Analysis of "Absolute Convergence" of $\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(lnn)^{n}}$

rocomath
Messages
1,752
Reaction score
1
\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(lnn)^{n}}

If I treat it as a geometric series, then when n=3, r is smaller than 1

\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}(\frac{1}{ln3})^3

What matters is that it's ultimately decreasing, would that be the correct approach? Even problem, no answer!

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What is r?
 
Well, as for an answer I would like to say that:

When n=3, r equals

|\frac{1}{ln3}|<1

Which is true, and so, what matters is that it is ultimately decreasing.
 
In the ratio test r = Limn-->infinity|Ln(n+1)-(n+1)/Ln(n)-n|.

If r < 1 then the series converges.

But ultimately the ratio test is about whether you have a decreasing sequence; so I think you can use the ratio test here.

Also, for n > 1, absolute convergence is the same as convergence because Ln(n) > 0.
 
Last edited:
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top