Need guidance on my proof of limit.

Samuelb88
Messages
160
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that [tex]lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} { (1 + 1/(2n))^n } = \sqrt{e}[/tex].

Homework Equations


I am allowed to assume * [tex]lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} { (1 + 1/n )^n} = e[/tex].
I am not allowed to use the theorem that asserts [tex]lim_{n\rightarrow n_0} {\sqrt{S_n}} = (lim_{n\rightarrow n_0} {S_n})^{1/2}[/tex].

The Attempt at a Solution



I want to show that the sequence is increasing and bounded, and therefore the [tex]lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} { (1 + 1/(2n))^n }[/tex] exists. Let's suppose I have show the sequence is increasing by comparing [tex]S_k[/tex] and [tex]S_{k+1}[/tex] and showing [tex]\forall k, S_k < S_{k+1}[/tex]. Let's also suppose I know that 2 is an upper bound for [tex]S_n[/tex]. Then I want to show [tex]\forall \epsilon >0[/tex] [tex]\exists N[/tex] such that [tex]\forall n > N[/tex], [tex]| (1 + 1/(2n) )^n - \sqrt{e} | < \epsilon[/tex].

Does this argument work?

Lemma: [tex]\forall \epsilon > 0[/tex] [tex]\exists N_0[/tex] such that [tex]\forall n > N_0[/tex], [tex]|2 + 1/n - 2| < \epsilon[/tex]. That is, [tex]lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} {(2 + 1/n)} = 2[/tex].

[tex]\forall n | ( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n - \sqrt{e} | < |1/n|[/tex]. Since [tex]\forall n, 1/n > 0[/tex], then [tex]|1/n| = 1/n[/tex]. By our lemma, we know [tex]|1/n| = 1/n < \epsilon[/tex]. Choose an [tex]n > 1/ \epsilon[/tex]. Then [tex]| ( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n - \sqrt{e} | < \epsilon[/tex] and therefore [tex]lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} { (1 + 1/(2n))^n } = \sqrt{e}[/tex].

I was originally trying to use * with the definition of a limit to show [tex]| ( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n - \sqrt{e} | < | ( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n - e | < \epsilon[/tex] but I couldn't figure out how to determine N.
 
It's not clear to me what the relevance of the lemma is to picking your value of n (why can't you just pick n larger than one over epsilon without looking at a different limit?), or why [tex] \forall n | ( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n - \sqrt{e} | < |1/n|[/tex] is true.
[tex] | ( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n - \sqrt{e} | < | ( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n - e | < \epsilon [/tex]

This middle term in the inequality is going to fairly large (in the analysis sense) when n is large. We know [tex]( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n[/tex] is going to be close to [tex]\sqrt{e}[/tex], so it can't be close to e as well. However, at some point you are going to need to use the limit that gives e, or some alternative definition of e
 
It's not clear to me what the relevance of the lemma is to picking your value of n (why can't you just pick n larger than one over epsilon without looking at a different limit?), or why [tex]\forall n | ( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n - \sqrt{e} | < |1/n|[/tex] is true.

I added the lemma to use the fact I knew the limit of the 2+1/n was 2, and to bound the difference [tex]|(1 + 1/(2n))^n - \sqrt{e}| < |1/n|[/tex] for all n (n is of course restricted to naturals, and this doesn't include zero). So my reasoning was after establishing the above inequality, to use the lemma to argue I can find an n>N such that [tex]|1/n| = 1/n < \epsilon[/tex]. That such n being any integer [tex]> 1/\epsilon[/tex]. Therefore if [tex]n > 1/\epsilon[/tex], then [tex]|(1 + 1/(2n))^n - \sqrt{e}| < \epsilon[/tex]. Does this make sense?

This middle term in the inequality is going to fairly large (in the analysis sense) when n is large. We know [tex]( 1 + 1/(2n) )^n[/tex] is going to be close to [tex]\sqrt{e}[/tex] , so it can't be close to e as well. However, at some point you are going to need to use the limit that gives e, or some alternative definition of e

Sorry, I meant to say: [tex]|(1 + 1/(2n)^n - \sqrt{e}|[/tex] < [tex]|(1+1/n)^n - e|[/tex]. Then using the fact I that I knew [tex]\forall \epsilon[/tex] there was some N such that whenever n>N, I was trying to argue [tex]|(1+1/n)^n - e| < \epsilon[/tex]. The main problem I had was deriving an explicit N from the inequality above. That is why I choose to bound the difference [tex]|(1 + 1/(2n)^n - \sqrt{e}|[/tex] by [tex]1/n[/tex] instead.
 
Last edited:
Here is an idea that I just thought of using the fact that I may assume * [tex]\lim_{n/rightarrow +/infty} {(1+1/n)^n}=e[/tex]. I am not sure if it is considered "rigorous" enough. Here it is:

I may use the fact that ** if [tex]S_n, T_n[/tex] are sequences, and [tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} {S_n} =A[/tex], [tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow} {T_n} = B[/tex]. Then [tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow} {S_n T_n} = AB[/tex].

Suppose * and let m=2n. Then [tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} {(1 + 1/n)^n} = \lim_{m\rightarrow +\infty} {(1+1/(2m))^{2m}[/tex] (Here I am making the argument that as [tex]n\rightarrow +\infty[/tex], [tex]2m\rightarrow +\infty[/tex] and hence [tex]m\rightarrow +\infty[/tex]). By **, [tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} {(1+1/(2m)^m (1+1/(2m))^m } = \lim_{m\rightarrow +\infty} {(1+1/(2m))^m} \lim_{m\rightarrow +\infty} {(1+1/(2m))^m = e[/tex]. Then [tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} {(1+1/(2m))^m } = \sqrt{e}[/tex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
3K