[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Home]
Trying to teach myself math.
If images are not shown try to refresh the page. If you like this website, please disable any AdBlock software!

File: tmp.png (25 KB, 603x478) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
25 KB, 603x478
Trying to teach myself math.
Got stuck...
Any help?
>>
Well, what you have looks good. The 1/n becomes "dx", and you can write n/(n+i) as 1/(1+i/n), and the i/n becomes "x", so perhaps you get something like $\int_0^1 1/(1+x)\, dx = \log(2)$
>>
File: tmp2.png (20 KB, 647x289) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
20 KB, 647x289
>>26956
Thank you, that's what I did.
>>
>>26939
>harmonic numbers
That's what the question is asking, but it's not the intended solution.

I think that the question can be solved using the integral of 1/x.

You will find the summands as a Riemann-sum of the function 1/x in the interval [n;2n+1] using unit-length intervals and function values at the left margin. This sum is greater than the integral of (1/x) between n and 2n+1.

Since int (1/x) dx = ln(x) + c you obtain that the sum is greater than ln(2n+1) - ln(n) > ln(2n) - ln(n) = ln(2) + ln(n) - ln(n) = ln(2).

The limes is therefore greater or equal to ln(2).

The second inequality can perhaps be done similarly taking a Rieman sum that is smaller than the integral of 1/x.
>>
>>26974
too late
>>
>>26974
useful none the less
>>
>>26974
I suppose you could do the same bounding procedure using 1/(1+x) as well, to make the whole process more rigorous.