Talk:Geometric sequence/Draft: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Boris Tsirelson
imported>Anthony.Sebastian
 
(9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:
:: Right. But what is meant by 0,0,1 ? --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 16:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
:: Right. But what is meant by 0,0,1 ? --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 16:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
:::Just a finite sequence, of length 3, whose first element is 0, second 0, and third 1. (You may think of a possible definition <math>a_{i-1}a_{i+1}=a_i^2</math>, but I did not say I want it to be in the article; I stay neutral; I only want ''some'' definition; and in fact, I feel already satisfied.) [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 17:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
:::Just a finite sequence, of length 3, whose first element is 0, second 0, and third 1. (You may think of a possible definition <math>a_{i-1}a_{i+1}=a_i^2</math>, but I did not say I want it to be in the article; I stay neutral; I only want ''some'' definition; and in fact, I feel already satisfied.) [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 17:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
:::: I see. I think it is best to stay with the "standard" (naive) definition here. That is why I did not change the lead, but only added a remark to the formal section. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 17:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


== What about q? ==
== What about q? ==
Line 31: Line 32:


::Nice. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 17:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
::Nice. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 17:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
== Dividing by zero ==
If ''q'' is permitted to be 1 then the formula for the finite sum needs a reservation. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 15:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
: Indeed. But not only since the last corrections -- q=1 was never excluded. It seems we both have overlooked it. But I have written it (blushing). --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 15:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
== For non-experts, article needs <b>many</b> more examples ==
It seems to me that, for non-experts, [[Geometric sequence]] needs <b>many</b> more examples, perhaps duplicate/triplicate examples in some cases. To make it more of a teaching tool for high-schoolers, undergraduates, other groups.
Why sequence called 'geometric'?
Would note vote against approving as is, but would hope for re-approval soon after.  [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 02:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
:1. Sorry, I do not understand what kind of examples do you mean. Would you please explain? And what do you mean by duplicate?
:2. I guess, what you really want to see here is a "Tutorial" subpage. But this could wait for version 2. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 04:47, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
:: Sebastian, the name "geometrical" almost certainly comes from the geometrical interpretation of "proportional" (similar figures), but to include this guess would be hasty. A historical note -- either here or in a separate article -- would be nice to have, but I could not provide it without some thorough research.
:: As for more examples: What would they add? I agree that a main page should be as accessible as its topic allows. But an encyclopedia is not a teaching tool -- it is a handbook that should make it easy to find information. Thus it should tell its "story" with as many words as needed, but not  with more. (I also confess that I would not know what to do in a Tutorial, either. The only topic I can think of are financial examples, but these would better fit to a page on interest.) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 15:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
:::Not a big deal for me. I'm pretty much of a math dummy. I'll give the article more concerted attention. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 04:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
== Approved [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Geometric_sequence/Draft&oldid=100671650 Version 1] ==
Congratulations again to the Mathematics Workgroup!  Not an easy task.  Good job! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 21:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
<div class="usermessage plainlinks">Discussion for [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Geometric_sequence/Draft&oldid=100671650 Version 1] stopped here. Please continue further discussion under this break. </div>

Latest revision as of 22:16, 15 May 2010

This article has a Citable Version.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition In elementary mathematics, a (finite or infinite) sequence of numbers such that the quotient of consecutive elements is constant. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Mathematics [Please add or review categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English

Cannot resist

The term still reminds me of the order in which students entered the room for geometry class; I was generally last. --Howard C. Berkowitz 21:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

What about zero?

It is unclear for now, whether the following sequences are geometric or not:

Boris Tsirelson 10:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Right. But what is meant by 0,0,1 ? --Peter Schmitt 16:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Just a finite sequence, of length 3, whose first element is 0, second 0, and third 1. (You may think of a possible definition , but I did not say I want it to be in the article; I stay neutral; I only want some definition; and in fact, I feel already satisfied.) Boris Tsirelson 17:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I see. I think it is best to stay with the "standard" (naive) definition here. That is why I did not change the lead, but only added a remark to the formal section. --Peter Schmitt 17:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

What about q?

"...is called geometric sequence if

for all indices i." — I'd add, "and some number q (not dependent on i)." Boris Tsirelson 10:16, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Right. Done. --Peter Schmitt 16:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

More examples

An example of an infinite increasing sequence could be added. Also a constant sequence. Boris Tsirelson 10:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I have added 3 more ( and 0,0,0 ). --Peter Schmitt 16:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Nice. Boris Tsirelson 17:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Dividing by zero

If q is permitted to be 1 then the formula for the finite sum needs a reservation. Boris Tsirelson 15:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. But not only since the last corrections -- q=1 was never excluded. It seems we both have overlooked it. But I have written it (blushing). --Peter Schmitt 15:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

For non-experts, article needs many more examples

It seems to me that, for non-experts, Geometric sequence needs many more examples, perhaps duplicate/triplicate examples in some cases. To make it more of a teaching tool for high-schoolers, undergraduates, other groups.

Why sequence called 'geometric'?

Would note vote against approving as is, but would hope for re-approval soon after. Anthony.Sebastian 02:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

1. Sorry, I do not understand what kind of examples do you mean. Would you please explain? And what do you mean by duplicate?
2. I guess, what you really want to see here is a "Tutorial" subpage. But this could wait for version 2. Boris Tsirelson 04:47, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Sebastian, the name "geometrical" almost certainly comes from the geometrical interpretation of "proportional" (similar figures), but to include this guess would be hasty. A historical note -- either here or in a separate article -- would be nice to have, but I could not provide it without some thorough research.
As for more examples: What would they add? I agree that a main page should be as accessible as its topic allows. But an encyclopedia is not a teaching tool -- it is a handbook that should make it easy to find information. Thus it should tell its "story" with as many words as needed, but not with more. (I also confess that I would not know what to do in a Tutorial, either. The only topic I can think of are financial examples, but these would better fit to a page on interest.) --Peter Schmitt 15:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Not a big deal for me. I'm pretty much of a math dummy. I'll give the article more concerted attention. Anthony.Sebastian 04:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Approved Version 1

Congratulations again to the Mathematics Workgroup! Not an easy task. Good job! D. Matt Innis 21:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)