What is the sum of a finite series with a constant p and variable n?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the summation of a finite series characterized by a constant exponent \( p \) and a variable \( n \). Participants explore the nature of series that do not fit traditional classifications such as arithmetic, geometric, or p-series.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants inquire about methods to sum a finite series with a single coefficient and an exponent, questioning the existence of formulas for various values of \( p \). Some mention the concept of telescoping series, while others express uncertainty about how to approach the problem.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants sharing insights about specific series and the complexity of deriving formulas for different values of \( p \). There is acknowledgment of the challenges in finding a general formula, particularly for non-integer values of \( p \).

Contextual Notes

Participants note that for certain integer values of \( p \), results can be derived, but as \( p \) increases, the complexity of the formulas grows significantly. There is also mention of the lack of known formulas for fractional values of \( p \).

Luke77
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Just wondering, is there a way to sort of "collapse" a finite series (to get the sum) that isn't classified as arithmetic, geometric or a p-series.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since you use the word "collapse", there is always the "collapsing" or "telescoping series". For example, it is easy to show that the series [tex]\sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{n^2+ n}[/tex] sums to [itex]1- 1/(n+1)[/itex]. That is because, using "partial fractions", we can rewrite [tex]\frac{1}{n^2+ n}= \frac{1}{n}- \frac{1}{n+1}[/tex] so that each "1/k" term reappears as "-1/(k+1)" and cancels. The only terms that survive are the first, 1, and the last, -1/(n+1).
 
Luke77 said:
Just wondering, is there a way to sort of "collapse" a finite series (to get the sum) that isn't classified as arithmetic, geometric or a p-series.

What kind of a series are you solving?
 
I'm solving a series with just one coefficient, n, and an exponent. I'm aware that I can bring the coefficient "through" the integral and solve from there but I don't know what sort of formula to use.
I also know I can just write it out.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Since you use the word "collapse", there is always the "collapsing" or "telescoping series". For example, it is easy to show that the series [tex]\sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{n^2+ n}[/tex] sums to [itex]1- 1/(n+1)[/itex]. That is because, using "partial fractions", we can rewrite [tex]\frac{1}{n^2+ n}= \frac{1}{n}- \frac{1}{n+1}[/tex] so that each "1/k" term reappears as "-1/(k+1)" and cancels. The only terms that survive are the first, 1, and the last, -1/(n+1).

I was hoping you would bring that up. For some reason, I really like telescoping series, but my series doesn't fall under it's description.
 
Luke77 said:
I'm solving a series with just one coefficient, n, and an exponent. I'm aware that I can bring the coefficient "through" the integral and solve from there but I don't know what sort of formula to use.
I also know I can just write it out.

What, exactly, is the series? Is it [itex]S_p = \sum_{n=1}^N n^p,[/itex], or is it something else? It the series I wrote is the one you want, you are out of luck: for general p there is NO formula (although, of course, for integers p = 0,1,2,3, and a few more, you can derive results). However, the results get increasingly complicated as p increases. For example, when p = 3 we get
[tex]S_3 = \frac{1}{4} N^2 (n+1)^2,[/tex]
but for p = 10 we get
[tex]S_{10} = \frac{1}{66} N(N+1)(2N+1)(N^2-N-1)(3N^6+9N^5+2N^4 -11N^3 +3N^2 +10N-5),[/tex]
and it gets worse for larger p.

RGV
 
Luke77 said:
I'm solving a series with just one coefficient, n, and an exponent. I'm aware that I can bring the coefficient "through" the integral and solve from there but I don't know what sort of formula to use.
I also know I can just write it out.

What, exactly, is the series? Is it [itex]S_p = \sum_{n=1}^N n^p,[/itex], or is it something else? It the series I wrote is the one you want, you are out of luck: for general p there is NO formula (although, of course, for integers p = 0,1,2,3---that are not really large---you can derive results). However, the results get increasingly complicated as p increases. For example, when p = 3 we get
[tex]S_3 = \frac{1}{4} N^2 (N+1)^2,[/tex]
but for p = 10 we get
[tex]S_{10} = \frac{1}{66} N(N+1)(2N+1)(N^2-N-1)(3N^6+9N^5+2N^4 -11N^3 +3N^2 +10N-5),[/tex]
and it gets worse for larger p. For fractional values of p, such as p = 1/2, etc., there are no known formulas. Basically, when we have such a series with known numerical values of N and p we just evaluate the sum numerically.

RGV
 
Yes, it is the series you wrote: p stays the same, n is the term.
Thanks everyone.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
4K