• Grubberfly 🔮@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    3 months ago

    tbf, the 2nd sum is exactly the first one just multiplied by 1/2. though i get that the progression is natural, even, and odd.

    the last one is definitely odd puzzling, but i cannot intuitively get the first one. how does summing the inverse of triangular number equal 2?

    • Buglefingers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I believe starting with 1/1 which equals 1, you are then adding infinitely (fractions) on top of the 1. So 1, then 1 1/2, ect, so the next full integer to be hit (infinitely down the line) would be 2.

      I don’t do high level math so I hope this explanation is correct or intelligible, this is just how I understand it intuitively

      • yetAnotherUser
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        But the first few values are:

        1 + 1/3 + 1/6 + 1/10 + 1/15 + 1/21 + 1/28…

        I really don’t see any pattern there showing why it converges to 2 exactly

        Edit:

        After thinking some more, you could write the sum as:

        (Sum from n=1 to infinity of): 2/(n * (n + 1))

        That sum is smaller than the sum of:

        2 * (1/n2) which converges to π2/3

        So I can see why it converges, just not where to.

        • Bender_on_Fire@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          I didn’t see the pattern either and had to look it up. Apparently, you can rewrite 1 + 1/(1+2) + 1/(1+2+3)+… as 2(1 - 1/2 + 1/2 - 1/3 +…+1/n - 1/(n + 1)) = 2(1 - 1/(n + 1))

          From there, the limit of 2 is obvious, but I guess you just have to build up intuition with infinite sums to see the reformulation.

        • Buglefingers@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          So the amount you are adding is getting smaller with each iteration, 1/4 is smaller than 1/2, however you are still adding 1/4 on top of the 1/2, and those two are combined, closer to “1” than either of them independently correct? (1/2 +1/4 =1/3. 1/3>1/2)

          So if the number gets bigger forever than at some point it will eventually hit “1”, since we already started with “1” the next “1” will be “2”

          I hope I’m explaining it well enough, it’s similar to how 3.33(repeating)x3…=10 (though technically for different reasons)

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s not saying the proof is obvious, just that the result is plausible on its face.

      • AernaLingus [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Written a bit more explicitly (although I kinda handwaved away the final term–the point is that you end up with one unpaired term which goes to zero)

        edit: I was honestly confused about how exactly this related to the question, but seeing the comment from @yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de (not visible from Hexbear) which showed that the first sum in the image is equivalent to

        the sum from n = 1 to ∞ of 2/(n * (n + 1))

        made things clear (just take the above, put 2 in the numerator, and you get a result of 2)