Is {q(n) * a(n)} = {p(n) * b(n)} (for all integer n's) a Cauchy Sequence?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lainyg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cauchy Sequence
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that the sequence q(n) = Sum(from k=1 to n) 1/n! is a Cauchy sequence. It is established that a sequence is Cauchy if, for every epsilon greater than 0, there exists an N such that for all m, n > N, the absolute difference |q(m) - q(n)| is less than epsilon. The convergence of the series ∑(1/k!) is highlighted, suggesting that since q(n) approaches e, it implies convergence and thus Cauchy property. Participants discuss the necessity of a direct proof versus relying on known convergence. The conversation emphasizes the relationship between Cauchy sequences and their limits, particularly in the context of the Taylor series expansion for e^x.
lainyg
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



q(n) = Sum(from k=1 to n) 1/n!


Exercise 3: Prove that {q(n)}n(forall)Ns is a cauchy sequence.


Homework Equations



none.

The Attempt at a Solution



So many attempts at a solution. I know that a sequence is a cauchy sequence if for all epsilons greater than 0 there exists an N such that m,n >N and therefore the absolute value of q(m) minus (qn) is less than epsilon. A sequence is considered a cauchy sequence of its terms approach a limit (and converge). My problem is with proving this as it is a sum, and not letting it get messy with double factorials. How do I prove this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you mean the sum of 1/k!, not 1/n!.

Hint 1: If \sum _{k = 1} ^{\infty}\frac{1}{k!} converges, then for any \epsilon > 0, there exists a natural N such that \sum _{k=N} ^{\infty} \frac{1}{k!} < \epsilon

Hint 2: What's the Taylor (or Maclaurin) expansion of ex?
 
OK, so..

if qn converges, then for any epsilon>0 there exists a natural N such that (qn when N=k) is less than epsilon.

With the maclaurin formula we can write that e^x = the sum (from n=0 to infinity) of x^n/n!. Therefore can we just say that since the lim (as n approaches infinity) of q(n) is e, then it converges, and therefore is a cauchy sequence? Or do we still need to show that there's an N such that q(n) is less than epsilon (for any epsilon greater than 0)?
 
I would guess that they are after a more direct proof than just saying 'I know it converges. Thus it is cauchy'. Would it help as a hint to note 1/n!<=1/2^(n) (at least for n>1)?
 
Last edited:
Another: Let {q(n)n} and {p(n)} (for all integer n's) be Cauchy Sequences which are equivalent. Further let {a(n)} and {b(n)} also be Cauchy Sequences which are equivalent.

Show {q(n) * a(n)} = {p(n) * b(n)} (for all integer n's)
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K