# C程式語言C++求解 20點

1+1/2+2/3+3/4+....+N-1/N

### 10 個解答

• 6 年前
最佳解答

1+1/2+2/3+3/4+....+N-1/N ... (X)

0/1+1/2+2/3+3/4+....+(N-1)/N ...(O)

2014-05-06 21:13:28 補充：

double xn(unsigned n) {

double s,x;

for(x=n, s=0.0; n>1; --n) s += 1.0/n;

return x-s;

}

2014-05-07 00:02:20 補充：

> 同學總是不加括號．．．

括號 is not the problem. Item 1 (1) which cannot be expressed in (n-1)/n is the problem.

2014-05-07 04:47:42 補充：

括號 is not a problem, just a mistake easy to fix. Whip her butts 3x times and it is learnt. However, unable to make the series using a simple rule is a mental deficiency taking years to repair.

This may not be significant to cats but is for huwomen.

2014-05-07 04:51:27 補充：

Trust me, it is harder to convince the poster why the first item of her series must be 0 than to convince her why she needs a pair of ().

2014-05-07 04:56:47 補充：

All mistakes give you wrong answers but some mistakes are more severe than the others. To me, I would accept teachers making () mistakes but never those making the 0/1 (v. 1/1) mistake. The root causes for the latter are very hard to fix.

2014-05-07 05:01:57 補充：

Did I just lose you? Probably it is too deep for cats, even those with feet.

2014-05-08 21:05:37 補充：

> However, have you considered the first term is not involved in the variable part?

Have you considered your left foot not part of the cat?

Have you considered refusing making left turns on the street?

2014-05-08 21:10:08 補充：

Dude,

Talk to me only on beautiful;

Talk to me NOT on ugly.

Considering any item of the series NOT part of the series is too ugly for a beauty to contemplate.

I thought that is the bottom line of all mathematicians?

2014-05-08 21:11:38 補充：

> Yes, I was watching you and lollipop.

Who is lollipop? why does one want to see anything ugly?

2014-05-08 22:37:46 補充：

> 1 + sum(i=1 to n-1) i/(i+1)

OMG, don't show me another ugly thing.

However,

1 + sum(i=0..n-1) (i/(i+1))

maybe acceptable. 0 is the origin of all beauties and all mathematicians shall stick to it.

There might be something that I will do for \$, but not this.

2014-05-08 23:20:59 補充：

Wait - is this the Cat (with expertise in math) I am talking to?

I think I need to check your HS diploma now.

How come our perceptions on math are so diff?

2014-05-09 01:05:27 補充：

&& you are in a pu\$\$y class for sure.

• 6 年前

到下面的網址看看吧

• 6 年前

到下面的網址看看吧

• 匿名使用者
6 年前

到下面的網址看看吧

• 您覺得這個回答如何？您可以登入為回答投票。
• 6 年前

到下面的網址看看吧

• 6 年前

參考下面的網址看看

http://phi008780520.pixnet.net/blog

• 6 年前

參考下面的網址看看

http://phi008780520.pixnet.net/blog

• 匿名使用者
6 年前

參考下面的網址看看

http://phi008780430.pixnet.net/blog

• 6 年前

001 的意見真令人感觸良多～

同學總是不加括號．．．

一定要闖禍後才學懂．．．

2014-05-07 04:24:42 補充：

括號 is not the problem with the syntax, in your case, but 括號 is the problem with the real meaning they want to convey.

2014-05-08 20:29:52 補充：

Yes, I was watching you and lollipop.

2014-05-08 20:31:26 補充：

However, as a matter of fact, have you considered the first term is not involved in the variable part?

1 + sum(i=1 to n-1) i/(i+1)

In some mathematical induction questions, this is the trick how it tests students.

2014-05-08 20:34:19 補充：

This is because in the proposition, the statement may not refer to an expression which is completely under the general term.

For example, I just found a question like:

Prove by induction that

1 + 1/(1*4) + 1/(4*7) + 1/(7*10) + ... + 1/[(3n-2)(3n+1)] = (4n+1)/(3n+1).

2014-05-08 20:35:58 補充：

When n = 1, the LHS of the statement is not 1, but 1 + 1/(1*4).

[I am sure this is a common trap.]

{Another issue, for a mathematician, another easy mistake to make for programming is missing the asterisk. They are too used to 2x instead of 2*x.}

2014-05-09 00:51:02 補充：

This is because Mathematics has many branches, maybe you belong to the royal class, melon belongs to the veggie class?

hahahah...

2014-05-09 04:49:57 補充：

教壞細路~~~~~~

=P

• 6 年前

: C程式語言C++求解

這啥鬼標題ㄚ