Show that the following sequence converges. Please Critique my proof.












8












$begingroup$


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.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 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


















8












$begingroup$


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.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 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
















8












8








8


1



$begingroup$


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.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




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






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








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
















  • 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












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

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.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 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





















1












$begingroup$

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 $a_n to b$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 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











    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    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









    3












    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$









    • 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


















    3












    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$









    • 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
















    3












    3








    3





    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    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.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    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
















    • 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













    1












    $begingroup$

    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 $a_n to b$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      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 $a_n to b$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        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 $a_n to b$.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        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 $a_n to b$.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 44 mins ago









        FalrachFalrach

        1,676224




        1,676224























            0












            $begingroup$

            Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$









            • 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
















            0












            $begingroup$

            Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$









            • 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














            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            Use $$sum_{k=1}^n(a_{k+1}-a_k)=a_{n+1}-a_1leqsum_{k=1}^nfrac{(-1)^k}{k}rightarrow -ln2$$







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            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














            • 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


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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





















































            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            CARDNET

            Boot-repair Failure: Unable to locate package grub-common:i386

            Aws NAT - Aws IGW- Aws router