kaz1
et tu
does 1-infinity=0 then
Yep, I know very little about it haha.Just googled it
Sounds immensely confusing lol
No, same issue.does 1-infinity=0 then
71/infinityDunno if this qustion is related, but seems interesting :
x^x^x^x^x^x^x^x^x^... = 7
( infinitely interated )
Find x
is it ?Square root 7?
But > 2.Square root 7?
is it the seventh root of 7?Dunno if this qustion is related, but seems interesting :
x^x^x^x^x^x^x^x^x^... = 7
( infinitely interated )
Find x
is it the seventh root of 7?
That only works for 7 powers though, but the question said it was infinitely iterated...?
but the idea of 1 to the power of n(where n is positive) is that the 1 is multiplied by itself n times, so wouldnt that mean that it doesnt matter what n is the answer would always be 1 because you're multiplying 1 by 1. which should means it wouldnt matter what n equaled in 1^n, it would always be 1 no matter what even to infinityWhy wouldnt 1 to the power of a chair equal 1? Infinity is not a real number, the current definition of exponentiation does not apply to this situation and we cannot extrapolate any information from the fact that 1 to the power of a real number is 1.
In any case the OP meant something different, read my earlier post on limits.
But n is a number and infinity is not a number, it's an idea.1 to the power of say n (n is some finite natural number) is 1 of course, and we all are taught 1 to the power of anything is 1.
So it would be obvious to think that 1^(infinity) is 1. Is this correct or not... What do you guys believe?
could some one tell me what's going on here
That only works for 7 powers though, but the question said it was infinitely iterated...?
It is possible that it is very slowly converging, but I'm on a train ready for a party so not really in Math mode now haha. But indeed a result like that is cause for questioning. However, you would think that with each further iteration, the power > 1 would compound upon itself and the result magnified every iteration.could some one tell me what's going on here
[as an experiment, I know it's not exactly 'Maths ']:
(using a calculator)
store A as 7^(1/7)
ans=A
then ans=A^ans, the 10 digits displayed don't seem to change at all after 30 iterations or so
and it is 1.530140119
or 1.53014011947213 (from MATLAB)
does that have something to do with machine epsilson(or whatever the right terminology is) , or is my experimental method flawed ?