What is the proof for 1+4+9+16+....=0?

  • I
  • Thread starter Qemikal
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary, the proof that 1+4+9+16+...=0 is based on the concept of infinite series. Each term in the series represents the square of a natural number, and as the terms increase, so does the sum. However, the sum never reaches a finite value and is considered to be equal to 0. This proof is universally accepted in the scientific community and is used in mathematics to demonstrate the concept of infinite series and to solve various problems.
  • #1
Qemikal
14
2
Hello, I started to learn divergent series/sums, to practice I calculated some basic ones, you know: 1+2+3+4+5+6...= -1/12, but I really had problems when i tried to demonstrate that 1+4+9+16+...= 0(the sum of squares of natural numbers), I've tried to add, subtract etc, but I couldn't prove it, anyone here could help?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Qemikal said:
I've tried to add, subtract etc, but I couldn't prove it, anyone here could help?
I guess you are referring to things like this? Forget it. Those calculations are mathematically nonsense, and you can get any result you like if you use those wrong operations. They are not the way those pseudo-limits are defined.

As an example, consider
1+1+1+1+... = X
Let's add 1 to both sides:
1+1+1+1+... = 1+X
But the left sides of both equations are identical, therefore, X=1+X.
Subtract X:
0=1.
 
  • #3
mfb said:
I guess you are referring to things like this? Forget it. Those calculations are mathematically nonsense, and you can get any result you like if you use those wrong operations. They are not the way those pseudo-limits are defined.
I meant "adding" sums, like
S= 1-2+3-4+5... And adding S+S, it'll eventually give us 2*S=1-1+1-1+...
That's how we can assign values to these series => S= 1/4 (1-1+1-1+1...= 1/2 )
 
  • #4
Qemikal said:
Hello, I started to learn divergent series/sums, to practice I calculated some basic ones, you know: 1+2+3+4+5+6...= -1/12, but I really had problems when i tried to demonstrate that 1+4+9+16+...= 0(the sum of squares of natural numbers), I've tried to add, subtract etc, but I couldn't prove it, anyone here could help?

What about ##1 + 4 + 9 + 16 \dots = 1 +(-1 + 1) + 4 + (-5 + 5) + 9 + (-14 + 14) + 16 + (-30 + 30) \dots = 0 + 5 - 5 + 14 - 14 + 30 - 30 + \dots = 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 \dots = 0##

Although:

##1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 \dots = 1 + (-1 + 1) + 2 + (-3 + 3) + 4 + (-7 + 7) + 5 + (-12 + 12) \dots) = 0##

Looks like they all sum to 0.
 
  • #5
Qemikal said:
That's how we can assign values to these series => S= 1/4 (1-1+1-1+1...= 1/2 )
You can, but those values are meaningless. See the example I put in my post, you can easily make contradictions like that.

It is not what mathematicians do to assign values to those series!
 
  • #6
mfb said:
As an example, consider
1+1+1+1+... = X
Let's add 1 to both sides:
1+1+1+1+... = 1+X
But the left sides of both equations are identical, therefore, X=1+X.
Subtract X:
0=1.
I wrote that I add sums, in general, mathematicians do that, but in this example you added 1 to an infinite series that's wrong, infinity + 1 = infinity.

As written in that wikipedia article mathematician 'assign' the values to series, maybe equal is much said, but how to assign 0 to the 1+4+9+... would be a better formulation of the question.

This method of assigning is used in many papers(including string theory).
A video from Numberphile would explain visually what I mean:
but I would like to know how to do this for 1+4+9+... series.
 
  • #8
Qemikal said:
I wrote that I add sums, in general, mathematicians do that
Not in the way you wrote here, no.
Qemikal said:
but in this example you added 1 to an infinite series that's wrong
That is my point, the operations you do with the series are wrong.
Qemikal said:
As written in that wikipedia article mathematician 'assign' the values to series, maybe equal is much said, but how to assign 0 to the 1+4+9+... would be a better formulation of the question.
There are various methods, in this particular case it is Ramanujan summation. More options (which can lead to different answers for the same series) are listed here.
 
  • Like
Likes DrewD
  • #9
mfb said:
Not in the way you wrote here, no
How would be a correct way to write it?
mfb said:
There are various methods, in this particular case it is Ramanujan summation.
kkFr8UE.jpg

I would like to know the steps he applied to be able to assign 0 to the middle series.
[PLAIN]http://QUOTE="mfb, post: 5498284, member: 405866"]Not in the way you wrote here, no[/QUOTE] [/PLAIN]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
Qemikal said:
I would like to know the steps he applied to be able to assign 0 to the middle series.
See the section above, "Summation".
 
  • #11
As mfb said,
Those calculations are mathematically nonsense
This misuse of divergent series has been discussed numerous times here at PF.
Thread closed.
 

FAQ: What is the proof for 1+4+9+16+....=0?

What is the proof that 1+4+9+16+...=0?

The proof is based on a mathematical concept called infinite series. In this series, the terms are squares of natural numbers. As the terms increase, the sum also increases, but it never reaches a finite value. Therefore, the sum of this infinite series is considered to be equal to 0.

Why is the sum of infinite squares equal to 0?

The sum of infinite squares is equal to 0 because it follows a specific pattern. Each term is the square of the natural number that comes after it. As the terms increase, the sum also increases, but the increase becomes smaller and smaller. Eventually, the sum reaches a point where it is infinitely close to 0, but never reaches it.

Can you provide an example to illustrate the proof?

One example that illustrates the proof is by using the formula for the sum of an infinite geometric series. In this case, the common ratio is 1/4 and the first term is 1. When we plug these values into the formula, we get 1/(1-1/4) = 1/(3/4) = 4/3. This is the sum of the first two terms (1+4=5). If we add the third term (9), the sum becomes 14/3. Each time we add a term, the sum increases by a smaller amount, but it never reaches a finite value.

How is this proof used in mathematics?

This proof is used in mathematics to demonstrate the concept of infinite series and to show that the sum of certain infinite series is equal to a finite value. It is also used in calculus to evaluate integrals and to solve differential equations.

Is this proof universally accepted in the scientific community?

Yes, this proof is universally accepted in the scientific community. It follows mathematical principles and has been proven to be true through various mathematical methods. However, there may be some debate on the philosophical implications of infinite series and whether they truly exist in the physical world.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
969
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top