Is the sequence {a_n} monotone?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pcvt
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining whether the sequence {a_n} = n + [(-1)^n]/n is monotone, with participants exploring justification for their claims.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss proving the monotonicity of the sequence through induction and the implications of the inequality n(n-1) > 0 for n > 1. Questions arise regarding the validity of the approach and the relevance of basic axioms of analysis.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants exploring different methods to prove the inequality and questioning the necessity of using induction. Some suggest alternative approaches, such as graphical analysis, while others express uncertainty about the implications of the initial conditions.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of the sequence not being true for n=1, which raises questions about the applicability of the induction method. Participants are navigating the constraints of proving monotonicity under these conditions.

pcvt
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


State whether or not the sequence {a_n} = n+[(-1)^n]/n is monotone or not and justify.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


It clearly appears to be monotone increasing, so I attempt to prove this. I've tried using induction and tried to prove that {an+1} -{an} >= 0. However, I've got it down to proving n(n-1)>0 for n>1, but I'm not sure how to prove this using just the basic axioms of analysis.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
pcvt said:

Homework Statement


State whether or not the sequence {a_n} = n+[(-1)^n]/n is monotone or not and justify.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


It clearly appears to be monotone increasing, so I attempt to prove this. I've tried using induction and tried to prove that {an+1} -{an} >= 0. However, I've got it down to proving n(n-1)>0 for n>1, but I'm not sure how to prove this using just the basic axioms of analysis.
What basic axioms are you talking about? Your approach using induction sounds good to me.
 
Well, would it be possible to redefine a new variable so that one can prove n(n-1)>0 for n>1 using induction? It seems possible to use induction but I'm not sure what to do about the fact that the statement isn't true for n=1.
 
I suppose you could do it by induction, but proving that n(n - 1) > 0 for n > 1 seems too trivial to bother with this technique. One look at the graph of y = x(x - 1) for x > 1 should convince anyone that the inequality is true.

You could also prove this inequality by noticing that for y = x2 - x has a derivative that is positive for x > 1/2, and that y(0) = y(1) = 0. The graph of this function crosses the x-axis at (1, 0) and increases without bound.

The expression n(n - 1), where n is an integer, agrees with x(x - 1) for all integer values of x.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K