Does This Alternating Series Converge?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dell
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Series
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the convergence of the alternating series Σ((-1)^(n-1) * (ln(n))^p / n) for p > 0. Participants analyze the series using integration techniques, noting that the absolute series diverges, indicating potential conditional convergence. The Leibniz test is suggested as a method to establish conditional convergence, with the conclusion that for large n, the terms of the series behave such that an > an+1, supporting the case for conditional convergence despite initial confusion regarding the behavior of the terms for smaller n.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of alternating series and convergence tests
  • Familiarity with integration techniques, particularly substitution methods
  • Knowledge of the Leibniz test for conditional convergence
  • Basic logarithmic properties and their behavior as n approaches infinity
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Leibniz test for alternating series in detail
  • Explore the implications of absolute versus conditional convergence
  • Investigate the behavior of logarithmic functions in series
  • Learn about convergence tests for series involving logarithmic terms
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying calculus or real analysis, and anyone interested in series convergence, particularly those dealing with alternating series and logarithmic functions.

Dell
Messages
555
Reaction score
0
i need to say prove that the following converges with n from 1 to infinity

Σ((-1)n-1)*((lnp(n)))/n) (p>0)

first thing i see here is integration, so i can tell if the series of absolute values converges or not, if it does then i know that my original series must converge.

t=ln(n)
dt=dn/n

so i have an integral from 0 to infinity of

tp dt

which is a simple integration and i find that the absolute values' series diverges which tells me that my series may conditionally converge if
lim an =0 (which it is)
and an>a(n+1) which it is not since the series keeps on rising in its absolute value, because of "p".

so how do i prove that the series converges?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1) Note that your integral runs from 1 to infinity, not from 0
2) The convergence of the integral depends on the value of p
3) If I read your post correctly you think you have shown that it always diverges, so why are you asking for a proof that it converges?
 
1) the original integral(dx) would have been from 1 to infinity, but after substitution(t=lnx) it runs from ln(1) which is 0
2)originally i also thought that the convergence depends on p, but it is given that p>0, and for any p, (lnx)^p/x is smaller than 1, not sure that it depends on p, plus the answer in the book is independent of p
3) i have shown that Σ|An| diverges, but that does not mean that ΣAn diverges necessarily, that is sort of the whole question, how do i find if it does or doesnt
 
Right, I'm sorry, I completely missed your point apparently...

So you have shown that there is no absolute convergence for any p, the question is then if there is conditional convergence, right?
I think the Leibniz test may help you with that.
 
i also thought that, only that i have no way of proving that an>an+1, in fact i think that an is not necessarily bigger than an+1,
for small n's, an is even smaller than an+1, for example a(1)=0 a(2)>0 because of ln,

is it enough to say that for n->inf, an>an+1 and so the seires conditionally converges, for smaller n's it really depends on p, but for very large, infinite, n- ln(n)^p is always smaller than n,
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K