1. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48793
    04 Aug '08 12:26
    Prove that for any positive integer n

    n cubed equals the sum of n sequential odd numbers

    eg 4^3 = 64 = 13 + 15 + 17 + 19
  2. Joined
    15 Feb '07
    Moves
    667
    04 Aug '08 13:25
    Finding the two following equations works wonders..

    SUM(i=1 to n, i)
    SUM(i=1 to n, i, i^3)
  3. Joined
    29 Apr '05
    Moves
    827
    04 Aug '08 15:55
    isnt 3 a positive integer? 3^3 = 27 and i dont see how 4 odd numbers can add up to another odd number. am i missing something, or did you mean any _even_ positive integer?
  4. Joined
    15 Feb '07
    Moves
    667
    04 Aug '08 16:06
    Originally posted by crazyblue
    isnt 3 a positive integer? 3^3 = 27 and i dont see how 4 odd numbers can add up to another odd number. am i missing something, or did you mean any _even_ positive integer?
    1^3 = 1 = 1
    2^3 = 8 = 3 + 5
    3^3 = 27 = 7 + 9 + 11
    4^3 = 64 = 13 + 15 + 17 + 19
    5^3 = 125 = 21 + 23 + 25 + 27 + 29

    Pattern continues.

    Prove that the sum of the first n cubes is the square of the sum of the first n numbers.
  5. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    10 Dec '06
    Moves
    8528
    04 Aug '08 16:45
    Originally posted by geepamoogle
    1^3 = 1 = 1
    2^3 = 8 = 3 + 5
    3^3 = 27 = 7 + 9 + 11
    4^3 = 64 = 13 + 15 + 17 + 19
    5^3 = 125 = 21 + 23 + 25 + 27 + 29

    Pattern continues.

    Prove that the sum of the first n cubes is the square of the sum of the first n numbers.
    proofing aside,....... because i can't do it๐Ÿ˜€........That is pretty cool๐Ÿ˜ฒ
  6. Joined
    29 Apr '05
    Moves
    827
    04 Aug '08 22:21
    oh nevermind, i had a blind moment up there ๐Ÿ˜‰
  7. Joined
    12 Sep '07
    Moves
    2668
    05 Aug '08 04:411 edit
    Ooo geep i love that relation. I especially like how it doesn't generalize to higher powers. Can be proven via induction(boring and ugly), telescoping(could be messy), a nice substitution (pretty cool), and geometrically (very awesome).

    Sum(i^3, i, 1, n)=Sum(i, i, 1, n)^2 Would look better if we had LATEX.
  8. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    05 Aug '08 13:02
    Originally posted by Dejection
    Ooo geep i love that relation. I especially like how it doesn't generalize to higher powers. Can be proven via induction(boring and ugly), telescoping(could be messy), a nice substitution (pretty cool), and geometrically (very awesome).

    Sum(i^3, i, 1, n)=Sum(i, i, 1, n)^2 Would look better if we had LATEX.
    My wife doesn't like latex. She's more into ... well, that's personal...
  9. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    10 Dec '06
    Moves
    8528
    05 Aug '08 13:481 edit
    hey what i am doing is just to gain a litle more insight..(ie completely unnecessary)..

    so when trying to find n^3 I noticed that the last odd term in the series
    is

    (n^2 + n -1) = A(n)

    and from there I deduced the first term of the series as

    (n^2 + n -1) -2( n - 1 )

    simplifying to

    n^2 -n + 1 = A(1)

    then use the formula for summing the first "n" terms of an arithmetic sequence

    S(n) = n / 2 ( A(1) + A(n) )

    = n^3

    Like I said....Hooray for me๐Ÿ˜....... I know, haha...........just wanted to see if anyone else looked at it the same way?

    As I said , this may seem trivial and silly, but for me it wasn't ....SO BACK OFF๐Ÿ˜ ....haha, I took that line from Billy Madison
  10. Joined
    10 Aug '07
    Moves
    32581
    18 Aug '08 11:02
    Let me start with this equation:

    (1) - 1+3+5+...+n = [(n+1)/2]^2

    If you take two numbers x, y, with y>x,

    y^2 - x^2 will always be a number of consecutive odd numbers.

    Now, if I prove
    n^3 = y^2 - x^2 for y>x, it is sufficient.

    We also know that:

    (2) 1^3 + 2^3 + ... + n^3 = [n(n+1)/2] ^ 2
    I have rewritten this as:
    Sum (n^3) = [n(n+1)/2]^2

    Let us take m=n-1,
    Now,
    n^3 = Sum (n^3) - Sum (m^3) = p^2 - q^2
    where, p = n(n+1)/2 and q = m(m+1)/2

    p > q, and hence for any number n,
    n^3 will always be a sum of a number of consecutive odd numbers.

    Looks like I got a proof, though I am using two well known formula (1) and (2).

    Wolf, Let me know if this is good.

    +Udaya
  11. Joined
    12 Sep '07
    Moves
    2668
    18 Aug '08 12:22
    Looks good to me.
  12. Joined
    10 Aug '07
    Moves
    32581
    19 Aug '08 09:49
    Here is another proof:

    n^3 = n * n^2

    Sum of an arithmetic series is:
    S = n * m, where n = number of terms, and m = mean of the series.

    In our case, in the series of consecutive odd numbers,
    if m = n^2, it will satisfy.

    For the series (of consecutive odd numbers), interval d=2.

    Also,
    Mean m = [2*a + (n-1)*d]/2 where a = first term, and d=interval.

    In our case d = 2, the equation reduces to:
    m = a + (n-1).

    Now, it is sufficient to prove that 'a' is odd. Then n^3 is the sum of a series of consecutive odd numbers.

    If n is odd, m=n^2 is also odd. n-1 is even, so 'a' is odd.
    If n is even, m=n^2 is also even. n-1 is odd, so 'a' must be odd to satisfy the equation.

    I think, this is better than the first one. No formulae used.

    +Udaya
  13. Shanghai
    Joined
    16 Feb '06
    Moves
    131091
    19 Aug '08 11:14
    Imagnine an nxnxn cube made from those 1 unit squares that you use at primary school when learning to count. There are n squares nxn.

    If n is odd keep one of these squares, take 2 from one square add it to another. Take 4 from another square add it to another. Take 6 from one square add it to another and so on.

    If n is even take 1 from one square and add it to another. Take 3 from another square and add it to another. Take 5 from another and so on.

    Both will give you a piles with consecutive odd numbers of unit squares.
  14. Joined
    12 Sep '07
    Moves
    2668
    19 Aug '08 13:20
    I didn't get that, could you explain please?
  15. Shanghai
    Joined
    16 Feb '06
    Moves
    131091
    19 Aug '08 16:43
    As an example, a cube 8x8x8. made of little unit cubes. This can be split into 8 layers with 8x8 little cubes. (each has 64).

    take one cube from one and put it with another (63,65)
    take 3 cubes from one and put with another (61,67)
    5 cubes from one to another (59,69)
    7 cubes from one to another (57,71)

    You get 57,59,61,63,65,67,69,71

    Now if it is 7x7x7 cube made of unit cubes

    Split into 7 layers each with 7x7 (49 cubes)

    Leave one alone (49)
    Move 2 from one to another (47,51)
    Move 4 from one to another (45,53)
    Move 6 from one to another (43,55)


    You get 43,45,47,49,51,53,55

    It was my attempt to come up with a more kinaesthetic answer but it is a bit tricky without good graphics or unit cubes!
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree