Epsilon proof and recursive sequences

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on how to construct an ε, N proof for a recursively defined sequence, with a focus on finding N such that |a_n - L| < ε. The user expresses curiosity about this topic, particularly in relation to infinitely nested radicals. They mention having proven the limit and convergence of recursive sequences but seek clarity on applying the traditional ε definition of convergence. The conversation includes references to cobwebbing and fixed-point concepts as potential methods for approaching the problem. The example provided involves a sequence converging to the golden ratio, illustrating the user's interest in practical applications of the ε, N proof.
dustbin
Messages
239
Reaction score
6
Hi,

I am wondering how one would go about an ε, N proof for a recursively defined sequence. Can anyone direct me to some reading or would like to provide insights of their own? This isn't for a homework problem... just general curiosity which I could not satisfy via search!

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Depending on the sequence, you may be able to solve for it explicitly and then take the limit as usual. What sequence are you working with, exactly?
 
I'm not working on any sequence in particular, but I started wondering about it while doing something with infinitely nested radicals. I've proven the limit, convergence, etc., of recursive sequences, including nested radicals. I'm wondering if there is a way of doing a traditional epsilon proof using the definition of a convergent sequence. How do you go about finding an n>N such that |a_n - L | < ε? This confuses me because a_n is given recursively...

Thank you for the links on cobwebbing! That looks interesting and I have never heard of it before.
 
To maybe clarify a bit: I am suggesting that the limit value is already known (or at least the suspected value). Given an ε>0, how do I find N such that |a_n - L | < ε whenever n>N.

For instance, if given the sequence x_1 = 1 and x_(n+1)= sqrt(1+x_n)... yielding sqrt(1+sqrt(1+sqrt(1+...))) which has the limit, if I remember correctly, value being the golden ratio.
 
We all know the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold uses open sets and homeomorphisms onto the image as open set in ##\mathbb R^n##. It should be possible to reformulate the definition of n-dimensional topological manifold using closed sets on the manifold's topology and on ##\mathbb R^n## ? I'm positive for this. Perhaps the definition of smooth manifold would be problematic, though.

Similar threads

  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
761
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K