mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Fun Stuff > Puzzles

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-03-26, 17:57   #1
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

23·727 Posts
Default Is (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ...) less than (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ...) ?

Is (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ...) less than (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ...) ?

It would seem not.

Because 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ... = -1/12
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-I6XTVZXww

I'm not sure if making a comparison like the above is valid. Perhaps I misunderstand comparisons of infinite sequences?
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-26, 19:06   #2
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

2·1,787 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
Is (1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ...) less than (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ...) ?

It would seem not.

Because 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ... = -1/12
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-I6XTVZXww

I'm not sure if making a comparison like the above is valid. Perhaps I misunderstand comparisons of infinite sequences?
Of course, the series as written do not converge, so simply taken at face value the question is nonsense.

One can assign values to the sums by misusing formulas. The value -1/12 assigned to 1 + 2 + 3 + ... is a case in point. We have

\zeta(s)\;=\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n^{-s}\text{, when }\Re(s)\;>\;1

The zeta function is defined at s = 0 and at s = -1 (though is not given by the above series at those points), taking the values -1/2 and -1/12, respectively.

Cheerfully disregarding the invalidity of the formula, mindlessly plugging in s = 0 gives

1 + 1 + 1 + ... ad infinitum = -1/2

and plugging s = -1 into the formula gives

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ... ad infinitum = -1/12.

And -1/2 < -1/12.

:-D

Last fiddled with by Dr Sardonicus on 2020-03-26 at 19:09 Reason: Rephrasing
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-26, 19:27   #3
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

23×727 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
Of course, the series as written do not converge, so simply taken at face value the question is nonsense.

One can assign values to the sums by misusing formulas. The value -1/12 assigned to 1 + 2 + 3 + ... is a case in point. We have

\zeta(s)\;=\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n^{-s}\text{, when }\Re(s)\;>\;1

The zeta function is defined at s = 0 and at s = -1 (though is not given by the above series at those points), taking the values -1/2 and -1/12, respectively.

Cheerfully disregarding the invalidity of the formula, mindlessly plugging in s = 0 gives

1 + 1 + 1 + ... ad infinitum = -1/2

and plugging s = -1 into the formula gives

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ... ad infinitum = -1/12.

And -1/2 < -1/12.

:-D
Very good.

If we assign:

A = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ...
B = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ...

Then B - A = B, since pairwise subtraction gives 0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + ... = 1 + 2 + 3 + ...

Therefore A = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ... = 0
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-26, 19:44   #4
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

2·1,787 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
Very good.

If we assign:

A = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ...
B = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ...

Then B - A = B, since pairwise subtraction gives 0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + ... = 1 + 2 + 3 + ...

Therefore A = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ... = 0
OTOH, we have

1 + A = A

Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-26, 19:50   #5
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

10110101110002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
OTOH, we have

1 + A = A

And B - A - 1 = B

Last fiddled with by retina on 2020-03-26 at 19:52 Reason: typo
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-27, 13:09   #6
wpolly
 
wpolly's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
Vienna, Austria

3338 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
Very good.

If we assign:

A = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ...
B = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + ...

Then B - A = B, since pairwise subtraction gives 0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + ... = 1 + 2 + 3 + ...

Therefore A = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ... = 0

Sadly, in the regime of regularized sums, we no longer have 0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + ... = 1 + 2 + 3 + ...
wpolly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-27, 13:31   #7
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

23×727 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wpolly View Post
Sadly, in the regime of regularized sums, we no longer have 0 + 1 + 2 + 3 + ... = 1 + 2 + 3 + ...
How come?
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-04-01, 15:41   #8
kriesel
 
kriesel's Avatar
 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

2·2,309 Posts
Default

Let A = 1 + 1 + 1 + ...
and A(i) = 1, defined for i a positive integer
Let B = 1 + 2 +3 + ...
and B(i) = i, defined for i a positive integer
Sum(B)=(i^2+i)/2
sum(A) = i
Sum(B)/sum(a) = (i^2+i)/2 / i = (i+1)/2
i=inf
Sum(B)/sum(A) = inf/2

Sum (Ai/Bi) = 1/i: sum is 1 + log i ~ log i
Sum (Bi/Ai) = i; sum is ( i^2 + i ) /2
limit as i->inf of Sum(Bi/Ai) / Sum (Ai/Bi) = (i^2 + i) /2 /(1+log i) ~inf^2/log(inf)/2

The value of S1 = 1-1+1-1... is not 0.5, the average of an even number of terms.
It has no single value. It's 0,1,0,1,... for sums of 0 or more terms. It's a biased square wave. It has DC amplitude 0.5 and AC amplitude 0.5.
The hand-wave in the video is literal and telling.

A series is bounded at the low end of the list, like a semi-infinite line or finite line. Terms preceding the first element are not zero, they are nonexistent and therefore undefined. Zero is a value; they have no value.

Summing two copies of S2, with one shifted, introduces an undefined term into the sum, not a zero:
S2 = 1 - 2 + 3 - 4 ...
S2a = undef + 1 - 2 + 3 - 4 ...
S2+S2a = (1-undef) -1 +1 -1 +1 ...

One could play the same trick with S1 to cancel the AC component
S1 = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 ...
S1'= undef + 1 - 1 + 1 ...
S1+S1' = 1-undef + 0 +0 +0...
and get the result 2 * S1 = 1 so S1 = 1/2 if ignoring the undef problem and the fact S1 and S1' are different series.

And shift S1 the other way ignoring one first term (half-cycle):
S1"= - 1 + 1 - 1 ...
s1 = 1 - 1 + 1 ...
2 S1 = 0; S1 = 0
But 2 S1 = 1 from earlier, so 1 = 0.

In the S2 portion of the video, there's a sleight of hand in discarding zero terms.
The series obtained is 0 4 0 8 0 12 ...
which is reduced in the video to the series 4 8 12 ...
which seems to rescale it on the "time" axis and omit some terms, drastically changing it into a staircase series. That changes the values of initial terms from 0 4 0 8 0 12 to 4 8 12 16 20 24, and the partial sums from 24 to 84 for equal number of initial terms. Making a series out of the nonzero elements of the series 0 4 0 8 0 12 ... creates a new different series.

Going back to the originals, series A and B, apply L'Hopital's rule.
g = sumA(i) = i; g' = 1
f = sumB(i) = (i^2+i)/2; f' = i + 1/2

f(inf)/g(inf) = lim f'(i) / g'(i) = (i + 1/2) / 1 = i + 1/2 = inf.
Series B is not only greater than series A, it is INFINITELY greater. Numerator and denominator are both positive.
https://math.hmc.edu/calculus/hmc-ma...hopitals-rule/

Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2020-04-01 at 15:51
kriesel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-04-01, 15:48   #9
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

132708 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kriesel View Post
<snip>
Series B is not only greater than series A, it is INFINITELY greater. Numerator and denominator are both positive.
Good job.

Now we have two answers.

A > B, and
B > A

Anyone want to speculate now that A = B?
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-04-01, 16:01   #10
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

23·191 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
Anyone want to speculate now that A = B?
Sure! They look like exactly the same size of infinity to me.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-04-01, 16:07   #11
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

10110101110002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
Sure! They look like exactly the same size of infinity to me.
Good job.

Now, anyone to suggest that they are uncomparable and all the above answers are meaningless?

Why are infinities so confusing?
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


All times are UTC. The time now is 01:36.

Tue Oct 27 01:36:49 UTC 2020 up 46 days, 22:47, 0 users, load averages: 2.25, 2.00, 1.87

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.