Convergence of a Recursive Sequence: Proving a_n*c*n\rightarrow 1 for Positive c

  • Thread starter Thread starter happyxiong531
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sequence
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving that for a recursive sequence defined by a_{n+1}=a_n(1-c*a_n/(1+a_n)), the product a_n*c*n converges to 1 for all positive constants c. The initial case where c=1 shows that a_n*n approaches 1, but challenges arise when c differs from 1. The user suggests that by redefining the sequence with b_n=ca_n, the convergence can be demonstrated, although they acknowledge their proof lacks rigor. Additionally, a condition is noted that ensures the positivity of the sequence elements, limiting the size of c. Overall, the user expresses confidence in their findings despite the need for a more formal proof.
happyxiong531
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I want to prove that
if the sequence a_n satisfy that
a_{n+1}=a_n\left(1-c\frac{a_n}{1+a_n}\right)
then a_n*c*n\rightarrow 1 for all positive c.

Like when c=1, then a_n*n\rightarrow 1,
but if c\neq 1, it's difficult to prove.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What makes you believe it is true? Your question implies a_n*n ->\frac{1}{c}. Doesn't look right, especially for large c.
 
Last edited:
mathman said:
What makes you believe it is true? Your question implies a_n*n -> 1/c. Doesn't look right, especially for large c.

Thank you for you reply.
I think it's correct.
First, I can have a_n*n\rightarrow 1 when c=1, from
a_{n+1}=\frac{a_n}{1+a_n}=\frac{a_{n-1}}{1+2a_{n-1}}=\cdots=\frac{a_1}{1+(n+1)a_1}

Then, let ca_n=b_n if c\neq 1, c is some constant. we can have b_{n+1}=b_n\left(1-\frac{b_n}{1+b_n/c}\right).

Actually, it's easy to prove a_n and b_n will go to zero,
so, \frac{b_n}{1+b_n/c}\sim\frac{b_n}{1+b_n}, thenb_n*n\rightarrow 1.

I have made a plot, it's correct no matter c is larger or less than 1.
But I think my proof is not strict.
Thanks for your concern.
 
mathman said:
What makes you believe it is true? Your question implies a_n*n ->\frac{1}{c}. Doesn't look right, especially for large c.

Oh, I forget there is a condition that
the sequence should satisfy that1-c\frac{a_1}{1+a_1}>0,
so that all the elements in this sequence should be positive, and c cannot be too large.
I have made some plots like c=0.5, c=2, the conclusion is correct.
Thanks
 
Write out your complete proof.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top