Talk:Geometric series

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Mathematics
Mathematics Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, which collaborates on articles related to mathematics.
Mathematics rating: Start Class High Priority  Field: Analysis
One of the 500 most frequently viewed mathematics articles.

Your article conflicts with geometric progression

Ooops ! I'm wrong this is really a serie.

Maybe you mean "a series"? "Series", with a final "s", is either singular or plural in English; there is no word "serie". -- Mike Hardy

Thanks I did'nt know. "Une série", "des séries" I believe it was the same in English. :)

I copied over the piece on geometric series in geometric sequence. It still needs to be integrated into the article. On further thought I feel that Geometric sequence and Geometric series should be combined since they deal with each other. Therefore I'm putting them together under Geometric progression and redirecting.

[edit] New article

I wrote this a while ago but never finished two of the the subsections, but I decided to go ahead and post it. Geometric series really do deserve their own article. Jim 20:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

You may compare the picture in the article for the series 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + etc with the picture on http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Series_%28mathematics%29 ; I think the latter is easier to understand. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 06:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I've edited the 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + etc picture to try to express the idea more clearly. (I agree that the old picture wasn't very good—let me know if you like the new one.) I like the picture that you linked to, but I think it's important to have a length-based illustration in addition to the area illustrations.
We might want to put a picture similar to the one you linked to immediately below the main picture of the article (or possibly make it the main picture, with the current main picture below). Geometric series are so wonderfully geometric that more pictures might be better. Jim 09:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The section described 'Sum' seems to refer only to the infinite geometric series rather than the series i={1,...,n}. Should the distinction be made clearer? The problem is that it says the formula for the sum is valid only for a convergent series. However, it is surely perfectly valid for a non-convergent geometric series, except when finding the infinite sum. Tommyfinch (talk) 14:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)