Analysis (convergent sequences) help

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pseudo Statistic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Analysis Sequences
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the analysis of convergent sequences, specifically addressing two key conditions for convergence: (1) a sequence {a_n} converges to a limit 'a' if every subsequence converges to 'a', and (2) a sequence converges to 'a' if it is bounded and 'a' is its only cluster point. The user seeks clarification on how to apply theorems related to cluster points and limits, and is advised to approach the proof by establishing the implications of each condition separately, utilizing proof by contradiction where necessary.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of convergent sequences and limits in real analysis.
  • Familiarity with subsequences and their properties.
  • Knowledge of cluster points and their definitions.
  • Basic proof techniques, including direct proof and proof by contradiction.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the definitions and properties of subsequences in real analysis.
  • Learn about cluster points and their role in convergence.
  • Review proof techniques, particularly proof by contradiction, in mathematical analysis.
  • Explore theorems related to convergent sequences and their implications.
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in mathematics, particularly those studying real analysis, as well as anyone interested in understanding the rigorous foundations of convergence in sequences.

Pseudo Statistic
Messages
391
Reaction score
6
I'm having a bit of trouble with two analysis questions, they are:
1) a_n -> a iff every subsequence of {a_n} converges to a

2) a_n->a iff {a_n} is bounded, and a is its only cluster point.

For the first, I was thinking of doing something along the lines of saying that a subsequence of a_n would be a_(f(n)); that is, f being a function that maps the natural numbers onto itself, and has the properly that whenever n>= m, f(n) >= f(m) (nondecreasing) and from there, saying that |a_n - a| < eps given some eps(ilon), for all n> N (Where N is a natural number)... and then arguing that, since f(n) spits out a natural number, then for some f(n) >= N, a_f(n) thus has the limit...

For the second (and probably the first too, but I can't see it?), I'm supposed to make use of the theorem:
i) x is a cluster point of {x_n} <---> for all eps>0, N natural number, there exists an n > N such that |x_n - x| < eps, x real number
ii) x is a cluster point of {x_n} iff there exists a converging subsequence {x_(n_k)} of {x_n} that converges to x.

I'm unsure as to how to approach the second one.. but my idea is..
First, work my way from a_n->a to a_n is bounded, and a is a cluster point, and work backward from there.
However, I'm unsure as to how cluster points and limits are related...
I'd really appreciate it if someone can point out where I could begin, and possibly clarify some things I'm confused about... if possible. :D
Thanks for any replies!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you know everything you need to prove your questions but you are just sort of muddling everything together. To prove a iff b, you need to prove two things, a implies b and b implies a. So clearly state each separate implication and get started. For example 2) becomes:

a) a_n->a implies a_n bounded.
b) a_n->a implies a is the only cluster point.
c) a_n bounded and a is the only cluster point of a_n implies a_n->a.

Treat each one separately and remember proof by contradiction can be useful.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K