Proof of a limit involving exponentials

  • Thread starter Thread starter phreak
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Proof
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that the limit of the average of exponential terms approaches zero for irrational values of alpha. A participant suggests that as the sequence progresses around the unit circle, the sums between points become negligible when they revisit nearby points. Another contributor proposes a method involving rational approximations to demonstrate the limit, emphasizing the importance of careful approximation techniques. The proof is confirmed by showing that the average sum can be bounded and approaches zero as N increases. The conversation highlights the interplay between irrationality and convergence in the context of exponential functions.
phreak
Messages
133
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Given k\in \mathbb{Z} \setminus \{ 0 \}, prove that \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^N e^{2\pi i k n \alpha}=0, for all \alpha \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Q}.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Well, I had an idea, but I'm not sure how well it works. Even if it did, I'm not sure how to make it rigorous. Basically, my idea was to say that you work your way around the unit circle, and that whenever we come arbitrarily close to hitting the same point again, the sum (between the two points) gets arbitrarily close to zero. Am I on the right track?

Edit: Alternately, could we use some convergence theorem using counting measure? Also, the limit is supposed to be 0, not 1. I changed it in the code, but it isn't working.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phreak said:
we come arbitrarily close to hitting the same point again, the sum (between the two points) gets arbitrarily close to zero. Am I on the right track?
This sounds like a reasonable line of attack.

Let's idealize for a bit (which may or may not help). For simplicity, let's fix a particular point, say, 1. What would happen if, after some number P of steps you really did return to 1?

(i.e. what if \alpha \in \mathbb{Q}, and k \alpha \notin \mathbb{Z})

Can you prove the limit goes to zero in this special case?


Also, the limit is supposed to be 0, not 1. I changed it in the code, but it isn't working.
You need to reload the image. Reloading the page might not do that, depending on your browser and its settings.
 
Ok, I proved it. Thanks a lot for the help.

(For the curious: You prove it for \alpha k rational. Then you pick r = p/q \in \Q s.t. |\alpha k - p/q | < \epsilon. You do a lot of clever approximation and you get that 1/N * the sum \le (2\epsilon+q)/N, which goes to 0 as N goes to infinity.)
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K