StevenJacobs990
- 16
- 0
n
∑ 3
k=0
How does this make sense when k=0?
∑ 3
k=0
How does this make sense when k=0?
The discussion clarifies the summation rules for constant values, specifically addressing the case when the lower bound of the summation index is zero. It establishes that the sum of a constant, such as 3, from k=0 to n results in 3(n+1). Additionally, it confirms that the lower bound does not affect the total count of terms, as illustrated by the example of summing from k=-1, which yields 3(n+2). The general formula for summation is succinctly summarized as ∑k=ab c = c (b-a+1).
PREREQUISITESMathematicians, educators, students studying calculus or algebra, and anyone interested in understanding summation rules and their applications.
Oh okay. The lower bound is the index origin and doesn't matter if it is negative?Gene Naden said:The sum is ##3+3+...=3(n+1)##
i.e. one is counting fence posts, not sections of wire.DrClaude said:To summarise,
$$
\sum_{k=a}^{b} c = c (b-a+1)
$$
for constant ##c##.