Talk:Geometric sequence/Draft: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Boris Tsirelson |
imported>Peter Schmitt (→What about zero?: I see) |
||
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? == |
Revision as of 11:39, 11 May 2010
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)
- 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)
- Right. But what is meant by 0,0,1 ? --Peter Schmitt 16:52, 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)