Is the Sequence {a_n} Convergent Given Its Recurrence Relation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MIT2014
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sequence Set
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the convergence of a sequence defined by a recurrence relation, specifically examining the inequality \(2a_n \leq a_{n-1} + a_{n+1}\). Participants are exploring the implications of this relation on the behavior of the sequence.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to analyze the recurrence relation and its implications for convergence, with some suggesting counterexamples and others questioning the assumptions made regarding boundedness and the behavior of differences between successive terms.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various interpretations being explored. Some participants have offered insights into the necessity of boundedness for convergence, while others express skepticism about the assumptions being made. There is no explicit consensus on the conditions required for convergence.

Contextual Notes

There are indications that the problem may require additional assumptions for a definitive conclusion, as some participants highlight potential counterexamples that challenge the validity of the original statement.

MIT2014
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


For n\geq1 let 2an \leq an-1 + an+1
Prove that an converges

Homework Equations


n/a

The Attempt at a Solution


2an+1 \leq an + an+2
an+2 \geq 2an+1 - an

How do I proceed? Ratio test?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
an = n would seem to be a counterexample.
 
Are you certain that this is correct?? Aren't there easy counterexamples?
 
I'm sorry. It should've been 2an instead of an. I've edited it above
 
What about the sequence

1,2,4,8,...,2^n,...
 
MIT2014 said:
I'm sorry. It should've been 2an instead of an. I've edited it above

Use the subscript button X2 to do subscripts. Also the forum rules indicate you should not change a post that has already been replied to because it makes the discussion difficult to follow. Just correct it in the next post.
 
First, Caltech>MIT lol.

Also, I believe you'd have to assume that the sequence an is bounded to solve this problem.
 
So how would you use boundedness to prove convergence?

PS. MIT>CalTech
 
From your sequence and with a little algebra it can be shown that
a_n - a_{n-1} \leq a_{n+1} - a_n.

Your sequence may converge if the different between sucessive terms approaches zero. If you don't impose some further restrictions I don't think you can show that this thing converges.

If a_n is bounded then things may work out.
 
  • #10
I don't think you have enough information in this problem.

if a_n - a_{n-1} \rightarrow 0 then you have convergence.
But note that a_n - a_{n-1} must be increasing to zero.

a_n must be bounded but even more than that !

Edit
Something like ln(n) satisfies the condition of a_n - a_(n-1) increasing to zero but it does not converge since it is not bounded.

This question requires too many assumptions; something must be wrong with the question.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
I'm not very good at this stuff, so guys tell me if I am wrong somewhere, but here it goes:

2an \leq an-1 + an+1
Through rearrangement: an - an+1 \leq an-1 - an

This means that the difference between successive terms is decreasing. Since an is decreasing, the differences must decrease to 0 (this is where I'm concerned, can you make that assumption? otherwise how would you do it?). Thus, there exists N so for any n\geqN |a-an|<epsilon for any epsilon greater than 0. Thus, an must be a convergent sequence.
 
  • #12
Hmm, I'm a bit skeptic. First of all, I see no reason to assume that it decreases to 0.
Secondly, take the sequence x_n=\sum_{k=1}^n{-\frac{1}{k}}. Then the difference between consecutive terms also decrease to 0. Still the sequence diverges...
 
  • #13
CalTech>MIT said:
I'm not very good at this stuff, so guys tell me if I am wrong somewhere, but here it goes:

2an \leq an-1 + an+1
Through rearrangement: an - an+1 \leq an-1 - an

This means that the difference between successive terms is decreasing. Since an is decreasing, the differences must decrease to 0 (this is where I'm concerned, can you make that assumption? otherwise how would you do it?). Thus, there exists N so for any n\geqN |a-an|<epsilon for any epsilon greater than 0. Thus, an must be a convergent sequence.
:-)
It doesn't have to be decreasing to zero. Infact, I has to be increasing to zero.

Just becase the difference approches zero doesn't guarantee convergence. In my above post I gave the examply of the sequence a_n=ln(n).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K