How can I show that $sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrtldots}}}$ exists?
$begingroup$
I would like to investigate the convergence of
$$sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+sqrtldots}}}}$$
Or more precisely, let $$begin{align}
a_1 & = sqrt 1\
a_2 & = sqrt{1+sqrt2}\
a_3 & = sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt 3}}\
a_4 & = sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt 4}}}\
&vdots
end{align}$$
Easy computer calculations suggest that this sequence converges rapidly to the value 1.75793275661800453265, so I handed this number to the all-seeing Google, which produced:
- OEIS A072449
- "Nested Radical Constant" from MathWorld
Henceforth let us write $sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + sqrt{cdots + sqrt{r_n}}}}$ as $[r_1, r_2, ldots r_n]$ for short, in the manner of continued fractions.
Obviously we have $$a_n= [1,2,ldots n] le underbrace{[n, n,ldots, n]}_n$$
but as the right-hand side grows without bound (It's $O(sqrt n)$) this is unhelpful. I thought maybe to do something like:
$$a_{n^2}le [1, underbrace{4, 4, 4}_3, underbrace{9, 9, 9, 9, 9}_5, ldots,
underbrace{n^2,n^2,ldots,n^2}_{2n-1}] $$
but I haven't been able to make it work.
I would like a proof that the limit $$lim_{ntoinfty} a_n$$
exists. The methods I know are not getting me anywhere.
I originally planned to ask "and what the limit is", but OEIS says "No closed-form expression is known for this constant".
The references it cites are unavailable to me at present.
sequences-and-series limits nested-radicals
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I would like to investigate the convergence of
$$sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+sqrtldots}}}}$$
Or more precisely, let $$begin{align}
a_1 & = sqrt 1\
a_2 & = sqrt{1+sqrt2}\
a_3 & = sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt 3}}\
a_4 & = sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt 4}}}\
&vdots
end{align}$$
Easy computer calculations suggest that this sequence converges rapidly to the value 1.75793275661800453265, so I handed this number to the all-seeing Google, which produced:
- OEIS A072449
- "Nested Radical Constant" from MathWorld
Henceforth let us write $sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + sqrt{cdots + sqrt{r_n}}}}$ as $[r_1, r_2, ldots r_n]$ for short, in the manner of continued fractions.
Obviously we have $$a_n= [1,2,ldots n] le underbrace{[n, n,ldots, n]}_n$$
but as the right-hand side grows without bound (It's $O(sqrt n)$) this is unhelpful. I thought maybe to do something like:
$$a_{n^2}le [1, underbrace{4, 4, 4}_3, underbrace{9, 9, 9, 9, 9}_5, ldots,
underbrace{n^2,n^2,ldots,n^2}_{2n-1}] $$
but I haven't been able to make it work.
I would like a proof that the limit $$lim_{ntoinfty} a_n$$
exists. The methods I know are not getting me anywhere.
I originally planned to ask "and what the limit is", but OEIS says "No closed-form expression is known for this constant".
The references it cites are unavailable to me at present.
sequences-and-series limits nested-radicals
$endgroup$
18
$begingroup$
This is probably a good place to start: "It was discovered by T. Vijayaraghavan that the infinite radical $sqrt{ a_1 + sqrt{ a_2 + sqrt{ a_3 + sqrt{a_4 + ldots }}}}$ where $a_n ge 0$, will converge to a limit if and only if the limit of $log a_n / 2^n$ exists" - Clawson, p. 229. (Taken from OEIS.)
$endgroup$
– George V. Williams
Jul 6 '13 at 3:23
$begingroup$
possible duplicate of Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:26
3
$begingroup$
I misread the solution at Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals. It asks several questions, one of which is mine, but all the answers provided are for the other questions.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:28
$begingroup$
Related: Nested radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:31
1
$begingroup$
This may help.
$endgroup$
– Maazul
Jul 6 '13 at 4:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I would like to investigate the convergence of
$$sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+sqrtldots}}}}$$
Or more precisely, let $$begin{align}
a_1 & = sqrt 1\
a_2 & = sqrt{1+sqrt2}\
a_3 & = sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt 3}}\
a_4 & = sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt 4}}}\
&vdots
end{align}$$
Easy computer calculations suggest that this sequence converges rapidly to the value 1.75793275661800453265, so I handed this number to the all-seeing Google, which produced:
- OEIS A072449
- "Nested Radical Constant" from MathWorld
Henceforth let us write $sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + sqrt{cdots + sqrt{r_n}}}}$ as $[r_1, r_2, ldots r_n]$ for short, in the manner of continued fractions.
Obviously we have $$a_n= [1,2,ldots n] le underbrace{[n, n,ldots, n]}_n$$
but as the right-hand side grows without bound (It's $O(sqrt n)$) this is unhelpful. I thought maybe to do something like:
$$a_{n^2}le [1, underbrace{4, 4, 4}_3, underbrace{9, 9, 9, 9, 9}_5, ldots,
underbrace{n^2,n^2,ldots,n^2}_{2n-1}] $$
but I haven't been able to make it work.
I would like a proof that the limit $$lim_{ntoinfty} a_n$$
exists. The methods I know are not getting me anywhere.
I originally planned to ask "and what the limit is", but OEIS says "No closed-form expression is known for this constant".
The references it cites are unavailable to me at present.
sequences-and-series limits nested-radicals
$endgroup$
I would like to investigate the convergence of
$$sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+sqrtldots}}}}$$
Or more precisely, let $$begin{align}
a_1 & = sqrt 1\
a_2 & = sqrt{1+sqrt2}\
a_3 & = sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt 3}}\
a_4 & = sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt 4}}}\
&vdots
end{align}$$
Easy computer calculations suggest that this sequence converges rapidly to the value 1.75793275661800453265, so I handed this number to the all-seeing Google, which produced:
- OEIS A072449
- "Nested Radical Constant" from MathWorld
Henceforth let us write $sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + sqrt{cdots + sqrt{r_n}}}}$ as $[r_1, r_2, ldots r_n]$ for short, in the manner of continued fractions.
Obviously we have $$a_n= [1,2,ldots n] le underbrace{[n, n,ldots, n]}_n$$
but as the right-hand side grows without bound (It's $O(sqrt n)$) this is unhelpful. I thought maybe to do something like:
$$a_{n^2}le [1, underbrace{4, 4, 4}_3, underbrace{9, 9, 9, 9, 9}_5, ldots,
underbrace{n^2,n^2,ldots,n^2}_{2n-1}] $$
but I haven't been able to make it work.
I would like a proof that the limit $$lim_{ntoinfty} a_n$$
exists. The methods I know are not getting me anywhere.
I originally planned to ask "and what the limit is", but OEIS says "No closed-form expression is known for this constant".
The references it cites are unavailable to me at present.
sequences-and-series limits nested-radicals
sequences-and-series limits nested-radicals
edited Nov 17 '14 at 5:23
MJD
asked Jul 6 '13 at 3:19
MJDMJD
47.3k29213396
47.3k29213396
18
$begingroup$
This is probably a good place to start: "It was discovered by T. Vijayaraghavan that the infinite radical $sqrt{ a_1 + sqrt{ a_2 + sqrt{ a_3 + sqrt{a_4 + ldots }}}}$ where $a_n ge 0$, will converge to a limit if and only if the limit of $log a_n / 2^n$ exists" - Clawson, p. 229. (Taken from OEIS.)
$endgroup$
– George V. Williams
Jul 6 '13 at 3:23
$begingroup$
possible duplicate of Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:26
3
$begingroup$
I misread the solution at Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals. It asks several questions, one of which is mine, but all the answers provided are for the other questions.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:28
$begingroup$
Related: Nested radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:31
1
$begingroup$
This may help.
$endgroup$
– Maazul
Jul 6 '13 at 4:44
add a comment |
18
$begingroup$
This is probably a good place to start: "It was discovered by T. Vijayaraghavan that the infinite radical $sqrt{ a_1 + sqrt{ a_2 + sqrt{ a_3 + sqrt{a_4 + ldots }}}}$ where $a_n ge 0$, will converge to a limit if and only if the limit of $log a_n / 2^n$ exists" - Clawson, p. 229. (Taken from OEIS.)
$endgroup$
– George V. Williams
Jul 6 '13 at 3:23
$begingroup$
possible duplicate of Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:26
3
$begingroup$
I misread the solution at Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals. It asks several questions, one of which is mine, but all the answers provided are for the other questions.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:28
$begingroup$
Related: Nested radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:31
1
$begingroup$
This may help.
$endgroup$
– Maazul
Jul 6 '13 at 4:44
18
18
$begingroup$
This is probably a good place to start: "It was discovered by T. Vijayaraghavan that the infinite radical $sqrt{ a_1 + sqrt{ a_2 + sqrt{ a_3 + sqrt{a_4 + ldots }}}}$ where $a_n ge 0$, will converge to a limit if and only if the limit of $log a_n / 2^n$ exists" - Clawson, p. 229. (Taken from OEIS.)
$endgroup$
– George V. Williams
Jul 6 '13 at 3:23
$begingroup$
This is probably a good place to start: "It was discovered by T. Vijayaraghavan that the infinite radical $sqrt{ a_1 + sqrt{ a_2 + sqrt{ a_3 + sqrt{a_4 + ldots }}}}$ where $a_n ge 0$, will converge to a limit if and only if the limit of $log a_n / 2^n$ exists" - Clawson, p. 229. (Taken from OEIS.)
$endgroup$
– George V. Williams
Jul 6 '13 at 3:23
$begingroup$
possible duplicate of Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:26
$begingroup$
possible duplicate of Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:26
3
3
$begingroup$
I misread the solution at Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals. It asks several questions, one of which is mine, but all the answers provided are for the other questions.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:28
$begingroup$
I misread the solution at Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals. It asks several questions, one of which is mine, but all the answers provided are for the other questions.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:28
$begingroup$
Related: Nested radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:31
$begingroup$
Related: Nested radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:31
1
1
$begingroup$
This may help.
$endgroup$
– Maazul
Jul 6 '13 at 4:44
$begingroup$
This may help.
$endgroup$
– Maazul
Jul 6 '13 at 4:44
add a comment |
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
For any $nge4$, we have $sqrt{2n} le n-1$. Therefore
begin{align*}
a_n
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{(n-1) + sqrt{2n}}}}}}\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{2(n-1)}}}}}\
&leldots\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{2(4)}}}}.
end{align*}
Hence ${a_n}$ is a monotonic increasing sequence that is bounded above.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The first part following from $n^2 -4n +1 >0$ for $nge 4$.
$endgroup$
– Tom Collinge
Jun 6 '14 at 14:17
$begingroup$
Very elegant estimate! +1
$endgroup$
– ZFR
Nov 15 '15 at 17:06
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first number $1$ is a nuisance, so at first we disregard it.
We proceed by induction, and deal with finite nested radicals that start with $sqrt{k+sqrt{(k+1)+cdots}}$, where $kge 2$.
We will show that such a radical is $lt 2k$, by induction on depth. The result is certainly true for all nested radicals of depth $1$, since $sqrt{q}lt 2q$.
For the induction step, a nested radical of depth $n$ that starts with $k$ is $sqrt{k+R}$, where $R$ is a nested radical of depth $n-1$ that starts with $k+1$. By the induction assumption, we have $Rlt 2k+2$. But then $sqrt{k+R}lt sqrt{3k+2}lt 2k$ if $k ge 2$.
So (finite) nested radicals of any depth that start with $2$ are $lt 4$. The sequence of nested radicals is clearly increasing, so it converges. It follows that the nested radical of the post is $le sqrt{1+4}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
An easy sloppy way to see it:
You know that $sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=phi$. Now multiply by $2$ to get $2phi=2sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+4sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+sqrt{16+sqrt{256+sqrt{256^2+dots}}}}>sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+dots}}}}$. Of course this should be done more rigorous.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If $( a_k )_{kinmathbb{N}}$ is any sequences of positive numbers such that:
$$0 le a_k le alpha lambda^{2^k}quadtext{ for some }quad alpha, lambda in mathbb{R}_{+}$$
Using same convention $;[r_1,r_2ldots] = sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + ldots}};$ as in the question,
we have:
$$begin{align}
[a_n] & le sqrt{alpha lambda^{2^n}} = sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}} = [alpha] lambda^{2^{n-1}}\
implies [a_{n-1},a_n ] &le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-1}}+sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}}}
=sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}} = [alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-2}}\
implies [a_{n-2},a_{n-1},a_n]&le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-2}} + sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}}} = [alpha,alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-3}}\
&;vdots\
implies [a_1,ldots,a_n] & le underbrace{ [ alpha,ldots,alpha ] }_{ntext{ terms}} lambda\
implies [a_1, ldots,a_n] & le [ alpha, alpha, ldots ]lambda = frac{1 + sqrt{1+4alpha}}{2}lambda
end{align}$$
Since $n le sqrt{2}^{2^n-2}$, we can take $alpha = frac12$ and $lambda = sqrt{2}$ to get:
$$[1,2,ldots,n] le underbrace{ [ frac12,ldots,frac12 ]}_{ntext{ terms}} lambda le frac{1+sqrt{3}}{sqrt{2}} sim 1.931851 $$
To get a better bound, observe for any $m, k in mathbb{Z}_{+}$, we have:
$$ m + k - 1 le frac{m^2}{m+1}left(sqrt{frac{m+1}{m}}right)^{2^k}$$
Using the same approach as above, we get:
$$[m,m+1,m+2,ldots] le frac{sqrt{m+1}+sqrt{4m^2+m+1}}{2sqrt{m}}$$
Take $m = 3$, we already get a bound accurate up to $O(10^{-2})$.
$$[3,4,ldots] le frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}
implies [1,2,3,ldots] le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}}} sim 1.760214368
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Take a positive sequence ${a_n}$ and a constant $c>0$ such that $sqrt{a_{n+1}}<ca_n$.
Set $b_n=sqrt{a_1+sqrt{a_2+cdots sqrt{a_n}}}$. By induction, $$log_{c+1} left(frac{b_n}{sqrt{a_1}}right)<sum_{i=1}^{n-1}2^{-i}<1$$
So $b_n<(c+1)sqrt{a_1}$ and $b_n$ is monotonic increasing; by the Monotone Convergence Theorem, $lim_{ntoinfty}b_n$ exists. Taking $a_n=n$ and $c>sqrt{2}$ answers this question.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
By linear approximations.
Since the sequence is increasing, it converges iff it doesn't go to infinity. Therefore we need only to construct an upper bound.
Notice that all tangents to $sqrt{x}$ are always above $sqrt{x}$. The slope of each tangent is $frac12frac1{sqrt x}$; but we can construct a simpler bound by noticing that the line through $(x,sqrt x)$ with slope $frac 1 2$ is above $sqrt{u}$ for all $u > x$ if $x geq 1$.
So $$sqrt{1 + sqrt{2 + sqrt{3 + dotsc}}} leq 1 + frac12(sqrt 2 + frac12(sqrt{3} + frac12(dotsc))) = sum_{i=1}^infty frac{sqrt i}{2^{i-1}}$$ and it's easier to see that that converges.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The last term is just $2 text{Li}_{-frac{1}{2}}left(frac{1}{2}right)approx 2.69451$
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Oct 17 '17 at 6:44
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f437209%2fhow-can-i-show-that-sqrt1-sqrt2-sqrt3-sqrt-ldots-exists%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
For any $nge4$, we have $sqrt{2n} le n-1$. Therefore
begin{align*}
a_n
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{(n-1) + sqrt{2n}}}}}}\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{2(n-1)}}}}}\
&leldots\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{2(4)}}}}.
end{align*}
Hence ${a_n}$ is a monotonic increasing sequence that is bounded above.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The first part following from $n^2 -4n +1 >0$ for $nge 4$.
$endgroup$
– Tom Collinge
Jun 6 '14 at 14:17
$begingroup$
Very elegant estimate! +1
$endgroup$
– ZFR
Nov 15 '15 at 17:06
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For any $nge4$, we have $sqrt{2n} le n-1$. Therefore
begin{align*}
a_n
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{(n-1) + sqrt{2n}}}}}}\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{2(n-1)}}}}}\
&leldots\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{2(4)}}}}.
end{align*}
Hence ${a_n}$ is a monotonic increasing sequence that is bounded above.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The first part following from $n^2 -4n +1 >0$ for $nge 4$.
$endgroup$
– Tom Collinge
Jun 6 '14 at 14:17
$begingroup$
Very elegant estimate! +1
$endgroup$
– ZFR
Nov 15 '15 at 17:06
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For any $nge4$, we have $sqrt{2n} le n-1$. Therefore
begin{align*}
a_n
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{(n-1) + sqrt{2n}}}}}}\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{2(n-1)}}}}}\
&leldots\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{2(4)}}}}.
end{align*}
Hence ${a_n}$ is a monotonic increasing sequence that is bounded above.
$endgroup$
For any $nge4$, we have $sqrt{2n} le n-1$. Therefore
begin{align*}
a_n
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{(n-1) + sqrt{2n}}}}}}\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{ldots+sqrt{(n-2)+sqrt{2(n-1)}}}}}\
&leldots\
&le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{2(4)}}}}.
end{align*}
Hence ${a_n}$ is a monotonic increasing sequence that is bounded above.
answered Jul 6 '13 at 5:54
user1551user1551
72.8k566127
72.8k566127
$begingroup$
The first part following from $n^2 -4n +1 >0$ for $nge 4$.
$endgroup$
– Tom Collinge
Jun 6 '14 at 14:17
$begingroup$
Very elegant estimate! +1
$endgroup$
– ZFR
Nov 15 '15 at 17:06
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first part following from $n^2 -4n +1 >0$ for $nge 4$.
$endgroup$
– Tom Collinge
Jun 6 '14 at 14:17
$begingroup$
Very elegant estimate! +1
$endgroup$
– ZFR
Nov 15 '15 at 17:06
$begingroup$
The first part following from $n^2 -4n +1 >0$ for $nge 4$.
$endgroup$
– Tom Collinge
Jun 6 '14 at 14:17
$begingroup$
The first part following from $n^2 -4n +1 >0$ for $nge 4$.
$endgroup$
– Tom Collinge
Jun 6 '14 at 14:17
$begingroup$
Very elegant estimate! +1
$endgroup$
– ZFR
Nov 15 '15 at 17:06
$begingroup$
Very elegant estimate! +1
$endgroup$
– ZFR
Nov 15 '15 at 17:06
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first number $1$ is a nuisance, so at first we disregard it.
We proceed by induction, and deal with finite nested radicals that start with $sqrt{k+sqrt{(k+1)+cdots}}$, where $kge 2$.
We will show that such a radical is $lt 2k$, by induction on depth. The result is certainly true for all nested radicals of depth $1$, since $sqrt{q}lt 2q$.
For the induction step, a nested radical of depth $n$ that starts with $k$ is $sqrt{k+R}$, where $R$ is a nested radical of depth $n-1$ that starts with $k+1$. By the induction assumption, we have $Rlt 2k+2$. But then $sqrt{k+R}lt sqrt{3k+2}lt 2k$ if $k ge 2$.
So (finite) nested radicals of any depth that start with $2$ are $lt 4$. The sequence of nested radicals is clearly increasing, so it converges. It follows that the nested radical of the post is $le sqrt{1+4}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first number $1$ is a nuisance, so at first we disregard it.
We proceed by induction, and deal with finite nested radicals that start with $sqrt{k+sqrt{(k+1)+cdots}}$, where $kge 2$.
We will show that such a radical is $lt 2k$, by induction on depth. The result is certainly true for all nested radicals of depth $1$, since $sqrt{q}lt 2q$.
For the induction step, a nested radical of depth $n$ that starts with $k$ is $sqrt{k+R}$, where $R$ is a nested radical of depth $n-1$ that starts with $k+1$. By the induction assumption, we have $Rlt 2k+2$. But then $sqrt{k+R}lt sqrt{3k+2}lt 2k$ if $k ge 2$.
So (finite) nested radicals of any depth that start with $2$ are $lt 4$. The sequence of nested radicals is clearly increasing, so it converges. It follows that the nested radical of the post is $le sqrt{1+4}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first number $1$ is a nuisance, so at first we disregard it.
We proceed by induction, and deal with finite nested radicals that start with $sqrt{k+sqrt{(k+1)+cdots}}$, where $kge 2$.
We will show that such a radical is $lt 2k$, by induction on depth. The result is certainly true for all nested radicals of depth $1$, since $sqrt{q}lt 2q$.
For the induction step, a nested radical of depth $n$ that starts with $k$ is $sqrt{k+R}$, where $R$ is a nested radical of depth $n-1$ that starts with $k+1$. By the induction assumption, we have $Rlt 2k+2$. But then $sqrt{k+R}lt sqrt{3k+2}lt 2k$ if $k ge 2$.
So (finite) nested radicals of any depth that start with $2$ are $lt 4$. The sequence of nested radicals is clearly increasing, so it converges. It follows that the nested radical of the post is $le sqrt{1+4}$.
$endgroup$
The first number $1$ is a nuisance, so at first we disregard it.
We proceed by induction, and deal with finite nested radicals that start with $sqrt{k+sqrt{(k+1)+cdots}}$, where $kge 2$.
We will show that such a radical is $lt 2k$, by induction on depth. The result is certainly true for all nested radicals of depth $1$, since $sqrt{q}lt 2q$.
For the induction step, a nested radical of depth $n$ that starts with $k$ is $sqrt{k+R}$, where $R$ is a nested radical of depth $n-1$ that starts with $k+1$. By the induction assumption, we have $Rlt 2k+2$. But then $sqrt{k+R}lt sqrt{3k+2}lt 2k$ if $k ge 2$.
So (finite) nested radicals of any depth that start with $2$ are $lt 4$. The sequence of nested radicals is clearly increasing, so it converges. It follows that the nested radical of the post is $le sqrt{1+4}$.
edited Jul 6 '13 at 4:49
answered Jul 6 '13 at 4:28
André NicolasAndré Nicolas
453k36425812
453k36425812
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
An easy sloppy way to see it:
You know that $sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=phi$. Now multiply by $2$ to get $2phi=2sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+4sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+sqrt{16+sqrt{256+sqrt{256^2+dots}}}}>sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+dots}}}}$. Of course this should be done more rigorous.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
An easy sloppy way to see it:
You know that $sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=phi$. Now multiply by $2$ to get $2phi=2sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+4sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+sqrt{16+sqrt{256+sqrt{256^2+dots}}}}>sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+dots}}}}$. Of course this should be done more rigorous.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
An easy sloppy way to see it:
You know that $sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=phi$. Now multiply by $2$ to get $2phi=2sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+4sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+sqrt{16+sqrt{256+sqrt{256^2+dots}}}}>sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+dots}}}}$. Of course this should be done more rigorous.
$endgroup$
An easy sloppy way to see it:
You know that $sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=phi$. Now multiply by $2$ to get $2phi=2sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+4sqrt{1+sqrt{1+sqrt{1+dots}}}}=sqrt{4+sqrt{16+sqrt{256+sqrt{256^2+dots}}}}>sqrt{1+sqrt{2+sqrt{3+sqrt{4+dots}}}}$. Of course this should be done more rigorous.
answered Jun 6 '14 at 13:08
heiniheini
13112
13112
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If $( a_k )_{kinmathbb{N}}$ is any sequences of positive numbers such that:
$$0 le a_k le alpha lambda^{2^k}quadtext{ for some }quad alpha, lambda in mathbb{R}_{+}$$
Using same convention $;[r_1,r_2ldots] = sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + ldots}};$ as in the question,
we have:
$$begin{align}
[a_n] & le sqrt{alpha lambda^{2^n}} = sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}} = [alpha] lambda^{2^{n-1}}\
implies [a_{n-1},a_n ] &le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-1}}+sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}}}
=sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}} = [alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-2}}\
implies [a_{n-2},a_{n-1},a_n]&le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-2}} + sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}}} = [alpha,alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-3}}\
&;vdots\
implies [a_1,ldots,a_n] & le underbrace{ [ alpha,ldots,alpha ] }_{ntext{ terms}} lambda\
implies [a_1, ldots,a_n] & le [ alpha, alpha, ldots ]lambda = frac{1 + sqrt{1+4alpha}}{2}lambda
end{align}$$
Since $n le sqrt{2}^{2^n-2}$, we can take $alpha = frac12$ and $lambda = sqrt{2}$ to get:
$$[1,2,ldots,n] le underbrace{ [ frac12,ldots,frac12 ]}_{ntext{ terms}} lambda le frac{1+sqrt{3}}{sqrt{2}} sim 1.931851 $$
To get a better bound, observe for any $m, k in mathbb{Z}_{+}$, we have:
$$ m + k - 1 le frac{m^2}{m+1}left(sqrt{frac{m+1}{m}}right)^{2^k}$$
Using the same approach as above, we get:
$$[m,m+1,m+2,ldots] le frac{sqrt{m+1}+sqrt{4m^2+m+1}}{2sqrt{m}}$$
Take $m = 3$, we already get a bound accurate up to $O(10^{-2})$.
$$[3,4,ldots] le frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}
implies [1,2,3,ldots] le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}}} sim 1.760214368
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If $( a_k )_{kinmathbb{N}}$ is any sequences of positive numbers such that:
$$0 le a_k le alpha lambda^{2^k}quadtext{ for some }quad alpha, lambda in mathbb{R}_{+}$$
Using same convention $;[r_1,r_2ldots] = sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + ldots}};$ as in the question,
we have:
$$begin{align}
[a_n] & le sqrt{alpha lambda^{2^n}} = sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}} = [alpha] lambda^{2^{n-1}}\
implies [a_{n-1},a_n ] &le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-1}}+sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}}}
=sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}} = [alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-2}}\
implies [a_{n-2},a_{n-1},a_n]&le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-2}} + sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}}} = [alpha,alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-3}}\
&;vdots\
implies [a_1,ldots,a_n] & le underbrace{ [ alpha,ldots,alpha ] }_{ntext{ terms}} lambda\
implies [a_1, ldots,a_n] & le [ alpha, alpha, ldots ]lambda = frac{1 + sqrt{1+4alpha}}{2}lambda
end{align}$$
Since $n le sqrt{2}^{2^n-2}$, we can take $alpha = frac12$ and $lambda = sqrt{2}$ to get:
$$[1,2,ldots,n] le underbrace{ [ frac12,ldots,frac12 ]}_{ntext{ terms}} lambda le frac{1+sqrt{3}}{sqrt{2}} sim 1.931851 $$
To get a better bound, observe for any $m, k in mathbb{Z}_{+}$, we have:
$$ m + k - 1 le frac{m^2}{m+1}left(sqrt{frac{m+1}{m}}right)^{2^k}$$
Using the same approach as above, we get:
$$[m,m+1,m+2,ldots] le frac{sqrt{m+1}+sqrt{4m^2+m+1}}{2sqrt{m}}$$
Take $m = 3$, we already get a bound accurate up to $O(10^{-2})$.
$$[3,4,ldots] le frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}
implies [1,2,3,ldots] le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}}} sim 1.760214368
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If $( a_k )_{kinmathbb{N}}$ is any sequences of positive numbers such that:
$$0 le a_k le alpha lambda^{2^k}quadtext{ for some }quad alpha, lambda in mathbb{R}_{+}$$
Using same convention $;[r_1,r_2ldots] = sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + ldots}};$ as in the question,
we have:
$$begin{align}
[a_n] & le sqrt{alpha lambda^{2^n}} = sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}} = [alpha] lambda^{2^{n-1}}\
implies [a_{n-1},a_n ] &le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-1}}+sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}}}
=sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}} = [alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-2}}\
implies [a_{n-2},a_{n-1},a_n]&le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-2}} + sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}}} = [alpha,alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-3}}\
&;vdots\
implies [a_1,ldots,a_n] & le underbrace{ [ alpha,ldots,alpha ] }_{ntext{ terms}} lambda\
implies [a_1, ldots,a_n] & le [ alpha, alpha, ldots ]lambda = frac{1 + sqrt{1+4alpha}}{2}lambda
end{align}$$
Since $n le sqrt{2}^{2^n-2}$, we can take $alpha = frac12$ and $lambda = sqrt{2}$ to get:
$$[1,2,ldots,n] le underbrace{ [ frac12,ldots,frac12 ]}_{ntext{ terms}} lambda le frac{1+sqrt{3}}{sqrt{2}} sim 1.931851 $$
To get a better bound, observe for any $m, k in mathbb{Z}_{+}$, we have:
$$ m + k - 1 le frac{m^2}{m+1}left(sqrt{frac{m+1}{m}}right)^{2^k}$$
Using the same approach as above, we get:
$$[m,m+1,m+2,ldots] le frac{sqrt{m+1}+sqrt{4m^2+m+1}}{2sqrt{m}}$$
Take $m = 3$, we already get a bound accurate up to $O(10^{-2})$.
$$[3,4,ldots] le frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}
implies [1,2,3,ldots] le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}}} sim 1.760214368
$$
$endgroup$
If $( a_k )_{kinmathbb{N}}$ is any sequences of positive numbers such that:
$$0 le a_k le alpha lambda^{2^k}quadtext{ for some }quad alpha, lambda in mathbb{R}_{+}$$
Using same convention $;[r_1,r_2ldots] = sqrt{r_1 + sqrt{r_2 + ldots}};$ as in the question,
we have:
$$begin{align}
[a_n] & le sqrt{alpha lambda^{2^n}} = sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}} = [alpha] lambda^{2^{n-1}}\
implies [a_{n-1},a_n ] &le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-1}}+sqrt{alpha}lambda^{2^{n-1}}}
=sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}} = [alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-2}}\
implies [a_{n-2},a_{n-1},a_n]&le sqrt{alphalambda^{2^{n-2}} + sqrt{alpha+sqrt{alpha}}lambda^{2^{n-2}}} = [alpha,alpha,alpha]lambda^{2^{n-3}}\
&;vdots\
implies [a_1,ldots,a_n] & le underbrace{ [ alpha,ldots,alpha ] }_{ntext{ terms}} lambda\
implies [a_1, ldots,a_n] & le [ alpha, alpha, ldots ]lambda = frac{1 + sqrt{1+4alpha}}{2}lambda
end{align}$$
Since $n le sqrt{2}^{2^n-2}$, we can take $alpha = frac12$ and $lambda = sqrt{2}$ to get:
$$[1,2,ldots,n] le underbrace{ [ frac12,ldots,frac12 ]}_{ntext{ terms}} lambda le frac{1+sqrt{3}}{sqrt{2}} sim 1.931851 $$
To get a better bound, observe for any $m, k in mathbb{Z}_{+}$, we have:
$$ m + k - 1 le frac{m^2}{m+1}left(sqrt{frac{m+1}{m}}right)^{2^k}$$
Using the same approach as above, we get:
$$[m,m+1,m+2,ldots] le frac{sqrt{m+1}+sqrt{4m^2+m+1}}{2sqrt{m}}$$
Take $m = 3$, we already get a bound accurate up to $O(10^{-2})$.
$$[3,4,ldots] le frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}
implies [1,2,3,ldots] le sqrt{1+sqrt{2+frac{1+sqrt{10}}{sqrt{3}}}} sim 1.760214368
$$
edited Jul 6 '13 at 6:01
answered Jul 6 '13 at 5:39
achille huiachille hui
96k5132258
96k5132258
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Take a positive sequence ${a_n}$ and a constant $c>0$ such that $sqrt{a_{n+1}}<ca_n$.
Set $b_n=sqrt{a_1+sqrt{a_2+cdots sqrt{a_n}}}$. By induction, $$log_{c+1} left(frac{b_n}{sqrt{a_1}}right)<sum_{i=1}^{n-1}2^{-i}<1$$
So $b_n<(c+1)sqrt{a_1}$ and $b_n$ is monotonic increasing; by the Monotone Convergence Theorem, $lim_{ntoinfty}b_n$ exists. Taking $a_n=n$ and $c>sqrt{2}$ answers this question.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Take a positive sequence ${a_n}$ and a constant $c>0$ such that $sqrt{a_{n+1}}<ca_n$.
Set $b_n=sqrt{a_1+sqrt{a_2+cdots sqrt{a_n}}}$. By induction, $$log_{c+1} left(frac{b_n}{sqrt{a_1}}right)<sum_{i=1}^{n-1}2^{-i}<1$$
So $b_n<(c+1)sqrt{a_1}$ and $b_n$ is monotonic increasing; by the Monotone Convergence Theorem, $lim_{ntoinfty}b_n$ exists. Taking $a_n=n$ and $c>sqrt{2}$ answers this question.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Take a positive sequence ${a_n}$ and a constant $c>0$ such that $sqrt{a_{n+1}}<ca_n$.
Set $b_n=sqrt{a_1+sqrt{a_2+cdots sqrt{a_n}}}$. By induction, $$log_{c+1} left(frac{b_n}{sqrt{a_1}}right)<sum_{i=1}^{n-1}2^{-i}<1$$
So $b_n<(c+1)sqrt{a_1}$ and $b_n$ is monotonic increasing; by the Monotone Convergence Theorem, $lim_{ntoinfty}b_n$ exists. Taking $a_n=n$ and $c>sqrt{2}$ answers this question.
$endgroup$
Take a positive sequence ${a_n}$ and a constant $c>0$ such that $sqrt{a_{n+1}}<ca_n$.
Set $b_n=sqrt{a_1+sqrt{a_2+cdots sqrt{a_n}}}$. By induction, $$log_{c+1} left(frac{b_n}{sqrt{a_1}}right)<sum_{i=1}^{n-1}2^{-i}<1$$
So $b_n<(c+1)sqrt{a_1}$ and $b_n$ is monotonic increasing; by the Monotone Convergence Theorem, $lim_{ntoinfty}b_n$ exists. Taking $a_n=n$ and $c>sqrt{2}$ answers this question.
answered Jul 6 '13 at 19:13
pre-kidneypre-kidney
12.9k1748
12.9k1748
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
By linear approximations.
Since the sequence is increasing, it converges iff it doesn't go to infinity. Therefore we need only to construct an upper bound.
Notice that all tangents to $sqrt{x}$ are always above $sqrt{x}$. The slope of each tangent is $frac12frac1{sqrt x}$; but we can construct a simpler bound by noticing that the line through $(x,sqrt x)$ with slope $frac 1 2$ is above $sqrt{u}$ for all $u > x$ if $x geq 1$.
So $$sqrt{1 + sqrt{2 + sqrt{3 + dotsc}}} leq 1 + frac12(sqrt 2 + frac12(sqrt{3} + frac12(dotsc))) = sum_{i=1}^infty frac{sqrt i}{2^{i-1}}$$ and it's easier to see that that converges.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The last term is just $2 text{Li}_{-frac{1}{2}}left(frac{1}{2}right)approx 2.69451$
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Oct 17 '17 at 6:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
By linear approximations.
Since the sequence is increasing, it converges iff it doesn't go to infinity. Therefore we need only to construct an upper bound.
Notice that all tangents to $sqrt{x}$ are always above $sqrt{x}$. The slope of each tangent is $frac12frac1{sqrt x}$; but we can construct a simpler bound by noticing that the line through $(x,sqrt x)$ with slope $frac 1 2$ is above $sqrt{u}$ for all $u > x$ if $x geq 1$.
So $$sqrt{1 + sqrt{2 + sqrt{3 + dotsc}}} leq 1 + frac12(sqrt 2 + frac12(sqrt{3} + frac12(dotsc))) = sum_{i=1}^infty frac{sqrt i}{2^{i-1}}$$ and it's easier to see that that converges.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The last term is just $2 text{Li}_{-frac{1}{2}}left(frac{1}{2}right)approx 2.69451$
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Oct 17 '17 at 6:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
By linear approximations.
Since the sequence is increasing, it converges iff it doesn't go to infinity. Therefore we need only to construct an upper bound.
Notice that all tangents to $sqrt{x}$ are always above $sqrt{x}$. The slope of each tangent is $frac12frac1{sqrt x}$; but we can construct a simpler bound by noticing that the line through $(x,sqrt x)$ with slope $frac 1 2$ is above $sqrt{u}$ for all $u > x$ if $x geq 1$.
So $$sqrt{1 + sqrt{2 + sqrt{3 + dotsc}}} leq 1 + frac12(sqrt 2 + frac12(sqrt{3} + frac12(dotsc))) = sum_{i=1}^infty frac{sqrt i}{2^{i-1}}$$ and it's easier to see that that converges.
$endgroup$
By linear approximations.
Since the sequence is increasing, it converges iff it doesn't go to infinity. Therefore we need only to construct an upper bound.
Notice that all tangents to $sqrt{x}$ are always above $sqrt{x}$. The slope of each tangent is $frac12frac1{sqrt x}$; but we can construct a simpler bound by noticing that the line through $(x,sqrt x)$ with slope $frac 1 2$ is above $sqrt{u}$ for all $u > x$ if $x geq 1$.
So $$sqrt{1 + sqrt{2 + sqrt{3 + dotsc}}} leq 1 + frac12(sqrt 2 + frac12(sqrt{3} + frac12(dotsc))) = sum_{i=1}^infty frac{sqrt i}{2^{i-1}}$$ and it's easier to see that that converges.
edited Jun 24 '15 at 18:39
answered Jun 24 '15 at 15:08
man on laptopman on laptop
5,74611238
5,74611238
$begingroup$
The last term is just $2 text{Li}_{-frac{1}{2}}left(frac{1}{2}right)approx 2.69451$
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Oct 17 '17 at 6:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The last term is just $2 text{Li}_{-frac{1}{2}}left(frac{1}{2}right)approx 2.69451$
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Oct 17 '17 at 6:44
$begingroup$
The last term is just $2 text{Li}_{-frac{1}{2}}left(frac{1}{2}right)approx 2.69451$
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Oct 17 '17 at 6:44
$begingroup$
The last term is just $2 text{Li}_{-frac{1}{2}}left(frac{1}{2}right)approx 2.69451$
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Oct 17 '17 at 6:44
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f437209%2fhow-can-i-show-that-sqrt1-sqrt2-sqrt3-sqrt-ldots-exists%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
18
$begingroup$
This is probably a good place to start: "It was discovered by T. Vijayaraghavan that the infinite radical $sqrt{ a_1 + sqrt{ a_2 + sqrt{ a_3 + sqrt{a_4 + ldots }}}}$ where $a_n ge 0$, will converge to a limit if and only if the limit of $log a_n / 2^n$ exists" - Clawson, p. 229. (Taken from OEIS.)
$endgroup$
– George V. Williams
Jul 6 '13 at 3:23
$begingroup$
possible duplicate of Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:26
3
$begingroup$
I misread the solution at Sum and Product of Infinite Radicals. It asks several questions, one of which is mine, but all the answers provided are for the other questions.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:28
$begingroup$
Related: Nested radicals
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jul 6 '13 at 3:31
1
$begingroup$
This may help.
$endgroup$
– Maazul
Jul 6 '13 at 4:44