alexmahone
- 303
- 0
Is the converse of the ratio test true?
The discussion centers on the validity of the converse of the Ratio Test in the context of convergent series. Participants assert that the converse does not always hold, providing counterexamples such as the series 0+0+0+... which converges but has an undefined ratio. Additionally, the series defined by \( a_n = \frac{1}{n(n-1)} \) is mentioned as a case where the limit of the ratio equals 1, further illustrating the limitations of the Ratio Test's converse. The conclusion emphasizes that convergence does not guarantee a limit of the ratio less than 1.
PREREQUISITESMathematicians, students studying calculus, educators teaching series convergence, and anyone interested in advanced mathematical analysis.
Krizalid said:I don't think so. I think you can construct an easy counterexample. Care to imagine one?
The "ratio test" says that if $lim \frac{a_{n+1}}{a_n}< 1$ then $\sum a_n$ converges.Alexmahone said:0+0+0+... converges but the ratio is not defined.
I wonder if there are any non-trivial counterexamples.
Maybe...Alexmahone said:0+0+0+... converges but the ratio is not defined.
I wonder if there are any non-trivial counterexamples.
HallsofIvy said:Find a convergent series such that that limit is 1.