Representing sums as sigma notation?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges of representing sums as sigma notation, particularly when the general term of the sum is not readily apparent. Participants explore methods for deriving general terms from given sequences and the limitations of such approaches.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that without a known general term, it is difficult to write a summation in sigma notation.
  • One participant inquires about finding a general term from an existing sum, mentioning specific cases like alternating signs and geometric progressions.
  • Another participant notes that there is no general algorithm for deriving useful general terms for arbitrary sequences, although expressions can be found that fit the terms.
  • It is mentioned that for a finite number of terms, infinitely many formulas can produce those terms, emphasizing the need for specificity in the types of formulas considered.
  • Participants discuss methods like curve fitting and interpolation, referencing techniques such as Lagrange interpolating polynomials for fitting functions to sequences.
  • One participant points out that some algorithms may not yield simple algebraic formulas for their terms, citing examples like the Collatz conjecture.
  • A later reply seeks clarification on whether the original question pertains to finding a general formula for the sum of n-terms when the formula for a term is known.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of finding general terms from sums, with some emphasizing the complexity and limitations of such tasks. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the existence of a straightforward method for all cases.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the absence of a clear algorithm for arbitrary sequences and the dependence on the type of formulas considered. The discussion highlights the complexity of deriving general expressions from finite sequences.

bluejay27
Messages
67
Reaction score
3
Hi is there a way or algorithm to find the sigma notation of sums in which the sums do not have an apparent general form?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
bluejay27 said:
Hi is there a way or algorithm to find the sigma notation of sums in which the sums do not have an apparent general form?
To write a summation using sigma notation, you need an expression that represents the general term being added. If you don't know the general term, you're out of luck in writing a summation.
 
How about if I already have the sum and have to find the general term from it. For example, if the terms are alternating in + and -, we would have to use (-1)^n. I am struggling in finding a way to generalize the constants that are in the terms. For example if all the terms would have a 5, the general term would have a 5. If the terms are going in the progression of 1, 5, 25, and 125, the general term would have a 5^n for Maclaurin series. But these are the easier cases, I am struggling in finding the general terms for other sequences... Is there a book that will help me explain this? That directly tackles finding the general expression from the terms?
 
There is no general algorithm to make a useful general term for arbitrary sequences. You can always find expressions (e. g. a polynomial of suitable order), but that doesn't make them useful.

As an example, 1, 5, 25, 125 is also reproduced by ##a_n = \frac {32}{3} n^3 - 56 n^2 + \frac{292}{3} n -51##. Does that make sense or help in any way? Not really. But it fits.
 
bluejay27 said:
I am struggling in finding the general terms for other sequences... Is there a book that will help me explain this? That directly tackles finding the general expression from the terms?

If you have a finite number of terms, there are infinitely many different formulae that will produce those finite number of terms. So, to have a well-posed mathematical problem, you have to be more specific about the type of formulae that you will consider (e.g. polynomials versus rational functions versus transcendental functions).

A squence can be considered as a special case of (x,y) data where x = the index of the term. (e.g the sequence 2, 7, 0, -3,... and be considered as (1,2) (2,7) (3,0) (4,-3),... ) Under the topic of "curve fitting" or "interpolation" you can look up methods to fit functions to curves so they pass exactly through some given (x,y) points. For example, if you want to fit a polynomial to such a sequence, you can study the lagrange interpolating polynomial ( http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LagrangeInterpolatingPolynomial.html )If you have an algorithm for generating an arbitrary finite number of terms then what is mathematically known about finding a algebraic formulae that produces those terms depends on the type of algorithm. For example, in the particular case that the algorithm is a recursion like ## y_{n+2} = 1 - 2y_{n+1} + y_{n} ## you can study recursion relations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recurrence_relation which are treated in books on the "Calculus Of Finite Differences" or "Difference Equations" (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0486650847/?tag=pfamazon01-20)

There can be types of algorithms where no simple algebraic formulas for reproducing their terms is known - and perhaps cases where no simple algebraic formulae exist. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collatz_conjecture ).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dkotschessaa
bluejay27 said:
the sigma notation of sums in which the sums do not have an apparent general form?

I'm interpreting you question to mean "where the n-th term of the sequence" does not have an apparent general form.

Are you asking, instead, about how to find general formula for the the sum of n-terms of a sequence when you do know the formula for a term ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K