Is the Convergence of a Real Number Series Determined by Positive Integers?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Euge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    2015
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The convergence of a series of real numbers, denoted as $\sum\limits_{n = 1}^\infty a_n$, is established through the condition of absolute convergence. Specifically, the series converges absolutely if for every $\epsilon > 0$, there exists a positive integer $N = N(\epsilon)$ such that for any indices $n_1,\ldots, n_m \geq N$, the inequality $|a_{n_1} + \cdots + a_{n_m}| < \epsilon$ holds. This criterion is essential for determining the behavior of infinite series in mathematical analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of real number series and convergence concepts
  • Familiarity with absolute convergence in mathematical analysis
  • Knowledge of epsilon-delta definitions in calculus
  • Basic skills in mathematical proofs and inequalities
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of absolute convergence in detail
  • Explore the epsilon-delta definition of limits in calculus
  • Learn about different types of convergence for series, including conditional convergence
  • Investigate the implications of convergence in functional analysis
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and researchers interested in series convergence, particularly those focusing on real analysis and mathematical proofs.

Euge
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
245
Here is this week's POTW:

-----
Let $\sum\limits_{n = 1}^\infty a_n$ be a series of real numbers. Show that $\sum\limits_{n = 1}^\infty a_n$ converges absolutely if and only if to each $\epsilon > 0$, there corresponds a positive integer $N = N(\epsilon)$ such that if $n_1,\ldots, n_m$ are indices no less than $N$, then $|a_{n_1} + \cdots + a_{n_m}| < \epsilon$.
-----

Remember to read the http://www.mathhelpboards.com/showthread.php?772-Problem-of-the-Week-%28POTW%29-Procedure-and-Guidelines to find out how to http://www.mathhelpboards.com/forms.php?do=form&fid=2!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No one answered this week's problem. You can find my solution below.
Suppose $\sum_{n = 1}^\infty a_n$ converges absolutely. Given $\epsilon > 0$, there exists a positive integer $N$ such that $\sum_{n = p}^q |a_n| < \epsilon$ whenever $q \ge p \ge N$. Let $n_1,\ldots, n_k$ be a finite set of indices such that $n_i \ge N$ for all $i$. Without loss of generality, assume $n_1 < \cdots < n_k$. Then

$$|a_{n_1} + \cdots + a_{n_k}| \le |a_{n_1}| + \cdots + |a_{n_k}| \le \sum_{n = n_1}^{n_k} |a_n| < \epsilon.$$

To prove the converse, we argue by contaposition. Suppose that $\sum_{n = 1}^\infty |a_n|$ diverges. Then there exists $\epsilon > 0$ such that, given $N \in \Bbb Z^{+}$, there exists $s > r \ge N$ such that $\sum_{n = r}^s |a_n|\ge \epsilon$. Let $n_1,\ldots, n_m, n_{m+1},\ldots, n_k$ be the indices in $\{r,r+1,\ldots, s\}$ such that $a_n \ge 0$ for $n = n_1,\ldots, n_m$ and $a_n \le 0$ for $n = n_{m+1},\ldots, n_k$. Since $$|a_{n_1} + \cdots + a_{n_m}| + |a_{n_{m+1}} + \cdots + a_{n_k}| = \sum_{n = r}^s |a_i| \ge \epsilon,$$ either $|a_{n_1} + \cdots + a_{n_m}| \ge \epsilon/2$ or $|a_{n_{m+1}} + \cdots + a_{n_k}| \ge \epsilon/2$. Hence, the contrapositive holds.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K