What is the formula for finding the sum of a Geometric Series?

ssjSolidSnake
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm having trouble finding the sequence's total sum from a formula concerning Geometric Series.
I've been using a calculator to find and manually input all of the terms into a table in Microsoft Excel and adding them all up at the end. The formula that I was given was \overline{10}\sum\underline{1}4(1/2)^n-1

The total sum that I found was 7.992188, but it was incorrect.

Can anyone help me find the Series Sum?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Can you express the question a little more precisely? I can't make sense of the overline 10, the underline 1, and where the rest of the formula is supposed to go. Please either use proper TeX code, or don't use it at all and write it out clearly and unambiguously. For example,
10 \sum_{n = 0}^\infty \frac{1}{4} \left( \frac{1}{2} \right)^{n - 1}
or
10 * (sum from n = 0 to infinity)[ (1/4) (1/2)^(n - 1) ]
 
Sorry about that. I'm not familiar with LaTex so I will attempt to state my problem as clearly as possible. (sum from n=1 to 10) [ 4(1/2)^(n - 1) ]

Thanks for the advice CompuChip
 
It looks like you have a finite geometric series.

sum(0,N) an = (1-aN+1)/(1-a)

You should be able to do the rest
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary pythagorus'
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