The idea behind the sum of powers of 2












9














I know that the sum of power of $2$ is $2^{n+1}-1$, and I know the mathematical induction proof. But does anyone know how $2^{n+1}-1$ comes up in the first place.



For example, sum of n numbers is $frac{n(n+1)}{2}$. The idea is that we replicate the set and put it in a rectangle, hence we can do the trick. What is the logic behind the sum of power of $2$ formula?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 2




    This addition of powers of two, and many other examples, are all geometric series. There's a lot of visualisations of this out there.
    – Parcly Taxel
    Oct 29 '16 at 10:58






  • 1




    Write the numbers in base 2: The powers of $2$ starting from $1=2^0$ will be in binary, $1+10+100+1000$ will always be a number that will be a n with all binary digits 1. This is the largest number having that many digits. SO it is of the form $2^{n+1}-1$
    – P Vanchinathan
    Oct 29 '16 at 11:01












  • I think there's a counting/probabilistic way to approach this something about having $n$ binary choices
    – BCLC
    Oct 31 '16 at 11:17
















9














I know that the sum of power of $2$ is $2^{n+1}-1$, and I know the mathematical induction proof. But does anyone know how $2^{n+1}-1$ comes up in the first place.



For example, sum of n numbers is $frac{n(n+1)}{2}$. The idea is that we replicate the set and put it in a rectangle, hence we can do the trick. What is the logic behind the sum of power of $2$ formula?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 2




    This addition of powers of two, and many other examples, are all geometric series. There's a lot of visualisations of this out there.
    – Parcly Taxel
    Oct 29 '16 at 10:58






  • 1




    Write the numbers in base 2: The powers of $2$ starting from $1=2^0$ will be in binary, $1+10+100+1000$ will always be a number that will be a n with all binary digits 1. This is the largest number having that many digits. SO it is of the form $2^{n+1}-1$
    – P Vanchinathan
    Oct 29 '16 at 11:01












  • I think there's a counting/probabilistic way to approach this something about having $n$ binary choices
    – BCLC
    Oct 31 '16 at 11:17














9












9








9


4





I know that the sum of power of $2$ is $2^{n+1}-1$, and I know the mathematical induction proof. But does anyone know how $2^{n+1}-1$ comes up in the first place.



For example, sum of n numbers is $frac{n(n+1)}{2}$. The idea is that we replicate the set and put it in a rectangle, hence we can do the trick. What is the logic behind the sum of power of $2$ formula?










share|cite|improve this question















I know that the sum of power of $2$ is $2^{n+1}-1$, and I know the mathematical induction proof. But does anyone know how $2^{n+1}-1$ comes up in the first place.



For example, sum of n numbers is $frac{n(n+1)}{2}$. The idea is that we replicate the set and put it in a rectangle, hence we can do the trick. What is the logic behind the sum of power of $2$ formula?







summation power-series






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Oct 29 '16 at 11:05









Parcly Taxel

41.2k137199




41.2k137199










asked Oct 29 '16 at 10:56









xcoder

153116




153116








  • 2




    This addition of powers of two, and many other examples, are all geometric series. There's a lot of visualisations of this out there.
    – Parcly Taxel
    Oct 29 '16 at 10:58






  • 1




    Write the numbers in base 2: The powers of $2$ starting from $1=2^0$ will be in binary, $1+10+100+1000$ will always be a number that will be a n with all binary digits 1. This is the largest number having that many digits. SO it is of the form $2^{n+1}-1$
    – P Vanchinathan
    Oct 29 '16 at 11:01












  • I think there's a counting/probabilistic way to approach this something about having $n$ binary choices
    – BCLC
    Oct 31 '16 at 11:17














  • 2




    This addition of powers of two, and many other examples, are all geometric series. There's a lot of visualisations of this out there.
    – Parcly Taxel
    Oct 29 '16 at 10:58






  • 1




    Write the numbers in base 2: The powers of $2$ starting from $1=2^0$ will be in binary, $1+10+100+1000$ will always be a number that will be a n with all binary digits 1. This is the largest number having that many digits. SO it is of the form $2^{n+1}-1$
    – P Vanchinathan
    Oct 29 '16 at 11:01












  • I think there's a counting/probabilistic way to approach this something about having $n$ binary choices
    – BCLC
    Oct 31 '16 at 11:17








2




2




This addition of powers of two, and many other examples, are all geometric series. There's a lot of visualisations of this out there.
– Parcly Taxel
Oct 29 '16 at 10:58




This addition of powers of two, and many other examples, are all geometric series. There's a lot of visualisations of this out there.
– Parcly Taxel
Oct 29 '16 at 10:58




1




1




Write the numbers in base 2: The powers of $2$ starting from $1=2^0$ will be in binary, $1+10+100+1000$ will always be a number that will be a n with all binary digits 1. This is the largest number having that many digits. SO it is of the form $2^{n+1}-1$
– P Vanchinathan
Oct 29 '16 at 11:01






Write the numbers in base 2: The powers of $2$ starting from $1=2^0$ will be in binary, $1+10+100+1000$ will always be a number that will be a n with all binary digits 1. This is the largest number having that many digits. SO it is of the form $2^{n+1}-1$
– P Vanchinathan
Oct 29 '16 at 11:01














I think there's a counting/probabilistic way to approach this something about having $n$ binary choices
– BCLC
Oct 31 '16 at 11:17




I think there's a counting/probabilistic way to approach this something about having $n$ binary choices
– BCLC
Oct 31 '16 at 11:17










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes


















14














The binary expansion of $sum_{k=0}^n2^k$ is a string of $n+1$ 1's:
$$underbrace{111dots111}_{n+1}$$
If I add a 1 to this number, what do I get?
$$1underbrace{000dots000}_{n+1}$$
1 followed by $n+1$ 0's, hence $2^{n+1}$. Therefore
$$sum_{k=0}^n2^k=2^{n+1}-1$$






share|cite|improve this answer































    6














    This works for any partial sum of geometric series.



    Let $S = 1 + x + x^2+ldots +x^n$. Then $xS = x + x^2 + ldots +x^n + x^{n+1} = S - 1 + x^{n+1}$.



    All you have to do now is solve for $S$ (assuming $xneq 1$).






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • Yes, but the OP said that he already knew this. What he is asking for is a visual representation of the proof.
      – Alex M.
      Oct 29 '16 at 11:01










    • Actually, they said that they knew proof by induction, but didn't know how one would come up with the formula in the first place. At least that is how I understood the question. @AlexM.
      – Ennar
      Oct 29 '16 at 11:02



















    2














    There is a geometrical explanation.



    Take a box long enough to put twice the amount of items equal to the last term of the sum, and try to pack it.



    Let's take a box of length $2 * 2^n$.



    Let's put the items from the first term ($2^n$) into the box. Now exactly one half of the space is left for the other terms, from $2^{n-1}$ down to $1$, so we repeat this process, starting from the next largest term.



    As we put the items from each term, we notice that they take exactly one half of the empty space left in the box, because both the largest term left and the space left decreases in half on each step.



    At some point we reach the first term, which is equal to 1, and there are two empty places left in the box for just one item, so after we put the last item into the box, there is still space for one more item.



    The length of the box is $2*2^n = 2^{n+1}$, but it could be shorter by one, which is $2^{n+1} - 1$, and this is our formula.



    For example, let's pack: $$sum_{i=0}^3 2^i$$



    Box length: $$2 * 2^3 = 16$$



    2^3    |* * * * * * * *|               |
    2^2 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *| |
    2^1 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *| |
    2^0 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *|*| |


    It could be shorter by one:
    $$2^{3+1}-1 = 15$$



    By the way, similar geometrical explanation can be used for the ever decreasing geometric progression $sum_{i=0}^infty 2^{-i}$ with the only difference that we do not need to account for the last piece of empty space, because it tends to 0. Instead, we take some continuous medium as an example, such as a ribbon or a thread, which can be divided virtually infinitely so it sums to exactly a length of 2 units.






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 2




      +1 Nice answer. To make it even nicer, edit to reformat with mathjax: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
      – Ethan Bolker
      Nov 24 at 23:27



















    0














    There is a combinatorial interpretation. Consider the collection of all binary sequences of length $n+1$ with at least one $1$ (call this set $E$). There are $$2^{n+1}-1$$ such sequences. Now let $E_j$ be the set of binary sequences of length $n+1$ such that the first $1$ is in the $j$ th component for $j=1,dotsc, n+1$. Then $|E_j|=2^{n+1-j}$. Then the $(E_j)$ partition $E$ and we have that
    $$
    1+2+2^2+dotsb+2^n=sum_{j=1}^{n+1}2^{n+1-j}=2^{n+1}-1.
    $$

    Alternatively
    $$
    sum_{k=0}^n 2^{k}=sum_{k=0}^n (2^{k+1}-2^k)=2^{n+1}-1.
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer





























      0














      Another geometric interpretation.



      Start with a line segment, AB. Extend this into a line. Use compassto mark off a point C by setting center at B and passing radius through A. Then lengths, AB=BC. Create point D in a similar way. We have thus constructed a length double that of the original line segment.



      This doubling can continue AS MUCH S you like.



      Now ignore the first line segment, AB.



      The series of segments now starts with BD which has double the length of AB.



      In general the nth segment in the first case is the n-1th segment upon removal of AB. Further, each is double the length of its corresponding section.



      So By subtracting a part we've doubled what remains, but with fewer sections to account for.



      This gives the formula.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        });
        });
        }, "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "69"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: true,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: 10,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });














        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1990137%2fthe-idea-behind-the-sum-of-powers-of-2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes








        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        14














        The binary expansion of $sum_{k=0}^n2^k$ is a string of $n+1$ 1's:
        $$underbrace{111dots111}_{n+1}$$
        If I add a 1 to this number, what do I get?
        $$1underbrace{000dots000}_{n+1}$$
        1 followed by $n+1$ 0's, hence $2^{n+1}$. Therefore
        $$sum_{k=0}^n2^k=2^{n+1}-1$$






        share|cite|improve this answer




























          14














          The binary expansion of $sum_{k=0}^n2^k$ is a string of $n+1$ 1's:
          $$underbrace{111dots111}_{n+1}$$
          If I add a 1 to this number, what do I get?
          $$1underbrace{000dots000}_{n+1}$$
          1 followed by $n+1$ 0's, hence $2^{n+1}$. Therefore
          $$sum_{k=0}^n2^k=2^{n+1}-1$$






          share|cite|improve this answer


























            14












            14








            14






            The binary expansion of $sum_{k=0}^n2^k$ is a string of $n+1$ 1's:
            $$underbrace{111dots111}_{n+1}$$
            If I add a 1 to this number, what do I get?
            $$1underbrace{000dots000}_{n+1}$$
            1 followed by $n+1$ 0's, hence $2^{n+1}$. Therefore
            $$sum_{k=0}^n2^k=2^{n+1}-1$$






            share|cite|improve this answer














            The binary expansion of $sum_{k=0}^n2^k$ is a string of $n+1$ 1's:
            $$underbrace{111dots111}_{n+1}$$
            If I add a 1 to this number, what do I get?
            $$1underbrace{000dots000}_{n+1}$$
            1 followed by $n+1$ 0's, hence $2^{n+1}$. Therefore
            $$sum_{k=0}^n2^k=2^{n+1}-1$$







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Oct 31 '16 at 10:20

























            answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:05









            Parcly Taxel

            41.2k137199




            41.2k137199























                6














                This works for any partial sum of geometric series.



                Let $S = 1 + x + x^2+ldots +x^n$. Then $xS = x + x^2 + ldots +x^n + x^{n+1} = S - 1 + x^{n+1}$.



                All you have to do now is solve for $S$ (assuming $xneq 1$).






                share|cite|improve this answer























                • Yes, but the OP said that he already knew this. What he is asking for is a visual representation of the proof.
                  – Alex M.
                  Oct 29 '16 at 11:01










                • Actually, they said that they knew proof by induction, but didn't know how one would come up with the formula in the first place. At least that is how I understood the question. @AlexM.
                  – Ennar
                  Oct 29 '16 at 11:02
















                6














                This works for any partial sum of geometric series.



                Let $S = 1 + x + x^2+ldots +x^n$. Then $xS = x + x^2 + ldots +x^n + x^{n+1} = S - 1 + x^{n+1}$.



                All you have to do now is solve for $S$ (assuming $xneq 1$).






                share|cite|improve this answer























                • Yes, but the OP said that he already knew this. What he is asking for is a visual representation of the proof.
                  – Alex M.
                  Oct 29 '16 at 11:01










                • Actually, they said that they knew proof by induction, but didn't know how one would come up with the formula in the first place. At least that is how I understood the question. @AlexM.
                  – Ennar
                  Oct 29 '16 at 11:02














                6












                6








                6






                This works for any partial sum of geometric series.



                Let $S = 1 + x + x^2+ldots +x^n$. Then $xS = x + x^2 + ldots +x^n + x^{n+1} = S - 1 + x^{n+1}$.



                All you have to do now is solve for $S$ (assuming $xneq 1$).






                share|cite|improve this answer














                This works for any partial sum of geometric series.



                Let $S = 1 + x + x^2+ldots +x^n$. Then $xS = x + x^2 + ldots +x^n + x^{n+1} = S - 1 + x^{n+1}$.



                All you have to do now is solve for $S$ (assuming $xneq 1$).







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Oct 29 '16 at 11:04

























                answered Oct 29 '16 at 11:00









                Ennar

                14.3k32343




                14.3k32343












                • Yes, but the OP said that he already knew this. What he is asking for is a visual representation of the proof.
                  – Alex M.
                  Oct 29 '16 at 11:01










                • Actually, they said that they knew proof by induction, but didn't know how one would come up with the formula in the first place. At least that is how I understood the question. @AlexM.
                  – Ennar
                  Oct 29 '16 at 11:02


















                • Yes, but the OP said that he already knew this. What he is asking for is a visual representation of the proof.
                  – Alex M.
                  Oct 29 '16 at 11:01










                • Actually, they said that they knew proof by induction, but didn't know how one would come up with the formula in the first place. At least that is how I understood the question. @AlexM.
                  – Ennar
                  Oct 29 '16 at 11:02
















                Yes, but the OP said that he already knew this. What he is asking for is a visual representation of the proof.
                – Alex M.
                Oct 29 '16 at 11:01




                Yes, but the OP said that he already knew this. What he is asking for is a visual representation of the proof.
                – Alex M.
                Oct 29 '16 at 11:01












                Actually, they said that they knew proof by induction, but didn't know how one would come up with the formula in the first place. At least that is how I understood the question. @AlexM.
                – Ennar
                Oct 29 '16 at 11:02




                Actually, they said that they knew proof by induction, but didn't know how one would come up with the formula in the first place. At least that is how I understood the question. @AlexM.
                – Ennar
                Oct 29 '16 at 11:02











                2














                There is a geometrical explanation.



                Take a box long enough to put twice the amount of items equal to the last term of the sum, and try to pack it.



                Let's take a box of length $2 * 2^n$.



                Let's put the items from the first term ($2^n$) into the box. Now exactly one half of the space is left for the other terms, from $2^{n-1}$ down to $1$, so we repeat this process, starting from the next largest term.



                As we put the items from each term, we notice that they take exactly one half of the empty space left in the box, because both the largest term left and the space left decreases in half on each step.



                At some point we reach the first term, which is equal to 1, and there are two empty places left in the box for just one item, so after we put the last item into the box, there is still space for one more item.



                The length of the box is $2*2^n = 2^{n+1}$, but it could be shorter by one, which is $2^{n+1} - 1$, and this is our formula.



                For example, let's pack: $$sum_{i=0}^3 2^i$$



                Box length: $$2 * 2^3 = 16$$



                2^3    |* * * * * * * *|               |
                2^2 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *| |
                2^1 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *| |
                2^0 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *|*| |


                It could be shorter by one:
                $$2^{3+1}-1 = 15$$



                By the way, similar geometrical explanation can be used for the ever decreasing geometric progression $sum_{i=0}^infty 2^{-i}$ with the only difference that we do not need to account for the last piece of empty space, because it tends to 0. Instead, we take some continuous medium as an example, such as a ribbon or a thread, which can be divided virtually infinitely so it sums to exactly a length of 2 units.






                share|cite|improve this answer



















                • 2




                  +1 Nice answer. To make it even nicer, edit to reformat with mathjax: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
                  – Ethan Bolker
                  Nov 24 at 23:27
















                2














                There is a geometrical explanation.



                Take a box long enough to put twice the amount of items equal to the last term of the sum, and try to pack it.



                Let's take a box of length $2 * 2^n$.



                Let's put the items from the first term ($2^n$) into the box. Now exactly one half of the space is left for the other terms, from $2^{n-1}$ down to $1$, so we repeat this process, starting from the next largest term.



                As we put the items from each term, we notice that they take exactly one half of the empty space left in the box, because both the largest term left and the space left decreases in half on each step.



                At some point we reach the first term, which is equal to 1, and there are two empty places left in the box for just one item, so after we put the last item into the box, there is still space for one more item.



                The length of the box is $2*2^n = 2^{n+1}$, but it could be shorter by one, which is $2^{n+1} - 1$, and this is our formula.



                For example, let's pack: $$sum_{i=0}^3 2^i$$



                Box length: $$2 * 2^3 = 16$$



                2^3    |* * * * * * * *|               |
                2^2 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *| |
                2^1 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *| |
                2^0 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *|*| |


                It could be shorter by one:
                $$2^{3+1}-1 = 15$$



                By the way, similar geometrical explanation can be used for the ever decreasing geometric progression $sum_{i=0}^infty 2^{-i}$ with the only difference that we do not need to account for the last piece of empty space, because it tends to 0. Instead, we take some continuous medium as an example, such as a ribbon or a thread, which can be divided virtually infinitely so it sums to exactly a length of 2 units.






                share|cite|improve this answer



















                • 2




                  +1 Nice answer. To make it even nicer, edit to reformat with mathjax: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
                  – Ethan Bolker
                  Nov 24 at 23:27














                2












                2








                2






                There is a geometrical explanation.



                Take a box long enough to put twice the amount of items equal to the last term of the sum, and try to pack it.



                Let's take a box of length $2 * 2^n$.



                Let's put the items from the first term ($2^n$) into the box. Now exactly one half of the space is left for the other terms, from $2^{n-1}$ down to $1$, so we repeat this process, starting from the next largest term.



                As we put the items from each term, we notice that they take exactly one half of the empty space left in the box, because both the largest term left and the space left decreases in half on each step.



                At some point we reach the first term, which is equal to 1, and there are two empty places left in the box for just one item, so after we put the last item into the box, there is still space for one more item.



                The length of the box is $2*2^n = 2^{n+1}$, but it could be shorter by one, which is $2^{n+1} - 1$, and this is our formula.



                For example, let's pack: $$sum_{i=0}^3 2^i$$



                Box length: $$2 * 2^3 = 16$$



                2^3    |* * * * * * * *|               |
                2^2 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *| |
                2^1 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *| |
                2^0 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *|*| |


                It could be shorter by one:
                $$2^{3+1}-1 = 15$$



                By the way, similar geometrical explanation can be used for the ever decreasing geometric progression $sum_{i=0}^infty 2^{-i}$ with the only difference that we do not need to account for the last piece of empty space, because it tends to 0. Instead, we take some continuous medium as an example, such as a ribbon or a thread, which can be divided virtually infinitely so it sums to exactly a length of 2 units.






                share|cite|improve this answer














                There is a geometrical explanation.



                Take a box long enough to put twice the amount of items equal to the last term of the sum, and try to pack it.



                Let's take a box of length $2 * 2^n$.



                Let's put the items from the first term ($2^n$) into the box. Now exactly one half of the space is left for the other terms, from $2^{n-1}$ down to $1$, so we repeat this process, starting from the next largest term.



                As we put the items from each term, we notice that they take exactly one half of the empty space left in the box, because both the largest term left and the space left decreases in half on each step.



                At some point we reach the first term, which is equal to 1, and there are two empty places left in the box for just one item, so after we put the last item into the box, there is still space for one more item.



                The length of the box is $2*2^n = 2^{n+1}$, but it could be shorter by one, which is $2^{n+1} - 1$, and this is our formula.



                For example, let's pack: $$sum_{i=0}^3 2^i$$



                Box length: $$2 * 2^3 = 16$$



                2^3    |* * * * * * * *|               |
                2^2 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *| |
                2^1 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *| |
                2^0 |* * * * * * * *|* * * *|* *|*| |


                It could be shorter by one:
                $$2^{3+1}-1 = 15$$



                By the way, similar geometrical explanation can be used for the ever decreasing geometric progression $sum_{i=0}^infty 2^{-i}$ with the only difference that we do not need to account for the last piece of empty space, because it tends to 0. Instead, we take some continuous medium as an example, such as a ribbon or a thread, which can be divided virtually infinitely so it sums to exactly a length of 2 units.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Nov 24 at 23:55

























                answered Nov 24 at 23:19









                George Polevoy

                1214




                1214








                • 2




                  +1 Nice answer. To make it even nicer, edit to reformat with mathjax: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
                  – Ethan Bolker
                  Nov 24 at 23:27














                • 2




                  +1 Nice answer. To make it even nicer, edit to reformat with mathjax: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
                  – Ethan Bolker
                  Nov 24 at 23:27








                2




                2




                +1 Nice answer. To make it even nicer, edit to reformat with mathjax: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
                – Ethan Bolker
                Nov 24 at 23:27




                +1 Nice answer. To make it even nicer, edit to reformat with mathjax: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
                – Ethan Bolker
                Nov 24 at 23:27











                0














                There is a combinatorial interpretation. Consider the collection of all binary sequences of length $n+1$ with at least one $1$ (call this set $E$). There are $$2^{n+1}-1$$ such sequences. Now let $E_j$ be the set of binary sequences of length $n+1$ such that the first $1$ is in the $j$ th component for $j=1,dotsc, n+1$. Then $|E_j|=2^{n+1-j}$. Then the $(E_j)$ partition $E$ and we have that
                $$
                1+2+2^2+dotsb+2^n=sum_{j=1}^{n+1}2^{n+1-j}=2^{n+1}-1.
                $$

                Alternatively
                $$
                sum_{k=0}^n 2^{k}=sum_{k=0}^n (2^{k+1}-2^k)=2^{n+1}-1.
                $$






                share|cite|improve this answer


























                  0














                  There is a combinatorial interpretation. Consider the collection of all binary sequences of length $n+1$ with at least one $1$ (call this set $E$). There are $$2^{n+1}-1$$ such sequences. Now let $E_j$ be the set of binary sequences of length $n+1$ such that the first $1$ is in the $j$ th component for $j=1,dotsc, n+1$. Then $|E_j|=2^{n+1-j}$. Then the $(E_j)$ partition $E$ and we have that
                  $$
                  1+2+2^2+dotsb+2^n=sum_{j=1}^{n+1}2^{n+1-j}=2^{n+1}-1.
                  $$

                  Alternatively
                  $$
                  sum_{k=0}^n 2^{k}=sum_{k=0}^n (2^{k+1}-2^k)=2^{n+1}-1.
                  $$






                  share|cite|improve this answer
























                    0












                    0








                    0






                    There is a combinatorial interpretation. Consider the collection of all binary sequences of length $n+1$ with at least one $1$ (call this set $E$). There are $$2^{n+1}-1$$ such sequences. Now let $E_j$ be the set of binary sequences of length $n+1$ such that the first $1$ is in the $j$ th component for $j=1,dotsc, n+1$. Then $|E_j|=2^{n+1-j}$. Then the $(E_j)$ partition $E$ and we have that
                    $$
                    1+2+2^2+dotsb+2^n=sum_{j=1}^{n+1}2^{n+1-j}=2^{n+1}-1.
                    $$

                    Alternatively
                    $$
                    sum_{k=0}^n 2^{k}=sum_{k=0}^n (2^{k+1}-2^k)=2^{n+1}-1.
                    $$






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    There is a combinatorial interpretation. Consider the collection of all binary sequences of length $n+1$ with at least one $1$ (call this set $E$). There are $$2^{n+1}-1$$ such sequences. Now let $E_j$ be the set of binary sequences of length $n+1$ such that the first $1$ is in the $j$ th component for $j=1,dotsc, n+1$. Then $|E_j|=2^{n+1-j}$. Then the $(E_j)$ partition $E$ and we have that
                    $$
                    1+2+2^2+dotsb+2^n=sum_{j=1}^{n+1}2^{n+1-j}=2^{n+1}-1.
                    $$

                    Alternatively
                    $$
                    sum_{k=0}^n 2^{k}=sum_{k=0}^n (2^{k+1}-2^k)=2^{n+1}-1.
                    $$







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Nov 25 at 0:07









                    Foobaz John

                    20.9k41250




                    20.9k41250























                        0














                        Another geometric interpretation.



                        Start with a line segment, AB. Extend this into a line. Use compassto mark off a point C by setting center at B and passing radius through A. Then lengths, AB=BC. Create point D in a similar way. We have thus constructed a length double that of the original line segment.



                        This doubling can continue AS MUCH S you like.



                        Now ignore the first line segment, AB.



                        The series of segments now starts with BD which has double the length of AB.



                        In general the nth segment in the first case is the n-1th segment upon removal of AB. Further, each is double the length of its corresponding section.



                        So By subtracting a part we've doubled what remains, but with fewer sections to account for.



                        This gives the formula.






                        share|cite|improve this answer


























                          0














                          Another geometric interpretation.



                          Start with a line segment, AB. Extend this into a line. Use compassto mark off a point C by setting center at B and passing radius through A. Then lengths, AB=BC. Create point D in a similar way. We have thus constructed a length double that of the original line segment.



                          This doubling can continue AS MUCH S you like.



                          Now ignore the first line segment, AB.



                          The series of segments now starts with BD which has double the length of AB.



                          In general the nth segment in the first case is the n-1th segment upon removal of AB. Further, each is double the length of its corresponding section.



                          So By subtracting a part we've doubled what remains, but with fewer sections to account for.



                          This gives the formula.






                          share|cite|improve this answer
























                            0












                            0








                            0






                            Another geometric interpretation.



                            Start with a line segment, AB. Extend this into a line. Use compassto mark off a point C by setting center at B and passing radius through A. Then lengths, AB=BC. Create point D in a similar way. We have thus constructed a length double that of the original line segment.



                            This doubling can continue AS MUCH S you like.



                            Now ignore the first line segment, AB.



                            The series of segments now starts with BD which has double the length of AB.



                            In general the nth segment in the first case is the n-1th segment upon removal of AB. Further, each is double the length of its corresponding section.



                            So By subtracting a part we've doubled what remains, but with fewer sections to account for.



                            This gives the formula.






                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            Another geometric interpretation.



                            Start with a line segment, AB. Extend this into a line. Use compassto mark off a point C by setting center at B and passing radius through A. Then lengths, AB=BC. Create point D in a similar way. We have thus constructed a length double that of the original line segment.



                            This doubling can continue AS MUCH S you like.



                            Now ignore the first line segment, AB.



                            The series of segments now starts with BD which has double the length of AB.



                            In general the nth segment in the first case is the n-1th segment upon removal of AB. Further, each is double the length of its corresponding section.



                            So By subtracting a part we've doubled what remains, but with fewer sections to account for.



                            This gives the formula.







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered Nov 25 at 1:12









                            TurlocTheRed

                            838311




                            838311






























                                draft saved

                                draft discarded




















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                                Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                                Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1990137%2fthe-idea-behind-the-sum-of-powers-of-2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Plaza Victoria

                                Puebla de Zaragoza

                                Musa