Solving a Math Problem: ΣKQ^n & ΔQΣKnQ^(n-1)

  • Thread starter Thread starter foo9008
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding a mathematical expression involving summations and differentials, specifically focusing on the terms ΣKQ^n and ΔQΣKnQ^(n-1). Participants are trying to clarify the transformation of the second term and its implications.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster expresses confusion regarding the transition from ΣKQ^n to ΔQΣKnQ^(n-1). Some participants question the readability of the exponents and the understanding of related equations. Others provide insights into the relationship between ΔQ and Q, suggesting that ΔQ becomes smaller with iterations and discussing the potential connection to differentiation and Newton's method.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the mathematical expressions. Some guidance has been offered regarding the relationship between ΔQ and Q, but there is no explicit consensus on the understanding of the terms involved.

Contextual Notes

There appears to be some difficulty in reading the exponents, which may be affecting participants' understanding. The original poster references a specific picture for context, indicating that visual elements are part of the problem setup.

foo9008
Messages
676
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


in the second picture (refer to the circled part) , i can understand the ΣKQ^n , but i don't understand the second one , why it will become ΔQΣKnQ^(n-1) ?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

 

Attachments

  • 01.jpg
    01.jpg
    45.8 KB · Views: 355
  • 02.jpg
    02.jpg
    45.1 KB · Views: 382
  • 03.jpg
    03.jpg
    32.6 KB · Views: 335
Physics news on Phys.org
Can't read the exponents. Did you understand 5.13 ?
 
BvU said:
Can't read the exponents. Did you understand 5.13 ?
not really
 
It all hinges on $$\Delta Q << Q \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ (Q + \Delta Q)^2 = Q^2 + 2 Q\, \Delta Q + (\Delta Q)^2\approx Q^2 + 2 Q \Delta Q$$ which is satisfied (maybe not in the first iteration, but later on it is) -- ##\Delta Q## gets smaller and smaller if you do things right.
(I filled in n = 2 for simplicity)

You could also see this as a differentiation ( ##{dh\over dQ} = 2KQ {\rm \ \ or \ \ } \Delta h = 2 Q \Delta Q ## ) and then the method is basically the Newton method
 
BvU said:
It all hinges on $$\Delta Q << Q \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ (Q + \Delta Q)^2 = Q^2 + 2 Q\, \Delta Q + (\Delta Q)^2\approx Q^2 + 2 Q \Delta Q$$ which is satisfied (maybe not in the first iteration, but later on it is) -- ##\Delta Q## gets smaller and smaller if you do things right.
(I filled in n = 2 for simplicity)

You could also see this as a differentiation ( ##{dh\over dQ} = 2KQ {\rm \ \ or \ \ } \Delta h = 2 Q \Delta Q ## ) and then the method is basically the Newton method
removed
 
??
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
950
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
731
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
803
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K