Maths on a Mug 11

This is one of the more common things that students ask me. Mostly this comes from people who have watched the incredibly successful Numperphile video, but the result was well known before then. There are a number of ways to ‘prove’ this result, giving rise to much internet angst, my favourite (and simplest) is that of Ramanujan:

c=1+2+3+4+5+6+,4c=4+8+12+,3c=12+34+56+,3c=1(1+1)2,3c=14,c=112.

Can you spot the mistake?

Fundamentally the flaws of these argument often arise from treating infinite sums like finite sums. In general, associativity and commutativity do not hold for infinite series. As an example, take the series 11+11+11+11+=0, and then add some brackets:

(11)+(11)+(11)+(11)+=0,1+(1+1)+(1+1)+(1+1)+(1+=1.

Which give you different answers!

For an excellent description of all the errors with the 1+2+3+=112 proof see the excellent Plus magazine article.


Previous Maths on a Mug Next Maths on a Mug



Enjoy Reading This Article?

Here are some more articles you might like to read next:

  • Was there room on the door for two?
  • Variance in TV Viewing Figures
  • The Impact of Form in Fantasy Football
  • Maths on a Mug 12
  • Euro 2020 Predictions