       Smarter way to calculate middle-right terms of continued fraction partial sums

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg70024] Smarter way to calculate middle-right terms of continued fraction partial sums
• From: "Diana" <diana.mecum at gmail.com>
• Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 05:13:05 -0400 (EDT)

```Math folks

I am trying to calculate the iterative terms of a continued fraction.

It is a limit of partial sums of continued fractions defined as
follows:

x[n_]:= Sum as j goes from 1 to n of (z^q^j)/d[j], where d is a
function of j.

When n = 1, z = 1, and q = 2,

x:= 1/d

I then

Solve[x == 1/a1, a1]

So, x = {0, a1}, a two-term continued fraction.

The second term looks like:

x:= 1/d + 1/d

I then

Solve[x == 1/(a1 + (1/-a2 + (1/-a1))), a2]

And get a partial sum which looks like

x = {0, a1, -a2, -a1}, a four-term continued fraction.

x:= 1/d + 1/d + 1/d

Solve[x == 1/(a1 + (1/-a2 + (1/-a1 + (1/-a3 + (1/a1 + (1/a2 +
(1/-a1))))))), a3]

x = {0, a1, -a2, -a1, -a3, a1, a2, -a1}, an eight-term continued
fraction.

So, each successive x[n] term is two times as long as the one before
it, and I am always solving for the middle right term. After I have
found the x term, for example, I can plug the solved value of a3
into the Solve equation and solve for the x term.

The terms eventually look like the following:

{0, a1, -a2, -a1, -a3, a1, a2, -a1, -a4, a1, -a2, -a1, a3, a1, a2, -a1,
-a5, a1, -a2, -a1,

-a3 a1, a2, -a1, a4, a1, -a2, -a1, a3, a1, a2, -a1, a6, ...}

Note that the signs of a1 alternate between positive and positive.
Likewise, all the variables alternate in sign.

I have been coding the Solve equation as fractions of 1 over a1 + 1
over -a2 + 1 over, etc.

By the fifth term, I have 63 fractions to code. I am sure there is a
smarter way to do this, so I am posting this question to the news
group.

Can someone help?

Diana

```

• Prev by Date: RE: How to make a progress bar?
• Next by Date: Re: How to make a progress bar?
• Previous by thread: Input, output troubles me ...
• Next by thread: RE: Re: Re: distance function