Proof of Divergence: (-1)^n Sequence

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the divergence of the sequence $$(-1)^n$$ using the ε-definition of the limit of a sequence. Participants explore the formal definition of convergence and engage in mathematical reasoning related to the sequence's behavior.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests the explicit statement of the ε-definition of convergence.
  • Another participant provides the formal definition of convergence for sequences of real numbers, indicating that divergence can be shown using the negation of this definition.
  • Several participants present their solutions, exploring different approaches to demonstrate the divergence of the sequence.
  • One participant discusses the implications of even and odd indices in the sequence, suggesting that for any natural number greater than a certain threshold, the sequence takes on distinct values based on parity.
  • Another participant proposes setting ε based on the value of L and examines cases where L equals -1 or is not equal to -1, indicating that different scenarios must be considered.
  • One participant employs propositional logic to outline the relationships between the conditions and the implications for the sequence's divergence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple approaches and reasoning for proving divergence, but there is no consensus on a single method or conclusion. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to demonstrate the divergence of the sequence.

Contextual Notes

Participants explore various cases and conditions, indicating that the proof may depend on specific assumptions about the values of L and the choice of ε. The discussion reflects a range of mathematical reasoning without resolving the underlying complexities.

solakis1
Messages
407
Reaction score
0
Prove that the sequence :$$(-1)^n$$ diverges by using the ε-definition of the limit of a sequence
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, what is that definition? Can you give an explicit statement of the definition?
 
Re: Sequences

HallsofIvy said:
Ok, what is that definition? Can you give an explicit statement of the definition?

Yes.
[sp] A sequence of real Nos, $$x_n$$, converges in $$R $$ iff

There exists $$m\in R$$ such that ,$$\forall\epsilon>0$$,there exists a natural No $$ k$$,such that :

$$\forall n\geq k\Longrightarrow |x_n-m|<\epsilon$$

.......OR in complete formalization.......

A sequence of real Nos, $$x_n$$, converges in $$R $$ iff

$$\exists m\forall\epsilon[\epsilon>0\Longrightarrow\exists k(k\in N\wedge\forall n(n\geq k\Longrightarrow |x_n-m|<\epsilon))]$$

Hence for diversion one ​may use the negation of the above definition[/sp]
 
Last edited:
Re: Sequences

Very good!

So, use a proof by contradiction. If this sequence converges to, say, m, then, given any $\epsilon> 0$, there exist N such that, if n> N, $|a_n- m|< \epsilon$. Suppose $\epsilon$ were equal to, say, 1/2. Since for any odd n, $a_n= -1$, and for any even n, $a_n= 1$, no matter what N is there will exist some even number, $n_e$, and some odd number, $n_o$, both larger than N such that $|a_{n_e}- m|= |1- m|< 1/2$ and $|a_{n_0}- m|= |-1- m|< 1/2$.

The first of those says $-1/2< 1- m< 1/2$ so that $-3/2< m< -1/2$ and the second that $-1/2< -1- m< 1/2$ so that $-3/2< -m< -1/2$ and then $1/2< m< 3/2$. $-3/2< m< -1/2$ and $1/2< m< 3/2$ cannot both be true.

Is there any reason why this pretty standard "Calculus I" homework problem was posted in "Challenge Questions and Puzzles"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Sequences

Here is my solution.

Given a real number $L$, set $\epsilon = \max\{\lvert 1 - \lvert L\rvert\rvert,2\}$. Then $\epsilon > 0$. If $N$ is a positive integer, let $n$ be $2N+1$ if $L \neq -1$, and $2N$ if $L=-1$. Then $n > N$ and $\lvert (-1)^n - L\rvert \ge \epsilon$. Hence, the sequence $\{(-1)^n\}$ is divergent.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sequences

HallsofIvy said:
Very good!

So, use a proof by contradiction. If this sequence converges to, say, m, then, given any $\epsilon> 0$, there exist N such that, if n> N, $|a_n- m|< \epsilon$. Suppose $\epsilon$ were equal to, say, 1/2. Since for any odd n, $a_n= -1$, and for any even n, $a_n= 1$, no matter what N is there will exist some even number, $n_e$, and some odd number, $n_o$, both larger than N such that $|a_{n_e}- m|= |1- m|< 1/2$ and $|a_{n_0}- m|= |-1- m|< 1/2$.

The first of those says $-1/2< 1- m< 1/2$ so that $-3/2< m< -1/2$ and the second that $-1/2< -1- m< 1/2$ so that $-3/2< -m< -1/2$ and then $1/2< m< 3/2$. $-3/2< m< -1/2$ and $1/2< m< 3/2$ cannot both be true.

Is there any reason why this pretty standard "Calculus I" homework problem was posted in "Challenge Questions and Puzzles"?
[sp] if n>N,then is either even or odd and not both
For example if N =100 ,all the n>N are:
101 or 102 or 103 or 104 or 105 or 106 e.t.c,e.t.c

And not ,101 and,102 ,e.t.c,e.t.c , because n can take only one value

For n even we have :|1-m|<1/2 => 1/2<m<3/2 or

For n odd we have :|1+m|<1/2 => -3/2<m<-1/2

Hence if n>N => n is even or odd => (1/2<m<3/2)or (-3/2<m<-1/2) which is true

From propositional logic:

(pv q ,p=>r,q=>t) => r v t.............1

put:

p=n is even
q= n is odd
r= 1/2<m<3/2
t= -3/2<m<-1/2

Then by using the above law we end up with : (1/2<m<3/2) or (-3/2<m<-1/2) [/sp]
 
Re: Sequences

Euge said:
Here is my solution.

Given a real number $L$, set $\epsilon = \max\{\lvert 1 - \lvert L\rvert\rvert,2\}$. Then $\epsilon > 0$. If $N$ is a positive integer, let $n$ be $2N+1$ if $L \neq -1$, and $2N$ if $L=-1$. Then $n > N$ and $\lvert (-1)^n - L\rvert \ge \epsilon$. Hence, the sequence $\{(-1)^n\}$ is divergent.

[sp] For n=2N+1, $$L\neq -1$$ ,then n>N and $$|(-1)^n-L|=|-1-L|=|1+L|$$

So ε must be set :ε =min{|1+L|,2}

I think.[/sp]
 
Re: Sequences

solakis said:
[sp] For n=2N+1, $$L\neq -1$$ ,then n>N and $$|(-1)^n-L|=|-1-L|=|1+L|$$

So ε must be set :ε =min{|1+L|,2}

I think.[/sp]
There was a typo, but $\min\{\lvert 1 + L\rvert, 2\}$ is not a valid choice for $\epsilon$ since then $\epsilon = 0$ when $L = -1$. In any case, I meant to have $\epsilon = \epsilon(L) := \lvert 1 + L\rvert$ for $L \neq -1$ and $2$ for $L = -1$. It is then clear that for each positive integer $n$, $\lvert (-1)^{2n} - (-1)\rvert = 2 = \epsilon(-1)$ and $\lvert (-1)^{2n+1} - L\rvert = \lvert 1 + L\rvert = \epsilon(L)$ (when $L \neq -1$)
 
Re: Sequences

Euge said:
There was a typo, but $\min\{\lvert 1 + L\rvert, 2\}$ is not a valid choice for $\epsilon$ since then $\epsilon = 0$ when $L = -1$. In any case, I meant to have $\epsilon = \epsilon(L) := \lvert 1 + L\rvert$ for $L \neq -1$ and $2$ for $L = -1$. It is then clear that for each positive integer $n$, $\lvert (-1)^{2n} - (-1)\rvert = 2 = \epsilon(-1)$ and $\lvert (-1)^{2n+1} - L\rvert = \lvert 1 + L\rvert = \epsilon(L)$ (when $L \neq -1$)

[sp] Given L,choose ε=min{|1-L|,2},then for any natular No L,put n=2N for L=-1 and n=2N+2 for $$L\neq -1$$.

Then we have for the 1st case n>N and $$|(-1)^n-L|=|1-(-1)|=2\geq\epsilon$$ and thus $$|(-1)^n-L|\geq\epsilon$$
For the 2nd case n>N and $$|(-1)^n-L| =|1-L|\geq\epsilon$$ thus $$|(-1)^n-L|\geq\epsilon$$

On the other hand if we choose ε=2 or ε=|1+L| ,since we also have L=-1 or $$L\neq -1$$ we have to examine 4 cases as dictated by propositional logic.

(pvq)and (rvt)=> (p and r)v(p and t)v (q and r) v (q and t),where:

p= (ε=2)
q= (ε= |1+L|)

r=(L=-1)

t= ($$L\neq -1$$) [/sp]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K