Counterexamples for False Statements and Divergence of a Sequence t_n

  • Thread starter Thread starter squaremeplz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sequence
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the false statements regarding the limits of sequences, specifically addressing the claims that if lim sup |s_n| = 5, then s_n is bounded, and if lim sup s_n = 0, then lim sup |s_n| is also false. Counterexamples are provided, including the sequence s_n = 1/n for even n and -1 for odd n, which demonstrates that lim sup s_n = 0. Additionally, the sequence t_n = s_n + (-1)^n * s_n is analyzed, revealing that it diverges unless s_n converges to a non-zero limit.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limit superior (lim sup) in sequences
  • Knowledge of convergent and divergent sequences
  • Familiarity with the concept of subsequences
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical notation and sequences
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of limit superior in sequences and their implications
  • Explore examples of convergent and divergent sequences in detail
  • Learn about subsequences and their convergence criteria
  • Investigate the implications of convergence on the behavior of derived sequences
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in advanced sequence analysis and limit theory will benefit from this discussion.

squaremeplz
Messages
114
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I know that the statements: if lim sup|s_n|=5, then s_n is bounded, and if lim sup s_n = 0 then lim sup |s_n| are false but I can't think of counter examples? Can someone suggest one or two please. many thanks

2. consider the sequence s_n convergent. Define a new sequence t_n such that

t_n = s_n + (-1)^(n)*(s_n)

a. show that t_n diverges

well lim sup s_n = s

then t_n = s_n*(1 + (-1)^n)

and finally

1/s * lim sup t_n = lim (1+(-1)^n)

the last sequence diverges because no matter how big n gets

the set will be {0, 2/s, 0, 2/s, 0, 2/s} at some point.

b) show by any method that t_n has a convergent subsequence

if we look at the previous tail we see that the 2k terms of n give a convergent subsequence that is

{0,0,0,0..}

right?

thansk!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
squaremeplease said:

Homework Statement



I know that the statements: if lim sup|s_n|=5, then s_n is bounded, and if lim sup s_n = 0 then lim sup |s_n| are false
Then you know wrong. If lim sup |s_n|= 5, then no subsequence can converge to anything larger than 5 or less than -5. That means that only a finite number of its terms can be larger than 5 or less than 5 and so the sequence is bounded by the largest of those and the smallest. If lim sup |s_n| is any finite number then the sequence s_n is bounded. I don't know what you mean by the second. "If lim sup s_n= 0 then lim sup |s_n|" is WHAT? Yes, it is false that the lim sup |s_n|= 0. s_n= 1/n if n is even, -1 if n is odd is a counter example.

but I can't think of counter examples? Can someone suggest one or two please. many thanks

2. consider the sequence s_n convergent. Define a new sequence t_n such that

t_n = s_n + (-1)^(n)*(s_n)

a. show that t_n diverges

well lim sup s_n = s

then t_n = s_n*(1 + (-1)^n)

and finally

1/s * lim sup t_n = lim (1+(-1)^n)
Are you assuming that s is not 0? you are not told that.

the last sequence diverges because no matter how big n gets

the set will be {0, 2/s, 0, 2/s, 0, 2/s} at some point.
No, it won't. It will "at some point" become a sequence in which odd terms are 0 and even terms converge to 2/s but not equal to what you have. And in any case, dirvergence of that sequence is not what you wanted to prove! Simpler is just to note that t_n itself is 0 for n odd, s_n for n even. In fact, the "theorem" as stated is not true. If s_n converges to 0, then t_n also converges to 0. You need the additional requirement that s_n NOT converge to 0 in order to argue that the sub-sequence {t_{2n}) converges to 2s while {t_{2n+1}) converges to 0. If 2s and 0 are different, {t_n} does not converge.

b) show by any method that t_n has a convergent subsequence

if we look at the previous tail we see that the 2k terms of n give a convergent subsequence that is

{0,0,0,0..}
right?

thansk!
[/quote]
NO! t_n= s_n+ (-1)^n s_n is 0 for n odd: 2k+1, not 2k!
 
it sounds like you know this material very well. The instructions for problem 2 include the important fact that s_n be a convergent sequence with a limit not equal to 0. Also, thank you for pointing out the fact that t_n = 0 on odd terms.

I don't understand your example for s_n = 1/n on even and -1 on odd?

Xould you be more specific

the terms are {-1, 1/2, -1, 1/4, -1, ...}

lim sup s_n = 0?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K