5
$\begingroup$

Wolfram|Alpha states that the infinite continued fraction $$\cfrac{1}{0+\cfrac{1}{0+\cdots}}=0.$$ Assuming $[0;0,0,\ldots]$ exists implies that the continued fraction is $1$, since $x=\dfrac{1}{0+\cfrac{1}{0+\cdots}}=\dfrac{1}{x}$ implies $x=1$ (ignoring the negative value). This, along with the divide by zero error, suggests W|A is wrong.

Is this an error on W|A's part? If not, is this just a convention, and is there a similar convention for $$\cfrac{0}{0+\cfrac{0}{0+\cdots}}?$$

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Did you mean to write $1$ or $0$ in the numerators? $\endgroup$
    – String
    Oct 5, 2013 at 23:51
  • $\begingroup$ I accidentally wrote 1 as 0 in my second equation (the equation with x); this is fixed now. $\endgroup$ Oct 6, 2013 at 0:07
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ You are correct that if the expression means anything then it equals its own reciprocal so it has to be $1$ or $-1$. But I think if you go to the definition of simple continued fraction you find it doesn't mean anything. $\endgroup$ Oct 6, 2013 at 0:39

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

As Gerry indicates in his comment: the definition of an infinite continued fraction is the limit of its finite truncations. Here none of the truncations are well-defined, so certainly neither is the limit.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .