Chronology |
Current Month |
Current Thread |
Current Date |

[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |

*From*: David Bowman <David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu>*Date*: Sun, 23 May 2021 12:49:31 +0000

Uh oh. I just realized that my choice of phrasing in my initial post in this thread has been less than optimal for clear communication. Multiple times in that post I said the phrase "finite telescoping sum" or "telescoping sum". This is misleading for what I was trying to communicate. What I should have said was "finite geometric sum/progression" or "geometric sum" in those places. The standard concept of a telescoping sum is different than the idea of a summable geometric sum of terms whose sum can be written as a quotient of differences. Typically a telescoping sum is one where subsequent terms act to cancel previous terms. I did not mean that latter standard usage in my post. I hope I didn't excessively confuse people with that above unfortunate choice of phraseology.

David Bowman

**References**:**[Phys-L] rms / conic / arithmetic / geometric averages***From:*John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>

**Re: [Phys-L] rms / conic / arithmetic / geometric averages***From:*David Bowman <David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: [Phys-L] rms / conic / arithmetic / geometric averages** - Next by Date:
**Re: [Phys-L] [ext] rms / conic / arithmetic / geometric averages** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [Phys-L] rms / conic / arithmetic / geometric averages** - Next by thread:
**Re: [Phys-L] rms / conic / arithmetic / geometric averages** - Index(es):