Formula for an infinite geometric series (Part 9)

I continue this series of posts by considering the formula for an infinite geometric series. Somewhat surprisingly (to students), the formula for an infinite geometric series is actually easier to remember than the formula for a finite geometric series.

One way of deriving the formula parallels yesterday’s post. If $a_1, a_2, a_3, \dots$ are the first terms of an infinite geometric sequence, let

$S = a_1 + a_2 + a_3 + \dots$

Recalling the formula for an geometric sequence, we know that

$a_2 = a_1 r$

$a_3 = a_1 r^2$

$\vdots$

Substituting, we find

$S = a_1 + a_1 r+ a_1 r^2 \dots$

For example, if $a_1 = \displaystyle \frac{1}{2}$ and $r = \displaystyle \frac{1}{2}$ , we have

$S = \displaystyle \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{4} + \frac{1}{8} + \dots$

This is perhaps the world’s most famous infinite series, as this is the subject of Zeno’s paradox. When I teach infinite series in class, I often engage the students by reminding students about Zeno’s paradox and then show them this clip from the 1994 movie I.Q.

This clip is almost always a big hit with my students.

Even after showing this clip, some students resist the idea that an infinite series can have a finite answer. For such students, I use a physical demonstration: I walk half-way across the classroom, then a quarter, and so on… until I walk head-first into a walk at full walking speed. The resulting loud thud usually confirms for students that an infinite sum can indeed have a finite answer.

P.S. PhD Comics recently had a cartoon concerning Zeno’s paradox. Source: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1610

Here’s another one. Source: http://www.xkcd.com/994/

Formula for a finite geometric series (Part 8)

As I’ve said before, I’m not particularly a fan of memorizing formulas. Apparently, most college students aren’t fans either, because they often don’t have immediate recall of certain formulas from high school when they’re needed in the collegiate curriculum.

While I’m not a fan of making students memorize formulas, I am a fan of teaching students how to derive formulas. Speaking for myself, if I ever need to use a formula that I know exists but have long since forgotten, the ability to derive the formula allows me to get it again.

Which leads me to today’s post: the derivation of the formulas for the sum of a finite geometric series. This topic is commonly taught in Precalculus but, in my experience, is often forgotten by students years later when needed in later classes.

Like its counterpart for arithmetic series, the formula for a finite geometric series can be derived using the patented Bag of Tricks. Socrates gave the Bag of Tricks to Plato, Plato gave it to Aristotle, it passed down the generations, my teacher taught the Bag of Tricks to me, and I teach it to my students.

If $a_1, \dots, a_n$ are the first $n$ terms of an geometric sequence, let

$S = a_1 + a_2 + a_3 + \dots + a_{n-1} + a_n$

Recalling the formula for an geometric sequence, we know that

$a_2 = a_1 r$

$a_3 = a_1 r^2$

$\vdots$

$a_{n-1} = a_1 r^{n-2}$

$a_n = a_1 r^{n-1}$

Substituting, we find

$S = a_1 + a_1 r+ a_1 r^2 \dots + a_1 r^{n-2} + a_1 r^{n-1}$

At this point, we use something different from the patented Bag of Tricks: we multiply both sides by $-r$ .

$-rS = -a_1r - a_1 r^2- a_1 r^3 \dots - a_1 r^{n-1} - a_1 r^n$

Next, we add the two equations. Notice that almost everything cancels on the right-hand side. The $a_1 r$ cancel, the $a_1 r^2$ cancel, yada yada yada, and the $a_1 r^{n-1}$ cancel. The only terms that remain are $a_1$ and $-a_1 r^n$ . So

$S - rS = a_1 - a_1 r^n$

$S(1-r) = a_1 (1- r^n)$

$S = \displaystyle \frac{a_1 ( 1-r^n) }{1-r}$

A quick pedagogical note: I find that this derivation “sells” best to students when I multiply by $-r$ and add, as opposed to multiplying by $r$ and subtracting.

This formula is also a straightforward consequence of the factorization formula

$x^n - y^n = (x-y)(x^{n-1} + x^{n-2} y + \dots +x y^{n-2} + y^{n-1})$

Just let $x=1$ and $y=r$ , and then multiply both sides by the first term $a_1$ .

However, in my experience, most students don’t have instant recall of this formula either. They can certainly remember the formula for the difference of two squares (which is a special case of the above formula), but they often can’t remember that the difference of two cubes has a formula. (And, while I’m on the topic, they also can’t remember that the sum of two cubes can always be factored.)

Pedagogically, the most common mistake that I see students make when using this formula is using the wrong exponent on the right-hand side. For example, suppose the problem is to simplify

$48 +24+ 12 + 6 + 3 + 1.5 + 0.75 + 0.375$

Here’s the common mistake: student solve for $n$ using the formula for a geometric sequence. They solve for the unknown exponent (often using logarithms) and find that $0.375 = 48 (0.5)^7$ . They conclude that $n=7$ , and then plug into for formula for a geometric series:

$S = \displaystyle \frac{48 ( 1-(0.5)^7) }{1-0.5} = 95.25$ (incorrect)

This answer is clearly wrong, since the sum of the original series must have a $5$ in the thousandths place. The answer $95.25$ is the correct answer to the wrong question — that’s the sum of the first seven terms of the sequence (stopping at $0.75$ ), but the original series has eight terms. Using the formula correctly, we find

$S = \displaystyle \frac{48 ( 1-(0.5)^8) }{1-0.5} = 95.625$ (correct)

Not surprisingly, the difference between the incorrect and correct answers is $0.375$ , the eighth term.

To help students avoid this mistake, I re-emphasize that the number $n$ stands for the number of terms in the series. In particular, it does not mean the exponent needed to give the last term in the series. That exponent, of course, is $n-1$ , not $n$ .

Formula for an arithmetic series (Part 7)

As we’ve discussed, the formula for an arithmetic series is

$S_n = \displaystyle \frac{n}{2} (2a_1 + [n-1] d) = \displaystyle \frac{n}{2} (a_1 + a_n)$ ,

where $n$ is the number of terms, $a_1$ is the first term, $d$ is the common difference, and $a_n$ is the last term. This formula may be more formally expressed as

$S = \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n a_k = \displaystyle \frac{n}{2} (2a_1 + [n-1] d) = \displaystyle \frac{n}{2} (a_1 + a_n)$

For homework and on tests, students are asked to directly plug into this formula and to apply this problem with word problems, like finding the total number of seats in an auditorium with 50 rows, where there are 12 seats in the front row and each row has two more seats than the row in front of it.

In my opinion, the ability to solve questions like the one below is the acid test for determining whether a student — who I assume can solve routine word problems like the one above — really understands series or is just familiar with series. In other words, if a student can solve routine word problems but is unable to handle a problem like the one below, then there’s still room for that student’s knowledge of series to deepen.

Calculate $\displaystyle \sum_{k=11}^{60} (5k - 2)$

There are two reasonable approaches for solving this problem.

Solution #1. Notice that $5k - 2 = 5(k-1) + 5 - 2 = 3 + 5(k-1)$ . So this is really an arithmetic series whose first term is $3$ and whose common difference is $5$ . Therefore,

$S = \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{60} a_k = \displaystyle \frac{60}{2} (2[3] + [60-1] 5)=9030$

However, I’m supposed to start the series on $k=11$ , not $k=1$ . That means that I need to subtract off the first ten terms of the above series. Now

$S = \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{10} a_k = \displaystyle \frac{10}{2} (2[3] + [10-1] 5)= 255$

Finally,

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=11}^{60} a_k = \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{60} a_k - \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{10} a_k = 9030 - 255 = 8775$

Solution #2. Writing out the terms, we see that

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=11}^{60} (5k - 2) = (5[11]-2) + (5[12]-2) + \dots + (5[60]-2)$

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=11}^{60} (5k - 2) = 53+58 + \dots +298$

The right-hand side is an arithmetic series whose “first” term is $53$ and whose last ( $50$ th) term is $298$ . Therefore,

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=11}^{60} (5k - 2) = \frac{50}{2} (53+298) = 8775$

Of the two solutions, I suppose I have a mild preference for the first, as the second solution won’t work for something like $\displaystyle \sum_{k=11}^{60} k^2$ . However, both solution demonstrate that the student is actually thinking about the meaning of the series instead of just plugging numbers in a formula, and so I’d be happy with either one in a Precalculus class.

Formula for an arithmetic series (Part 6)

In the previous posts of this series, I described two methods of deriving the formula

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k = \frac{n(n+1)}{2}$

The first method concerned reversing the terms of the sum (or, almost equivalently, taking the terms in pairs). The second method used mathematical induction.

Mathematical induction can be applied to arithmetic series as well as other series. However, the catch is that you have to know the answer before proving that the answer actually is correct. By contrast, the first method did not require us to know the answer in advance — it just fell out of the calculation — but it cannot be applied to series that are not arithmetic.

Here’s a third method using the principle of telescoping series. This method has the strengths of the previous two methods: it does not require us to know the answer in advance, and it can also be applied to some other series which are not arithmetic.

To begin, consider the sum

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2]$

At this early point, students often object, “Where did that come from?” I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again: I tell them my usual tongue-in-cheek story that this idea comes from the patented Bag of Tricks. Socrates gave the Bag of Tricks to Plato, Plato gave it to Aristotle, it passed down the generations, my teacher taught the Bag of Tricks to me, and I teach it to my students.

In any event, I will evaluate this sum in two different ways.

Step 1. Just write out the terms of the series, starting from $k=1$ and ending with $k =n$ .

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2] = [1^2 - 0^2] + [2^2 - 1^2] + [3^2 - 2^2] + \dots + [n^2 - (n-1)^2]$

Notice that, on the right-hand side, the $1^2$ terms cancel, the $2^2$ terms cancel, and so on. In fact, almost everything cancels. The only two terms that aren’t cancelled are the $0^2$ and $n^2$ terms. Therefore,

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2] = n^2 - 0^2 = n^2$

Step 2. Next, we’ll rewrite the original sum by expanding out the terms inside of the sum:

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2] = \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k^2 -2k + 1)]$

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2] = \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [2k-1]$

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2] = \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n 2k - \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n 1$

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2] = 2\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k - \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n 1$

Step 3. Of course, these different looking answers from Steps 1 and 2 have to be the same, so let’s set them equal to each other:

$2\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k - \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n 1 = n^2$

There is one unknown in this equation, $\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k$ . The second sum is just the constant $1$ added to itself $n$ times, and so $\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n 1 = n$ . Therefore, we solve for the unknown:

$2 \left(\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k \right) - n = n^2$

$2 \left(\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k \right) = n^2 + n$

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k = \displaystyle \frac{n^2 + n}{2}$

The beauty of this approach is that this approach can be continued. For example, to obtain $\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k^2$ , we begin with

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^3 - (k-1)^3]$

Step 1. By telescoping series,

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^3 - (k-1)^3] = n^3 - 0^3 = n^3$

Step 2. Using the binomial theorem,

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^3 - (k-1)^3] = \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^3 - (k^3 -3k^2+3k- 1)]$

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2] = 3\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k^2 - 3\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k + \displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n 1$

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n [k^2 - (k-1)^2] = 3\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k^2 - 3\left( \frac{n(n+1)}{2} \right) + n$

Step 3. Setting these two expressions equal to each other,

$3\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k^2 - 3\left( \frac{n(n+1)}{2} \right) + n= n^3$

And we eventually conclude that:

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^n k^2 = \displaystyle \frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6}$

And then this could be continued to obtain closed-form expressions for higher exponents of $k$ .

Formula for an arithmetic series (Part 5)

In Precalculus, Discrete Mathematics or Real Analysis, an arithmetic series is often used as a student’s first example of a proof by mathematical induction. Recall, from Wikipedia:

Mathematical induction is a method of mathematical proof typically used to establish a given statement for all natural numbers. It is done in two steps. The first step, known as the base case, is to prove the given statement for the first natural number. The second step, known as the inductive step, is to prove that the given statement for any one natural number implies the given statement for the next natural number. From these two steps, mathematical induction is the rule from which we infer that the given statement is established for all natural numbers.

The simplest and most common form of mathematical induction infers that a statement involving a natural number n holds for all values of n. The proof consists of two steps:

The basis (base case): prove that the statement holds for the first natural number $n$ . Usually, $n=0$ or $n=1$ .

The inductive step: prove that, if the statement holds for some natural number $n$ , then the statement holds for $n+1$ .

The hypothesis in the inductive step that the statement holds for some $n$ is called the induction hypothesis (or inductive hypothesis). To perform the inductive step, one assumes the induction hypothesis and then uses this assumption to prove the statement for $n+1$ .

As an inference rule, mathematical induction can be justified as follows. Having proven the base case and the inductive step, then any value can be obtained by performing the inductive step repeatedly. It may be helpful to think of the domino effect. Consider a half line of dominoes each standing on end, and extending infinitely to the right. Suppose that:

The first domino falls right.

If a (fixed but arbitrary) domino falls right, then its next neighbor also falls right.

With these assumptions one can conclude (using mathematical induction) that all of the dominoes will fall right.

Mathematical induction… works because $n$ is used to represent an arbitrary natural number. Then, using the inductive hypothesis, i.e. that $P(n)$ is true, show $P(k+1)$ is also true. This allows us to “carry” the fact that $P(0)$ is true to the fact that $P(1)$ is also true, and carry $P(1)$ to $P(2)$ , etc., thus proving $P(n)$ holds for every natural number $n$ .

When students first encounter mathematical induction (in either Precalculus, Discrete Mathematics, or Real Analysis), the theorems that students are asked to prove usually fall into four categories:

Calculating a series (examples below).
Statements concerning divisibility (for example, proving that $4$ is always a factor of $5^n-1$ ).
Finding a closed-form expression for a recursively defined sequence (for example, if $a_1 = 4$ and $a_n = 3a_{n-1}$ if $n \ge 2$ , proving that $a_n = 4 \times 3^{n-1}$ 0
Statements concerning inequality (for example, proving that $n! > 4^n$ if $n \ge 9$ 0

Here’s a common first example of mathematical induction applied to an arithmetic series. Notice that the statement of the theorem matches the form $\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}(a_1 + a_n)$ seen earlier in this series (pardon the pun) of posts.

Theorem. $1 + 2 + \dots + (n-1) + n = \displaystyle \frac{n(n+1)}{2}$

Proof. Induction on $n$ .

$n = 1$ : The left-hand is simply $1$ , while the right-hand side is $\displaystyle \frac{(1)(2)}{2}$ , which is also equal to $1$ . So the base case works.

$n$ : Assume that the statement holds true for the integer $n$ .

$n+1$ . If I replace $n$ by $n+1$ in the statement of the theorem, then the right-hand side becomes

$\displaystyle \frac{(n+1)[(n+1)+1]}{2} = \displaystyle \frac{(n+1)(n+2)}{2}$

I find it helpful to describe this to students as my target. In other words, as I manipulate the left-hand side, my ultimate goal is to end up with this target. Once I have done that, then I have completed the proof.

If I replace $n$ by $n+1$ in the statement of the theorem, then the left-hand side will now end on $n+1$ instead of $n$ :

$1 + 2 + \dots + (n-1) + n + (n+1)$

Notice that we’ve seen almost all of this before, except for the extra term $n+1$ . So we will substitute using the induction hypothesis, carrying the extra $n+1$ along for the ride.

$1 + 2 + \dots + (n-1) + n + (n+1) = \displaystyle \frac{n(n+1)}{2} + (n+1)$

Now our task is, by hook or by crook, using whatever algebraic tricks we can think of to convert this last expression into the target. Most students are completely comfortable doing this, although they typically multiply out the term $n(n+1)$ unnecessarily. Indeed, many early proofs by induction are simplified by factoring out terms whenever possible — in the example below, $(n+1)$ is factored on the last step — as opposed to multiplying them out. In my experience, proofs by induction often serve as a stringent test of students’ algebra skills as opposed to their skills in abstract reasoning.

In any event, here’s the end of the proof:

$1 + 2 + \dots + (n-1) + n + (n+1) = \displaystyle \frac{n(n+1)}{2} + (n+1)$

$1 + 2 + \dots + (n-1) + n + (n+1) = \displaystyle \frac{n(n+1) + 2(n+1)}{2}$

$1 + 2 + \dots + (n-1) + n + (n+1) = \displaystyle \frac{(n+1)(n + 2)}{2}$

Mathematical induction can be used to verify formulas for series which are not arithmetic, like

$1^2 + 2^2 + \dots + (n-1)^2 + n^2 = \displaystyle \frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6}$

$1^3 + 2^3 + \dots + (n-1)^3 + n^3 = \displaystyle \frac{n^2(n+1)^2}{4}$

However, the downside of a proof by induction lies in the word verify, as it’s necessary to actually know what’s going to work before proceeding with the proof.

In the next post, I’ll describe a method of obtaining these series that does not require mathematical induction.

Formula for an arithmetic series (Part 4)

Which leads me to today’s post: the derivation of the formulas for the sum of an arithmetic series. This topic is commonly taught in Precalculus but, in my experience, is often forgotten by students years later when needed in later classes.

To get the idea across, consider the arithmetic series

$S = 16 + 19 + 22 + 25 + 28 + 31 + 34 + 37 + 40 + 43$

Now write the sum in reverse order. This doesn’t change the value of the sum, and so:

$S = 43 + 40 + 37 +34+ 31 + 28 + 25 + 22 + 19 + 16$

Now add these two lines vertically. Notice that $16 + 43 = 59$ , $19 + 40 = 59$ , and in fact each pair of numbers adds to $59$ . So

$2S = 59 + 59 + 59 + 59 + 59 + 59 + 59 + 59 + 59 + 59$

$2S = 59 \times 10 = 590$

$S = 295$

Naturally, this can be directly confirmed with a calculator by just adding the 10 numbers.

When I show this to my students, they often complain that there’s no way on earth that they would have thought of that for themselves. They wouldn’t have thought to set the sum equal to $S$ , and they certainly would not have thought to reverse the terms in the sum. To comfort them, I tell them my usual tongue-in-cheek story that this idea comes from the patented Bag of Tricks. Socrates gave the Bag of Tricks to Plato, Plato gave it to Aristotle, it passed down the generations, my teacher taught the Bag of Tricks to me, and I teach it to my students.

The derivation of the general formula proceeds using the same idea. If $a_1, \dots, a_n$ are the first $n$ terms of an arithmetic sequence, let

$S = a_1 + a_2 + \dots + a_{n-1} + a_n$

Recalling the formula for an arithmetic sequence, we know that

$a_2 = a_1 + d$

$\vdots$

$a_{n-1} = a_1 + (n-2)d$

$a_n = a_1 + (n-1)d$

Substituting, we find

$S = a_1 + [a_1 + d] + \dots + [a_1 + (n-2)d] + [a_1 + (n-1)d]$

As above, we now return the order…

$S = [a_1 + (n-1)d] + [a_1 + (n-2)d] + \dots + [a_1 + d] + a_1$

… and add the two equations:

$2S = [2a_1 + (n-1)d] + [2a_1 + d+(n-2)d] + \dots + [2a_1 +(n-2)d+ d] + [2a_1+(n-1)d]$

$2S = [2a_1 + (n-1)d] + [2a_1 + (n-1)d] + \dots + [2a_1 +(n-1)d] + [2a_1+(n-1)d]$

$2S = n[2a_1 + (n-1)d]$

$S = \displaystyle \frac{n}{2} [2a_1 + (n-1)d]$

We also note that the formula may be rewritten as

$S = \displaystyle \frac{n}{2} [a_1 + \{a_1 + (n-1)d\} ]$

$S = \displaystyle \frac{n}{2} [a_1 + a_n]$

This latter form isn’t too difficult to state as a sentence: the sum of a series with $n$ is the average of the first and last terms, multiplied by the number of terms.

Indeed, I have seen textbooks offer proofs of this formula by using the same logic that young Gauss used to find the sum $1 + 2 + \dots + 99 + 100$ . The “proof” goes like this: Take the terms in pairs. The first term plus the last term is $a_1 + a_n$ . The second term plus the second-to-last term is $a_2 + a_{n-1} = a_1 + d + a_n - d = a_1 + a_n$ . And so on. So each pair adds to $a_1 + a_n$ . Since there are $n$ terms, there are $n/2$ pairs, and so we derive the above formula for $S$ .

You’ll notice I put “proof” in quotation marks. There’s a slight catch with the above logic: it only works if $n$ is an even number. If $n$ is odd, the result is still correct, but the logic to get the result is slightly different. That’s why I don’t particularly recommend using the above paragraph to prove this formula for students, even though it fits nicely with the almost unforgettable Gauss story.

That said, for talented students looking for a challenge, I would recommend showing this idea, then point out the flaw in the argument, and then ask the students to come up with an alternate proof for handling odd values of $n$ .

Calculation of a famous arithmetic series (Part 3)

In this post, we’ll consider the calculation of a very famous arithmetic series… not because the series is particularly important, but because it’s part of a legendary story about one of the greatest mathematicians who ever lived. My frank opinion is that every math teacher should know this story. While I’m not 100% certain about small details of the story — like whether young Gauss was 9 or 10 years old when the following event happened — I’m just going to go with the story as told by the website http://www.math.wichita.edu/history/men/gauss.html.

Carl Friedrich Gauss (1777-1855) is considered to be the greatest German mathematician of the nineteenth century. His discoveries and writings influenced and left a lasting mark in the areas of number theory, astronomy, geodesy, and physics, particularly the study of electromagnetism.

Gauss was born in Brunswick, Germany, on April 30, 1777, to poor, working-class parents. His father labored as a gardner and brick-layer and was regarded as an upright, honest man. However, he was a harsh parent who discouraged his young son from attending school, with expectations that he would follow one of the family trades. Luckily, Gauss’ mother and uncle, Friedrich, recognized Carl’s genius early on and knew that he must develop this gifted intelligence with education.

While in arithmetic class, at the age of ten, Gauss exhibited his skills as a math prodigy when the stern schoolmaster gave the following assignment: “Write down all the whole numbers from $1$ to $100$ and add up their sum.” When each student finished, he was to bring his slate forward and place it on the schoolmaster’s desk, one on top of the other. The teacher expected the beginner’s class to take a good while to finish this exercise. But in a few seconds, to his teacher’s surprise, Carl proceeded to the front of the room and placed his slate on the desk. Much later the other students handed in their slates.

At the end of the classtime, the results were examined, with most of them wrong. But when the schoolmaster looked at Carl’s slate, he was astounded to see only one number: $5050$ . Carl then had to explain to his teacher that he found the result because he could see that, $1+100=101$ , $2+99=101$ , $3+98=101$ , so that he could find $50$ pairs of numbers that each add up to $101$ . Thus, $50$ times $101$ will equal $5050$ .

Pedagogical thoughts about sequences and series (Part 2)

After yesterday’s post about arithmetic and geometric sequences, I’d like to contribute some thoughts about teaching this topic, based on my own experience over the years.

1. Some students really resist the subscript notation $a_n$ when encountering it for the first time. To allay these concerns, I usually ask my students, “Why can’t we just label the terms in the sequence as $a$ , $b$ , $c$ , and so on?” They usually can answer: what if there are more than 26 terms? That’s the right answer, and so the $a_n$ is used so that we’re not limited to just the letters of the English alphabet.

Another way of selling the $a_n$ notation to students is by telling them that it’s completely analogous to the $f(x)$ notation used more commonly in Algebra II and Precalculus. For a “regular” function $f(x)$ , the number $x$ is chosen from the domain of real numbers. For a sequence $a_n$ , the number $n$ is chosen from the domain of positive (or nonnegative) integers.

2. The formulas in Part 1 of this series (pardon the pun) only apply to arithmetic and geometric sequences, respectively. In other words, if the sequence is neither arithmetic nor geometric, then the above formulas should not be used.

While this is easy to state, my observation is that some students panic a bit when working with sequences and tend to use these formulas on homework and test questions even when the sequence is specified to be something else besides these two types of sequences. For example, consider the following problem:

Find the 10th term of the sequence $1, 4, 9, 16, \dots$

I’ve known pretty bright students who immediately saw that the first term was $1$ and the difference between the first and second terms was $3$ , and so they answered that the tenth term is $1 + (10-1)\times 3 = 28$ … even though the sequence was never claimed to be arithmetic.

I’m guessing that these arithmetic and geometric sequences are emphasized so much in class that some students are conditioned to expect that every series is either arithmetic or geometric, forgetting (especially on tests) that there are sequences other than these two.

3. Regarding arithmetic sequences, sometimes it helps by giving students a visual picture by explicitly make the connection between the terms of an arithmetic sequence and the points of a line. For example, consider the arithmetic sequence which begins

$13, 16, 19, 22, \dots$

The first term is $13$ , the second term is $16$ , and so on. Now imagine plotting the points $(1,13)$ , $(2,16)$ , $(3,19)$ , and $(4,22)$ on the coordinate plane. Clearly the points lie on a straight line. This is not surprising since there’s a common difference between terms. Moreover, the slope of the line is $3$ . This matches the common difference of the arithmetic sequence.

4. In ordinary English, the words sequence and series are virtually synonymous. For example, if someone says either, “a sequence of unusual events” or “a series of unusual events,” the speaker means pretty much the same thing

However, in mathematics, the words sequence and series have different meanings. In mathematics, an example of an arithmetic sequence are the terms

$1, 3, 5, 7, 9, \dots, 99$

However, an example of an arithmetic series would be

$1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 9 + \dots + 99$

In other words, a sequence provides the individual terms, while a series is a sum of the terms.

When teaching this topic, I make sure to take a minute to emphasize that the words sequence and series will mean something different in my class, even though they basically mean the same thing in ordinary English.

Formulas for arithmetic and geometric sequences (Part 1)

I’m not particularly a fan of memorizing formulas. Apparently, most college students aren’t fans either, because they often don’t have immediate recall of certain formulas from high school when they’re needed in the collegiate curriculum.

Which leads me to today’s post: the derivation of the formulas for the $n$ th term of an arithmetic sequence and of a geometric sequence. This topic is commonly taught in Precalculus but, in my experience, is often forgotten by students years later when needed in later classes.

An arithmetic sequence is specified by two numbers: the first term and the common difference between terms. For example, if the first term is $16$ and the common difference is $3$ , then the sequence begins as

$16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, \dots$

If the first term is $29$ and the common difference is $-4$ , then the sequence begins as

$29, 25, 21, 17, 13, 9, 5, 1, -3, \dots$

For those of us old enough to remember, our favorite arithmetic sequences came from Schoolhouse Rock:

Let’s discuss the first arithmetic sequence, whose first seven terms are:

$16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, \dots$

How do we get the $8$ th term? That’s easy: we just add $3$ to $34$ to get $37$ .

How to we get the $100$ th term. That’s easy: we just add $3$ to the $99$ th term.

Oops. We don’t know the $99$ th term. To get the $99th$ term, we need the $98$ th term, which in turn requires the $97$ th term. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

The trouble (so far) is that an arithmetic sequence is recursively defined: to get one term, I add something to the previous term. Mathematically, the arithmetic sequence is defined by

$a_n = a_{n-1} + d$ ,

where $d$ is the common difference. This can be very intimidating to students when seeing it for the first time. So, to make this formula less intimidating, I usually read this equation as “Each next term in the sequence is equal to the previous term in the sequence plus the common difference.”

It would be far better to have a closed-form formula, where I could just plug in $100$ to get the $100$ th term, without first figuring out the previous $99$ terms.

To this end, we notice the following pattern:

Second term: $19 = 16 + 3$
Third term: $22 = 19 + 3 = 16 + 3 + 3 = 16 + 2 \times 3$
Fourth term: $25 = 22+ 3 = 16 + (2 \times 3) + 3 = 16 + 3 \times 3$
Fifth term: $28 = 25+ 3 = 16 + (3 \times 3) + 3 = 16 + 4 \times 3$
Sixth term: $31 = 28+ 3 = 16+ (4 \times 3) + 3 = 16 + 5 \times 3$
Seventh term: $34 = 31 + 3 = 16 + (5 \times 3) + 3 = 16 + 6 \times 3$

It looks like we have a pattern, so we can guess that:

One hundredth term = $16 + (100-1) \times 3 = 313$

In general, we have justified the closed-form formula

$a_n = a_1 + (n-1)d$ ,

where $a_1$ is the first term, and $d$ is the common difference. In words: to get the $n$ th term of an arithmetic sequence, we add $d$ to the first term $n-1$ times. (This may be formally proven using mathematical induction, though I won’t do so here.)

A closed-form formula for a geometric sequence is similarly obtained. In a geometric sequence, each term is equal to the previous term multiplied by a common ratio. Mathematically, the geometric sequence is recursively defined by

$a_n = a_{n-1}r$ ,

where $r$ is the common ratio. For example, if the first term is $3$ and the common ratio is $2$ , then the first few terms of the sequence are

$3, 6, 12, 24, 48, dots$

By the same logic used above, to get the $n$ th term of an geometric sequence, we multiply $r$ to the first term $n-1$ times. Thus justifies the formula

$a_n = a_1 r^{n-1}$ ,

which may be formally proven using mathematical induction.

Dating pools

Source: http://www.xkcd.com/314/