Help Needed: Solving Sequences with Standard Limits Equations

chief10
Messages
78
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm having trouble with these here.. it's been a while since I've done sequences and I can't seem to make this work with Standard Limits equations.

Clearly the answer given by Wolfram solver is there after the = but i'd like to know the reasoning behind it.

Anyone that could point me in the right direction would be most helpful!

1.
zuf9eg.png


2.
5plz8.png


3.
anbz1x.png
thanks a lot

-chief10
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you know the standard limit result for (1+1/n)n? Yo can use that to solve 1 and 3.
 
chief10 said:

Homework Statement



I'm having trouble with these here.. it's been a while since I've done sequences and I can't seem to make this work with Standard Limits equations.

Clearly the answer given by Wolfram solver is there after the = but i'd like to know the reasoning behind it.

Anyone that could point me in the right direction would be most helpful!

1.
zuf9eg.png


2.
5plz8.png


3.
anbz1x.png



thanks a lot

-chief10

All you need to know is that e^x = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} (1 + \frac{x}{n})^{n} and that if \lim f(x) = a and \lim g(x) = b with a,b≠∞, then \lim f(x) g(x) = a b
 
haruspex said:
Do you know the standard limit result for (1+1/n)n? Yo can use that to solve 1 and 3.

so you just divide inside the brackets by 'n' right?

i don't get how the (n+1) part works with the particular standard limit though.. it's throwing me off a bit..

also what do you do with n^n..
 
clamtrox said:
All you need to know is that e^x = \lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} (1 + \frac{x}{n})^{n} and that if \lim f(x) = a and \lim g(x) = b with a,b≠∞, then \lim f(x) g(x) = a b

ah yeah just your standard limit laws

how do you apply it to this one though..
 
Last edited:
I couldn't work it out

SL 7 didn't work for me.. any more tips?
 
chief10 said:
so you just divide inside the brackets by 'n' right?
Yes. Please post your working as far as you get.
 
You can also use the definition of e in terms of a limit for point 2, so you can have a common starting point for all 3. But using e for point 2 might be an overkill, though.
 
Actually for the third one you don't need the definition of e.

0≤n^{n}/(3+n)^{n+1}≤ ?? which approaches 0.
 
  • #10
dextercioby said:
You can also use the definition of e in terms of a limit for point 2, so you can have a common starting point for all 3. But using e for point 2 might be an overkill, though.

haruspex said:
Yes. Please post your working as far as you get.

This is what I've done for (1-(1/(n^2)))^n ===> I think it works

exp[lim(n→∞)n*log(1-(1/(n^2)))

let t = 1/n and use L'Hopitals

exp[2*lim(t→0)(t/((t^2)-1))

then take the limit of each individual component inside the exponent and you should be left with exp(2*0/0-1) = exp(0) = 1

sound about right?

reckon i should do the same thing [exp(log)] type approach for the others?
 
  • #11
happysauce said:
Actually for the third one you don't need the definition of e.

0≤n^{n}/(3+n)^{n+1}≤ ?? which approaches 0.

could you elaborate further? I've never seen that concept before
 
  • #12
for number 1 i can't seem to solve it using exp[log]...

L'Hopitals doesn't work since the denominator is 1..
 
  • #13
chief10 said:
for number 1 i can't seem to solve it using exp[log]...

L'Hopitals doesn't work since the denominator is 1..

Number 1 might be conceptually easier if you first write m = n+2 and consider m→∞. You can split it into two fractions, after which the rule I mentioned earlier becomes useful.
 
  • #14
chief10 said:
could you elaborate further? I've never seen that concept before

You know that the sequence is positive, if you show that the sequence is bounded by another sequence and that bounded sequence approaches 0, then you can deduce that your original sequence is 0. Similar concept to squeeze theorem.
 
  • #15
For the second one you can do in 1 step. Factor it then apply the definition of e^x and you get 1/e * e = 1.
 
Back
Top