Difference between revisions of "Infinite Series"
(Added additional video links) |
|||
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | A ''series'' is the sum of a sequence of terms. An ''infinite series'' is the sum of an infinite number of terms (the actual sum of the series need not be infinite, as we will see below). | ||
+ | |||
+ | While there is usually some pattern in the terms being added, technically a series can be the sum of ''any'' sequence of terms: | ||
+ | :<math>1+2+\pi+\cos\tfrac{\pi}{12}+e+\ldots</math> | ||
+ | The problem with the above series is, it is not at all clear what the next term of the series would be, nor any subsequent ones. To say anything useful about the series, there needs to be a clear pattern. Two such patterns seen in sequences that also appear in the study of series are called ''arithmetic'' and ''geometric''. | ||
+ | |||
+ | An ''arithmetic series'' is the sum of a sequence of terms having a ''common difference'' (i.e., the difference between consecutive terms is always the same). For example, | ||
+ | :<math>1+4+7+10+13+\dots</math> | ||
+ | is an arithmetic series with common difference 3, since <math>a_2-a_1=3</math>, <math>a_3-a_2=3</math>, and so forth. Unlike the first series above, this series has a clear pattern. It is obvious that the next term of the series is 16, and then 19, and so on. | ||
+ | |||
+ | A ''geometric series'' is the sum of a sequence of terms having a ''common ratio'' (i.e., the ratio between consecutive terms is always the same). For example, | ||
+ | :<math>1+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{8}+\frac{1}{16}+\ldots</math> | ||
+ | is a geometric series with common ratio <math>\tfrac{1}{2}</math>, since <math>a_2/a_1=\tfrac{1}{2}</math>, <math>a_3/a_2=\tfrac{1}{2}</math>, and so forth. As before, there is a definite pattern, and the next term of the series is clearly <math>\tfrac{1}{32}</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Summation notation == | ||
+ | |||
+ | ''Summation notation'' provides a compact way of writing an infinite series. The arithmetic series above can be written | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} [1+3(n-1)]</math> | ||
+ | or, more simply | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (3n-2).</math> | ||
+ | The symbol on the left is a Sigma (the Greek letter for capital "S", standing for "Sum"); it is also known as a ''summation symbol''. Along with the expressions above and below the Sigma, it is read: | ||
+ | :"The sum, as <math>n</math> goes from 1 to infinity, of..." | ||
+ | |||
+ | The algebraic expression on the right is the ''n''th term of the series, and is often generically called "<math>a_n</math>", as is also done with sequences. This means that the sum could have been written a bit more verbosely (and perhaps more <span id="pedantically">pedantically</span>) as | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} a_n \mbox{, where } a_n=3n-2,</math> | ||
+ | a form that more explicitly reflects the idea that a series is the sum of a sequence of terms. (The expression <math>a_n=3n-2</math> by itself defines the sequence of terms, but note that it is a bit ambiguous since it's not clear without additional context whether the sequence starts at <math>n=1</math> or <math>n=0</math>, or indeed any other value. Incidentally, the first summation formula above, which might have seemed a bit strange at first, came from the formula for the ''n''th term of an arithmetic sequence, which you probably first learned in algebra class: <math>a_n=a_1+d(n-1)</math>.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | To verify that this summation formula represents the same sum as in the previous section, we simply evaluate the algebraic expression (<math>a_n</math>) for the first value of <math>n</math> (in this case, 1), then the next value (2), and so forth: | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (3n-2) = [3(1)-2]+[3(2)-2]+[3(3)-2]+\ldots = 1+4+7+\ldots</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | As for the geometric series, it should be easy to verify the representation | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^{n-1}}</math> | ||
+ | or, equivalently | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{n-1}.</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Non-uniqueness of summation notation === | ||
+ | |||
+ | Note that the representation of a series in summation notation is not unique, even ignoring simple algebraic rewrites. All of the sums seen so far have started at <math>n=1</math>, as is usually the convention adopted for sequences, but we could have chosen to start the sums at any other value of <math>n</math>. In fact, it is quite common to start infinite series at <math>n=0</math>. If we follow that convention, the arithmetic series would be written | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (3n+1)</math> | ||
+ | and the geometric series would be | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^n.</math> | ||
+ | Again, these expressions should be easy to verify. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Furthermore, as with functions, the variable used in the sum (called the ''index variable'') is completely arbitrary. Thus, the following sums also represent the same series (respectively) as those above: | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} (3k+1)</math> | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{i=0}^{\infty} \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^i</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | As a result of this fact, any series can be rewritten by simply changing the starting value of the series and compensating for this change in the formula for the ''n''th term. To be specific, consider the first series above in this section. Using the substitution <math>n=m-2</math>, we get the series | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{m-2=0}^{\infty} (3[m-2]+1) = \sum_{m=2}^\infty (3m-5).</math> | ||
+ | But then the variable <math>m</math> can simply be changed back to <math>n</math> to get | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=2}^{\infty} (3n-5).</math> | ||
+ | Notice how this new series can be seen as resulting from "bumping up" the starting value of the original series by 2 and "bumping down" each <math>n</math> in the <math>a_n</math> formula by the same amount (that is, replacing each <math>n</math> by <math>n-2</math> and then simplifying). This kind of change to a series is sometimes necessary to verify a given series formula (say, when looking up the answer to an exercise in a textbook). | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Series versus sequence === | ||
+ | |||
+ | As mentioned [[#pedantically|above]], there is an important difference between an infinite series, which is the sum of an infinite number of terms, and the ''sequence'' formed by those same terms. | ||
+ | |||
+ | At the risk of being repetitive, our arithmetic series is | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (3n-2) = 1+4+7+10+\ldots,</math> | ||
+ | but the corresponding sequence of terms is | ||
+ | :<math>\{a_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty} = \{3n-2\}_{n=1}^{\infty} = 1,4,7,10,\ldots.</math> | ||
+ | It might seem silly at this point to make such a big deal out of this distinction, but it will be very important going forward not to confuse these two concepts. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Sequence of partial sums == | ||
+ | |||
+ | One special kind of sequence that is very useful to consider when studying series is the ''sequence of partial sums'', defined in the following way (assuming a starting value of 1 for the index variable) for any positive integer <math>n</math>: | ||
+ | <blockquote style="background: white; border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em;"> | ||
+ | :<math>s_n=\sum_{k=1}^{n}a_k=a_1+a_2+a_3+\ldots+a_n</math> | ||
+ | </blockquote> | ||
+ | For our arithmetic series, the sequence of partial sums is: | ||
+ | :<math>s_1 =a_1=1</math> | ||
+ | :<math>s_2 =a_1+a_2=1+4=5</math> | ||
+ | :<math>s_3 =a_1+a_2+a_3=1+4+7=12</math> | ||
+ | :<math>s_4 =a_1+a_2+a_3+a_4=1+4+7+10=22</math> | ||
+ | :<math>\ldots</math> | ||
+ | Thus | ||
+ | :<math>\left\{s_n\right\}=1,5,12,22,\ldots.</math> | ||
+ | Note how this sequence of partial sums is very different from the sequence of terms discussed in the last section! | ||
+ | |||
+ | Just as the series itself can be written more compactly in summation notation by finding the pattern in its terms, the sequence of partial sums for a series can (sometimes) also be written compactly as a function of <math>n</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | It should be easy to check that the following expression accurately represents the (first few terms of the) sequence of partial sums shown above: | ||
+ | :<math>s_n =\frac{3n^2-n}{2}</math> | ||
+ | To see where this expression came from, we first need to review some properties of sums that you probably remember from arithmetic and algebra, but might not be familiar with in summation notation. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Some properties of finite sums === | ||
+ | |||
+ | <blockquote style="background: white; border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em;"> | ||
+ | Constant factors can be factored out of (or multiplied into) finite sums: | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=1}^{n} c\,a_k=c\sum_{k=1}^{n}a_k</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Finite sums can be added and subtracted, as long as they cover the same range of values of the index variable: | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=1}^{n} a_k+\sum_{k=1}^{n}b_k=\sum_{k=1}^{n}(a_k+b_k)</math> | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=1}^{n} a_k-\sum_{k=1}^{n}b_k=\sum_{k=1}^{n}(a_k-b_k)</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Putting these two ideas together, one may show the following property for arbitrary linear combinations: | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=1}^{n} (c\,a_k+d\,b_k)=c\sum_{k=1}^{n}a_k+d\sum_{k=1}^{n}b_k</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Furthermore, there are special formulas for sums of certain simple expressions: | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=1}^{n} 1=n</math> | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=1}^{n} k=\frac{n(n+1)}{2}</math> | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=1}^{n} r^k=\frac{r(1-r^n)}{1-r}\mbox{ if }r\ne1</math> | ||
+ | </blockquote> | ||
+ | |||
+ | The first special sum formula is obvious, since it represents the sum of ''n'' copies of the number 1. You might recognize the second and third formulas from your intermediate algebra or precalculus class. | ||
+ | |||
+ | With these facts, one may derive the expression given above for the sequence of partial sums of our arithmetic sequence. | ||
+ | :<math>\begin{align} | ||
+ | \sum_{k=1}^{n} (3k-2)&=\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n} 3k\right) - \left(\sum_{k=1}^{n} 2\right) \\ | ||
+ | &=3\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n} k\right) - 2\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n} 1\right) \\ | ||
+ | &=3\left[\frac{n(n+1)}{2}\right]-2(n) \\ | ||
+ | &=\frac{3n^2+3n}{2}-\frac{4n}{2} \\ | ||
+ | s_n&=\frac{3n^2-n}{2} | ||
+ | \end{align}</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Similarly, one may derive the sequence of partial sums for the geometric series: | ||
+ | :<math>\begin{align} | ||
+ | \sum_{k=1}^{n} (\tfrac{1}{2})^{k-1} &= \sum_{k=1}^{n} (\tfrac{1}{2})^k(\tfrac{1}{2})^{-1} \\ | ||
+ | &= \sum_{k=1}^{n} (\tfrac{1}{2})^k(2) \\ | ||
+ | &= 2\sum_{k=1}^{n} (\tfrac{1}{2})^{k} \\ | ||
+ | &= 2\left(\frac{\tfrac{1}{2}[1-(\tfrac{1}{2})^n]}{1-\tfrac{1}{2}}\right) \\ | ||
+ | s_n &= 2[1-(\tfrac{1}{2})^n] | ||
+ | \end{align}</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Finding a series from its partial sums === | ||
+ | |||
+ | Using the fact that | ||
+ | :<math>s_n=a_1+a_2+\ldots+a_{n-1}+a_n=s_{n-1}+a_n,</math> | ||
+ | we see that | ||
+ | <blockquote style="background: white; border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em;"> | ||
+ | :<math>a_n=s_n-s_{n-1}.</math> | ||
+ | </blockquote> | ||
+ | This provides a way of "recovering" the original series from its sequence of partial sums. | ||
+ | |||
+ | For our arithmetic series: | ||
+ | :<math>\begin{align} | ||
+ | a_n &= s_n-s_{n-1} \\ | ||
+ | &=\left[\frac{3n^2-n}{2}\right]-\left[\frac{3(n-1)^2-(n-1)}{2}\right] \\ | ||
+ | &=\left[\frac{3n^2-n}{2}\right]-\left[\frac{3(n^2-2n+1)-(n-1)}{2}\right] \\ | ||
+ | &=\left[\frac{3n^2-n}{2}\right]-\left[\frac{3n^2-6n+3-n+1}{2}\right] \\ | ||
+ | &=\frac{3n^2-n-3n^2+6n-3+n-1}{2} \\ | ||
+ | &=\frac{6n-4}{2} \\ | ||
+ | a_n&=3n-2 | ||
+ | \end{align}</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Sum of an infinite series == | ||
+ | |||
+ | Now we can finally formally define the ''sum of an infinite series'' as the limit of its sequence of partial sums: | ||
+ | <blockquote style="background: white; border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em;"> | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} a_n=\lim_{n\to\infty}s_n</math> | ||
+ | </blockquote> | ||
+ | |||
+ | If the limit converges to a real number, say <math>s</math>, then the infinite series is said to ''converge to the sum'' <math>s</math>, or to ''be convergent with sum'' <math>s</math>. If the limit diverges (including the cases where the limit is infinity or negative infinity), then the series is said to ''diverge'' or to ''be divergent'' in the same way, and its sum is said to ''not exist'' (or to be infinity or negative infinity, as appropriate). Note that one does not describe the series itself as "not existing" when it diverges, only its sum. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Consider again the arithmetic and geometric series we have been discussing up to this point. It is obvious by simply looking at the original arithmetic series | ||
+ | :<math>1+4+7+10+13+\dots</math> | ||
+ | that it does not have a finite sum. The terms being added are themselves getting larger and larger without bound, so the sum is getting larger and larger without bound. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The sequence of partial sums given above formalizes this idea. In particular, because | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (3n-2) = \lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{3n^2-n}{2} = \infty,</math> | ||
+ | the arithmetic series diverges to infinity. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Now consider the original geometric series: | ||
+ | :<math>1+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{8}+\frac{1}{16}+\ldots</math> | ||
+ | The terms here are getting smaller and smaller, and indeed are approaching zero. Since adding zero to something doesn't change its value, it seems reasonable to suspect that the sum might be a fixed, finite number. What does the sequence of partial sums reveal? | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (\tfrac{1}{2})^{n-1} = \lim_{n\to\infty} 2[1-(\tfrac{1}{2})^n] = 2(1-0)=2</math> | ||
+ | So the geometric series does, in fact, converge to the finite sum 2. | ||
+ | |||
+ | It seems obvious that any series whose terms "blow up" to infinity (like our arithmetic series) will diverge, but does every series whose terms shrink to zero (like our geometric series) converge to a finite sum? It turns out the answer to that question is no. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Harmonic series === | ||
+ | |||
+ | There is a very important series whose sequence of terms goes to zero and yet the series diverges because the sequence of ''partial sums'' diverges to infinity. It is called the ''harmonic series'': | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n}</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Obviously the terms of this series go to zero: | ||
+ | :<math>\lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{1}{n}=0</math> | ||
+ | But what about the sequence of partial sums? For convenience sake, we consider not the ''n''th partial sum but the <math>2^n</math>th partial sum, then group the terms in a clever way, and find a lower bound for each group of terms: | ||
+ | :<math>\begin{matrix} | ||
+ | \displaystyle{\sum_{k=1}^{2^n} \frac{1}{k}} &= 1+{} &\underbrace{\frac{1}{2}}_{\text{group }1} &+ &\underbrace{\frac{1}{3}+\frac{1}{4}}_{\text{group }2} &+ &\underbrace{\frac{1}{5}+\frac{1}{6}+\frac{1}{7}+\frac{1}{8}}_{\text{group }3} &{}+\ldots+{} &\underbrace{\sum_{k=2^{n-1}+1}^{2^n} \frac{1}{k}}_{\text{group }n} \\ | ||
+ | &> 1+{} &\frac{1}{2} &+ &\frac{1}{4}(2) &+ &\frac{1}{8}(4) &{}+\ldots+{} &\frac{1}{2^n}(2^{n-1}) \\ | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | &= 1+{} &\frac{1}{2} &+ &\frac{1}{2} &+ &\frac{1}{2} &{}+\ldots+{} &\frac{1}{2} | ||
+ | \end{matrix}</math> | ||
+ | There are ''n'' terms equal to <math>\tfrac{1}{2}</math> in the final sum, thus | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{k=1}^{2^n} \frac{1}{k} > 1+\sum_{k=1}^{n} \frac{1}{2}=1+\frac{n}{2}.</math> | ||
+ | The limit of this final expression, as <math>n\to\infty</math>, is infinity. This means the sequence of partial sums diverges. (Technically, we have only shown that a "subsequence" of the original sequence of partial sums diverges, but it turns out that this is sufficient to prove that the original sequence diverges.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Therefore, the harmonic series diverges even though its terms shrink to zero. Many other series share this property, some of which will be discussed below. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === "Eventually" === | ||
+ | |||
+ | When considering whether a given series is convergent or divergent, it is often useful to "ignore" the first several terms of the series. For example, as we have seen, the series | ||
+ | :<math>1+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{8}+\frac{1}{16}+\ldots</math> | ||
+ | is geometric and converges to 2, but the series | ||
+ | :<math>-1+3+1+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{8}+\frac{1}{16}+\ldots</math> | ||
+ | is not geometric, since the first two terms don't fit the pattern of the rest of the series. But since the series behaves like a geometric series from the third term onward, one might call the series "eventually" geometric: it didn't start out that way, but eventually it settled down and behaved like a geometric series. We will use this idea of a series "eventually" having a certain property many times in the discussion that follows. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Clearly if the first (geometric) series above converges, the second (eventually geometric) series will also converge. In fact, by considering separately the sum of the first two terms and the sum of the rest of the terms, we can deduce that the sum of the second series is | ||
+ | :<math>-1+3+\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^{n-1}} = (-1+3)+(2) = 4.</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Similarly, the series | ||
+ | :<math>\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{8}+\frac{1}{16}+\ldots</math> | ||
+ | converges in the same way as the original geometric series, but again the new (this time shorter) series converges to a different sum (the original sum minus the first two terms): | ||
+ | :<math>\sum_{n=3}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^{n-1}} = \biggl(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^{n-1}}\biggr) - \biggl(\sum_{n=1}^2 \frac{1}{2^{n-1}}\biggr) = (2)-(1+\tfrac{1}{2}) = \tfrac{1}{2}</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | So, note that ''whether'' a series converges doesn't depend on what's happening at the beginning of the series, but the ''sum'' of the series definitely does! | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Series convergence and divergence == | ||
+ | |||
+ | Now that we've covered enough background about series, we can start to systematically investigate the convergence and divergence of many different kinds of infinite series. In some cases we will be able to find a formula for the partial sums, and thus the sum of the series, but in most cases we will not. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Necessary condition for convergence === | ||
+ | |||
+ | Note that we have already considered one convergent series whose terms shrink to zero (the geometric series), one divergent series whose terms shrink to zero (the harmonic series), and one divergent series whose terms do not shrink to zero (the arithmetic series). What about the remaining case: a convergent series whose terms do not shrink to zero? Turns out, that's not possible. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <blockquote style="background: white; border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em;"> | ||
+ | :'''Theorem: A necessary condition for series convergence''' | ||
+ | :If the infinite series <math>\sum_{n=c}^\infty a_n</math> converges (where <math>c</math> is any integer), then <math>\lim_{n\to\infty} a_n = 0</math>. | ||
+ | </blockquote> | ||
+ | |||
+ | So, every convergent series has a sequence of terms that converges to zero. But, as we saw with the harmonic series, just because a series has terms that shrink to zero, that doesn't mean that the series converges. Therefore, having terms that go to zero is a ''necessary'' condition that a convergent series must satisfy, but not a ''sufficient'' condition that allows us to ''conclude'' that a given series converges. (Put more bluntly: ''Just because the terms go to zero doesn't mean the series converges!'') | ||
+ | |||
+ | So what ''is'' a sufficient condition for series convergence? Well, there are many such conditions, several of which will be discussed later. All of them, however, will be saying essentially the same thing: that the terms of the series are going to zero "fast enough" that it allows the series to converge. | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Sufficient condition for divergence === | ||
+ | |||
+ | Recall from basic logic that the statement "If A then B" is equivalent to "If not B then not A". Applying this idea to the previous theorem gives a way of determining that an infinite series diverges (the so-called ''divergence test'', which we will see again). | ||
+ | |||
+ | <blockquote style="background: white; border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em;"> | ||
+ | : '''Theorem:A sufficient condition for series divergence''' | ||
+ | :If it is not true that <math>\lim_{n\to\infty} a_n = 0</math> (including the case in which the limit does not exist), then the infinite series <math>\sum_{n=c}^\infty a_n</math> (where <math>c</math> is any integer) diverges. | ||
+ | :'''Proof''' | ||
+ | :This is an immediate consequence of the last theorem. The argument is a simple proof by contradiction: Let <math>\lim_{n\to\infty} a_n</math> either not equal 0 or not exist. Assume that <math>\sum_{n=c}^\infty a_n</math> converges (for some integer <math>c</math>). Then by the theorem above, <math>\lim_{n\to\infty} a_n</math> must equal 0. This is clearly a contradiction. Thus <math>\sum_{n=c}^\infty a_n</math> must diverge. | ||
+ | </blockquote> | ||
+ | |||
+ | While this gives a very useful way of checking for divergence, it is not a very "powerful" method, since — as we've already said — there are many divergent infinite series whose terms do actually go to zero. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Properties of infinite series == | ||
+ | |||
+ | There are several properties of infinite series that are direct consequences of the corresponding properties of finite sums: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Constants can be factored out of (or multiplied into) infinite series: | ||
+ | * For any real number <math>c</math>, <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} c\,a_k</math> converges if <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> converges, in which case <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} c\,a_k = c\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}a_k.</math> | ||
+ | * For any non-zero real number <math>c</math>, <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} c\,a_k</math> diverges if <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> diverges. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Note that <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} c\,a_k</math> ''converges'' if <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> diverges but <math>c=0</math> (because it is a series whose terms are all zero). | ||
+ | |||
+ | Sums and differences of convergent infinite series are convergent: | ||
+ | * If <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k</math> both converge, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k+b_k)</math> also converges and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k+b_k) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k + \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k.</math> | ||
+ | * If <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k</math> both converge, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k-b_k)</math> also converges and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k-b_k) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k - \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k.</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Sums and differences of one convergent and one divergent series are divergent: | ||
+ | * If <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> converges and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k</math> diverges, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k+b_k)</math> and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k-b_k)</math> both diverge. | ||
+ | * If <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> diverges and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k</math> converges, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k+b_k)</math> and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k-b_k)</math> both diverge. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Sums and differences of two divergent series may be convergent or divergent (thus one cannot decide whether they converge or diverge without applying a specific convergence or divergence test): | ||
+ | * If <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k</math> both diverge, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k+b_k)</math> and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (a_k-b_k)</math> may either (both) converge or (both) diverge. | ||
+ | |||
+ | More generally, linear combinations of convergent infinite series are convergent: | ||
+ | * If <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k</math> both converge and <math>c</math> and <math>d</math> are any real numbers, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (c\,a_k+d\,b_k)</math> also converges and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (c\,a_k+d\,b_k) = c \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k + d \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k.</math> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Linear combinations of a mix of convergent and divergent series are (usually) divergent: | ||
+ | * If <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> converges and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k</math> diverges, and <math>c</math> and <math>d</math> are any real numbers with <math>d \ne 0</math>, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (c\,a_k+d\,b_k)</math> diverges. (If <math>d=0</math>, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (c\,a_k+d\,b_k)</math> converges.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | However, arbitrary linear combinations of divergent series are (usually) inconclusive with respect to their convergence without further testing: | ||
+ | * If <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} a_k</math> and <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} b_k</math> both diverge and <math>c</math> and <math>d</math> are non-zero real numbers, then <math>\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} (c\,a_k+d\,b_k)</math> may either converge or diverge. (If exactly one of the constants <math>c</math> and <math>d</math> is zero, then the latter series diverges. If both <math>c=0</math> and <math>d=0</math>, then the latter series converges.) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Resources== | ||
[https://youtu.be/jPx2S4mSZWc Introduction to Infinite Series] by James Sousa | [https://youtu.be/jPx2S4mSZWc Introduction to Infinite Series] by James Sousa | ||
Line 6: | Line 275: | ||
[https://youtu.be/-wvF8OQSMx8 Convergence & Divergence - Geometric Series, Telescoping Series, Harmonic Series, Divergence Test] by The Organic Chemistry Tutor | [https://youtu.be/-wvF8OQSMx8 Convergence & Divergence - Geometric Series, Telescoping Series, Harmonic Series, Divergence Test] by The Organic Chemistry Tutor | ||
− | |||
[https://youtu.be/6LfoMmCckFY Telescoping Series] by James Sousa | [https://youtu.be/6LfoMmCckFY Telescoping Series] by James Sousa | ||
Line 15: | Line 283: | ||
[https://youtu.be/H8HVYiEqzBo Telescoping Series , Finding the Sum, Example 1] by patrickJMT | [https://youtu.be/H8HVYiEqzBo Telescoping Series , Finding the Sum, Example 1] by patrickJMT | ||
− | |||
[https://youtu.be/pFcJZnxqzNc Infinite Geometric Series] by James Sousa | [https://youtu.be/pFcJZnxqzNc Infinite Geometric Series] by James Sousa | ||
Line 30: | Line 297: | ||
[https://youtu.be/jxRqRLMliPc Finding The Sum of an Infinite Geometric Series] by The Organic Chemistry Tutor | [https://youtu.be/jxRqRLMliPc Finding The Sum of an Infinite Geometric Series] by The Organic Chemistry Tutor | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Licensing== | ||
+ | Content obtained and/or adapted from: | ||
+ | * [https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:Dcljr/Series Series, Wikibooks] under a CC BY-SA license |
Latest revision as of 13:08, 29 October 2021
A series is the sum of a sequence of terms. An infinite series is the sum of an infinite number of terms (the actual sum of the series need not be infinite, as we will see below).
While there is usually some pattern in the terms being added, technically a series can be the sum of any sequence of terms:
The problem with the above series is, it is not at all clear what the next term of the series would be, nor any subsequent ones. To say anything useful about the series, there needs to be a clear pattern. Two such patterns seen in sequences that also appear in the study of series are called arithmetic and geometric.
An arithmetic series is the sum of a sequence of terms having a common difference (i.e., the difference between consecutive terms is always the same). For example,
is an arithmetic series with common difference 3, since , , and so forth. Unlike the first series above, this series has a clear pattern. It is obvious that the next term of the series is 16, and then 19, and so on.
A geometric series is the sum of a sequence of terms having a common ratio (i.e., the ratio between consecutive terms is always the same). For example,
is a geometric series with common ratio , since , , and so forth. As before, there is a definite pattern, and the next term of the series is clearly .
Contents
Summation notation
Summation notation provides a compact way of writing an infinite series. The arithmetic series above can be written
or, more simply
The symbol on the left is a Sigma (the Greek letter for capital "S", standing for "Sum"); it is also known as a summation symbol. Along with the expressions above and below the Sigma, it is read:
- "The sum, as goes from 1 to infinity, of..."
The algebraic expression on the right is the nth term of the series, and is often generically called "", as is also done with sequences. This means that the sum could have been written a bit more verbosely (and perhaps more pedantically) as
a form that more explicitly reflects the idea that a series is the sum of a sequence of terms. (The expression by itself defines the sequence of terms, but note that it is a bit ambiguous since it's not clear without additional context whether the sequence starts at or , or indeed any other value. Incidentally, the first summation formula above, which might have seemed a bit strange at first, came from the formula for the nth term of an arithmetic sequence, which you probably first learned in algebra class: .)
To verify that this summation formula represents the same sum as in the previous section, we simply evaluate the algebraic expression () for the first value of (in this case, 1), then the next value (2), and so forth:
As for the geometric series, it should be easy to verify the representation
or, equivalently
Non-uniqueness of summation notation
Note that the representation of a series in summation notation is not unique, even ignoring simple algebraic rewrites. All of the sums seen so far have started at , as is usually the convention adopted for sequences, but we could have chosen to start the sums at any other value of . In fact, it is quite common to start infinite series at . If we follow that convention, the arithmetic series would be written
and the geometric series would be
Again, these expressions should be easy to verify.
Furthermore, as with functions, the variable used in the sum (called the index variable) is completely arbitrary. Thus, the following sums also represent the same series (respectively) as those above:
As a result of this fact, any series can be rewritten by simply changing the starting value of the series and compensating for this change in the formula for the nth term. To be specific, consider the first series above in this section. Using the substitution , we get the series
But then the variable can simply be changed back to to get
Notice how this new series can be seen as resulting from "bumping up" the starting value of the original series by 2 and "bumping down" each in the formula by the same amount (that is, replacing each by and then simplifying). This kind of change to a series is sometimes necessary to verify a given series formula (say, when looking up the answer to an exercise in a textbook).
Series versus sequence
As mentioned above, there is an important difference between an infinite series, which is the sum of an infinite number of terms, and the sequence formed by those same terms.
At the risk of being repetitive, our arithmetic series is
but the corresponding sequence of terms is
It might seem silly at this point to make such a big deal out of this distinction, but it will be very important going forward not to confuse these two concepts.
Sequence of partial sums
One special kind of sequence that is very useful to consider when studying series is the sequence of partial sums, defined in the following way (assuming a starting value of 1 for the index variable) for any positive integer :
For our arithmetic series, the sequence of partial sums is:
Thus
Note how this sequence of partial sums is very different from the sequence of terms discussed in the last section!
Just as the series itself can be written more compactly in summation notation by finding the pattern in its terms, the sequence of partial sums for a series can (sometimes) also be written compactly as a function of .
It should be easy to check that the following expression accurately represents the (first few terms of the) sequence of partial sums shown above:
To see where this expression came from, we first need to review some properties of sums that you probably remember from arithmetic and algebra, but might not be familiar with in summation notation.
Some properties of finite sums
Constant factors can be factored out of (or multiplied into) finite sums:
Finite sums can be added and subtracted, as long as they cover the same range of values of the index variable:
Putting these two ideas together, one may show the following property for arbitrary linear combinations:
Furthermore, there are special formulas for sums of certain simple expressions:
The first special sum formula is obvious, since it represents the sum of n copies of the number 1. You might recognize the second and third formulas from your intermediate algebra or precalculus class.
With these facts, one may derive the expression given above for the sequence of partial sums of our arithmetic sequence.
Similarly, one may derive the sequence of partial sums for the geometric series:
Finding a series from its partial sums
Using the fact that
we see that
This provides a way of "recovering" the original series from its sequence of partial sums.
For our arithmetic series:
Sum of an infinite series
Now we can finally formally define the sum of an infinite series as the limit of its sequence of partial sums:
If the limit converges to a real number, say , then the infinite series is said to converge to the sum , or to be convergent with sum . If the limit diverges (including the cases where the limit is infinity or negative infinity), then the series is said to diverge or to be divergent in the same way, and its sum is said to not exist (or to be infinity or negative infinity, as appropriate). Note that one does not describe the series itself as "not existing" when it diverges, only its sum.
Consider again the arithmetic and geometric series we have been discussing up to this point. It is obvious by simply looking at the original arithmetic series
that it does not have a finite sum. The terms being added are themselves getting larger and larger without bound, so the sum is getting larger and larger without bound.
The sequence of partial sums given above formalizes this idea. In particular, because
the arithmetic series diverges to infinity.
Now consider the original geometric series:
The terms here are getting smaller and smaller, and indeed are approaching zero. Since adding zero to something doesn't change its value, it seems reasonable to suspect that the sum might be a fixed, finite number. What does the sequence of partial sums reveal?
So the geometric series does, in fact, converge to the finite sum 2.
It seems obvious that any series whose terms "blow up" to infinity (like our arithmetic series) will diverge, but does every series whose terms shrink to zero (like our geometric series) converge to a finite sum? It turns out the answer to that question is no.
Harmonic series
There is a very important series whose sequence of terms goes to zero and yet the series diverges because the sequence of partial sums diverges to infinity. It is called the harmonic series:
Obviously the terms of this series go to zero:
But what about the sequence of partial sums? For convenience sake, we consider not the nth partial sum but the th partial sum, then group the terms in a clever way, and find a lower bound for each group of terms:
There are n terms equal to in the final sum, thus
The limit of this final expression, as , is infinity. This means the sequence of partial sums diverges. (Technically, we have only shown that a "subsequence" of the original sequence of partial sums diverges, but it turns out that this is sufficient to prove that the original sequence diverges.)
Therefore, the harmonic series diverges even though its terms shrink to zero. Many other series share this property, some of which will be discussed below.
"Eventually"
When considering whether a given series is convergent or divergent, it is often useful to "ignore" the first several terms of the series. For example, as we have seen, the series
is geometric and converges to 2, but the series
is not geometric, since the first two terms don't fit the pattern of the rest of the series. But since the series behaves like a geometric series from the third term onward, one might call the series "eventually" geometric: it didn't start out that way, but eventually it settled down and behaved like a geometric series. We will use this idea of a series "eventually" having a certain property many times in the discussion that follows.
Clearly if the first (geometric) series above converges, the second (eventually geometric) series will also converge. In fact, by considering separately the sum of the first two terms and the sum of the rest of the terms, we can deduce that the sum of the second series is
Similarly, the series
converges in the same way as the original geometric series, but again the new (this time shorter) series converges to a different sum (the original sum minus the first two terms):
So, note that whether a series converges doesn't depend on what's happening at the beginning of the series, but the sum of the series definitely does!
Series convergence and divergence
Now that we've covered enough background about series, we can start to systematically investigate the convergence and divergence of many different kinds of infinite series. In some cases we will be able to find a formula for the partial sums, and thus the sum of the series, but in most cases we will not.
Necessary condition for convergence
Note that we have already considered one convergent series whose terms shrink to zero (the geometric series), one divergent series whose terms shrink to zero (the harmonic series), and one divergent series whose terms do not shrink to zero (the arithmetic series). What about the remaining case: a convergent series whose terms do not shrink to zero? Turns out, that's not possible.
- Theorem: A necessary condition for series convergence
- If the infinite series converges (where is any integer), then .
So, every convergent series has a sequence of terms that converges to zero. But, as we saw with the harmonic series, just because a series has terms that shrink to zero, that doesn't mean that the series converges. Therefore, having terms that go to zero is a necessary condition that a convergent series must satisfy, but not a sufficient condition that allows us to conclude that a given series converges. (Put more bluntly: Just because the terms go to zero doesn't mean the series converges!)
So what is a sufficient condition for series convergence? Well, there are many such conditions, several of which will be discussed later. All of them, however, will be saying essentially the same thing: that the terms of the series are going to zero "fast enough" that it allows the series to converge.
Sufficient condition for divergence
Recall from basic logic that the statement "If A then B" is equivalent to "If not B then not A". Applying this idea to the previous theorem gives a way of determining that an infinite series diverges (the so-called divergence test, which we will see again).
- Theorem:A sufficient condition for series divergence
- If it is not true that (including the case in which the limit does not exist), then the infinite series (where is any integer) diverges.
- Proof
- This is an immediate consequence of the last theorem. The argument is a simple proof by contradiction: Let either not equal 0 or not exist. Assume that converges (for some integer ). Then by the theorem above, must equal 0. This is clearly a contradiction. Thus must diverge.
While this gives a very useful way of checking for divergence, it is not a very "powerful" method, since — as we've already said — there are many divergent infinite series whose terms do actually go to zero.
Properties of infinite series
There are several properties of infinite series that are direct consequences of the corresponding properties of finite sums:
Constants can be factored out of (or multiplied into) infinite series:
- For any real number , converges if converges, in which case
- For any non-zero real number , diverges if diverges.
Note that converges if diverges but (because it is a series whose terms are all zero).
Sums and differences of convergent infinite series are convergent:
- If and both converge, then also converges and
- If and both converge, then also converges and
Sums and differences of one convergent and one divergent series are divergent:
- If converges and diverges, then and both diverge.
- If diverges and converges, then and both diverge.
Sums and differences of two divergent series may be convergent or divergent (thus one cannot decide whether they converge or diverge without applying a specific convergence or divergence test):
- If and both diverge, then and may either (both) converge or (both) diverge.
More generally, linear combinations of convergent infinite series are convergent:
- If and both converge and and are any real numbers, then also converges and
Linear combinations of a mix of convergent and divergent series are (usually) divergent:
- If converges and diverges, and and are any real numbers with , then diverges. (If , then converges.)
However, arbitrary linear combinations of divergent series are (usually) inconclusive with respect to their convergence without further testing:
- If and both diverge and and are non-zero real numbers, then may either converge or diverge. (If exactly one of the constants and is zero, then the latter series diverges. If both and , then the latter series converges.)
Resources
Introduction to Infinite Series by James Sousa
Calculating the first terms in a series of partial sums by Krista King
Sum of the series of partial sums by Krista King
Convergence & Divergence - Geometric Series, Telescoping Series, Harmonic Series, Divergence Test by The Organic Chemistry Tutor
Telescoping Series by James Sousa
Finding a Formula for a Partial Sum of a Telescoping Series by patrickJMT
Telescoping Series ,Showing Divergence Using Partial Sums by patrickJMT
Telescoping Series , Finding the Sum, Example 1 by patrickJMT
Infinite Geometric Series by James Sousa
Geometric Series and the Test for Divergence - Part 1 by patrickJMT
Geometric Series and the Test for Divergence - Part 2 by patrickJMT
Convergence of a geometric series by Krista King
Values for which the geometric series converges by Kritsa King
Geometric Series and Geometric Sequences - Basic Introduction by The Organic Chemistry Tutor
Finding The Sum of an Infinite Geometric Series by The Organic Chemistry Tutor
Licensing
Content obtained and/or adapted from:
- Series, Wikibooks under a CC BY-SA license