vktsn0303
- 30
- 0
How can it be proved that as lim n tends to infinity, (n2-1)/(n2 + n + 1) tends to 1 ?
jbunniii said:Divide the numerator and denominator by ##n^2## to obtain
$$\lim_{n \to\infty} \frac{1 - 1/n^2}{1 + 1/n + 1/n^2}$$
The numerator and denominator both have limit ##1## as ##n \to\infty##, therefore so does the quotient.
vktsn0303 said:How can it be proved that as lim n tends to infinity, (n2-1)/(n2 + n + 1) tends to 1 ?
you are right.jbunniii said:Divide the numerator and denominator by ##n^2## to obtain
$$\lim_{n \to\infty} \frac{1 - 1/n^2}{1 + 1/n + 1/n^2}$$
The numerator and denominator both have limit ##1## as ##n \to\infty##, therefore so does the quotient.
Because that would be assuming that the limit of the quotient is the quotient of the limits. That principle is almost true. It holds when all three limits exist (and when the limit of the denominator is non-zero). But when the limit of the numerator and denominator both fail to exist, one is left with no prediction for the limit of the quotient. It is an "indeterminate form".vktsn0303 said:Well, I actually had a fundamental doubt (silly even) for which reason I had posted the question mainly. I am a newbie to the concept of limits. My doubt is as follows. Why should we look to modify the numerator or the denominator or both? Why not just consider that as n tends to infinity the division in question gives us (infinity)/(infinity) which is not defined.
You're not really modifying either the numerator or denominator. All that's happening is the factoring of both num. and denom.vktsn0303 said:Well, I actually had a fundamental doubt (silly even) for which reason I had posted the question mainly. I am a newbie to the concept of limits. My doubt is as follows. Why should we look to modify the numerator or the denominator or both?
vktsn0303 said:Why not just consider that as n tends to infinity the division in question gives us (infinity)/(infinity) which is not defined. This would lead us to the conclusion that the problem is therefore not solvable. Why can't this just be the case. I have actually observed many problems being solved by modifying the numerator and denominator. But it just seems so obvious that (infinity)/(infinity) is the actual result.
Consider a very simple example. Let us define a constant sequence: ##x_n = 1## for all positive integers ##n##. Clearly this sequence has limit ##1##. Now let's rewrite the same sequence another way. Most likely you agree that ##n/n = 1## for every ##n##, so I can write ##x_n = n/n##. I have not changed the value of the sequence for any ##n##, so its limit cannot change: it is still ##1##. It doesn't become ##\infty/\infty## just because the numerator and denominator both approach infinity.vktsn0303 said:Why should we look to modify the numerator or the denominator or both? Why not just consider that as n tends to infinity the division in question gives us (infinity)/(infinity) which is not defined. This would lead us to the conclusion that the problem is therefore not solvable. Why can't this just be the case. I have actually observed many problems being solved by modifying the numerator and denominator. But it just seems so obvious that (infinity)/(infinity) is the actual result.
vktsn0303 said:Well, I actually had a fundamental doubt (silly even) for which reason I had posted the question mainly. I am a newbie to the concept of limits. My doubt is as follows. Why should we look to modify the numerator or the denominator or both? Why not just consider that as n tends to infinity the division in question gives us (infinity)/(infinity) which is not defined. This would lead us to the conclusion that the problem is therefore not solvable. Why can't this just be the case. I have actually observed many problems being solved by modifying the numerator and denominator. But it just seems so obvious that (infinity)/(infinity) is the actual result.