Divergent Harmonic Series, Convergent P-Series (Cauchy sequences)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on demonstrating the convergence properties of the harmonic series and the p-series using Cauchy sequences. It establishes that the harmonic series, represented as \(\sum \frac{1}{n}\), is not convergent because its partial sums do not form a Cauchy sequence. Conversely, the p-series \(\sum \frac{1}{n^2}\) is shown to be convergent as its partial sums do form a Cauchy sequence, satisfying the condition that for every \(\epsilon > 0\), there exists an \(N\) such that the difference between terms is less than \(\epsilon\).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Cauchy sequences and their properties
  • Familiarity with series convergence tests
  • Basic knowledge of limits and epsilon-delta definitions
  • Experience with mathematical notation and summation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Cauchy sequences in detail
  • Learn about convergence tests for series, including the Ratio Test and Root Test
  • Explore the implications of the p-series test for different values of p
  • Investigate the relationship between Cauchy sequences and completeness in metric spaces
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone studying real analysis or series convergence, particularly those focusing on sequences and series in calculus.

PingPong
Messages
61
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


(a) Show that [itex]\sum \frac 1n[/itex] is not convergent by showing that the partial sums are not a Cauchy sequence
(b) Show that [itex]\sum \frac 1{n^2}[/itex] is convergent by showing that the partial sums form a Cauchy sequence

Homework Equations


Given epsilon>0, a sequence is Cauchy if there exists an N such that [itex]|a_m-a_n|<\epsilon[/itex] for every m,n>N.

The Attempt at a Solution


For part (a), the sequence terms are [itex]a_n=1+1/2+\ldots+1/n[/itex], so assuming that m>n,
[tex]|a_m-a_n|=1/m+1/(m-1)+\ldots+1/(n+1)<\frac{m-n}{n+1}<\frac{m-n}{n}[/tex].

Now, if I take epsilon=1/2 and suppose that m>n>N implies that the distance between two elements is less than epsilon. But m=2n>n>N gives the difference to be 1, which is greater than epsilon, so the sequence is not Cauchy. I think I've gotten this half - am I correct??

For part (b), I'm not sure how to do it. The sequence terms are [itex]a_n=1+1/2^2+\ldots+1/n^2[/itex], so again assuming that m>n, we have

[tex]|a_m-a_n|=1/m^2+1/(m-1)^2+\ldots+1/(n+1)^2<\frac{m-n}{(n+1)^2}<\frac{m-n}{n^2}<\frac{m}{n^2}[/tex]

I want to be able to find N such that m>n>N implies that this difference is less than epsilon, right? To do that, since I've assumed that m>n, if I can eliminate m from the expression, I'm good to go, but I can't figure out how to do it. Help!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm grasping at straws here, but I want to show that [itex]m/n^2<\epsilon[/itex]. So I can say, since [itex]n<m[/itex], that [itex]n/n^2=1/n<m/n^2<\epsilon[/itex].

I know this probably isn't right, but if anybody could give me a hand it'd be appreciated.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K