# fp2 ln(1+x) mclaurin series question

#1
As I have marked in the attachment, the book shows that the rth term of the series is (xto the power r)/r but this means if we substitute r as 0 the term is undefined?

Is the book still right?

My second question: I can see the series is valid for x>-1 because ln (1-1) =ln 0 but how can I tell the series is valid for x<1?
0
6 years ago
#2
(Original post by thebrahmabull)
As I have marked in the attachment, the book shows that the rth term of the series is (xto the power r)/r but this means if we substitute r as 0 the term is undefined?

Is the book still right?

My second question: I can see the series is valid for x>-1 because ln (1-1) =ln 0 but how can I tell the series is valid for x<1?
The series will diverge for , but converges for .
You could do so by noting that , which you can express as the sum of a GP, and infer from there that the given series is convergent for and check as special cases.
0
6 years ago
#3
(Original post by thebrahmabull)
As I have marked in the attachment, the book shows that the rth term of the series is (xto the power r)/r but this means if we substitute r as 0 the term is undefined?

Is the book still right?

My second question: I can see the series is valid for x>-1 because ln (1-1) =ln 0 but how can I tell the series is valid for x<1?
The first term is x and the next involves x^2 so the general term only applies from r=1 onwards, so r will never equal 0
1
X

new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

### Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Why not re-start the conversation?

see more

### See more of what you like onThe Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

### Poll

Join the discussion

Yes (68)
66.02%
No (26)
25.24%
I didn't use it to prepare (9)
8.74%