Vub
The Power of Two
+188|6938|Sydney, Australia

some_random_panda wrote:

I thought that this was interesting and so i removed it from the post and put it in this one...


Say, you have infinite number of columns leading down of infinite numbers in this pattern and infinite rows of infinite numbers leading across in this pattern...

0           1           1/2               1/4               1/8               1/16...  =2

-1          0           1                  1/2               1/4               1/8...    =1

-1/2       -1          0                  1                  1/2               1/4...    =1/2

-1/4       -1/2       -1                 0                  1                  1/2...    =1/4

-1/8       -1/4        -1/2             -1                 0                  1...       =1/8
.             .            .                  .                   .                   .               .
.             .            .                  .                   .                   .               .
.             .            .                  .                   .                   .            =4    <--------rows equal 4

=-2        =-1         =-1/2          =-1/4             =-1/8          =-1/16...   -----> =-4    <------------columns equal
                                                                                                                                                 -4


yet the table clearly equals 0!

Anyone know why if you add it horizontally, vertically or as a concept that it is different? 
The first row will have infinite numbers.
The second row will have infinity + 1 numbers.
The longest row will have infinity + infinity numbers.

In your second proof, ordering numbers by the size of their sets, infinity + infinity is not equal to infinity. In fact, infinity + 1 doesn't equal infinity.

Assuming your second proof is true:
What this means is that each row and column will have one more element than the previous row/column.

Let's look at your addition of rows. The first row total is 2, the second is 1...the last I assume is 0, and the row goes something like this
[0 - 1/Very large number - ........ - 1/4 - 1/2 - 0 + 1/2 + 1/4 + ....... + 1/Very large number + 0]. Note this has twice the number of elements in it than the first rwo.

Remembering that column 2 has one more number than column 1, and column 3 has two more than column 1 etc, there are incomplete rows beneath this last one you've added. So, while you've added an infinity number of rows to get to E = 4, you've missed the other infinity number of rows which are incomplete (incomplete meaning that it doesn't represent all the columns). These incomplete rows contain all negative numbers, and their sums will cancel out your positive sum of 4.

https://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z22/vub_photos/Maybe.jpg

You were right. The boxed bit does equal 0 because it is symmetrical. But notice, Region A = - Region B, so they cancel each other out. Hence the table does = 0. The only reason you got 4 and -4 was because, using finite maths to solve this question, you didn't take into account the incomplete rows of Region B.

Another way of looking at this question is that because in normal everyday maths infinity + infinity = infinity is impossible, hence this question, where infinity + infinity must equal to infinity, cannot be solved by everyday maths.

Last edited by Vub (2007-06-28 22:51:49)

some_random_panda
Flamesuit essential
+454|6835

Not bad at all.  Actually, a much easier and faster way to answer the question was "When dealing with infinite sequences of numbers, the order of summation matters."

Hmm...that's not you in the link in the sig, is it?  Because if it is...holy crap.
Vub
The Power of Two
+188|6938|Sydney, Australia

some_random_panda wrote:

Not bad at all.  Actually, a much easier and faster way to answer the question was "When dealing with infinite sequences of numbers, the order of summation matters."

Hmm...that's not you in the link in the sig, is it?  Because if it is...holy crap.
What link do you mean? The sydney morning herald one? Yep, it is, my brother and I.
R3v4n
We shall beat to quarters!
+433|6931|Melbourne

1+1 = 2?
~ Do you not know that in the service … one must always choose the lesser of two weevils?
Vub
The Power of Two
+188|6938|Sydney, Australia
Oh yes, and another thing, the table does not equal to 0, because if it does it would need a negative x for every positive x on the table, this is clearly not the case, as your final row starts from negative 1/large number goes to 0 and then goes to positive 1/large number. This row itself will be 0, so your table will not add to give you 0.

In fact, the table adds up to give you 4.

Last edited by Vub (2007-07-01 02:01:27)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard