Are my results new? [closed] Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara ...

How come Sam didn't become Lord of Horn Hill?

English words in a non-english sci-fi novel

Book where humans were engineered with genes from animal species to survive hostile planets

Should I use a zero-interest credit card for a large one-time purchase?

Is it fair for a professor to grade us on the possession of past papers?

How does debian/ubuntu knows a package has a updated version

Sci-Fi book where patients in a coma ward all live in a subconscious world linked together

What would be the ideal power source for a cybernetic eye?

How to react to hostile behavior from a senior developer?

Extract all GPU name, model and GPU ram

Using audio cues to encourage good posture

What is Wonderstone and are there any references to it pre-1982?

Why do people hide their license plates in the EU?

In predicate logic, does existential quantification (∃) include universal quantification (∀), i.e. can 'some' imply 'all'?

How to find out what spells would be useless to a blind NPC spellcaster?

Error "illegal generic type for instanceof" when using local classes

Echoing a tail command produces unexpected output?

Coloring maths inside a tcolorbox

What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?

String `!23` is replaced with `docker` in command line

How do pianists reach extremely loud dynamics?

How does the particle を relate to the verb 行く in the structure「A を + B に行く」?

At the end of Thor: Ragnarok why don't the Asgardians turn and head for the Bifrost as per their original plan?

porting install scripts : can rpm replace apt?



Are my results new? [closed]



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Proof of an equality involving cosine $sqrt{2 + sqrt{2 + cdots + sqrt{2 + sqrt{2}}}} = 2cos (pi/2^{n+1})$Computation of coefficients of Lagrange polynomialsIs it true that the formulas of the volume and surface area of an n-dimensional sphere are best expressed in terms of $eta = frac{pi}{2}$?Continuous/interpolating alternative to order of magnitude?Lagrange interpolation for ellipseIs there a primitive recursive function which gives the nth digit of $pi$, despite the table-maker's dilemma?Condition number for polynomial interpolation matrixJacobian determinant for bi-linear QuadrilateralsWhy is $leftlfloorfrac{lfloor apirfloor}{a}rightrfloor=3$ for $a>0$?How does one approximate a second derivative with ATPS interpolationSimplify this expression with divided differences.












32












$begingroup$


I'm eighteen and sometimes I like doing math on my own when I'm inspired. I would like to know if some of my "discoveries" are new (I don't think so :) ). These are some of the results I found in the last 3 years:



Infinite radical converging to pi
$$pi= lim_{xtoinfty} 2^xsqrt{2-sqrt{2+sqrt{2+sqrt{2+...}}}} tag{1}$$
Where in the radical there are $x$ numbers $2$



Determinant of a matrix for the interpolation of polynomials



Let $p(x)=[a_n,a_{n-1},...,a_1,a_0]$ be a polynomial passing through $n+1$ points $P_i(x_i,y_i)$ . This polynomial is intrinsically connected with the matrix:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & ... & x_1^{n-1} & x_1^{n} \
1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & ... & x_2^{n-1} & x_2^{n} \
. & & . & & . & \
. & & & . & . & \
1 & x_{n-1} & x_{n-1}^2 & ... & x_{n-1}^{n-1} & x_{n-1}^{n} \
1 & x_n & x_n^2 & ... & x_n^{n-1} & x_n^{n} \
end{bmatrix} tag{2}$$



Moreover:
$$detbegin{bmatrix}
1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & ... & x_1^{n-1} & x_1^{n} \
1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & ... & x_2^{n-1} & x_2^{n} \
. & & . & & . & \
. & & & . & . & \
1 & x_{n-1} & x_{n-1}^2 & ... & x_{n-1}^{n-1} & x_{n-1}^{n} \
1 & x_n & x_n^2 & ... & x_n^{n-1} & x_n^{n} \
end{bmatrix}=prod _{k>j} (x_k-x_j) tag{3}$$



Bounds for the sum of prime factors



Let $ Pi(x) $ be the function that gives in output the sum of the primes factors of $x$ for example $ Pi(8)=6, $ then:
$$log_3(x^3)leq Pi(x) leq x tag{4}$$



An alternative formula for the divisor function



$sigma_0(x)$ is defined as the function that gives in output the number of divisors of $x$, then:
$$sigma_0(x)=sum_{i=1}^x log_xleft ( i^{left lfloor frac{x}{i} right rfloor-left lfloor frac{x-1}{i} right rfloor}frac{left lfloor frac{x}{i} right rfloor!}{left lfloor frac{x-1}{i} right rfloor!} right ) tag{5}$$



Conjecture about the n-nacci period



Let $ T(n) $ be the function the gives in output the $n$-nacci period, i.e. the periodicity of the units digit in a $n$-nacci sequence with all of the starting terms that are equal to $1$ ($T(2)=60$ is the classic Fibonacci sequence). Then my conjecture is that:



$$T(2n+1)=frac{5^{2n+1}-1}{4} tag{6}$$



Clearly, $n$ is integer. I almost forgot $2n+1$ must not terminate with digit $1$ (in that case the problem is trivial).



I hope you can tell me whether this results are trivial or not and if they are eventually wrong. Thank you for the time :) .










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$



closed as too broad by quid Apr 6 at 15:41


Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.














  • 7




    $begingroup$
    That's the Vandermonde determinant.
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Mar 24 at 11:35






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This is definitely impressive work! Good job! :) Your matrix is called "Vandermonde" matrix, which is known to have an inverse if $x_ineq x_j$ for all $ineq j$. It is definitely impressive that you have discovered that by yourself.
    $endgroup$
    – st.math
    Mar 24 at 11:37








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Keep up the good work. You can't be expected to find something truly new without extensive background, but it happens. Quite recently random people on the internet with no math background have made advances, and one of them was added as an author to a paper on the results, as anonymous.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Mar 24 at 11:50






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @poetasis I specified under that the number of two(that equals the number of roots) must be equal to x.
    $endgroup$
    – Eureka
    Mar 24 at 11:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I'm afraid I still vote to close this question. You should only have one question per post. Otherwise it is impossible to point at duplicates of each part. It is not intended to be personal, so please don't take it as such. Just a clinical application of site rules.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:14


















32












$begingroup$


I'm eighteen and sometimes I like doing math on my own when I'm inspired. I would like to know if some of my "discoveries" are new (I don't think so :) ). These are some of the results I found in the last 3 years:



Infinite radical converging to pi
$$pi= lim_{xtoinfty} 2^xsqrt{2-sqrt{2+sqrt{2+sqrt{2+...}}}} tag{1}$$
Where in the radical there are $x$ numbers $2$



Determinant of a matrix for the interpolation of polynomials



Let $p(x)=[a_n,a_{n-1},...,a_1,a_0]$ be a polynomial passing through $n+1$ points $P_i(x_i,y_i)$ . This polynomial is intrinsically connected with the matrix:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & ... & x_1^{n-1} & x_1^{n} \
1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & ... & x_2^{n-1} & x_2^{n} \
. & & . & & . & \
. & & & . & . & \
1 & x_{n-1} & x_{n-1}^2 & ... & x_{n-1}^{n-1} & x_{n-1}^{n} \
1 & x_n & x_n^2 & ... & x_n^{n-1} & x_n^{n} \
end{bmatrix} tag{2}$$



Moreover:
$$detbegin{bmatrix}
1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & ... & x_1^{n-1} & x_1^{n} \
1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & ... & x_2^{n-1} & x_2^{n} \
. & & . & & . & \
. & & & . & . & \
1 & x_{n-1} & x_{n-1}^2 & ... & x_{n-1}^{n-1} & x_{n-1}^{n} \
1 & x_n & x_n^2 & ... & x_n^{n-1} & x_n^{n} \
end{bmatrix}=prod _{k>j} (x_k-x_j) tag{3}$$



Bounds for the sum of prime factors



Let $ Pi(x) $ be the function that gives in output the sum of the primes factors of $x$ for example $ Pi(8)=6, $ then:
$$log_3(x^3)leq Pi(x) leq x tag{4}$$



An alternative formula for the divisor function



$sigma_0(x)$ is defined as the function that gives in output the number of divisors of $x$, then:
$$sigma_0(x)=sum_{i=1}^x log_xleft ( i^{left lfloor frac{x}{i} right rfloor-left lfloor frac{x-1}{i} right rfloor}frac{left lfloor frac{x}{i} right rfloor!}{left lfloor frac{x-1}{i} right rfloor!} right ) tag{5}$$



Conjecture about the n-nacci period



Let $ T(n) $ be the function the gives in output the $n$-nacci period, i.e. the periodicity of the units digit in a $n$-nacci sequence with all of the starting terms that are equal to $1$ ($T(2)=60$ is the classic Fibonacci sequence). Then my conjecture is that:



$$T(2n+1)=frac{5^{2n+1}-1}{4} tag{6}$$



Clearly, $n$ is integer. I almost forgot $2n+1$ must not terminate with digit $1$ (in that case the problem is trivial).



I hope you can tell me whether this results are trivial or not and if they are eventually wrong. Thank you for the time :) .










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$



closed as too broad by quid Apr 6 at 15:41


Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.














  • 7




    $begingroup$
    That's the Vandermonde determinant.
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Mar 24 at 11:35






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This is definitely impressive work! Good job! :) Your matrix is called "Vandermonde" matrix, which is known to have an inverse if $x_ineq x_j$ for all $ineq j$. It is definitely impressive that you have discovered that by yourself.
    $endgroup$
    – st.math
    Mar 24 at 11:37








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Keep up the good work. You can't be expected to find something truly new without extensive background, but it happens. Quite recently random people on the internet with no math background have made advances, and one of them was added as an author to a paper on the results, as anonymous.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Mar 24 at 11:50






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @poetasis I specified under that the number of two(that equals the number of roots) must be equal to x.
    $endgroup$
    – Eureka
    Mar 24 at 11:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I'm afraid I still vote to close this question. You should only have one question per post. Otherwise it is impossible to point at duplicates of each part. It is not intended to be personal, so please don't take it as such. Just a clinical application of site rules.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:14
















32












32








32


5



$begingroup$


I'm eighteen and sometimes I like doing math on my own when I'm inspired. I would like to know if some of my "discoveries" are new (I don't think so :) ). These are some of the results I found in the last 3 years:



Infinite radical converging to pi
$$pi= lim_{xtoinfty} 2^xsqrt{2-sqrt{2+sqrt{2+sqrt{2+...}}}} tag{1}$$
Where in the radical there are $x$ numbers $2$



Determinant of a matrix for the interpolation of polynomials



Let $p(x)=[a_n,a_{n-1},...,a_1,a_0]$ be a polynomial passing through $n+1$ points $P_i(x_i,y_i)$ . This polynomial is intrinsically connected with the matrix:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & ... & x_1^{n-1} & x_1^{n} \
1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & ... & x_2^{n-1} & x_2^{n} \
. & & . & & . & \
. & & & . & . & \
1 & x_{n-1} & x_{n-1}^2 & ... & x_{n-1}^{n-1} & x_{n-1}^{n} \
1 & x_n & x_n^2 & ... & x_n^{n-1} & x_n^{n} \
end{bmatrix} tag{2}$$



Moreover:
$$detbegin{bmatrix}
1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & ... & x_1^{n-1} & x_1^{n} \
1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & ... & x_2^{n-1} & x_2^{n} \
. & & . & & . & \
. & & & . & . & \
1 & x_{n-1} & x_{n-1}^2 & ... & x_{n-1}^{n-1} & x_{n-1}^{n} \
1 & x_n & x_n^2 & ... & x_n^{n-1} & x_n^{n} \
end{bmatrix}=prod _{k>j} (x_k-x_j) tag{3}$$



Bounds for the sum of prime factors



Let $ Pi(x) $ be the function that gives in output the sum of the primes factors of $x$ for example $ Pi(8)=6, $ then:
$$log_3(x^3)leq Pi(x) leq x tag{4}$$



An alternative formula for the divisor function



$sigma_0(x)$ is defined as the function that gives in output the number of divisors of $x$, then:
$$sigma_0(x)=sum_{i=1}^x log_xleft ( i^{left lfloor frac{x}{i} right rfloor-left lfloor frac{x-1}{i} right rfloor}frac{left lfloor frac{x}{i} right rfloor!}{left lfloor frac{x-1}{i} right rfloor!} right ) tag{5}$$



Conjecture about the n-nacci period



Let $ T(n) $ be the function the gives in output the $n$-nacci period, i.e. the periodicity of the units digit in a $n$-nacci sequence with all of the starting terms that are equal to $1$ ($T(2)=60$ is the classic Fibonacci sequence). Then my conjecture is that:



$$T(2n+1)=frac{5^{2n+1}-1}{4} tag{6}$$



Clearly, $n$ is integer. I almost forgot $2n+1$ must not terminate with digit $1$ (in that case the problem is trivial).



I hope you can tell me whether this results are trivial or not and if they are eventually wrong. Thank you for the time :) .










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I'm eighteen and sometimes I like doing math on my own when I'm inspired. I would like to know if some of my "discoveries" are new (I don't think so :) ). These are some of the results I found in the last 3 years:



Infinite radical converging to pi
$$pi= lim_{xtoinfty} 2^xsqrt{2-sqrt{2+sqrt{2+sqrt{2+...}}}} tag{1}$$
Where in the radical there are $x$ numbers $2$



Determinant of a matrix for the interpolation of polynomials



Let $p(x)=[a_n,a_{n-1},...,a_1,a_0]$ be a polynomial passing through $n+1$ points $P_i(x_i,y_i)$ . This polynomial is intrinsically connected with the matrix:
$$begin{bmatrix}
1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & ... & x_1^{n-1} & x_1^{n} \
1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & ... & x_2^{n-1} & x_2^{n} \
. & & . & & . & \
. & & & . & . & \
1 & x_{n-1} & x_{n-1}^2 & ... & x_{n-1}^{n-1} & x_{n-1}^{n} \
1 & x_n & x_n^2 & ... & x_n^{n-1} & x_n^{n} \
end{bmatrix} tag{2}$$



Moreover:
$$detbegin{bmatrix}
1 & x_1 & x_1^2 & ... & x_1^{n-1} & x_1^{n} \
1 & x_2 & x_2^2 & ... & x_2^{n-1} & x_2^{n} \
. & & . & & . & \
. & & & . & . & \
1 & x_{n-1} & x_{n-1}^2 & ... & x_{n-1}^{n-1} & x_{n-1}^{n} \
1 & x_n & x_n^2 & ... & x_n^{n-1} & x_n^{n} \
end{bmatrix}=prod _{k>j} (x_k-x_j) tag{3}$$



Bounds for the sum of prime factors



Let $ Pi(x) $ be the function that gives in output the sum of the primes factors of $x$ for example $ Pi(8)=6, $ then:
$$log_3(x^3)leq Pi(x) leq x tag{4}$$



An alternative formula for the divisor function



$sigma_0(x)$ is defined as the function that gives in output the number of divisors of $x$, then:
$$sigma_0(x)=sum_{i=1}^x log_xleft ( i^{left lfloor frac{x}{i} right rfloor-left lfloor frac{x-1}{i} right rfloor}frac{left lfloor frac{x}{i} right rfloor!}{left lfloor frac{x-1}{i} right rfloor!} right ) tag{5}$$



Conjecture about the n-nacci period



Let $ T(n) $ be the function the gives in output the $n$-nacci period, i.e. the periodicity of the units digit in a $n$-nacci sequence with all of the starting terms that are equal to $1$ ($T(2)=60$ is the classic Fibonacci sequence). Then my conjecture is that:



$$T(2n+1)=frac{5^{2n+1}-1}{4} tag{6}$$



Clearly, $n$ is integer. I almost forgot $2n+1$ must not terminate with digit $1$ (in that case the problem is trivial).



I hope you can tell me whether this results are trivial or not and if they are eventually wrong. Thank you for the time :) .







interpolation pi






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 27 at 17:57









Somos

15.1k11337




15.1k11337










asked Mar 24 at 11:30









EurekaEureka

876114




876114




closed as too broad by quid Apr 6 at 15:41


Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.









closed as too broad by quid Apr 6 at 15:41


Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.










  • 7




    $begingroup$
    That's the Vandermonde determinant.
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Mar 24 at 11:35






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This is definitely impressive work! Good job! :) Your matrix is called "Vandermonde" matrix, which is known to have an inverse if $x_ineq x_j$ for all $ineq j$. It is definitely impressive that you have discovered that by yourself.
    $endgroup$
    – st.math
    Mar 24 at 11:37








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Keep up the good work. You can't be expected to find something truly new without extensive background, but it happens. Quite recently random people on the internet with no math background have made advances, and one of them was added as an author to a paper on the results, as anonymous.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Mar 24 at 11:50






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @poetasis I specified under that the number of two(that equals the number of roots) must be equal to x.
    $endgroup$
    – Eureka
    Mar 24 at 11:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I'm afraid I still vote to close this question. You should only have one question per post. Otherwise it is impossible to point at duplicates of each part. It is not intended to be personal, so please don't take it as such. Just a clinical application of site rules.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:14
















  • 7




    $begingroup$
    That's the Vandermonde determinant.
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Mar 24 at 11:35






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This is definitely impressive work! Good job! :) Your matrix is called "Vandermonde" matrix, which is known to have an inverse if $x_ineq x_j$ for all $ineq j$. It is definitely impressive that you have discovered that by yourself.
    $endgroup$
    – st.math
    Mar 24 at 11:37








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Keep up the good work. You can't be expected to find something truly new without extensive background, but it happens. Quite recently random people on the internet with no math background have made advances, and one of them was added as an author to a paper on the results, as anonymous.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Mar 24 at 11:50






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    @poetasis I specified under that the number of two(that equals the number of roots) must be equal to x.
    $endgroup$
    – Eureka
    Mar 24 at 11:53






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I'm afraid I still vote to close this question. You should only have one question per post. Otherwise it is impossible to point at duplicates of each part. It is not intended to be personal, so please don't take it as such. Just a clinical application of site rules.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:14










7




7




$begingroup$
That's the Vandermonde determinant.
$endgroup$
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Mar 24 at 11:35




$begingroup$
That's the Vandermonde determinant.
$endgroup$
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Mar 24 at 11:35




3




3




$begingroup$
This is definitely impressive work! Good job! :) Your matrix is called "Vandermonde" matrix, which is known to have an inverse if $x_ineq x_j$ for all $ineq j$. It is definitely impressive that you have discovered that by yourself.
$endgroup$
– st.math
Mar 24 at 11:37






$begingroup$
This is definitely impressive work! Good job! :) Your matrix is called "Vandermonde" matrix, which is known to have an inverse if $x_ineq x_j$ for all $ineq j$. It is definitely impressive that you have discovered that by yourself.
$endgroup$
– st.math
Mar 24 at 11:37






4




4




$begingroup$
Keep up the good work. You can't be expected to find something truly new without extensive background, but it happens. Quite recently random people on the internet with no math background have made advances, and one of them was added as an author to a paper on the results, as anonymous.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Mar 24 at 11:50




$begingroup$
Keep up the good work. You can't be expected to find something truly new without extensive background, but it happens. Quite recently random people on the internet with no math background have made advances, and one of them was added as an author to a paper on the results, as anonymous.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Mar 24 at 11:50




3




3




$begingroup$
@poetasis I specified under that the number of two(that equals the number of roots) must be equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Eureka
Mar 24 at 11:53




$begingroup$
@poetasis I specified under that the number of two(that equals the number of roots) must be equal to x.
$endgroup$
– Eureka
Mar 24 at 11:53




2




2




$begingroup$
I'm afraid I still vote to close this question. You should only have one question per post. Otherwise it is impossible to point at duplicates of each part. It is not intended to be personal, so please don't take it as such. Just a clinical application of site rules.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Mar 29 at 9:14






$begingroup$
I'm afraid I still vote to close this question. You should only have one question per post. Otherwise it is impossible to point at duplicates of each part. It is not intended to be personal, so please don't take it as such. Just a clinical application of site rules.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Mar 29 at 9:14












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2





+25







$begingroup$

About the determinant:



Such a matrix is said to be of the Vandermonde form.



Its determinant is obviously a polynomial in the $x_i$. It must cancel whenever two $x_i$ are equal (making two equal rows), so that it must be a multiple of every $(x_i-x_j)$. There are $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$ such factors. On another hand, the degree of the polynomial must be the the sum of the degrees along a row, i.e. the $n^{th}$ triangular number, $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$. This is enough to say that



$$det M=mprod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$$ for some nonzero constant $m$.





About the infinite radical:



You must be careful about this notation because you don't say what is "a the end of the dots". You can express the nested radicals as a recurrence



$$r_{n+1}=sqrt{r_n+2},$$ but some $r_0$ must be specified. If you take $r_0=2$, then for all $n$, $r_n=2$ and… $pi=0$ !



You probably obtained your formula from the perimeter of the circle, by successive doublings of the number of sides, using the angle halving formula



$$2cosfrac x2=sqrt{2cos x + 2}$$ and $x=dfracpi{2^m}$ for some $m$. Then starting from $m=1$, $r_0=0$, and your estimates of $pi$ are



$$2^nsinfracpi{2^n}.$$



Congratulations, you rejoined Archimedes' findings !






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JyrkiLahtonen: what an unfriendly and inappropriate remark! I am not after "points". I am addressing the question of the OP willing to know if his findings are correct/known.
    $endgroup$
    – Yves Daoust
    Mar 29 at 9:23








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    And failed to search for dupes, and did not notice that the question has three questions compressed to one in violation of the site rules. It is fine to be friendly to newbies, but they also need guidance about the site norms.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:34






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I concede that there is room for differences of opinion here, but from the point of view of site curation it does not really make a difference whether your just post and not worry about duplicates -approach is due to hunger for points or for something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 11:11


















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2





+25







$begingroup$

About the determinant:



Such a matrix is said to be of the Vandermonde form.



Its determinant is obviously a polynomial in the $x_i$. It must cancel whenever two $x_i$ are equal (making two equal rows), so that it must be a multiple of every $(x_i-x_j)$. There are $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$ such factors. On another hand, the degree of the polynomial must be the the sum of the degrees along a row, i.e. the $n^{th}$ triangular number, $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$. This is enough to say that



$$det M=mprod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$$ for some nonzero constant $m$.





About the infinite radical:



You must be careful about this notation because you don't say what is "a the end of the dots". You can express the nested radicals as a recurrence



$$r_{n+1}=sqrt{r_n+2},$$ but some $r_0$ must be specified. If you take $r_0=2$, then for all $n$, $r_n=2$ and… $pi=0$ !



You probably obtained your formula from the perimeter of the circle, by successive doublings of the number of sides, using the angle halving formula



$$2cosfrac x2=sqrt{2cos x + 2}$$ and $x=dfracpi{2^m}$ for some $m$. Then starting from $m=1$, $r_0=0$, and your estimates of $pi$ are



$$2^nsinfracpi{2^n}.$$



Congratulations, you rejoined Archimedes' findings !






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JyrkiLahtonen: what an unfriendly and inappropriate remark! I am not after "points". I am addressing the question of the OP willing to know if his findings are correct/known.
    $endgroup$
    – Yves Daoust
    Mar 29 at 9:23








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    And failed to search for dupes, and did not notice that the question has three questions compressed to one in violation of the site rules. It is fine to be friendly to newbies, but they also need guidance about the site norms.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:34






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I concede that there is room for differences of opinion here, but from the point of view of site curation it does not really make a difference whether your just post and not worry about duplicates -approach is due to hunger for points or for something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 11:11
















2





+25







$begingroup$

About the determinant:



Such a matrix is said to be of the Vandermonde form.



Its determinant is obviously a polynomial in the $x_i$. It must cancel whenever two $x_i$ are equal (making two equal rows), so that it must be a multiple of every $(x_i-x_j)$. There are $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$ such factors. On another hand, the degree of the polynomial must be the the sum of the degrees along a row, i.e. the $n^{th}$ triangular number, $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$. This is enough to say that



$$det M=mprod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$$ for some nonzero constant $m$.





About the infinite radical:



You must be careful about this notation because you don't say what is "a the end of the dots". You can express the nested radicals as a recurrence



$$r_{n+1}=sqrt{r_n+2},$$ but some $r_0$ must be specified. If you take $r_0=2$, then for all $n$, $r_n=2$ and… $pi=0$ !



You probably obtained your formula from the perimeter of the circle, by successive doublings of the number of sides, using the angle halving formula



$$2cosfrac x2=sqrt{2cos x + 2}$$ and $x=dfracpi{2^m}$ for some $m$. Then starting from $m=1$, $r_0=0$, and your estimates of $pi$ are



$$2^nsinfracpi{2^n}.$$



Congratulations, you rejoined Archimedes' findings !






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JyrkiLahtonen: what an unfriendly and inappropriate remark! I am not after "points". I am addressing the question of the OP willing to know if his findings are correct/known.
    $endgroup$
    – Yves Daoust
    Mar 29 at 9:23








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    And failed to search for dupes, and did not notice that the question has three questions compressed to one in violation of the site rules. It is fine to be friendly to newbies, but they also need guidance about the site norms.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:34






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I concede that there is room for differences of opinion here, but from the point of view of site curation it does not really make a difference whether your just post and not worry about duplicates -approach is due to hunger for points or for something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 11:11














2





+25







2





+25



2




+25



$begingroup$

About the determinant:



Such a matrix is said to be of the Vandermonde form.



Its determinant is obviously a polynomial in the $x_i$. It must cancel whenever two $x_i$ are equal (making two equal rows), so that it must be a multiple of every $(x_i-x_j)$. There are $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$ such factors. On another hand, the degree of the polynomial must be the the sum of the degrees along a row, i.e. the $n^{th}$ triangular number, $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$. This is enough to say that



$$det M=mprod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$$ for some nonzero constant $m$.





About the infinite radical:



You must be careful about this notation because you don't say what is "a the end of the dots". You can express the nested radicals as a recurrence



$$r_{n+1}=sqrt{r_n+2},$$ but some $r_0$ must be specified. If you take $r_0=2$, then for all $n$, $r_n=2$ and… $pi=0$ !



You probably obtained your formula from the perimeter of the circle, by successive doublings of the number of sides, using the angle halving formula



$$2cosfrac x2=sqrt{2cos x + 2}$$ and $x=dfracpi{2^m}$ for some $m$. Then starting from $m=1$, $r_0=0$, and your estimates of $pi$ are



$$2^nsinfracpi{2^n}.$$



Congratulations, you rejoined Archimedes' findings !






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



About the determinant:



Such a matrix is said to be of the Vandermonde form.



Its determinant is obviously a polynomial in the $x_i$. It must cancel whenever two $x_i$ are equal (making two equal rows), so that it must be a multiple of every $(x_i-x_j)$. There are $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$ such factors. On another hand, the degree of the polynomial must be the the sum of the degrees along a row, i.e. the $n^{th}$ triangular number, $dfrac{n(n+1)}2$. This is enough to say that



$$det M=mprod_{i<j}(x_i-x_j)$$ for some nonzero constant $m$.





About the infinite radical:



You must be careful about this notation because you don't say what is "a the end of the dots". You can express the nested radicals as a recurrence



$$r_{n+1}=sqrt{r_n+2},$$ but some $r_0$ must be specified. If you take $r_0=2$, then for all $n$, $r_n=2$ and… $pi=0$ !



You probably obtained your formula from the perimeter of the circle, by successive doublings of the number of sides, using the angle halving formula



$$2cosfrac x2=sqrt{2cos x + 2}$$ and $x=dfracpi{2^m}$ for some $m$. Then starting from $m=1$, $r_0=0$, and your estimates of $pi$ are



$$2^nsinfracpi{2^n}.$$



Congratulations, you rejoined Archimedes' findings !







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Mar 29 at 9:00

























answered Mar 28 at 19:56









Yves DaoustYves Daoust

133k676232




133k676232








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JyrkiLahtonen: what an unfriendly and inappropriate remark! I am not after "points". I am addressing the question of the OP willing to know if his findings are correct/known.
    $endgroup$
    – Yves Daoust
    Mar 29 at 9:23








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    And failed to search for dupes, and did not notice that the question has three questions compressed to one in violation of the site rules. It is fine to be friendly to newbies, but they also need guidance about the site norms.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:34






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I concede that there is room for differences of opinion here, but from the point of view of site curation it does not really make a difference whether your just post and not worry about duplicates -approach is due to hunger for points or for something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 11:11














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JyrkiLahtonen: what an unfriendly and inappropriate remark! I am not after "points". I am addressing the question of the OP willing to know if his findings are correct/known.
    $endgroup$
    – Yves Daoust
    Mar 29 at 9:23








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    And failed to search for dupes, and did not notice that the question has three questions compressed to one in violation of the site rules. It is fine to be friendly to newbies, but they also need guidance about the site norms.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 9:34






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I concede that there is room for differences of opinion here, but from the point of view of site curation it does not really make a difference whether your just post and not worry about duplicates -approach is due to hunger for points or for something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Mar 29 at 11:11








1




1




$begingroup$
@JyrkiLahtonen: what an unfriendly and inappropriate remark! I am not after "points". I am addressing the question of the OP willing to know if his findings are correct/known.
$endgroup$
– Yves Daoust
Mar 29 at 9:23






$begingroup$
@JyrkiLahtonen: what an unfriendly and inappropriate remark! I am not after "points". I am addressing the question of the OP willing to know if his findings are correct/known.
$endgroup$
– Yves Daoust
Mar 29 at 9:23






3




3




$begingroup$
And failed to search for dupes, and did not notice that the question has three questions compressed to one in violation of the site rules. It is fine to be friendly to newbies, but they also need guidance about the site norms.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Mar 29 at 9:34




$begingroup$
And failed to search for dupes, and did not notice that the question has three questions compressed to one in violation of the site rules. It is fine to be friendly to newbies, but they also need guidance about the site norms.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Mar 29 at 9:34




1




1




$begingroup$
I concede that there is room for differences of opinion here, but from the point of view of site curation it does not really make a difference whether your just post and not worry about duplicates -approach is due to hunger for points or for something else.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Mar 29 at 11:11




$begingroup$
I concede that there is room for differences of opinion here, but from the point of view of site curation it does not really make a difference whether your just post and not worry about duplicates -approach is due to hunger for points or for something else.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Mar 29 at 11:11



Popular posts from this blog

Nidaros erkebispedøme

Birsay

Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...