Analysis of "X = (xn) Sequence of Strictly Positive Real Numbers

  • Thread starter Thread starter buzzmath
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Analysis
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the sequence X = (xn) of strictly positive real numbers, demonstrating that if lim(x(n+1)/xn) < 1, then there exists a constant C > 0 and a ratio r with 0 < r < 1 such that 0 < xn < Cr^n for sufficiently large n, leading to lim(xn) = 0. Participants suggest choosing r such that lim(x(n+1)/xn) < r < 1 and applying induction to derive the inequality xn < Cr^n. The conclusion emphasizes the need for a rigorous approach to establish the upper bound for xn.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in calculus
  • Familiarity with sequences and series
  • Knowledge of mathematical induction
  • Basic concepts of real analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of limits in sequences and series
  • Learn about mathematical induction techniques
  • Explore the concept of convergence in real analysis
  • Investigate the implications of the ratio test for series convergence
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of real analysis, and anyone interested in understanding the behavior of sequences of strictly positive real numbers and their convergence properties.

buzzmath
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
X = (xn) is a sequence of strictly positive real numbers, where (xn) is x subscript n, such that lim(x(n+1)/xn) < 1. Show that for some r with 0<r<1 and some C>0 that 0<xn<Cr^n for all sufficiently large natural numbers n. and that lim(xn) = 0

So for I have this:
choose r such that lim(x(n+1)/xn)<r<1 and take a neighborhood of this limit to be the interval (-1,r) So there exists a natural number K such that 0<x(n+1)/xn<r for all n>=K. I can also write r = 1/(1+a) where a>0 and show that lim(r^n)=0. All I need to show now is that xn<Cr^n. Because I know that if lim(r^n)=0 and ||xn - 0||<=C|r^n| where C>0 then lim(r^n)=0. I'm not really sure how to get the xn<Cr^n though. Any help or suggestions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You've shown xn+1/xn<r for n>=K. You can rewrite this as xn+1<r*xn. Apply induction to get an inequality involving xk+n and xk.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
12K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K