)\,dx + \int_{n+1}^\infty f(x)\,dx\biggr).$$ In your problem, you should take $f(x) = \dfrac1{x^{1.01}}$ and $n=1$. Then $s_1 = 1$ and $$s \approx 1 + \frac12\biggl(\int_1^\infty \frac1{x^{1.01}}\,dx + \int_2^\infty \frac1{x^{1.01}}\,dx\biggr).$$ If you do that and evaluate the integrals correctly, you should find that $s\approx 100.65$, as the question suggests.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K