For j >1 the first 2^j digits are correct

  • MHB
  • Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation is discussing an iteration formula and its approximations for a specific value. The goal is to show that the first $2^j$ digits of the approximation are correct for that value. The approach involves using induction and finding an expression for $x_j$ in terms of $2^j$. The conversation ends with a correction to a previous calculation.
  • #1
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
5,049
7
Hey! 😊

We have the iteration formula $$x_{j+1}=2x_j-3x_j^2$$ and using the starting point $x_0=0.3$ we get the following approximations for $\frac{1}{3}$ :

\begin{align*}&x_1=2x_0-3x_0^2=2\cdot 0.3-3\cdot 0.3^2=0.33 \\ &x_2=2x_1-3x_1^2=2\cdot 0.33-3\cdot 0.33^2=0.3333 \\ &x_3=2x_2-3x_2^2=2\cdot 0.3333-3\cdot 0.3333^2=0.33333333\end{align*}

Now I want to show that for $j\geq 1$ the first $2^j$ digits of $x_j$ are correct for $\frac{1}{3}$.

It is $\frac{1}{3}=0.33333333333333333333333333\ldots$.

The approximation $x_1$ has the first $2=2^1$ digits correct.

The approximation $x_2$ has the first $4=2^2$ digits correct.

The approximation $x_3$ has the first $8=2^3$ digits correct.To show that it holds for $j\geq 1$ do we have to use induction? :unsure:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi mathmari!

Induction seems to be the way to go yes.
So we need to write $x_j$ in terms of $2^j$. Can we find such an expression? 🤔
 
  • #3
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Induction seems to be the way to go yes.
So we need to write $x_j$ in terms of $2^j$. Can we find such an expression? 🤔

As a power of $10$ we get \begin{align*}x_j&=\sum_{i=1}^{2^j}\frac{3}{10^i}=3\cdot \sum_{i=1}^{2^j}\frac{1}{10^i}=3\cdot \left (\sum_{i=0}^{2^j}\frac{1}{10^i}-1\right )=3\cdot \frac{\frac{1}{10^{2^j+1}}-1}{\frac{1}{10}-1}-3=3\cdot \frac{\frac{1}{10^{2^j+1}}-1}{-\frac{9}{10}}-3=-\frac{10}{9}\cdot 3\cdot \left (\frac{1}{10^{2^j+1}}-1\right )-3=-\frac{10}{3}\cdot \left (\frac{1}{10^{2^j+1}}-1\right )-3=-\frac{10}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^j+1}}+\frac{10}{3}-3\\ & =-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^j}}+\frac{1}{3}\end{align*} right?
So by induction on $j$ we get:

Base Case: For $j=1$ we get the desired result, as seen.

Inductive Hypothesis: We suppose that the formula is true for $j=k$, i.e. $\displaystyle{x_k=-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^k}}+\frac{1}{3}}$.

Inductive Step: We want to show that the formula is true also for $j=k+1$ : \begin{align*}x_{k+1}=2x_k-3x_k^2\ &\overset{(IH)}{=} \ 2\left (-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^k}}+\frac{1}{3}\right )-3\left (-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^k}}+\frac{1}{3}\right )^2\\ & =-\frac{2}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^k}}+2\cdot \frac{1}{3}-3\left (\frac{1}{3^2}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^{k+1}}}-2\cdot \frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^k}}\cdot \frac{1}{3}+\frac{1}{3^2}\right ) \\ & =-\frac{2}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^k}}+2\cdot \frac{1}{3}-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^{k+1}}}+2\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^k}}\cdot \frac{1}{3}-\frac{1}{3}\\ & =\frac{1}{3}-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^{k+1}}} \end{align*}

So we get that this hold for every $j\geq 1$ (Happy)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
mathmari said:
As a power of $10$ we get \begin{align*}x_j&=-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^j}}+\frac{10}{3}\end{align*} right?
Suppose we substitute $j=1$. Then we should get $x_1=0.33$ yes?
$$x_1=-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^1}}+\frac{10}{3}=-\frac{1}{300}+\frac{10}{3}=3.33$$
That's not correct is it? :eek:
 
  • #5
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Suppose we substitute $j=1$. Then we should get $x_1=0.33$ yes?
$$x_1=-\frac{1}{3}\cdot \frac{1}{10^{2^1}}+\frac{10}{3}=-\frac{1}{300}+\frac{10}{3}=3.33$$
That's not correct is it? :eek:

I found my error! I edited my previous post and the correct result came out!
 

FAQ: For j >1 the first 2^j digits are correct

1. What does "For j >1 the first 2^j digits are correct" mean?

The statement means that for any number j that is greater than 1, the first 2 to the power of j digits of a number are correct. In other words, the first 2, 4, 8, 16, etc. digits will be accurate.

2. How is this statement relevant to science?

This statement is relevant to science because it is often used in mathematical and computational models to represent the accuracy of calculations or measurements. It can also be used to analyze the precision and limitations of scientific data.

3. Can you provide an example of this statement in action?

For example, if we have a number with 10 digits, the first 2^2 (4) digits would be the first 4 digits. If the statement holds true, those first 4 digits would be accurate.

4. What implications does this statement have for scientific research?

This statement can have significant implications for scientific research, as it highlights the importance of accuracy and precision in data collection and analysis. It also emphasizes the need for proper methods and techniques to ensure the validity of scientific findings.

5. Is this statement always true?

No, this statement is not always true. It is a simplification and approximation that is used in certain contexts and may not hold true in all cases. It is important to carefully consider the specific situation and context before applying this statement in scientific research.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
917
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
799
Replies
17
Views
3K
Back
Top