/sci/ - Science & Math

>recursive math problem
>implying it has a static answer

How strange, I keep getting -4. What am I doing wrong?

4+2+9+(-3)+5+(-11)+(-6)+17=17
imokaywiththis.jpg

>>4021320
recursively adding 0 is allowed

>>4021320
The only correct solution, this is an instance of nth limit summation(similar to the Fibonacci Sequence), it does not have a single answer, just a formula.

add the numbers, then add 4 from 4chan, then add 17 from the bottom.

>>4021313
sohardcore.jpg

>>4021331
luckily summing a lot of zeros to infinity makes zero

answer is 17

>>4021347
By calculating the answer you are creating a new iteration, which means the previous answer is only valid on a kth step.
If you want the answer for base case, then it is indeed zero, a correct answer on the other hand will be a formula.

>/sci/
>doesn't even understand basic recursive and math princples

>>4021347
By calculating the answer you are creating a new iteration, which means the previous answer is only valid on a kth step.

If you want the answer for base case, then it is indeed seventeen, a correct answer on the other hand will be a formula.

>/sci/
>doesn't even understand basic recursive and math principles

>>4021357
you are still doing it wrong

here is a simple example for you

what is the sum of numbers after this line

0

answer 17

>>4021357
it looks recursive, but because all other numbers sum to zero, it actually isn't (except in a fatuous way of recursively adding zero)

>>4021357
proven retard

>>4021361
No you are just too inept to understand the problem's depth, you can't even think past one step. It's people like you that make me want to murder math teachers who just give kids formulas and say "do it".

>>4021361
>>4021347
>>4021363
>>4021329
proven samefag

F(n)=F(n-1)+17
F(0)=17
Where n is an integer greater than zero.

^ Correct answer for all your root eating troglodytes.

>>4021367
i'm a phd maths student.

you just haven't figured it out

look again, the answer is stable at 17

>>4021320
Well when facing a recursive problem like this one, you're supposed to do a fixpoint study. Also if you end up showing that there's a single fixpoint in the range of possible answers, then your problem has what I guess you're calling a "static answer".

So I agree with what you meant but not with what you actually said.

>>4021367
nope, you are just seeing a complication that would exist if all numbers but the 17 didn't sum to zero

>>4021378
i'm not even sure it's recursive

it is saying 0 + x = x

which is always true, even for x = 17

You faggots are all getting trolled.
Except this guy: >>4021320

No matter what number OP put in the Answer box, it would be valid.

>>4021374
>Morons
Actual Answer: 1320879478914 for iteration 0

>>4021389
as was said here>>4021383

but that isn't what the confused guy at >>4021320 said at all

>>4021383
The general setting would be something like solving f(x)=x though. Here we're lucky, because since for all x, f(x)=x, so every number is a fixpoint and therefore an answer of the problem. If he had asked something different, there might have been an only fixpoint to f. Say, something like "What is the double of the sum of the numbers on this page?".

>this thread

You do realize that <span class="math">x[/spoiler] can be any number, right?

>>4021403
And my point is, when you are giving this question "what is f(the numbers on this page)?", you have to convert it to "what is f(the numbers already on the page,x)=x", which can be written "g(x)=x" for some g. Then, every fixpoint of g is an answer. If g has no fixpoint (say, <span class="math">x\mapsto x^x[/spoiler]), there is no answer. If every point is a fixpoint, as in OPs pic, because g is <span class="math">x\mapsto x[/spoiler], then every possible answer works. Otherwise, it may be anything in between.

>>4021403
if it said something like 1 + x = x

or 1 + 17 = 17

it would just be a false statement, seeing as we have no power to change any number, or iterate

if the answer box was left blank however. for us to fill in, then yes iteration would apply

>>4021421
Oh, but aren't we discussing what could or couldn't fix within the box?

>>4021426
i assumed the 17 was given and fixed, as it was already there

but who knows what OP was thinking

I got it, was dissapointed someone had already answered it though:
>>4021323