Why does $sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac1x$ have such a poor radius of convergence?
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am confused as to why $$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac1x$$
only works for $xin (0,2)$. I get that it has a singularity at $x=0$, so that can't work, but there are no singularities for the rest of the positive real line. Why isn't there a power series representation of $frac1x$ which works for the whole positive real line? Are there any series representations of $1/x$ which work for $xin (0,infty)$? I can't find any. Thanks.
sequences-and-series convergence power-series taylor-expansion
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am confused as to why $$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac1x$$
only works for $xin (0,2)$. I get that it has a singularity at $x=0$, so that can't work, but there are no singularities for the rest of the positive real line. Why isn't there a power series representation of $frac1x$ which works for the whole positive real line? Are there any series representations of $1/x$ which work for $xin (0,infty)$? I can't find any. Thanks.
sequences-and-series convergence power-series taylor-expansion
The domain of convergence of a real power series is always either a finitely long interval or the whole real line.
– Andreas Blass
2 days ago
3
$sum r^n$ converges iff $-1<r<1$. If $r=1-x$ that's the same as $0<x<2$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
$1/x$ has a pole at $x=0$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
1
More specifically: their intervals of convergence are symmetric around the point of evaluation, which is $1$ here, so the Taylor series does not converge beyond $x = 2$ (and you can check that it doesn't converge at $x = 2$ either).
– user3482749
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am confused as to why $$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac1x$$
only works for $xin (0,2)$. I get that it has a singularity at $x=0$, so that can't work, but there are no singularities for the rest of the positive real line. Why isn't there a power series representation of $frac1x$ which works for the whole positive real line? Are there any series representations of $1/x$ which work for $xin (0,infty)$? I can't find any. Thanks.
sequences-and-series convergence power-series taylor-expansion
I am confused as to why $$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac1x$$
only works for $xin (0,2)$. I get that it has a singularity at $x=0$, so that can't work, but there are no singularities for the rest of the positive real line. Why isn't there a power series representation of $frac1x$ which works for the whole positive real line? Are there any series representations of $1/x$ which work for $xin (0,infty)$? I can't find any. Thanks.
sequences-and-series convergence power-series taylor-expansion
sequences-and-series convergence power-series taylor-expansion
edited yesterday
Asaf Karagila♦
300k32421751
300k32421751
asked 2 days ago
clathratus
2,146221
2,146221
The domain of convergence of a real power series is always either a finitely long interval or the whole real line.
– Andreas Blass
2 days ago
3
$sum r^n$ converges iff $-1<r<1$. If $r=1-x$ that's the same as $0<x<2$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
$1/x$ has a pole at $x=0$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
1
More specifically: their intervals of convergence are symmetric around the point of evaluation, which is $1$ here, so the Taylor series does not converge beyond $x = 2$ (and you can check that it doesn't converge at $x = 2$ either).
– user3482749
2 days ago
add a comment |
The domain of convergence of a real power series is always either a finitely long interval or the whole real line.
– Andreas Blass
2 days ago
3
$sum r^n$ converges iff $-1<r<1$. If $r=1-x$ that's the same as $0<x<2$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
$1/x$ has a pole at $x=0$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
1
More specifically: their intervals of convergence are symmetric around the point of evaluation, which is $1$ here, so the Taylor series does not converge beyond $x = 2$ (and you can check that it doesn't converge at $x = 2$ either).
– user3482749
2 days ago
The domain of convergence of a real power series is always either a finitely long interval or the whole real line.
– Andreas Blass
2 days ago
The domain of convergence of a real power series is always either a finitely long interval or the whole real line.
– Andreas Blass
2 days ago
3
3
$sum r^n$ converges iff $-1<r<1$. If $r=1-x$ that's the same as $0<x<2$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
$sum r^n$ converges iff $-1<r<1$. If $r=1-x$ that's the same as $0<x<2$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
$1/x$ has a pole at $x=0$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
$1/x$ has a pole at $x=0$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
1
1
More specifically: their intervals of convergence are symmetric around the point of evaluation, which is $1$ here, so the Taylor series does not converge beyond $x = 2$ (and you can check that it doesn't converge at $x = 2$ either).
– user3482749
2 days ago
More specifically: their intervals of convergence are symmetric around the point of evaluation, which is $1$ here, so the Taylor series does not converge beyond $x = 2$ (and you can check that it doesn't converge at $x = 2$ either).
– user3482749
2 days ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
The radius of convergence of a power series in $z-a$ is the largest $r$ such that the sum of the series is analytic in the disk ${z: |z-a| < r}$ in the complex plane. Thus a singularity at some point stops the series from converging
at all points farther away from the centre than that point, even though the function may be analytic at those other points.
On the other hand, you could take the series
$$ frac{1}{x} = -1 + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+x}{1+2x}right)^n$$
which converges for all $x > 0$ (in fact, everywhere outside a circle of radius $1/3$ centred at $-1/3$ in the complex plane).
Of course, this is not a power series in the usual sense.
What type of series is $$-1+sum_{ngeq0}bigg(frac{1+x}{1+2x}bigg)^n$$ and how do you find it? Is this type of series generally better at approximating rational functions?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
@clathratus It's just a geometric series where $y=frac{1+x}{1+2x}$. It is a special case for $a=2$ of: $$frac{1}{x}+a = frac{1+ax}{x}\ = frac{1+ax}{1+ax - (1+ax-x)}\ = frac{1}{1 - frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}}\ =sum_{n=0}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n $$ Note that the series given in the posted answer does not include the term $n=0$ as you wrote in your comment.
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman I see. So the $$sum_{n=0}^{infty}$$ in your comment is supposed to be different too?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
No, I wrote what I meant. you could rewrite mine as $$frac{1}{x} = 1-a + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n$$ to be consistent if you'd like. (The $n=0$ term is just $1$, so take your pick on whether you want to index it or not)
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman Thank you for the clarification. I understand now.
– clathratus
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
The basic answer to you question is that a "normal" power series, i.e. with non-negative integral
exponents, including Taylor series, does not have singularities in the finite complex plane
and consequently cannot reproduce them.
A function $ f(z)$ , which is analytic in a domain of the complex plane,
can be developed (by definition) in power series around a point in that domain, and the radius
of convergence of the series will be equal to the distance of that point from the nearest
singularity, of course excluded.
Thus, for $1/z$ which has a simple pole at $z=0$ :
- when developed at $z=1$ will have a convergence radius of $ 1$;
- to get a larger radius( $R$), you shall develop it around $z_0=R$ ;
- there is no possibility to develop it so as to encompass positive and negative real values of it.
The Laurent series for $1/z$ at $z_0=0$ is infact $1/z$, i.e. the function itself.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The geometric series $sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n$ converges for
$$|1-x|<1 iff -1<1-x<1 iff 0<x<2$$
and we have
$$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac{1}{1-(1-x)}=frac1x$$
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The set of those real numbers at which a power series $displaystylesum_{n=0}^infty a_n(x-a)^n$ belongs to one of these types:
${a}$;
$(a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$(a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$mathbb R$.
Since, $(0,+infty)$ doesn't appear here, no power series exists whose sum is $frac1x$ in $(0,+infty)$ and which diverges otherwise.
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
The radius of convergence of a power series in $z-a$ is the largest $r$ such that the sum of the series is analytic in the disk ${z: |z-a| < r}$ in the complex plane. Thus a singularity at some point stops the series from converging
at all points farther away from the centre than that point, even though the function may be analytic at those other points.
On the other hand, you could take the series
$$ frac{1}{x} = -1 + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+x}{1+2x}right)^n$$
which converges for all $x > 0$ (in fact, everywhere outside a circle of radius $1/3$ centred at $-1/3$ in the complex plane).
Of course, this is not a power series in the usual sense.
What type of series is $$-1+sum_{ngeq0}bigg(frac{1+x}{1+2x}bigg)^n$$ and how do you find it? Is this type of series generally better at approximating rational functions?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
@clathratus It's just a geometric series where $y=frac{1+x}{1+2x}$. It is a special case for $a=2$ of: $$frac{1}{x}+a = frac{1+ax}{x}\ = frac{1+ax}{1+ax - (1+ax-x)}\ = frac{1}{1 - frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}}\ =sum_{n=0}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n $$ Note that the series given in the posted answer does not include the term $n=0$ as you wrote in your comment.
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman I see. So the $$sum_{n=0}^{infty}$$ in your comment is supposed to be different too?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
No, I wrote what I meant. you could rewrite mine as $$frac{1}{x} = 1-a + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n$$ to be consistent if you'd like. (The $n=0$ term is just $1$, so take your pick on whether you want to index it or not)
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman Thank you for the clarification. I understand now.
– clathratus
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
The radius of convergence of a power series in $z-a$ is the largest $r$ such that the sum of the series is analytic in the disk ${z: |z-a| < r}$ in the complex plane. Thus a singularity at some point stops the series from converging
at all points farther away from the centre than that point, even though the function may be analytic at those other points.
On the other hand, you could take the series
$$ frac{1}{x} = -1 + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+x}{1+2x}right)^n$$
which converges for all $x > 0$ (in fact, everywhere outside a circle of radius $1/3$ centred at $-1/3$ in the complex plane).
Of course, this is not a power series in the usual sense.
What type of series is $$-1+sum_{ngeq0}bigg(frac{1+x}{1+2x}bigg)^n$$ and how do you find it? Is this type of series generally better at approximating rational functions?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
@clathratus It's just a geometric series where $y=frac{1+x}{1+2x}$. It is a special case for $a=2$ of: $$frac{1}{x}+a = frac{1+ax}{x}\ = frac{1+ax}{1+ax - (1+ax-x)}\ = frac{1}{1 - frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}}\ =sum_{n=0}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n $$ Note that the series given in the posted answer does not include the term $n=0$ as you wrote in your comment.
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman I see. So the $$sum_{n=0}^{infty}$$ in your comment is supposed to be different too?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
No, I wrote what I meant. you could rewrite mine as $$frac{1}{x} = 1-a + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n$$ to be consistent if you'd like. (The $n=0$ term is just $1$, so take your pick on whether you want to index it or not)
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman Thank you for the clarification. I understand now.
– clathratus
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
The radius of convergence of a power series in $z-a$ is the largest $r$ such that the sum of the series is analytic in the disk ${z: |z-a| < r}$ in the complex plane. Thus a singularity at some point stops the series from converging
at all points farther away from the centre than that point, even though the function may be analytic at those other points.
On the other hand, you could take the series
$$ frac{1}{x} = -1 + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+x}{1+2x}right)^n$$
which converges for all $x > 0$ (in fact, everywhere outside a circle of radius $1/3$ centred at $-1/3$ in the complex plane).
Of course, this is not a power series in the usual sense.
The radius of convergence of a power series in $z-a$ is the largest $r$ such that the sum of the series is analytic in the disk ${z: |z-a| < r}$ in the complex plane. Thus a singularity at some point stops the series from converging
at all points farther away from the centre than that point, even though the function may be analytic at those other points.
On the other hand, you could take the series
$$ frac{1}{x} = -1 + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+x}{1+2x}right)^n$$
which converges for all $x > 0$ (in fact, everywhere outside a circle of radius $1/3$ centred at $-1/3$ in the complex plane).
Of course, this is not a power series in the usual sense.
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
Robert Israel
314k23206453
314k23206453
What type of series is $$-1+sum_{ngeq0}bigg(frac{1+x}{1+2x}bigg)^n$$ and how do you find it? Is this type of series generally better at approximating rational functions?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
@clathratus It's just a geometric series where $y=frac{1+x}{1+2x}$. It is a special case for $a=2$ of: $$frac{1}{x}+a = frac{1+ax}{x}\ = frac{1+ax}{1+ax - (1+ax-x)}\ = frac{1}{1 - frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}}\ =sum_{n=0}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n $$ Note that the series given in the posted answer does not include the term $n=0$ as you wrote in your comment.
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman I see. So the $$sum_{n=0}^{infty}$$ in your comment is supposed to be different too?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
No, I wrote what I meant. you could rewrite mine as $$frac{1}{x} = 1-a + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n$$ to be consistent if you'd like. (The $n=0$ term is just $1$, so take your pick on whether you want to index it or not)
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman Thank you for the clarification. I understand now.
– clathratus
2 days ago
add a comment |
What type of series is $$-1+sum_{ngeq0}bigg(frac{1+x}{1+2x}bigg)^n$$ and how do you find it? Is this type of series generally better at approximating rational functions?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
@clathratus It's just a geometric series where $y=frac{1+x}{1+2x}$. It is a special case for $a=2$ of: $$frac{1}{x}+a = frac{1+ax}{x}\ = frac{1+ax}{1+ax - (1+ax-x)}\ = frac{1}{1 - frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}}\ =sum_{n=0}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n $$ Note that the series given in the posted answer does not include the term $n=0$ as you wrote in your comment.
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman I see. So the $$sum_{n=0}^{infty}$$ in your comment is supposed to be different too?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
No, I wrote what I meant. you could rewrite mine as $$frac{1}{x} = 1-a + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n$$ to be consistent if you'd like. (The $n=0$ term is just $1$, so take your pick on whether you want to index it or not)
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman Thank you for the clarification. I understand now.
– clathratus
2 days ago
What type of series is $$-1+sum_{ngeq0}bigg(frac{1+x}{1+2x}bigg)^n$$ and how do you find it? Is this type of series generally better at approximating rational functions?
– clathratus
2 days ago
What type of series is $$-1+sum_{ngeq0}bigg(frac{1+x}{1+2x}bigg)^n$$ and how do you find it? Is this type of series generally better at approximating rational functions?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
2
@clathratus It's just a geometric series where $y=frac{1+x}{1+2x}$. It is a special case for $a=2$ of: $$frac{1}{x}+a = frac{1+ax}{x}\ = frac{1+ax}{1+ax - (1+ax-x)}\ = frac{1}{1 - frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}}\ =sum_{n=0}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n $$ Note that the series given in the posted answer does not include the term $n=0$ as you wrote in your comment.
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@clathratus It's just a geometric series where $y=frac{1+x}{1+2x}$. It is a special case for $a=2$ of: $$frac{1}{x}+a = frac{1+ax}{x}\ = frac{1+ax}{1+ax - (1+ax-x)}\ = frac{1}{1 - frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}}\ =sum_{n=0}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n $$ Note that the series given in the posted answer does not include the term $n=0$ as you wrote in your comment.
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman I see. So the $$sum_{n=0}^{infty}$$ in your comment is supposed to be different too?
– clathratus
2 days ago
@adfriedman I see. So the $$sum_{n=0}^{infty}$$ in your comment is supposed to be different too?
– clathratus
2 days ago
2
2
No, I wrote what I meant. you could rewrite mine as $$frac{1}{x} = 1-a + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n$$ to be consistent if you'd like. (The $n=0$ term is just $1$, so take your pick on whether you want to index it or not)
– adfriedman
2 days ago
No, I wrote what I meant. you could rewrite mine as $$frac{1}{x} = 1-a + sum_{n=1}^infty left(frac{1+(a-1)x}{1+ax}right)^n$$ to be consistent if you'd like. (The $n=0$ term is just $1$, so take your pick on whether you want to index it or not)
– adfriedman
2 days ago
@adfriedman Thank you for the clarification. I understand now.
– clathratus
2 days ago
@adfriedman Thank you for the clarification. I understand now.
– clathratus
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
The basic answer to you question is that a "normal" power series, i.e. with non-negative integral
exponents, including Taylor series, does not have singularities in the finite complex plane
and consequently cannot reproduce them.
A function $ f(z)$ , which is analytic in a domain of the complex plane,
can be developed (by definition) in power series around a point in that domain, and the radius
of convergence of the series will be equal to the distance of that point from the nearest
singularity, of course excluded.
Thus, for $1/z$ which has a simple pole at $z=0$ :
- when developed at $z=1$ will have a convergence radius of $ 1$;
- to get a larger radius( $R$), you shall develop it around $z_0=R$ ;
- there is no possibility to develop it so as to encompass positive and negative real values of it.
The Laurent series for $1/z$ at $z_0=0$ is infact $1/z$, i.e. the function itself.
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
The basic answer to you question is that a "normal" power series, i.e. with non-negative integral
exponents, including Taylor series, does not have singularities in the finite complex plane
and consequently cannot reproduce them.
A function $ f(z)$ , which is analytic in a domain of the complex plane,
can be developed (by definition) in power series around a point in that domain, and the radius
of convergence of the series will be equal to the distance of that point from the nearest
singularity, of course excluded.
Thus, for $1/z$ which has a simple pole at $z=0$ :
- when developed at $z=1$ will have a convergence radius of $ 1$;
- to get a larger radius( $R$), you shall develop it around $z_0=R$ ;
- there is no possibility to develop it so as to encompass positive and negative real values of it.
The Laurent series for $1/z$ at $z_0=0$ is infact $1/z$, i.e. the function itself.
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
The basic answer to you question is that a "normal" power series, i.e. with non-negative integral
exponents, including Taylor series, does not have singularities in the finite complex plane
and consequently cannot reproduce them.
A function $ f(z)$ , which is analytic in a domain of the complex plane,
can be developed (by definition) in power series around a point in that domain, and the radius
of convergence of the series will be equal to the distance of that point from the nearest
singularity, of course excluded.
Thus, for $1/z$ which has a simple pole at $z=0$ :
- when developed at $z=1$ will have a convergence radius of $ 1$;
- to get a larger radius( $R$), you shall develop it around $z_0=R$ ;
- there is no possibility to develop it so as to encompass positive and negative real values of it.
The Laurent series for $1/z$ at $z_0=0$ is infact $1/z$, i.e. the function itself.
The basic answer to you question is that a "normal" power series, i.e. with non-negative integral
exponents, including Taylor series, does not have singularities in the finite complex plane
and consequently cannot reproduce them.
A function $ f(z)$ , which is analytic in a domain of the complex plane,
can be developed (by definition) in power series around a point in that domain, and the radius
of convergence of the series will be equal to the distance of that point from the nearest
singularity, of course excluded.
Thus, for $1/z$ which has a simple pole at $z=0$ :
- when developed at $z=1$ will have a convergence radius of $ 1$;
- to get a larger radius( $R$), you shall develop it around $z_0=R$ ;
- there is no possibility to develop it so as to encompass positive and negative real values of it.
The Laurent series for $1/z$ at $z_0=0$ is infact $1/z$, i.e. the function itself.
edited yesterday
answered 2 days ago
G Cab
17.1k31237
17.1k31237
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The geometric series $sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n$ converges for
$$|1-x|<1 iff -1<1-x<1 iff 0<x<2$$
and we have
$$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac{1}{1-(1-x)}=frac1x$$
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The geometric series $sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n$ converges for
$$|1-x|<1 iff -1<1-x<1 iff 0<x<2$$
and we have
$$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac{1}{1-(1-x)}=frac1x$$
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
The geometric series $sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n$ converges for
$$|1-x|<1 iff -1<1-x<1 iff 0<x<2$$
and we have
$$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac{1}{1-(1-x)}=frac1x$$
The geometric series $sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n$ converges for
$$|1-x|<1 iff -1<1-x<1 iff 0<x<2$$
and we have
$$sum_{ngeq0}(1-x)^n=frac{1}{1-(1-x)}=frac1x$$
answered 2 days ago
gimusi
89.1k74495
89.1k74495
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The set of those real numbers at which a power series $displaystylesum_{n=0}^infty a_n(x-a)^n$ belongs to one of these types:
${a}$;
$(a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$(a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$mathbb R$.
Since, $(0,+infty)$ doesn't appear here, no power series exists whose sum is $frac1x$ in $(0,+infty)$ and which diverges otherwise.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The set of those real numbers at which a power series $displaystylesum_{n=0}^infty a_n(x-a)^n$ belongs to one of these types:
${a}$;
$(a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$(a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$mathbb R$.
Since, $(0,+infty)$ doesn't appear here, no power series exists whose sum is $frac1x$ in $(0,+infty)$ and which diverges otherwise.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
The set of those real numbers at which a power series $displaystylesum_{n=0}^infty a_n(x-a)^n$ belongs to one of these types:
${a}$;
$(a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$(a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$mathbb R$.
Since, $(0,+infty)$ doesn't appear here, no power series exists whose sum is $frac1x$ in $(0,+infty)$ and which diverges otherwise.
The set of those real numbers at which a power series $displaystylesum_{n=0}^infty a_n(x-a)^n$ belongs to one of these types:
${a}$;
$(a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$(a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r)$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$[a-r,a+r]$, for some $rin(0,+infty)$;
$mathbb R$.
Since, $(0,+infty)$ doesn't appear here, no power series exists whose sum is $frac1x$ in $(0,+infty)$ and which diverges otherwise.
answered 2 days ago
José Carlos Santos
143k20112211
143k20112211
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3020447%2fwhy-does-sum-n-geq01-xn-frac1x-have-such-a-poor-radius-of-convergence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
The domain of convergence of a real power series is always either a finitely long interval or the whole real line.
– Andreas Blass
2 days ago
3
$sum r^n$ converges iff $-1<r<1$. If $r=1-x$ that's the same as $0<x<2$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
$1/x$ has a pole at $x=0$.
– Lord Shark the Unknown
2 days ago
1
More specifically: their intervals of convergence are symmetric around the point of evaluation, which is $1$ here, so the Taylor series does not converge beyond $x = 2$ (and you can check that it doesn't converge at $x = 2$ either).
– user3482749
2 days ago