How to Bound the Limit of Arithmetic Mean from Below

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving that if the limit of the sequence \( a_n \) approaches \( c \) as \( n \) approaches infinity, then the limit of the arithmetic mean \( o_n = \frac{a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_n}{n} \) also approaches \( c \). The user attempts to establish a lower bound for \( o_n \) using the properties of limits and the triangle inequality. Key steps include selecting an \( \epsilon > 0 \) and demonstrating that the terms of the sequence can be bounded in relation to \( \epsilon \), ultimately leading to the conclusion that \( |o_n - c| < 2\epsilon \) for sufficiently large \( n \).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in sequences and series
  • Familiarity with the triangle inequality in mathematical proofs
  • Knowledge of convergence criteria for sequences
  • Basic proficiency in manipulating inequalities
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of convergent sequences in real analysis
  • Learn about the triangle inequality and its applications in proofs
  • Explore the concept of bounded sequences and their implications
  • Investigate the relationship between sequences and their arithmetic means
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in mathematics, particularly those studying real analysis or sequences and series, as well as anyone looking to deepen their understanding of convergence and limits in mathematical contexts.

JG89
Messages
724
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Prove if that if the limit of a_n = c as n approaches infinity, then the limit of o_n = c as n approaches infinity, where o_n is the arithmetic mean (a_1 + ... + a_n)/n

Homework Equations



I can't figure out how to bound it from below.

The Attempt at a Solution



Assuming that the terms go in ascending order, then a_n is the largest term in the numerator, and so o_n <= n(a_n)/n = a_n.

So I have it bounded above. But I can't figure out how to bound it below, such that the sequence which bounds it below converges to a_n as well. Help would be appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try this. Select [tex]\epsilon > 0[/tex]. Since the original sequence converges to [tex]c[/tex] there is an integer [tex]N_1[/tex] such that

[tex] |a_n - c | < \epsilon \quad \text{ for } n \ge N_1[/tex]

Now, if [tex]m > N_1[/tex],

[tex] \left| \frac{a_1 + a_2 + \dots + a_{N_1} + a_{N_1+1} + \dots + a_m}{m} - c \right| \le \left|\frac{(a_1-c) + (a_2 - c) + \dots + (a_{N_1} - c)}{m}\right| + \left|\frac{(a_{N_1+1} - c) + \dots + (a_m - c)}{m} \right|[/tex]

You can use the triangle inequality (repeatedly) on each of these two terms. Every piece from the second fraction can be bounded in relation to [tex]\epsilon[/tex], and since there are finitely many terms from the first piece, you can bound those. With a little though you should be able to show that, for [tex]m[/tex] big enough, [tex]\sigma_m[/tex] (the general term in the sum sequence) is within [tex]\epsilon[/tex] of [tex]c[/tex]
 
Ok. So let e denote epsilon.

I have

|(a_1 + .. + a_m)/m - c| <= |(a_1 - c)/m| + ... + |(a_m - c)/m| < |(a_1 - c)/m| + ... +

|(a_N1 - c)/m) + |m*e/m| = |(a_1 - c)/m| + ... + |(a_N1 - c)/m) + e. Now, assuming a_N1 is the largest term in the sequence a_1,...,a_N1, then, |(a_1 - c)/m| + ... + |(a_N1 - c)/m) + e
< |m(a_N1 - c)/m| + e = |a_N1 - c| + e. I know that for any n >= N1, |a_n - c| < e. So I know that |a_N1 - c| < e, so therefore |a_N1 - c| + e < e + e = 2e.

I'm stuck on that part now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K