x Turn on thread page Beta
 You are Here: Home >< Maths

Does this need Abel's theorem? watch

1. Prove

What theorem do I need for this?
2. No theorem needed (theorems would generally tell you whether or not a series converges, but not what it converges to). There's a trick for these sorts of sums. Consider the expansion . How can you manipulate this to help you? (it might help you to write out your sum more fully). Hint below:

Spoiler:
Show
You're allowed to differentiate/integrate, multiply through by things...
3. (Original post by Daniel Freedman)
No theorem needed (theorems would generally tell you whether or not a series converges, but not what it converges to). There's a trick for these sorts of sums. Consider the expansion . How can you manipulate this to help you? (it might help you to write out your sum more fully). Hint below:

Spoiler:
Show
You're allowed to differentiate/integrate, multiply through by things...
Okay so I got that to be

I let x = 2 =>

How do I move on from this?
4. Also I tried just putting x = 1/2 into the equation you gave but that didn't yield the right result!
5. Firstly, remember that the series only converges for |x| < 1, so you cant let x = 2.

Substituting in an appropriate value should be the final thing you do. First, you need to manipulate to make it look more like your series. What happens if you differentiate it?
6. (Original post by Daniel Freedman)
First, you need to manipulate to make it look more like your series. What happens if you differentiate it?
You need to justify why you can differentiate term-by-term and get the same result as differentiating the expression for the sum.
7. (Original post by Daniel Freedman)
Firstly, remember that the series only converges for |x| < 1, so you cant let x = 2.

Substituting in an appropriate value should be the final thing you do. First, you need to manipulate to make it look more like your series. What happens if you differentiate it?
This gets

How do I get this to become (I assume) ?
8. You don't need to. Set x = 1/2.
9. (Original post by DFranklin)
You don't need to. Set x = 1/2.
Almost there

=>

there seems to be a sign error but I can't find it!
10. You've differentiated wrongly. (You get one minus from the ^-1 exponent, and another because it's (1-x), not (1+x)).

Note that this is still NOT a valid proof in an analysis sense - you can't differentiate an infinite series term by term without justification.
11. (Original post by Dagnabbit)
Prove

What theorem do I need for this?
Don't you just use proof by mathematical induction?I.e. Let n=1, if true then we can say is also true for n=k, then you prove it works for n=k+1, thus true for any value.
12. (Original post by ConorMC)
Don't you just use proof by mathematical induction?I.e. Let n=1, if true then we can say is also true for n=k, then you prove it works for n=k+1, thus true for any value.
No. You can use induction to prove something works for finite cases, but this does not directly carry through to the infinite case.

In this case, we don't even have a statement of the result for the finite case. A valid way of proving the desired result is to find the result for the finite case, prove it by induction, and then examine what happens as the number of terms goes to infinity. Unfortunately, the finite result is more complicated than the infinite one.
13. (Original post by ConorMC)
Don't you just use proof by mathematical induction?I.e. Let n=1, if true then we can say is also true for n=k, then you prove it works for n=k+1, thus true for any value.
We have no way of knowing it's true for n = 1 though!
14. (Original post by DFranklin)
You've differentiated wrongly. (You get one minus from the ^-1 exponent, and another because it's (1-x), not (1+x)).

Note that this is still NOT a valid proof in an analysis sense - you can't differentiate an infinite series term by term without justification.
Ah, yep, cheers muchly!

Would it help if we assumed the series converged uniformly for |x| < 1?
15. (Original post by Dagnabbit)
Would it help if we assumed the series converged uniformly for |x| < 1?
Well, if you're going to assume stuff, why not just assume the result? (You are actually OK if the differentiated series converges uniformly, but it's not incredibly obvious).
16. (Original post by DFranklin)
Well, if you're going to assume stuff, why not just assume the result? (You are actually OK if the differentiated series converges uniformly, but it's not incredibly obvious).
I think this is what Abel's theorem might be about, I'll read up on it a bit. Cheers for help
17. (Original post by Dagnabbit)
I think this is what Abel's theorem might be about, I'll read up on it a bit.
No, it isn't. (The point you are interested in isn't on the radius of convergence, so you don't need Abel).
18. (Original post by DFranklin)
No, it isn't. (The point you are interested in isn't on the radius of convergence, so you don't need Abel).
Is it something that can be tackled in second year analysis?
19. (Original post by Dagnabbit)
Is it something that can be tackled in second year analysis?
First year, even.

If you have the theorem that a power series can be differentiated term by term within it's radius of convergence, you can use that.

Otherwise, define

You can find S_n(x) explicitly by considering S_n(x) - xS_n(x). (You get a GP with a couple of extra terms at beginning/end).
20. (Original post by DFranklin)
First year, even.

...
I used Weierstrass' M-test which seems to work

Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: March 28, 2011
Today on TSR

Loughborough better than Cambridge

Loughborough at number one

Poll
Useful resources

Make your revision easier

Maths Forum posting guidelines

Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

How to use LaTex

Writing equations the easy way

Study habits of A* students

Top tips from students who have already aced their exams

Create your own Study Planner

Never miss a deadline again

Thinking about a maths degree?

Chat with other maths applicants

Can you help? Study help unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE