Proving the existence of a limit?


by pivoxa15
Tags: existence, limit, proving
pivoxa15
pivoxa15 is offline
#1
Feb17-08, 09:35 PM
P: 2,268
How do you prove the existence but not necessarily the value of a limit?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
SensaBubble: It's a bubble, but not as we know it (w/ video)
The hemihelix: Scientists discover a new shape using rubber bands (w/ video)
Microbes provide insights into evolution of human language
John Creighto
John Creighto is offline
#2
Feb17-08, 09:42 PM
P: 813
Quote Quote by pivoxa15 View Post
How do you prove the existence but not necessarily the value of a limit?
Why not give an example of such a problem because I think your question is too general.
pivoxa15
pivoxa15 is offline
#3
Feb17-08, 09:54 PM
P: 2,268
Suppose you are given a limit. Show that a limit exists without needing to say what it is.

It is a general question.

John Creighto
John Creighto is offline
#4
Feb17-08, 10:09 PM
P: 813

Proving the existence of a limit?


Quote Quote by pivoxa15 View Post
Suppose you are given a limit. Show that a limit exists without needing to say what it is.

It is a general question.
Which means there is about a million answers. For instance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_convergence
pivoxa15
pivoxa15 is offline
#5
Feb17-08, 10:51 PM
P: 2,268
Okay, good point. I'll be more specific. I was thinking of limits of sequences only. Or are all limits sequences in which case I haven't narrowed down anything?
John Creighto
John Creighto is offline
#6
Feb17-08, 10:54 PM
P: 813
Quote Quote by pivoxa15 View Post
Okay, good point. I'll be more specific. I was thinking of limits of sequences only. Or are all limits sequences in which case I haven't narrowed down anything?
Well how about showing the limit of [tex]a_n-a_{n+1}=0[/tex] as n->oo
morphism
morphism is offline
#7
Feb17-08, 11:00 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 2,020
Quote Quote by John Creighto View Post
Well how about showing the limit of [tex]a_n-a_{n+1}=0[/tex] as n->oo
This doesn't imply that (a_n) will converge. [Counterexample: a_n = log(n).]
morphism
morphism is offline
#8
Feb17-08, 11:03 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 2,020
Quote Quote by pivoxa15 View Post
Okay, good point. I'll be more specific. I was thinking of limits of sequences only. Or are all limits sequences in which case I haven't narrowed down anything?
If you're going to be taking a limit of something, then it had better be a sequence (or something sequence-like). So, no, you haven't narrowed down anything. Do you mean sequences of numbers?

In any case, there are a few existence results that can come in handy. One example is the monotone convergence theorem, which states that if a sequences of real numbers is monotone and bounded, then it must converge.
John Creighto
John Creighto is offline
#9
Feb17-08, 11:18 PM
P: 813
Quote Quote by morphism View Post
Well how about showing the limit of [tex]a_n-a_{n+1}=0[/tex] as n->oo
This doesn't imply that (a_n) will converge. [Counterexample: a_n = log(n).]
What if a_n is bound both above and bellow?
pivoxa15
pivoxa15 is offline
#10
Feb17-08, 11:34 PM
P: 2,268
Quote Quote by John Creighto View Post
What if a_n is bound both above and bellow?
In which case it would be in a compact space. All cauchy sequences in a compact space converge.
morphism
morphism is offline
#11
Feb17-08, 11:41 PM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 2,020
Quote Quote by pivoxa15 View Post
In which case it would be in a compact space. All cauchy sequences in a compact space converge.
Just because (a_n - a_{n+1}) -> 0 doesn't mean a_n is Cauchy. Again, a counterexample to this claim is a_n = log(n). We have log(n) - log(n+1) = log(n/(n+1)) -> log(1) = 0, but if this were Cauchy, then it would be convergent (since the reals are complete), and it clearly isn't.

It turns out that being bounded isn't good enough either, although finding a counterexample was trickier. At any rate: try a_n = exp(i(1 + 1/2 + ... + 1/n)). This doesn't converge - it goes around the unit circle in the complex plane. On the other hand,
[tex]a_n - a_{n+1} = \exp\left(i \left(1 + \frac{1}{2} + ... + \frac{1}{n}\right)\right)\left(1 - \exp\left(\frac{i}{n+1}\right)\right) \to 0.[/itex]
John Creighto
John Creighto is offline
#12
Feb17-08, 11:50 PM
P: 813
Quote Quote by morphism View Post
Just because (a_n - a_{n+1}) -> 0 doesn't mean a_n is Cauchy. Again, a counterexample to this claim is a_n = log(n). We have log(n) - log(n+1) = log(n/(n+1)) -> log(1) = 0, but if this were Cauchy, then it would be convergent (since the reals are complete), and it clearly isn't.

It turns out that being bounded isn't good enough either, although finding a counterexample was trickier. At any rate: try a_n = exp(i(1 + 1/2 + ... + 1/n)). This doesn't converge - it goes around the unit circle in the complex plane. On the other hand,
[tex]a_n - a_{n+1} = \exp\left(i \left(1 + \frac{1}{2} + ... + \frac{1}{n}\right)\right)\left(1 - \exp\left(\frac{i}{n+1}\right)\right) \to 0.[/itex]
Okay, how about [tex]a_n-a_{n-1} \le k \left( \frac{1}{n}-\frac{1}{n-1} \right) [/tex] for all n greater then M
John Creighto
John Creighto is offline
#13
Feb18-08, 12:01 AM
P: 813
Quote Quote by morphism View Post
It turns out that being bounded isn't good enough either, although finding a counterexample was trickier. At any rate: try a_n = exp(i(1 + 1/2 + ... + 1/n)). This doesn't converge - it goes around the unit circle in the complex plane. On the other hand,
[tex]a_n - a_{n+1} = \exp\left(i \left(1 + \frac{1}{2} + ... + \frac{1}{n}\right)\right)\left(1 - \exp\left(\frac{i}{n+1}\right)\right) \to 0.[/itex]
That's a pretty interesting example. Can you find a similar example on the reals?
morphism
morphism is offline
#14
Feb18-08, 12:26 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 2,020
Quote Quote by John Creighto View Post
Okay, how about [tex]a_n-a_{n-1} \le k \left( \frac{1}{n}-\frac{1}{n-1} \right) [/tex] for all n greater then M
What are k and M?

That's a pretty interesting example. Can you find a similar example on the reals?
Take the real part of it and see what happens.
pivoxa15
pivoxa15 is offline
#15
Feb18-08, 12:41 AM
P: 2,268
To be more specific, I had a sequence a_m/b_m where a_m and b_m in the limit is 0.

However they are not functions so can't use that rule which I can't spell, l'hospil's rule?
John Creighto
John Creighto is offline
#16
Feb18-08, 01:07 AM
P: 813
Quote Quote by morphism View Post
What are k and M?


Take the real part of it and see what happens.
k an M are arbitrary chosen to make the inequality work for a given sequence.
HallsofIvy
HallsofIvy is offline
#17
Feb18-08, 06:33 AM
Math
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 38,900
Why didn't you say that when you were first asked to be specific?

If all you know is that [itex]a_n[/itex] and [itex]b_n[/itex] go to 0, you can't say anything about whether [itex]a_n/b_n[/itex] converges or diverges. For example, if [itex]a_n= 1/n^2[/itex] and [itex]b_n= 1/n[/itex], it is obvious that both [itex]a_n[/itex] and [itex]b_n[/itex] converge to 0. And [itex]a_n/b_n= (1/n^2)(n/1)= 1/n[/itex] converges to 0.

But if [itex]b_n= 1/n^2[/itex] and [itex]a_n= 1/n[/itex], it is still obvious that both [itex]a_n[/itex] and [itex]b_n[/itex] converge to 0 but now [itex]a_n/b_n= (1/n)(n^2/1)= n[/itex] does not converge.
ssd
ssd is offline
#18
Feb20-08, 12:12 PM
P: 239
Looking upon the 1st post: if left hand and right hand limits are equal, then the limit exists.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Proving this limit Calculus & Beyond Homework 6
Proving a limit Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
Proving a limit Precalculus Mathematics Homework 5
Proving the limit for the number e Calculus & Beyond Homework 11
Proving this Limit Introductory Physics Homework 1