MHB Nick's question at Yahoo Answers (Maclaurin series)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the Maclaurin series for the function f(x) = x/(1-x^4). It establishes that for |t|<1, the series expansion of 1/(1-t) can be utilized. By applying this to f(x), the series is expressed as f(x) = x * (1/(1-x^4)), leading to the summation form. The resulting Maclaurin series is identified as the summation from n=0 to infinity of x^(4n+1), valid for |x|<1. This provides a clear solution to the original question posed by Nick.
Fernando Revilla
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
631
Reaction score
0
Here is the question:

for f(x)= (x)/(1-x^4)

= summation from 0 to infinity:

Here is a link to the question:

Find the Maclaurin series? - Yahoo! Answers

I have posted a link there to this topic so the OP can find my response.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hello nick,

If $|t|<1$ we know that $\dfrac{1}{1-t}=\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}t^n$. Then, using the Algebra of series: $$f(x)=x\cdot\dfrac{1}{1-x^4}=x\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(x^4)^n=\sum_{n=0}^{ \infty}x^{4n+1}\quad (|x|<1)$$ So, necessarily the Maclaurin series for $f(x)$ is $\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}x^{4n+1}.$
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top