Limit of Series: $\frac{1}{n}$

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Vitor Pimenta
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Series
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the limit of the sequence defined by the average of the harmonic series up to \( n \), specifically the expression \(\frac{{1 + \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{3} + ... + \frac{1}{n}}}{n}\). Participants explore whether this limit exists and the implications of various mathematical theorems related to sequences and averages.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the expression is technically a sequence rather than a series.
  • Another participant suggests using an integral comparison to analyze the limit of the sequence.
  • A claim is made referencing a theorem that states if a sequence converges to \( L \), then the average of its first \( n \) terms also converges to \( L \).
  • A later reply challenges the previous claim by providing a detailed argument involving the definition of limits and epsilon-delta reasoning.
  • Another participant identifies the theorem discussed as Cesàro's theorem and provides a proof outline for it, emphasizing the behavior of the terms as \( n \) approaches infinity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the application of the theorem regarding limits and averages. While some support the theorem's validity, others question its applicability in this specific context, leading to an unresolved discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made regarding the convergence of the sequence and the conditions under which the theorem applies. The discussion does not resolve these issues.

Vitor Pimenta
Messages
10
Reaction score
1
What should be the limit of the following series (if any ...)

[tex]\frac{{1 + \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{3} + ... + \frac{1}{n}}}{n}[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Technically, this is not a series but a sequence.

That aside, one way to get the answer is to use, for ##k\geq 2, \frac{1}{k}=\int_{k-1}^k\frac{dx}{k}\leq \int_{k-1}^k \frac{dx}{x} ## .
 
I have just found here that, given a sequence [tex]{\left\{ {{a_n}} \right\}_{n = 1}}^\infty[/tex], [tex]\mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } {a_n} = L \Rightarrow \mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } \left( {\frac{{{a_1} + {a_2} + {a_3} + ... + {a_n}}}{n}} \right) = L[/tex]

Instant answer ¬¬'
 
Ah yes, even simpler you're right : )
 
Vitor Pimenta said:
I have just found here that, given a sequence [tex]{\left\{ {{a_n}} \right\}_{n = 1}}^\infty[/tex], [tex]\mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } {a_n} = L \Rightarrow \mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } \left( {\frac{{{a_1} + {a_2} + {a_3} + ... + {a_n}}}{n}} \right) = L[/tex]

Instant answer ¬¬'

I don't see how that follows actually. Use that for every ##\epsilon > 0##, there is an ##N## such that ##|a_n-L| < \epsilon##. Then for all ##n## larger than ##N##,
##|\frac{a_1 + ... + a_n}{n} - L| = |\frac{a_1 + ... + a_N}{n} + \frac{(a_{N+1}-L) + ...+ (a_n-L)}{n}| \leq |\frac{a_1 + ... + a_N}{n}| + |\frac{(a_{N+1}-L)}{n}| + ...+ |\frac{(a_n-L)}{n}| < |\frac{a_1 + ... + a_N}{n}| + \frac{\epsilon}{n} + ... + \frac{\epsilon}{n} = |\frac{a_1 + ... + a_N}{n}| + \epsilon.##

As ##n \to \infty##, the expression ##|\frac{a_1 + ... + a_N}{n}|## will converge to 0. In particular, there is some N' such that for all n larger than N', we have ## |\frac{a_1 + ... + a_N}{n}| < \epsilon##. Thus we find that choosing N' large enough (bigger than N), we will have for any chosen ##\epsilon > 0## and for all n larger than N', that ##|\frac{a_1 + ... + a_n}{n} - L| < 2\epsilon## proving that ## \lim_{n \to \infty} |\frac{a_1 + ... + a_n}{n} - L| = 0##.

Note: edited
 
Last edited:
I know this, it's called Cesaro's theorem.
For the proof you can write: ## |(\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n a_k) - L | \le \frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^N |a_k - L| + \frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n |a_k - L| ##

The first term tends to 0 as n tends to infinity.
The second term is bounded by ##\frac{n-N}{n} \varepsilon ## for N big enough
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K