Show that the following sequence converges. Please Critique my proof.
$begingroup$
The problem is as follows:
Let ${a_n}$ be a sequence of nonnegative numbers such that
$$
a_{n+1}leq a_n+frac{(-1)^n}{n}.
$$
Show that $a_n$ converges.
My (wrong) proof:
Notice that
$$
|a_{n+1}-a_n|leq left|frac{(-1)^n}{n}right|leqfrac{1}{n}
$$
and since it is known that $frac{1}{n}rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrow infty$. We see that we can arbitarily bound, $|a_{n+1}-a_n|$. Thus, $a_n$ converges.
My question:
This is a question from a comprehensive exam I found and am using to review.
Should I argue that we should select $N$ so that $n>N$ implies $left|frac{1}{n}right|<epsilon$ as well?
Notes: Currently working on the proof.
real-analysis sequences-and-series convergence fake-proofs
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The problem is as follows:
Let ${a_n}$ be a sequence of nonnegative numbers such that
$$
a_{n+1}leq a_n+frac{(-1)^n}{n}.
$$
Show that $a_n$ converges.
My (wrong) proof:
Notice that
$$
|a_{n+1}-a_n|leq left|frac{(-1)^n}{n}right|leqfrac{1}{n}
$$
and since it is known that $frac{1}{n}rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrow infty$. We see that we can arbitarily bound, $|a_{n+1}-a_n|$. Thus, $a_n$ converges.
My question:
This is a question from a comprehensive exam I found and am using to review.
Should I argue that we should select $N$ so that $n>N$ implies $left|frac{1}{n}right|<epsilon$ as well?
Notes: Currently working on the proof.
real-analysis sequences-and-series convergence fake-proofs
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Your proof is not correct. Your arguments would also work for $a_n = sum_{i=1}^n frac 1 i$, which does not converge.
$endgroup$
– Falrach
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Note that you not only need to bound $left| a_{n+1} - a_n right|$ arbitrarily small, but also $left| a_{m} - a_n right|$ for all $m,n geq N$ (where $N$ can be chosen according to the bound).
$endgroup$
– Maximilian Janisch
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The problem is as follows:
Let ${a_n}$ be a sequence of nonnegative numbers such that
$$
a_{n+1}leq a_n+frac{(-1)^n}{n}.
$$
Show that $a_n$ converges.
My (wrong) proof:
Notice that
$$
|a_{n+1}-a_n|leq left|frac{(-1)^n}{n}right|leqfrac{1}{n}
$$
and since it is known that $frac{1}{n}rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrow infty$. We see that we can arbitarily bound, $|a_{n+1}-a_n|$. Thus, $a_n$ converges.
My question:
This is a question from a comprehensive exam I found and am using to review.
Should I argue that we should select $N$ so that $n>N$ implies $left|frac{1}{n}right|<epsilon$ as well?
Notes: Currently working on the proof.
real-analysis sequences-and-series convergence fake-proofs
$endgroup$
The problem is as follows:
Let ${a_n}$ be a sequence of nonnegative numbers such that
$$
a_{n+1}leq a_n+frac{(-1)^n}{n}.
$$
Show that $a_n$ converges.
My (wrong) proof:
Notice that
$$
|a_{n+1}-a_n|leq left|frac{(-1)^n}{n}right|leqfrac{1}{n}
$$
and since it is known that $frac{1}{n}rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrow infty$. We see that we can arbitarily bound, $|a_{n+1}-a_n|$. Thus, $a_n$ converges.
My question:
This is a question from a comprehensive exam I found and am using to review.
Should I argue that we should select $N$ so that $n>N$ implies $left|frac{1}{n}right|<epsilon$ as well?
Notes: Currently working on the proof.
real-analysis sequences-and-series convergence fake-proofs
real-analysis sequences-and-series convergence fake-proofs
edited 17 mins ago
Darel
asked 4 hours ago
DarelDarel
1149
1149
4
$begingroup$
Your proof is not correct. Your arguments would also work for $a_n = sum_{i=1}^n frac 1 i$, which does not converge.
$endgroup$
– Falrach
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Note that you not only need to bound $left| a_{n+1} - a_n right|$ arbitrarily small, but also $left| a_{m} - a_n right|$ for all $m,n geq N$ (where $N$ can be chosen according to the bound).
$endgroup$
– Maximilian Janisch
3 hours ago
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
Your proof is not correct. Your arguments would also work for $a_n = sum_{i=1}^n frac 1 i$, which does not converge.
$endgroup$
– Falrach
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Note that you not only need to bound $left| a_{n+1} - a_n right|$ arbitrarily small, but also $left| a_{m} - a_n right|$ for all $m,n geq N$ (where $N$ can be chosen according to the bound).
$endgroup$
– Maximilian Janisch
3 hours ago
4
4
$begingroup$
Your proof is not correct. Your arguments would also work for $a_n = sum_{i=1}^n frac 1 i$, which does not converge.
$endgroup$
– Falrach
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Your proof is not correct. Your arguments would also work for $a_n = sum_{i=1}^n frac 1 i$, which does not converge.
$endgroup$
– Falrach
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Note that you not only need to bound $left| a_{n+1} - a_n right|$ arbitrarily small, but also $left| a_{m} - a_n right|$ for all $m,n geq N$ (where $N$ can be chosen according to the bound).
$endgroup$
– Maximilian Janisch
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Note that you not only need to bound $left| a_{n+1} - a_n right|$ arbitrarily small, but also $left| a_{m} - a_n right|$ for all $m,n geq N$ (where $N$ can be chosen according to the bound).
$endgroup$
– Maximilian Janisch
3 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Consider $b_n = a_n + sum_{k=1}^{n-1} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$. Then
$$ b_{n+1}
= a_{n+1} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
leq a_n + frac{(-1)^n}{n} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
= b_n, $$
which shows that $(b_n)$ is non-increasing. Moreover, since $sum_{k=1}^{infty} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$ converges by alternating series test and $(a_n)$ is non-negative, it follows that $(b_n)$ is bounded from below. Therefore $(b_n)$ converges, and so, $(a_n)$ converges as well.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Thank you, that's neat! One might add that this argument always works for lower-bounded $(a_n)$ with $a_{n+1}le a_n+c_n$ for some summable $(c_n)$ by setting $b_n=a_n-sum_{k=1}^{n-1}c_k$.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Define $b_k := a_{2k+1}$. Then
$$b_k leq a_{2k} + (-1)^{2k}frac{1}{2k} leq b_{k-1} + (frac{1}{2k} - frac{1}{2k-1}) leq b_{k-1}$$
Since $b_k$ is non-negative and non-increasing: $b_k to b$.
Suppose $a_n nrightarrow b$. Then there exists an $varepsilon > 0 $ s.t. for infinitely many $n$ holds $|a_{2n} - b| > varepsilon$.
Assume that $|a_{2m+1}-a_m| > frac{varepsilon}{2}$ for infinitely many $m$. Then, since $a_{2m+1}- a_m leq frac{1}{2m}$ we have that
begin{align}
a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align}
for infinitely many $m$. Let $M := {m geq 1 : a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2} text{ is fulfilled for } m }$
begin{align*}
d_m := 1_M (m)
end{align*}
This implies
begin{align*}
0 leq a_{2m+1} = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^{2m} (a_{k+1} - a_k ) = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k+1} - a_{2k}) + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k} - {a_{2k-1}}) \
leq a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k} frac{1}{2k}- frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k-1}frac{1}{2k-1} to a_1 - sum_{k=1}^infty frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{i=1}^infty (-1)^i frac{1}{i} = - infty
end{align*}
since $|M| = infty$ and the last series converges. This is a contradiction.
Therefore we have that there exists $Kgeq 1$ s.t. for all $kgeq K$ it holds: $|a_{2k+1} - a_k| leq frac{varepsilon}{2}$. We can conclude that
begin{align*}
|a{2n+1} - b| geq |a_{2n} - b| - |a_{2n+1} - a_n| geq varepsilon - frac{varepsilon}{2} = frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align*}
for infinitely $n geq K$. Contradiction. Thus $a_n to b$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Be careful! The assumption is only an inequality.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Mars Plastic I see. It was typo.
$endgroup$
– Michael Rozenberg
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That shows that $(a_n)$ is bounded above, but why is it convergent?
$endgroup$
– Martin R
2 hours ago
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3131816%2fshow-that-the-following-sequence-converges-please-critique-my-proof%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Consider $b_n = a_n + sum_{k=1}^{n-1} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$. Then
$$ b_{n+1}
= a_{n+1} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
leq a_n + frac{(-1)^n}{n} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
= b_n, $$
which shows that $(b_n)$ is non-increasing. Moreover, since $sum_{k=1}^{infty} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$ converges by alternating series test and $(a_n)$ is non-negative, it follows that $(b_n)$ is bounded from below. Therefore $(b_n)$ converges, and so, $(a_n)$ converges as well.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Thank you, that's neat! One might add that this argument always works for lower-bounded $(a_n)$ with $a_{n+1}le a_n+c_n$ for some summable $(c_n)$ by setting $b_n=a_n-sum_{k=1}^{n-1}c_k$.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider $b_n = a_n + sum_{k=1}^{n-1} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$. Then
$$ b_{n+1}
= a_{n+1} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
leq a_n + frac{(-1)^n}{n} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
= b_n, $$
which shows that $(b_n)$ is non-increasing. Moreover, since $sum_{k=1}^{infty} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$ converges by alternating series test and $(a_n)$ is non-negative, it follows that $(b_n)$ is bounded from below. Therefore $(b_n)$ converges, and so, $(a_n)$ converges as well.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Thank you, that's neat! One might add that this argument always works for lower-bounded $(a_n)$ with $a_{n+1}le a_n+c_n$ for some summable $(c_n)$ by setting $b_n=a_n-sum_{k=1}^{n-1}c_k$.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider $b_n = a_n + sum_{k=1}^{n-1} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$. Then
$$ b_{n+1}
= a_{n+1} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
leq a_n + frac{(-1)^n}{n} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
= b_n, $$
which shows that $(b_n)$ is non-increasing. Moreover, since $sum_{k=1}^{infty} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$ converges by alternating series test and $(a_n)$ is non-negative, it follows that $(b_n)$ is bounded from below. Therefore $(b_n)$ converges, and so, $(a_n)$ converges as well.
$endgroup$
Consider $b_n = a_n + sum_{k=1}^{n-1} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$. Then
$$ b_{n+1}
= a_{n+1} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
leq a_n + frac{(-1)^n}{n} + sum_{k=1}^{n} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
= b_n, $$
which shows that $(b_n)$ is non-increasing. Moreover, since $sum_{k=1}^{infty} frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}$ converges by alternating series test and $(a_n)$ is non-negative, it follows that $(b_n)$ is bounded from below. Therefore $(b_n)$ converges, and so, $(a_n)$ converges as well.
answered 3 hours ago
Sangchul LeeSangchul Lee
95k12170276
95k12170276
2
$begingroup$
Thank you, that's neat! One might add that this argument always works for lower-bounded $(a_n)$ with $a_{n+1}le a_n+c_n$ for some summable $(c_n)$ by setting $b_n=a_n-sum_{k=1}^{n-1}c_k$.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
2 hours ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Thank you, that's neat! One might add that this argument always works for lower-bounded $(a_n)$ with $a_{n+1}le a_n+c_n$ for some summable $(c_n)$ by setting $b_n=a_n-sum_{k=1}^{n-1}c_k$.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
2 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Thank you, that's neat! One might add that this argument always works for lower-bounded $(a_n)$ with $a_{n+1}le a_n+c_n$ for some summable $(c_n)$ by setting $b_n=a_n-sum_{k=1}^{n-1}c_k$.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thank you, that's neat! One might add that this argument always works for lower-bounded $(a_n)$ with $a_{n+1}le a_n+c_n$ for some summable $(c_n)$ by setting $b_n=a_n-sum_{k=1}^{n-1}c_k$.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Define $b_k := a_{2k+1}$. Then
$$b_k leq a_{2k} + (-1)^{2k}frac{1}{2k} leq b_{k-1} + (frac{1}{2k} - frac{1}{2k-1}) leq b_{k-1}$$
Since $b_k$ is non-negative and non-increasing: $b_k to b$.
Suppose $a_n nrightarrow b$. Then there exists an $varepsilon > 0 $ s.t. for infinitely many $n$ holds $|a_{2n} - b| > varepsilon$.
Assume that $|a_{2m+1}-a_m| > frac{varepsilon}{2}$ for infinitely many $m$. Then, since $a_{2m+1}- a_m leq frac{1}{2m}$ we have that
begin{align}
a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align}
for infinitely many $m$. Let $M := {m geq 1 : a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2} text{ is fulfilled for } m }$
begin{align*}
d_m := 1_M (m)
end{align*}
This implies
begin{align*}
0 leq a_{2m+1} = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^{2m} (a_{k+1} - a_k ) = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k+1} - a_{2k}) + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k} - {a_{2k-1}}) \
leq a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k} frac{1}{2k}- frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k-1}frac{1}{2k-1} to a_1 - sum_{k=1}^infty frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{i=1}^infty (-1)^i frac{1}{i} = - infty
end{align*}
since $|M| = infty$ and the last series converges. This is a contradiction.
Therefore we have that there exists $Kgeq 1$ s.t. for all $kgeq K$ it holds: $|a_{2k+1} - a_k| leq frac{varepsilon}{2}$. We can conclude that
begin{align*}
|a{2n+1} - b| geq |a_{2n} - b| - |a_{2n+1} - a_n| geq varepsilon - frac{varepsilon}{2} = frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align*}
for infinitely $n geq K$. Contradiction. Thus $a_n to b$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Define $b_k := a_{2k+1}$. Then
$$b_k leq a_{2k} + (-1)^{2k}frac{1}{2k} leq b_{k-1} + (frac{1}{2k} - frac{1}{2k-1}) leq b_{k-1}$$
Since $b_k$ is non-negative and non-increasing: $b_k to b$.
Suppose $a_n nrightarrow b$. Then there exists an $varepsilon > 0 $ s.t. for infinitely many $n$ holds $|a_{2n} - b| > varepsilon$.
Assume that $|a_{2m+1}-a_m| > frac{varepsilon}{2}$ for infinitely many $m$. Then, since $a_{2m+1}- a_m leq frac{1}{2m}$ we have that
begin{align}
a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align}
for infinitely many $m$. Let $M := {m geq 1 : a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2} text{ is fulfilled for } m }$
begin{align*}
d_m := 1_M (m)
end{align*}
This implies
begin{align*}
0 leq a_{2m+1} = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^{2m} (a_{k+1} - a_k ) = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k+1} - a_{2k}) + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k} - {a_{2k-1}}) \
leq a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k} frac{1}{2k}- frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k-1}frac{1}{2k-1} to a_1 - sum_{k=1}^infty frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{i=1}^infty (-1)^i frac{1}{i} = - infty
end{align*}
since $|M| = infty$ and the last series converges. This is a contradiction.
Therefore we have that there exists $Kgeq 1$ s.t. for all $kgeq K$ it holds: $|a_{2k+1} - a_k| leq frac{varepsilon}{2}$. We can conclude that
begin{align*}
|a{2n+1} - b| geq |a_{2n} - b| - |a_{2n+1} - a_n| geq varepsilon - frac{varepsilon}{2} = frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align*}
for infinitely $n geq K$. Contradiction. Thus $a_n to b$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Define $b_k := a_{2k+1}$. Then
$$b_k leq a_{2k} + (-1)^{2k}frac{1}{2k} leq b_{k-1} + (frac{1}{2k} - frac{1}{2k-1}) leq b_{k-1}$$
Since $b_k$ is non-negative and non-increasing: $b_k to b$.
Suppose $a_n nrightarrow b$. Then there exists an $varepsilon > 0 $ s.t. for infinitely many $n$ holds $|a_{2n} - b| > varepsilon$.
Assume that $|a_{2m+1}-a_m| > frac{varepsilon}{2}$ for infinitely many $m$. Then, since $a_{2m+1}- a_m leq frac{1}{2m}$ we have that
begin{align}
a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align}
for infinitely many $m$. Let $M := {m geq 1 : a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2} text{ is fulfilled for } m }$
begin{align*}
d_m := 1_M (m)
end{align*}
This implies
begin{align*}
0 leq a_{2m+1} = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^{2m} (a_{k+1} - a_k ) = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k+1} - a_{2k}) + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k} - {a_{2k-1}}) \
leq a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k} frac{1}{2k}- frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k-1}frac{1}{2k-1} to a_1 - sum_{k=1}^infty frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{i=1}^infty (-1)^i frac{1}{i} = - infty
end{align*}
since $|M| = infty$ and the last series converges. This is a contradiction.
Therefore we have that there exists $Kgeq 1$ s.t. for all $kgeq K$ it holds: $|a_{2k+1} - a_k| leq frac{varepsilon}{2}$. We can conclude that
begin{align*}
|a{2n+1} - b| geq |a_{2n} - b| - |a_{2n+1} - a_n| geq varepsilon - frac{varepsilon}{2} = frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align*}
for infinitely $n geq K$. Contradiction. Thus $a_n to b$.
$endgroup$
Define $b_k := a_{2k+1}$. Then
$$b_k leq a_{2k} + (-1)^{2k}frac{1}{2k} leq b_{k-1} + (frac{1}{2k} - frac{1}{2k-1}) leq b_{k-1}$$
Since $b_k$ is non-negative and non-increasing: $b_k to b$.
Suppose $a_n nrightarrow b$. Then there exists an $varepsilon > 0 $ s.t. for infinitely many $n$ holds $|a_{2n} - b| > varepsilon$.
Assume that $|a_{2m+1}-a_m| > frac{varepsilon}{2}$ for infinitely many $m$. Then, since $a_{2m+1}- a_m leq frac{1}{2m}$ we have that
begin{align}
a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align}
for infinitely many $m$. Let $M := {m geq 1 : a_{2m+1} - a_m < - frac{varepsilon}{2} text{ is fulfilled for } m }$
begin{align*}
d_m := 1_M (m)
end{align*}
This implies
begin{align*}
0 leq a_{2m+1} = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^{2m} (a_{k+1} - a_k ) = a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k+1} - a_{2k}) + sum_{k=1}^m (a_{2k} - {a_{2k-1}}) \
leq a_1 + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k} frac{1}{2k}- frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{k=1}^m (-1)^{2k-1}frac{1}{2k-1} to a_1 - sum_{k=1}^infty frac{varepsilon}{2} d_k + sum_{i=1}^infty (-1)^i frac{1}{i} = - infty
end{align*}
since $|M| = infty$ and the last series converges. This is a contradiction.
Therefore we have that there exists $Kgeq 1$ s.t. for all $kgeq K$ it holds: $|a_{2k+1} - a_k| leq frac{varepsilon}{2}$. We can conclude that
begin{align*}
|a{2n+1} - b| geq |a_{2n} - b| - |a_{2n+1} - a_n| geq varepsilon - frac{varepsilon}{2} = frac{varepsilon}{2}
end{align*}
for infinitely $n geq K$. Contradiction. Thus $a_n to b$.
answered 44 mins ago
FalrachFalrach
1,676224
1,676224
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Be careful! The assumption is only an inequality.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Mars Plastic I see. It was typo.
$endgroup$
– Michael Rozenberg
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That shows that $(a_n)$ is bounded above, but why is it convergent?
$endgroup$
– Martin R
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Be careful! The assumption is only an inequality.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Mars Plastic I see. It was typo.
$endgroup$
– Michael Rozenberg
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That shows that $(a_n)$ is bounded above, but why is it convergent?
$endgroup$
– Martin R
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$
$endgroup$
Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$
edited 4 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
Michael RozenbergMichael Rozenberg
106k1893198
106k1893198
1
$begingroup$
Be careful! The assumption is only an inequality.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Mars Plastic I see. It was typo.
$endgroup$
– Michael Rozenberg
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That shows that $(a_n)$ is bounded above, but why is it convergent?
$endgroup$
– Martin R
2 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Be careful! The assumption is only an inequality.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Mars Plastic I see. It was typo.
$endgroup$
– Michael Rozenberg
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That shows that $(a_n)$ is bounded above, but why is it convergent?
$endgroup$
– Martin R
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Be careful! The assumption is only an inequality.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Be careful! The assumption is only an inequality.
$endgroup$
– Mars Plastic
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Mars Plastic I see. It was typo.
$endgroup$
– Michael Rozenberg
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Mars Plastic I see. It was typo.
$endgroup$
– Michael Rozenberg
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That shows that $(a_n)$ is bounded above, but why is it convergent?
$endgroup$
– Martin R
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That shows that $(a_n)$ is bounded above, but why is it convergent?
$endgroup$
– Martin R
2 hours ago
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3131816%2fshow-that-the-following-sequence-converges-please-critique-my-proof%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
4
$begingroup$
Your proof is not correct. Your arguments would also work for $a_n = sum_{i=1}^n frac 1 i$, which does not converge.
$endgroup$
– Falrach
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Note that you not only need to bound $left| a_{n+1} - a_n right|$ arbitrarily small, but also $left| a_{m} - a_n right|$ for all $m,n geq N$ (where $N$ can be chosen according to the bound).
$endgroup$
– Maximilian Janisch
3 hours ago