Evaluating ∑ln(n)/n: Bounded Values & n\geq3

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter negation
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the convergence of the series ∑ln(n)/n for n ≥ 3. It is established that ln(n)/n is not strictly decreasing or strictly positive on the interval [1, ∞) and is instead strictly increasing on (0, e] and strictly decreasing on [e, ∞). The squeeze theorem is applied to demonstrate that the series diverges, as ∑1/n diverges, leading to the conclusion that ∑ln(n)/n also diverges. The choice of starting at n = 3 is justified by the behavior of the function ln(n)/n in relation to the integral test for convergence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of series convergence and divergence
  • Familiarity with the squeeze theorem
  • Knowledge of integral calculus, specifically the integral test for convergence
  • Basic properties of logarithmic functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the integral test for convergence in more detail
  • Learn about the properties of logarithmic functions, particularly ln(x)/x
  • Explore the application of the squeeze theorem in various mathematical contexts
  • Investigate the behavior of series and integrals involving other logarithmic expressions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying calculus, and anyone interested in series convergence, particularly those focusing on logarithmic functions and their properties.

negation
Messages
817
Reaction score
0
In determining whether ∑ln(n)/n converges or diverges, where n=[0,∞], ln(n)/n must be evaluated at the upper and lower bound. My notes breezed through this part without much explanation on finding the bounded values for ln(n)/n. I suspect it might have something to do with squeeze theorem.
Or rather, why is n \geq 3 a good value?
(I'm not sure if this should be homework because technically it isn't but some clarification on the question I have would be great!)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
negation said:
In determining whether ∑ln(n)/n converges or diverges, where n=[0,∞], ln(n)/n must be evaluated at the upper and lower bound. My notes breezed through this part without much explanation on finding the bounded values for ln(n)/n. I suspect it might have something to do with squeeze theorem.
Or rather, why is n \geq 3 a good value?
(I'm not sure if this should be homework because technically it isn't but some clarification on the question I have would be great!)

Let N \in \mathbb{N}. If f : [N, \infty) \to \mathbb{R} is a strictly decreasing strictly positive function, then \sum_{n=N}^M f(n) can be bounded by <br /> \int_{N}^M f(x)\,dx \leq \sum_{n=N}^M f(n) \leq f(N) + \int_{N+1}^M f(x-1)\,dx <br /> = f(N) + \int_N^{M-1} f(x)\,dx. To see this, draw the graphs of f(x), f([x]) and f(x-1), where [x] is the greatest integer less than or equal to x and compare the areas under each. Thus by the squeeze theorem, <br /> \lim_{M \to \infty} \int_{N}^M f(x)\,dx \leq \lim_{M \to \infty}\sum_{n=N}^M f(n) \leq <br /> f(N) + \lim_{M \to \infty} \int_N^{M-1} f(x)\,dx \leq f(N) + \lim_{M \to \infty} \int_N^M f(x)\,dx so that the sum converges if and only if the integral converges.

\ln(x)/x is not strictly decreasing or strictly positive on [1,\infty) and isn't even defined for x = 0. It is strictly increasing on (0, e] and is then strictly decreasing and strictly positive on [e, \infty). Thus we must take N = 3 and split the sum as <br /> \lim_{M \to \infty} \sum_{n=1}^M \frac{\ln(n)}n = \frac{\ln(2)}2 + \lim_{M \to \infty} \sum_{n=3}^M\frac{\ln(n)}n.
 
Last edited:
ln(n)/n > 1/n (n>2). ∑1/n diverges, therefore ∑ln(n)/n diverges.
 
pasmith said:
Let N \in \mathbb{N}. If f : [N, \infty) \to \mathbb{R} is a strictly decreasing strictly positive function, then \sum_{n=N}^M f(n) can be bounded by <br /> \int_{N}^M f(x)\,dx \leq \sum_{n=N}^M f(n) \leq f(N) + \int_{N+1}^M f(x-1)\,dx <br /> = f(N) + \int_N^{M-1} f(x)\,dx. To see this, draw the graphs of f(x), f([x]) and f(x-1), where [x] is the greatest integer less than or equal to x and compare the areas under each. Thus by the squeeze theorem, <br /> \lim_{M \to \infty} \int_{N}^M f(x)\,dx \leq \lim_{M \to \infty}\sum_{n=N}^M f(n) \leq <br /> f(N) + \lim_{M \to \infty} \int_N^{M-1} f(x)\,dx \leq f(N) + \lim_{M \to \infty} \int_N^M f(x)\,dx so that the sum converges if and only if the integral converges.

\ln(x)/x is not strictly decreasing or strictly positive on [1,\infty) and isn't even defined for x = 0. It is strictly increasing on (0, e] and is then strictly decreasing and strictly positive on [e, \infty). Thus we must take N = 3 and split the sum as <br /> \lim_{M \to \infty} \sum_{n=1}^M \frac{\ln(n)}n = \frac{\ln(2)}2 + \lim_{M \to \infty} \sum_{n=3}^M\frac{\ln(n)}n.

Hi

Why isn't ln(x)/x strictly increasing on the domain [1,∞)?
ln(x)/x - ln(x-1)/(x-1) gives a positive increment and continues on as our domain tends towards infinity. Or is it categourically "not strictly decreasing" because it grows too slow?
To begin with, what is the definitition of strictly positive in this context?
 
ln(x)/x is decreasing -> 0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K