Square root in suqare root in square root in square root in

In summary, there is a way to represent the given expression as a power series and use convergence criteria to show that it is convergent. Also, by finding upper and lower bounds, it can be shown that the value of the expression lies between 1001 and 1002.001.
  • #1
songoku
2,294
325
square root in suqare root in square root in square root in...

Homework Statement


Find the value of:
[tex]\sqrt{1001\sqrt{1002\sqrt{1003\sqrt{1004...}}}}[/tex]


Homework Equations


exponential and surd


The Attempt at a Solution


I tried to square it but didn't find any patterns because the radicands are not the same. Help...

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


not sure if it will work, but how about writing as
[tex] (1001(1002...)^{\frac{1}{2}})^{\frac{1}{2}}[/tex]

then maybe see if you can simplify and take a logarithm?
 
  • #3


songoku said:

Homework Statement


Find the value of:
[tex]\sqrt{1001\sqrt{1002\sqrt{1003\sqrt{1004...}}}}[/tex]


Homework Equations


exponential and surd


The Attempt at a Solution


I tried to square it but didn't find any patterns because the radicands are not the same. Help...

Thanks

Here is a suggestion which I have actually tried---and it works. Look at successive approximations: let S[1](x) = sqrt(x), S[2](x) = sqrt(x*S[1](x)),... S[n+1](x) = sqrt(x*S[n](x)),.. and compute S[1](x),..., S[n](x) numerically for a few values of x and for n up to about 20-30; for example, you could use a spreadsheet. The results may surprise you, as they did me. The answer for lim_{n->infinity}S[n](1001) is then clear, which may then help in finding a way to prove it. It is always easier to prove something when you know what you are looking for.

RGV
 
  • #4


Ray Vickson said:
Here is a suggestion which I have actually tried---and it works. Look at successive approximations: let S[1](x) = sqrt(x), S[2](x) = sqrt(x*S[1](x)),... S[n+1](x) = sqrt(x*S[n](x)),.. and compute S[1](x),..., S[n](x) numerically for a few values of x and for n up to about 20-30; for example, you could use a spreadsheet. The results may surprise you, as they did me. The answer for lim_{n->infinity}S[n](1001) is then clear, which may then help in finding a way to prove it. It is always easier to prove something when you know what you are looking for.

RGV

That's always a good first strategy. The numerical approach at first APPEARS to converge to 1002 to a good approximation. Which would be surprising! But I don't think that's actually the limit. It's a bit less than 1002. I really don't think this is a function you can compute analytically. It would be interesting to be shown it could, though. You CAN show it does converge using lanedance's suggestion. And you CAN write a numerical approximation to the answer. But I think that's all you can do.
 
Last edited:
  • #5


As Lanedance suggested, the expression can be written in the form

[tex]\prod_1^n{(1000+k)^{\frac{1}{2^k}}}[/tex].

Taking the logarithm, it is a series and some of the convergence-criteria can be applied to show that it is convergent or not, and can find a lower limit.

ehild
 
  • #6


ehild said:
As Lanedance suggested, the expression can be written in the form

[tex]\prod_1^n{(1000+k)^{\frac{1}{2^k}}}[/tex].

Taking the logarithm, it is a series and some of the convergence-criteria can be applied to show that it is convergent or not, and can find a lower limit.

ehild

Sir, shouldn't the exponent be ( 1 / 2k ) ?

If not so, could you please elaborate.

Thanks.
 
  • #7


We need powers of 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, etc.

sqrt(sqrt(sqrt(x))) = x to the power 1/8
 
  • #8


I think the answer lies in the finding of f(x)

where

f**2(x-1) = ( x-1 ) * f(x)

f squared of (x-1 ) equals ( x minus 1 ) times ( f of x )

f(x-1) * f(x-1) = (x-1) * f(x)

if we can solve this equation and find f(x)

We can then plug in the value x=1001

and find out what f(1001) is.
 
  • #9


Dick said:
That's always a good first strategy. The numerical approach at first APPEARS to converge to 1002 to a good approximation. Which would be surprising! But I don't think that's actually the limit. It's a bit less than 1002. I really don't think this is a function you can compute analytically. It would be interesting to be shown it could, though. You CAN show it does converge using lanedance's suggestion. And you CAN write a numerical approximation to the answer. But I think that's all you can do.

If S(x) = sqrt(x*sqrt(x+1)*sqrt(... ))), taking logarithms gives L(x) = lnS(x) = sum_{k=0..infinity} ln(k+x)/2^(k+1). The ratio test show that the series is convergent for any x > 0. We can get good numerical values for L(x) just by taking many terms, in a simple spreadsheet or programmable hand-held calculator. For example, by performing an error analysis on the infinite series we are guaranteed that taking 41 terms (sum_{k=0..40}) gives more than full 6-decimal accuracy for S(1001) = exp(L(1001)).

RGV
 
Last edited:
  • #10


Just for fun I download the mpmath package for Python. The following is the evaluation for [strike]7000[/strike] 6999 terms at 1200 dp precision. :smile:

Code:
from mpmath import mp

mp.dps=1200
s=mp.mpf(0)
p2=mp.mpf(2)

for k in range(1,7000) :
    x=mp.mpf(1000+k)
    s=s+mp.log(x)/p2
    p2=p2+p2

print mp.exp(s)

Code:
1001.99900397913691898234439715244344613729998738717041977274676200148199509558817554545417076124318480940610680361311614854981603236455318607100162785113625170638256422574541347581096615035978851664139085456338883594740422731293953208208144172243868905270361292059529263885996278587885993677025105711750619813487545990403024502836716136675785661195184541807980681958180327723191234228986168561284824245851495221985327190918407653825883156881071095089445088055616086340359845081535782146671200814749246453040284862549740844129680298559371650374132490575305619530188927496517152722612153193833757754310883347426813571188377508484422925408646686318012394719790714830903494186462930528915274650314653701307950669845027675076978273020036611482127244665921724832927562221042065147872776648580806362571880958572257635842221805174250500907725156069329281841466085876234699317471711743482677662082232151927374650792614369602453252418264601925148261436388726832874441122942437367419289549047172944608662444481832971555133410691363743174251382431045383895821360549236143488774247447599308457363870075777157976111773915678002918789458376189266258999122256218899692315961897948080517046667533746089790257098403498
 
  • #11


You can also use the power series expansion of log(1+x) to start writing the expression in terms of powers of n=1000. n*exp(2/n-6/(2n^2)+...). The n*exp(2/n) part shows you why the result is close to 1002.
 
  • #12


It is easy to find a lower and an upper bound for the original expression, S.

The logarithm of the original expression is

[itex]L=ln(S)=\sum_1^{\infty}ln(1000+k)(\frac{1}{2})^k[/itex]

[itex]L>ln(1000+1)\sum_1^{\infty}(\frac{1}{2})^k=ln(1001)[/itex], so S>1001.

To find an upper bound, multiply L by 2 and subtract L.

[itex]2L=ln(1001)+\sum_1^{\infty}ln(1001+k)(\frac{1}{2})^k[/itex]

[itex]2L-L=ln(1001)+\sum_1^{\infty}ln(\frac{1001+k}{1000+k})(\frac{1}{2})^k[/itex]

[itex]ln(\frac{1001+k}{1000+k})=ln(1+\frac{1}{1000+k})<ln(1.001)[/itex],

[itex]L<ln1001+ln1.001\sum_1^{\infty}(\frac{1}{2})^k=ln1001+ln1.001=ln(1002.001)[/itex]

S<1002.001

ehild
 

1. What is the square root of the square root of the square root of the square root of a number?

The square root of the square root of the square root of the square root of a number is equal to the number itself. This is because taking the square root four times cancels out the square root operation, leaving the original number.

2. Can the square root of the square root of the square root of a negative number be real?

No, the square root of a negative number is not a real number. This is because when taking the square root of a negative number, the result is an imaginary number.

3. How do you simplify a square root within a square root within a square root?

To simplify a square root within a square root within a square root, you can use the property of multiplying square roots: √(a√b) = √a * √b. This allows you to break down the nested square roots into individual square roots and simplify them separately.

4. Is the square root of the square root of the square root of a number always a smaller number?

Not necessarily. The square root of a number can be smaller or larger than the original number, depending on the value of the number. For example, the square root of the square root of 16 is 2, which is smaller than 16, but the square root of the square root of 0.25 is 0.5, which is larger than 0.25.

5. What is the difference between a square root and a square root within a square root?

A square root, represented by the symbol √, is a mathematical operation that finds the number that, when multiplied by itself, gives the original number. A square root within a square root, on the other hand, is a nested operation where the square root symbol is used multiple times, indicating that the operation is being applied multiple times. For example, √(√x) is a square root within a square root, whereas √x is a single square root.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
766
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
Back
Top