dane502
- 20
- 0
Homework Statement
Given the sequence
[tex]L_n = Q \cdot (1 + \frac{r}{n}} )^n[/tex]
where [tex]Q > 0, r > 0[/tex]
show that it either converges or diverges.
Homework Equations
Restating the sequence as a recurrence could (maybe) be of help:
[tex]L_{n+1} = L_n \cdot (1 + \frac{r}{n}} )[/tex] and [tex]L_1 = Q \cdot (1 + \frac{r}{1}})[/tex]
The Attempt at a Solution
I've tried two different approaches:
- Using the epsilon-definition of convergence: Using Maple I've found the limit of the sequence to be [tex]e^r \cdot Q[/tex], so there exists a [tex]N \in \mathbb{R}[/tex] such that
[tex]\vert Q \cdot (1 + \frac{r}{n}} )^n - e^r \cdot Q \vert < \epsilon[/tex]
for all [tex]n \geq N[/tex].
The problem with this method is, that I can't figure out what to do upon rewriting the above inequality:
[tex]\vert \frac{(n+r)^n}{n^n} - e^r \vert < \frac{\epsilon}{Q}[/tex]
Ideally, I should either solve for [tex]n[/tex] , thus allowing me to find a suitable [tex]\epsilon[/tex] or reduce the inequality to some form where choosing and [tex]\epsilon[/tex] would be obvious. But it seems impossible due to the exponentiation. - Using that a sequence converges iff it is monotonous and has a supremum/infimum
Therefore I've thought of restating the sequence as a recurrence and showing that it is monotunous and has a supremum.
Showing that the sequence is monotonous is easy:
[tex]r > 0[/tex], so [tex](1 + \frac{r}{n}}) > 1[/tex], so [tex]L_{n+1} > L_n[/tex].
The second part seems unsolvable, though.
I've tried to use induction to show that the sequence has a supremum.
Base step:
I guess that proving [tex]Q \cdot (1 + r) < Q \cdot e^r[/tex] is easy, and so I haven't yet spent time on proving it.
What I have spent time on, however, is the inductive step:
Assuming that [tex]L_k < Q \cdot e^r[/tex], I need to prove that [tex]L_{k+1} < Q \cdot e^r[/tex].
This problem reduces to showing the following:
[tex](1 + \frac{r}{k})^k < e^r[/tex] iff [tex](1 + \frac{r}{k})^{k+1} < e^r[/tex]
I have no idea how one would go about proving that the left side of the 'iff' implies the right side of the 'iff'
I would greatly appreciate if anyone could help me making some advances using either method 1 or method 2 - or an entirely different method.
Last edited: