Math Is Fun Forum
  Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

#26 2009-05-18 20:40:28

Kurre
Member
Registered: 2006-07-18
Posts: 280

Re: Kurre's Exercises

Last edited by Kurre (2009-05-18 20:41:16)

Offline

#27 2009-05-22 07:58:04

bobbym
Administrator
From: Bumpkinland
Registered: 2009-04-12
Posts: 90,607

Re: Kurre's Exercises

Hi Kurre;

Will you please post your solution to #7. I have been using summation by parts, abels transformation, exponential substitution to get a geometric sum and all the trig identities I know.


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.

I agree with you regarding the satisfaction and importance of actually computing some numbers. I can't tell you how often I see time and money wasted because someone didn't bother to run the numbers.

Offline

#28 2009-05-22 10:39:45

kean
Member
Registered: 2009-05-17
Posts: 8

Re: Kurre's Exercises

sure! it's right

\sum_{k=1}^n \zeta_k^m =0

Offline

#29 2009-05-22 15:27:34

bobbym
Administrator
From: Bumpkinland
Registered: 2009-04-12
Posts: 90,607

Re: Kurre's Exercises

Hi Bo Li;

Welcome to the forum.

You forgot to enclose your latex between {math}{/math} with [ replacing { and ] replacing } so it looks like this:

Anyway, how does this prove # 14


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.

I agree with you regarding the satisfaction and importance of actually computing some numbers. I can't tell you how often I see time and money wasted because someone didn't bother to run the numbers.

Offline

#30 2009-05-23 00:04:13

Kurre
Member
Registered: 2006-07-18
Posts: 280

Re: Kurre's Exercises

Offline

#31 2009-05-23 00:31:08

Kurre
Member
Registered: 2006-07-18
Posts: 280

Re: Kurre's Exercises

kean wrote:

sure! it's right

\sum_{k=1}^n \zeta_k^m =0

it does not hold for all m and n

Offline

#32 2009-05-23 00:37:58

bobbym
Administrator
From: Bumpkinland
Registered: 2009-04-12
Posts: 90,607

Re: Kurre's Exercises

Thanks Kurre for providing the answer to #7.


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.

I agree with you regarding the satisfaction and importance of actually computing some numbers. I can't tell you how often I see time and money wasted because someone didn't bother to run the numbers.

Offline

#33 2009-05-24 21:40:00

Kurre
Member
Registered: 2006-07-18
Posts: 280

Re: Kurre's Exercises

#15let k,n be positive integers, a a nonzero real, k<n+1 . Show that:


both with real analysis and by using residue calculus

edit: i did a mistake so i dont know if its possible to do this using residues, but that does not mean it must be impossible

Last edited by Kurre (2009-05-25 06:43:09)

Offline

#34 2009-05-27 21:12:01

Kurre
Member
Registered: 2006-07-18
Posts: 280

Re: Kurre's Exercises

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB