Tricki
a repository of mathematical know-how
Add article
Navigate
Tags
Search
Forums
Help
Top level
›
Different kinds of Tricki article
›
Front pages for different areas of mathematics
›
Analysis front page
›
Real analysis front page
›
I have a problem to solve in real analysis
View
Edit
Revisions
I have a problem about the convergence of a sequence
Title:
*
Area of mathematics:
*
A comma-separated list of areas of mathematics to which this article applies. Use ">" to tag in a subcategory. Example: Analysis > Harmonic analysis, Combinatorics
Keywords:
A comma-separated list of keywords associated with this article. Example: free group
Used in:
A comma-separated list of examples of where this technique is used. Example: Cauchy-Schwarz inequality
Parent articles:
Order
-1
0
1
-1
0
1
Body:
Each time you click on the sentence that best describes your problem, more text and/or further questions will appear. <p> [add]My problem concerns finding the limit of an explicitly given sequence.{{ *Is the sequence defined by means of a formula for the $n$th term, or is it defined in some less direct way, such as using a recurrence relation? **[add]It's defined by a formula for the $n$th term.{{ ***Could you say in broad terms what the function for $a_n$ is like? ****[add] $a_n$ is a ''rational function'' of $n$, that is, a function of the form $p(n)/q(n),$ where $p$ and $q$ are both polynomials.{{ *****In that case, all you need to do is to exploit the following facts. If $a_n\rightarrow a$ and $b_n\rightarrow b,$ then $a_n+b_n\rightarrow a+b,$ $a_n-b_n\rightarrow a-b,$ $\lambda a_n\rightarrow \lambda a$, $a_nb_n\rightarrow ab,$ and $a_n/b_n\rightarrow a/b$ if $b\ne 0.$ It helps to divide through by the largest power of $n$ that appears in $q$. For instance, to prove that $\frac{n^2+n}{n^2+5}\rightarrow 1,$ one rewrites it as $\frac{1+1/n}{1+5/n^2}$ and applies the above rules to argue that the top and bottom tend to 1, so the whole fraction tends to 1. It should be noted that this argument freely uses the fact that $1/n\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow\infty.$ This is called the ''Archimedean property'' of the real numbers.}}[/add] ****[add] The expression for $a_n$ involves a ratio of two functions that are more complicated than polynomials.{{ *****In that case you have a formula of the form $a_n=f(n)/g(n),$ so you want to compare the growth rates of $f$ and $g$ as $n$ tends to infinity. A few techniques can get you quite a long way. For example, if you can find some $\rho>1$ and prove that the ratio $a_{n+1}/a_n$ is greater than $\rho$ for every sufficiently large $n,$ then $a_n$ must tend to infinity. This, for example, is enough to show that $a_n=2^n/n^{100}$ tends to infinity. To see this, note that $2^{n+1}/2^n=2,$ while $(n+1)^{100}/n^{100}=(1+1/n)^{100},$ which tends to $1$ as $n$ tends to infinity (because it is a product of 100 sequences, all of which tend to $1$). Therefore, for sufficiently large $n,$ $a_{n+1}/a_n$ is bigger than $3/2.$ More generally, any exponential function $c^n$ with $c>1$ grows faster than any polynomial function $p(n).$ Combining this with techniques for dealing with rational functions will allow you to find limits of sequences such as $a_n=\frac{n^2+n^3e^{-n}}{n^2-72n-1}.$}}[/add] ****[add] The formula for $a_n$ involves raising a number to a power that depends on $n$.{{ *****There are various things you might have to do here. For instance, if you are asked to prove the obvious seeming fact that $2^{1/n}\rightarrow 1$ as $n\rightarrow\infty,$ then try turning the problem round: if $2^{1/n}>1+\delta,$ then $(1+\delta)^n<2$; however, the very simple but surprisingly useful inequality $(1+\delta)^n\geq 1+n\delta$ proves that $(1+\delta)^n>2$ when $n>1/\delta.$ <br />If $a_n$ is equal to some number close to $1$ raised to a power that depends on $n$, then you will almost certainly want to make use of the fact that $(1+1/n)^n\rightarrow e.$ For example, if you are asked for the limit of $(1+3/n)^n,$ you can argue that it is the cube of $(1+3/n)^{n/3}$ and hence that it tends to $e^3.$ And $(1+1/n^2)^n$ is the $n$th root of $(1+1/n^2)^{n^2},$ which is less than $e$ (because in fact the sequence $(1+1/n)^n$ is increasing), so it tends to $1$ (because $e^{1/n}$ tends to $1$).}}[/add] ****[add] The formula for $a_n$ involves factorials.{{ *****In that case, what you need to do depends on how delicate the problem is. Does it look as though $a_n$ tends to $0$ or to $\infty$? ******[add] Yes.{{ *******Then you may be able to get away with proving that $a_{n+1}/a_n$ is bounded away from $1$. For example, if $a_n=n!/n^n,$ then $a_{n+1}/a_n=(n+1)n^n/(n+1)^{n+1}=(n/(n+1))^n=1/(1+1/n)^n\rightarrow e^{-1},$ which implies that $a_n\rightarrow 0.$ Or you may consider using simple estimates for $n!$ such as that $n!\geq(n/e)^n,$ which actually follows from the above calculation if we observe that $a_{n+1}/a_n=1/(1+1/n)>e^{-1}$ and $a_0=1.$}}[/add] ******[add] No (or don't know, or yes but it seems hard to prove).{{ *******In that case the problem is more delicate, and you may need to use [[w:Stirling's_approximation|Stirling's formula]], which says that the ratio of $n!$ to $\sqrt{2\pi n}(n/e)^n$ tends to 1 as $n$ tends to infinity.}}[/add]}}[/add]}}[/add] **[add]It's defined by means of a recurrence.{{ ***There is one trick that is extremely useful in this situation, and it is sometimes even useful for determining limits of sequences where the $n$th term $a_n$ is given by a formula, and that is first to prove that a limit exists, and then to use the recurrence to determine what the limit must be. An example will illustrate the idea. Suppose we define a sequence by taking $a_0=2$ and $a_{n+1}=a_n/2+1/a_n.$ If we know that this sequence tends to a limit $a,$ then both $a_n$ and $a_n/2+1/a_n$ must tend to $a$ (since $a_{n+1}$ also tends to $a$). But $a_n/2+1/a_n$ tends to $a/2+1/a$, by the rules for adding and dividing limits, so $a=a/2+1/a,$ which implies that $a^2=2.$ Since every $a_n$ is positive (by an easy induction), $a=\sqrt{2}.$ However, we still need to prove that the sequence converges to ''something''. How can we do this without simply proving that it converges to $\sqrt{2}$? The answer is that there are theorems (or axioms) that say that a sequence with such-and-such a property converges. For example, [[w:Cauchy_sequence|Cauchy sequences]] converge. For this particular problem, we use the fact that a monotone decreasing function that is bounded below converges. If we know that $a_n>\sqrt{2}$, then it is easy to check that $a_{n+1}<a_n.$ But $a_0>\sqrt{2}$ and $t/2+1/t$ is greater than $\sqrt{2}$ by the AM-GM inequality applied to $t$ and $2/t.$ Therefore, the result is proved.}}[/add] }}[/add] </p> <p> [add]I have an explicitly given sequence, and am required to prove that it converges, but I am not required to calculate the limit.{{ *In that case, you should consider finding the limit anyway, and you should also consider the techniques for proving convergence of sequences where all you are told is that they satisfy certain properties.}}[/add] </p> <p> [add]I am supposed to prove rigorously a statement that looks utterly obvious, such as that $2^{-n}$ or $n^{-1}$ tend to $0.${{ *Such questions look a bit confusing to begin with, but the point is to deduce them from the axioms for a complete ordered field. The simplest technique is the one suggested on this page for dealing with sequences defined by recurrences: argue first that your sequence tends to a limit and then think about what the limit must be. For example, the sequence $n^{-1}$ is monotone decreasing and bounded below by $0,$ so it converges to some limit (which must be non-negative). If this limit is $x$ and $x\ne 0,$ then there must be some $n$ such that $1/n<2x,$ which implies that $1/m<x/2$ whenever $m>4n.$ But this contradicts the fact that $1/n$ tends to $x.$ A similar argument works for $2^{-n}.$}}[/add] </p> <p> [add]My problem is to prove that a sequence converges, but rather than being told what the sequence is I just know that it has certain properties.{{ *If your problem cannot be tackled by formal methods such as are explained in [[I have a problem to solve in real analysis and I do not believe that a fundamental idea is needed]], then the main way of tackling a problem of this kind is to use a criterion for the convergence of sequences. The two most commonly used criteria are these. (1) Every sequence that is monotone increasing and bounded above, or monotone decreasing and bounded below, converges. (2) Every [[w:Cauchy_sequence|Cauchy sequence]] converges. Sometimes it helps to [[Prove that a sequence convergences by passing to a subsequence|pass to a subsequence]].}}[/add] </p>
This is a stub
A stub is an article that is not sufficiently complete to be interesting.
Notifications
File attachments
Changes made to the attachments are not permanent until you save this post. The first "listed" file will be included in RSS feeds.
Attach new file:
Images are larger than
640x480
will be resized. The maximum upload size is
1 MB
. Only files with the following extensions may be uploaded:
jpg jpeg gif png svg
.
Revision information
Log message:
An explanation of the additions or updates being made to help other authors understand your motivations.
Search this site:
Recent articles
View a list of all articles.
Littlewood-Paley heuristic for derivative
Geometric view of Hölder's inequality
Diagonal arguments
Finding an interval for rational numbers with a high denominator
Try to prove a stronger result
Use self-similarity to get a limit from an inferior or superior limit.
Prove a consequence first
Active forum topics
Plenty of LaTeX errors
Tutorial
A different kind of article?
Countable but impredicative
Tricki Papers
more
Recent comments
I don't think this statement
choice of the field
Incorrect Image
Article classification
Higher dimensional analogues
more