Taylor Series: Show Terms Decay as 1/n^2

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating that the Taylor series of (1+cx)ln(1+x) has terms that decay as 1/n^2 with an appropriate choice of constant c. A participant acknowledges the known decay of ln(1+x) as 1/n but struggles to show the desired result. There is also a side conversation about forum etiquette, with one user apologizing for being snappy and expressing a welcoming attitude towards newcomers. The thread highlights the importance of understanding series expansion and decay rates in mathematical analysis. Overall, the conversation emphasizes both the mathematical inquiry and the community dynamics within the forum.
optics101
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Show that, with an appropriate choice of constant c, the taylor series of

(1+cx)ln(1+x)

has terms which decay as 1/n^2

I know that ln(1+x) decays as 1/n, but I don't know how to show the above. Please help.

Thanks in advance
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It's against the forum rules to post the exactly same question in two different subforums. You should delete one of them.
 
My apologies, I am just beginning to use this forum. I did not know how to delete them, so I just cleared the content within the others.
 
The other copies are now deleted.
 
optics101 said:
My apologies, I am just beginning to use this forum. I did not know how to delete them, so I just cleared the content within the others.

By the way, welcome to the forum and I'm sorry I got a bit snippy there. I tend to do that (this is not a forum for the thinskinned) without thinking about significant things like, hey you're new here.

What's even worse is that after giving you a hard time I can't even answer your question. Fortunately for you, not everyone here is as useless as I am.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top