alexmahone
- 303
- 0
Is the converse of the ratio test true?
The discussion centers around the validity of the converse of the ratio test for series convergence. Participants explore whether a convergent series necessarily implies that the limit of the ratio of consecutive terms is less than 1, examining both trivial and non-trivial examples.
Participants generally disagree on the validity of the converse of the ratio test, with multiple competing views and examples being presented. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the existence of definitive counterexamples.
Participants have not reached a consensus on the implications of the ratio test's converse, and there are unresolved questions regarding the definitions and conditions under which the limit of the ratio is evaluated.
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.