Summation of sin(pi*n/2)/2: Is the Execution Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mr-feeno
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convergence
mr-feeno
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}sin(\frac{\pi*n}{2})/{2}I don't have a solution, and wondered if the execution is correct.

The Attempt at a Solution


I thought that one can use comparison test where; \sum b_n= \frac{1}{n^{1/2}}.
Since p<1 ---> divergent. But many of the students says it converges. Some suggestions?

We know that the series is alternating, and if I use its test I get that it converges. Reckon that perhaps the fault lies there?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's define a function that's related to that series:

##f(x) = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}sin(\frac{n\pi x}{2})## .

Now obviously the sum of the original series, if it exists, is ##f(1)##. Is the expression of ##f(x)## the Fourier series of some function that you know?

EDIT1: This might help: http://functions.wolfram.com/GeneralizedFunctions/DiracDelta/06/01/

Is the Dirac delta an acceptable function in the sense of rigorous mathematics?

EDIT2: Also, if a sum of terms ##a_k## is convergent, what can we tell about the limit of the sequence ##(a_k)## when ##k \rightarrow \infty## ?
 
Last edited:
mr-feeno said:

Homework Statement


\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}sin(\frac{\pi*n}{2})/{2}I don't have a solution, and wondered if the execution is correct.

The Attempt at a Solution


I thought that one can use comparison test where; \sum b_n= \frac{1}{n^{1/2}}.
Since p<1 ---> divergent. But many of the students says it converges. Some suggestions?

We know that the series is alternating, and if I use its test I get that it converges. Reckon that perhaps the fault lies there?

Well, the actual terms for ##n = 2,3,4, \ldots## are 0, -1/2, 0, 1/2, 0, -1/2, 0, 1/2, 0, ... . Do you think those terms give a convergent series?
 
hilbert2 said:
Maybe in the sense of Cesaro summability...

I would rather that the OP have a good grasp of ordinary convergence/divergence before exploring more arcane topics like cesaro or Abel or ... summability.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top