An absurdly interesting radical....

In summary, the conversation is discussing an interesting limit found by Heidy, which states that the limit of a nested square root expression as the variable approaches 0 from the positive side is equal to 1. The conversation also mentions the use of this limit in proving that 1=0. There is also a proposed proof using fixed points and an attempt to show that the limit is equal to 1 by showing that it is always greater than or equal to 1.
  • #1
DreamWeaver
303
0
Here's an interesting limit I found the other day...\(\displaystyle \text{limit}_{\, \epsilon \to 0^{+}}\sqrt{\epsilon + \sqrt{\epsilon + \sqrt{ \epsilon + \sqrt{\epsilon + \cdots} } } } = 1\)It's both obvious and yet elusive... Any ideas on how to prove it...?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Incidentally, I'm only part-way toward a proof myself, so I don't have the answer yet. But still, it's both a Challenge and a Puzzle, so I thought of this board... (Heidy)
 
  • #3
DreamWeaver said:
Here's an interesting limit I found the other day...\(\displaystyle \text{limit}_{\, \epsilon \to 0^{+}}\sqrt{\epsilon + \sqrt{\epsilon + \sqrt{ \epsilon + \sqrt{\epsilon + \cdots} } } } = 1\)It's both obvious and yet elusive... Any ideas on how to prove it...?

Setting $\displaystyle x = f(\varepsilon)$ the x must satisfy the equation $\displaystyle \sqrt{\varepsilon + x} = x$ and, if You suppose that thye only positive value of a square root must be considered, the explicit expression of f(*) is... $\displaystyle f(\varepsilon) = \frac{1 + \sqrt{1 + 4\ \varepsilon}}{2}\ (1)$ ... and observing (1) it seems to be $\displaystyle \lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0} f(\varepsilon) = 1$. However we have to consider that we are evaluating the 'limit of a limit' like $\displaystyle \lim _{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0}\ \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \text {of something}$ and the result can be different if You invert the order of limits and evaluate $\displaystyle \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\ \lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0}\ \text {of something}$. For this reason also the alternative... $\displaystyle f(\varepsilon) = \frac{1 - \sqrt{1 + 4\ \varepsilon}}{2}\ (2)$

... [supposing to consider the negative value of the square root...] should be considered and in this case is $\displaystyle \lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0} f(\varepsilon) = 0$. All that in any case requires more investigation...
Kind regards $\chi$ $\sigma$
 
  • #4
A so called crank used this to prove that $1 = 0$ quite a few days ago in MMF : http://www.mymathforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=44831
 
  • #5
DreamWeaver said:
Here's an interesting limit I found the other day...\(\displaystyle \text{limit}_{\, \epsilon \to 0^{+}}\sqrt{\epsilon + \sqrt{\epsilon + \sqrt{ \epsilon + \sqrt{\epsilon + \cdots} } } } = 1\)It's both obvious and yet elusive... Any ideas on how to prove it...?

In order to get a correct answer to the question You have to clarify what the expression $\displaystyle f(\epsilon)= \sqrt{\epsilon + \sqrt{\epsilon + \sqrt{ \epsilon + \sqrt{\epsilon + \cdots} } } }$ means. In effect is $\displaystyle f(\epsilon) = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} a_{n}$ where $a_{n}$ satisfy the difference equation... $\displaystyle a_{n+1} = \sqrt{a_{n} + \epsilon},\ a_{0}= \epsilon\ (1)$

Analysing (1) You imposing the condition $\Delta_{n} = a_{n+1} - a_{n} =0$ You find that that there is an attractive fixed point in $\displaystyle x_{1} = \frac{1 + \sqrt{1 + 4\ \epsilon}}{2}$ and a repulsive fixed point in $\displaystyle x_{0} = \frac{1 - \sqrt{1 + 4\ \epsilon}}{2}$ and that means that for any $\displaystyle x_{0} < \epsilon < x_{1}$ is $\displaystyle f(\epsilon) = x_{1} = \frac{1 + \sqrt{1 + 4\ \epsilon}}{2}$ and $\displaystyle \lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} f(\epsilon)=1$, even if [and that is an important detail...] is $\displaystyle f(0)=0$... Kind regards $\chi$ $\sigma$
 
  • #6
I am not sure if this actually works (there might be something missing) but here goes:

[sp]Suppose $\sqrt{a + \sqrt{a + \sqrt{a + \cdots}}} = a^*$, $\sqrt{b + \sqrt{b + \sqrt{b + \cdots}}} = b^*$, and $0 < a < b$.

Then $a^* = \frac{1 + \sqrt{1 + 4a}}{2}$ and $b^* = \frac{1 + \sqrt{1 + 4b}}{2}$ therefore it follows that $a^* < b^*$.

Now suppose that $a^* < 1$. This leads to the contradiction that $\sqrt{1 + 4a} < 1$. Therefore $a^* \geq 1$, so $1 \leq a^* < b^*$.

Therefore $a^*$ goes to $1$ as $a$ goes to $0$.

$\blacksquare$[/sp]
 

FAQ: An absurdly interesting radical....

What is the meaning of "An absurdly interesting radical...."?

"An absurdly interesting radical...." is a phrase that can have multiple interpretations, but it is often used to describe something or someone that is unique, unconventional, and thought-provoking. It may also refer to an idea or concept that challenges traditional beliefs or norms.

Who coined the phrase "An absurdly interesting radical...."?

The phrase "An absurdly interesting radical...." is often attributed to French philosopher and writer Albert Camus. However, it has also been used by other authors and thinkers in various contexts.

How does "An absurdly interesting radical...." relate to science?

In science, "An absurdly interesting radical...." can refer to groundbreaking discoveries or theories that challenge long-standing beliefs and bring about a paradigm shift. It may also describe scientists who are unafraid to question established ideas and push the boundaries of their fields.

Is "An absurdly interesting radical...." always a positive term?

The interpretation of "An absurdly interesting radical...." can vary depending on the context and the person using it. While it may be seen as a compliment for some, others may view it as a negative or derogatory term. It ultimately depends on the individual's perception.

Can "An absurdly interesting radical...." be applied to non-scientific fields?

Yes, "An absurdly interesting radical...." can be used in various contexts, not just in science. It can be applied to art, literature, politics, and other fields that involve unconventional and thought-provoking ideas or individuals.

Back
Top