Can an alternating series with decreasing terms converge to zero?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the convergence properties of an alternating series with decreasing terms, specifically whether such a series can converge to zero. Participants explore the implications of the alternating series test and the conditions under which the series converges.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that if an alternating series ##\sum (-1)^n b_n## converges, then ##\lim_{n \to \infty} b_n = 0## and that ##b_n## is monotonically decreasing, leading to the conclusion that the series does not converge to zero.
  • Another participant proposes that the series can only converge to zero if all terms are zero, suggesting that the series remains positive if the terms are strictly decreasing.
  • A later reply challenges the initial conclusion, stating that the sum can be zero if pairs of alternate terms have the same magnitude, but this contradicts the assumption of strict monotonicity.
  • One participant suggests using a comparison test with another series that has a similar rate of change to analyze convergence further.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether an alternating series with decreasing terms can converge to zero. There is no consensus, as some argue it cannot while others present conditions under which it might.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of whether the terms are strictly decreasing or not, which affects the conclusions drawn about convergence. The discussion also highlights the need for careful consideration of the definitions and assumptions involved.

member 428835
Hi PF!

The other day I was showing convergence for an alternating series, let's call it ##\sum (-1)^n b_n##. I showed that ##\lim_{n \to \infty} b_n = 0## and that ##b_n## was monotonically decreasing; hence the series converges by the alternating series test. but I needed also to show it did not converge to zero. the argument I used was that since ##|b_1 - b_2| >0## and that since ##b_n## monotonically decreases, we then know ##\sum (-1)^n b_n > |b_1 - b_2|##. Is my intuition correct here? If so, is it ever possible to have a series described above converge to zero?

Let me know what you think!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First thought this was wrong, but yes.

Set ## a_n=b_{2n}-b_{2n+1}\geq 0 ##

## \sum(-1)^n b_n =\sum a_n \geq 0 ## and this can only be zero if ## \forall n, b_n=0 ##

Edit you seem to have the index n starting at 1 instead of 0 so you need to adjust the above a little, but this doesn't change anything except perhaps a sign.
And your argument, assuming the b's are strictly decreasing, works - you can also complete it to cover all cases where b is not identically 0.
 
Last edited:
Thanks! I thought so but wanted reassurance.
 
Wrong conclusion! a_n=0 will hold if pairs of alternate terms have the same magnitude b_{2n}=-b_{2n+1}, and b_{2n} \gt b_{2n+2}.
 
But ##b_n## is monotonically decreasing.
 
Oops you are right of course !

The sum is 0 iff ## \forall n, b_{2n}=b_{2n+1} ## and that's all we can say.

Of course if we know that b is strictly dereasing this cannot happen, but i was trying to avoid needing that since op did not say "strict".

Failed attempt, sorry.

To expand, the generic counterexampe to my initial claim is the altermating sum
## b_0-b_0+...+b_n-b_n+...##
which converges to 0 iff ## b_n\rightarrow 0 ##
 
Last edited:
I'd use comparison test with another series that has similar rate of change as the one you're using.

##\sum \limits_{i} \left | {b_i} \right | \geq \sum \limits_{i} \left | {a_i} \right |##

Where ##a_i \approx b_i## in structure, but ##a_i## is both monotonic and bounded.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K