njtt, look at the ways that an infinite sum is different from a finite sum. When we say that 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10, we’re saying anybody with a knowledge of ordinary arithmetic can solve the problem in a finite amount of time. Furthermore, because of the laws of arithmetic, the summation can be done in various ways. We can add it like this:
1 + (2 + (3 +4))
or like this:
((1 + 2) + 3) + 4
or several other ways.
We can also add it in other orders like this:
4 + 3 + 2 + 1
or this:
2 + 1 + 3 + 4
In other words, finite addition is both associative and commutative.
But what does it even mean for there to be an answer to the infinite addition?:
1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + . . .
You can’t say that it’s obvious just from the usual definition of finite addition. By the usual definition of infinite addition, that sum is 2. But what does that mean? It means that if you add the numbers in the given order, the sum will get closer and closer to 2. You have to add them in the given order though. Suppose that you were to say, "Well, I don’t want to add in the given order. I want to add in my own order. I want to add it like this:
1 + 1/4 + 1/16 + 1/64 + . . . + 1/2 + 1/8 + 1/32 + 1/128 + . . ."
If you were to add it that way, you could say that the sum doesn’t get closer and closer to 2. The sum, as far as you can take it, gets closer and closer to 1 and 1/3. That’s because you never get around to adding the second part of the sum. So you have to have a different definition for addition when you do infinite addition.
Notice that we could say that the infinite sum:
1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + . . .
could be split up into the two infinite sums:
1 + 1/4 + 1/16 + 1/64 + 1/128 + . . .
The first sum adds up to 1 and 1/3 and the second sum adds up to 2/3, so the two infinite additions give the same answer when added together as when split apart.
Now look at this sum:
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + . . .
You can’t use the same rule as before to define this infinite sum. You don’t get closer and closer to anything. Now, it’s true that according to the standard definition in this case, the sum of this is ∞, since the sum increases without bound. But that’s a new definition. Nothing in the standard definition of finite addition or infinite addition (when the sum converges toward a finite number) tells you this.
Now look at this sum:
1 + (-2) + 3 + (-4) + 5 + (-6) + . . .
You can’t use the rules of finite addition to come up with this sum. You can’t use the rule of what the sums are converging toward, because they aren’t converging toward a single number. You can’t say that the sum is ∞ or -∞, because the sum isn’t growing upward or downward without bound. The sum is bouncing back and forth between 1 and (-1). You have to come up with a new definition for the sum. One way is to say that no sum exists. That’s a definition though, not something that’s clear from previous definitions.
So when you ask how this can be true:
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + . . . = (-1/12)
The answer is that it’s a new definition for the meaning of infinite sums. You want to know how this can contradict the sum that you know of:
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + . . . = ∞.
It’s because it’s using a different, older definition for infinite sums. It’s possible to use different definitions in different parts of mathematics. It’s like asking what the answer to this question is:
11 + 11 = ?
The answer can be 22 or it can be 1001 (or it can be many other things). It depends which number base you’re using. In decimal numbers, the answer is 22. In binary numbers, the answer is 1001. If you’re going to understand mathematics, you have to understand that the definitions are different in different parts of the field.