#Calculating row geometric sequence
146 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
what answer does the answerbook give
you forgot to simplify your fraction answer
when you simplify a fraction, both the numerator and the denominator change
also how did you get 99990/180000
Ive made worse
if youre ever not sure, you can use a calculator to verify each step
true, but honestly I used the same strategy and formula. So it should be right.
what you did here isnt correct
you need to know where the +1 in the n+1 comes from
the steps you are currently doing use a different version fo the formula that does not have a +1
so your formula is $\text{first term}\cdot\frac{1-(\text{ratio})^5}{1-\text{ratio}}$
mtt07734
What does ratio mean, i'm sorry
1/10
you used the capital letter R for it, remember
it stands for Ratio
(also you need to use a lowercase r not a capital one)
ok
But now you say first term *
But the formula should stay the same, shouldn't it?
Because
Hold on: you most likely know, but ill show you the only formula i've gotten from the theory book to solve these. Ill send a picture
This is the formula I've used and the only one for these problems I've got from the theory book. It should be solveable with this formula.
A0 = begin term so 5/10
R = 1/10 (I assume)
An= 5/1.000.000
you calculated N wrong
Like in the formula or in general?
in this particular formula
n + 1
-5 + 1
Not really, sorry
-4?
no
there are three definitions for N depending on how you view the series and the formula you use
first, do you know the notation for how to write a sequence down
Sigma notation?
do you know the notation for how to write a sequence down
Then, I don't think so.
do you remember a0, a1, a2 meaning anything?
Ah yes, I know it
you know a0, a1, a2 is called a "sequence"?
Yes
then do you know the notation for how to write a sequence down
now do you know what the n in an meant?
its a variable
like aN is the end term
no its not
n is just a regular variable thats commonly used for indices
(indices is index but plural)
(the number in the lower-right of a is called an "index")
so n fundamentally does not have any meaning tied to it
part of the problem is what you begin the sequence with
Ah yes it defines on which position it is, right?
sure
part of the problem is what you begin the sequence with
you can either choose the index to begin at 0 or at 1
then the sequence begins at a0 and then goes a1, a2, a3 ...
to represent an arbitrary term at index n, you use an
n is not a special letter for this purpose
if you want to use the letter k for the index, you use ak
the letter i for the index is common as well
so n here is already very broad
Yes thanks, I know. I have done that before with A and B because Ak index was not equal to 0
no idea what you mean by that
the index can either begin at 0 or 1 regardless of what letter youre using
its a separate, independent choice
I changed variables with arithmetic sequences before
So when Ak= not equal to 1 I had to change variables
So I did B = K + ( number to make it 1)
So if Ak was -2 than It would be B = K + 3
thats not a green flag
not a red one either
we can address what youre doing wrong there later
for now, whether the sequence begins at 0 or 1 changes what an can be made to mean
lets say the sequence begins at 1
then an can be said to mean the "nth term in the sequence"
because the indices matches up with the way youd naturally count with 1
the first term is a1
the second term is a2
the third term is a3
etc.
therefore the nth term is an
now if you want to calculate a series for this,
you call the first term a1 = 5/10
you call the ratio r = 1/10
and n in this case is the sixth term, 5/100000
from there,
,,a_1\cdot\frac{1-r^{n+1}}{1-r}\text{ is correct}
mtt07734
You mean 5/1.000.000, I guess
yea
now take a look at what you calculated instead
you did a combination of things oddly that you still havent corrected up until now
first,
So if i'm not wrong a1 is a0 in my formula because they both represent 5/10(the first number)
no
Oof big F
because if you think thats the only issue, youre in for a nasty surprise later on
you shouldve pointed out the n
first
for now though as a precursor,
you should be doing r^N instead of 10^N
that shows your intuition for how this works, and what youre actually doing, arent aligned
OMG im sorry
But that thing you took is the one I didn't use anymore
because see:
Ill show you
One second
pls
a
If you click on "a" then scroll to the original picture from my calculations
My latest calculation start at 2 lines down from where you got that screenshot from
I might resend the picture with my latest calculation. I know the -4 was wrong.
The same picture but cut
you should just start a new page and have it be the calculations you know should work
along with what you think would reasonably justify it
Because that first picture of my calculations have 2 differen calculations the first one is totally etrong
for example if you think this is correct, you should leave it in the new page
I said to make a new page
beause this still has the exact same issue
new page please
Yes I know
then dont point out a corner that's still just as wrong as the picture I showed
I have a new page