Prove lim na^n = 0 when 0 < a < 1

  • Thread starter Thread starter e(ho0n3
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The limit lim na^n = 0 is proven for 0 < a < 1 by transforming the discrete variable n into a continuous variable x, leading to the limit lim xa^x = 0. Utilizing L'Hospital's rule, the proof shows that for any ε > 0, there exists an N such that xa^x < ε for all x > N. The discussion also explores alternative methods, including an inductive approach and the application of the Archimedean property and the squeeze theorem, to reinforce the conclusion that the limit approaches zero.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in calculus
  • Familiarity with L'Hospital's rule
  • Knowledge of the Archimedean property
  • Concept of the squeeze theorem
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of L'Hospital's rule in various limit problems
  • Explore the Archimedean property in real analysis
  • Learn about the squeeze theorem and its proofs
  • Investigate alternative limit proofs using induction techniques
USEFUL FOR

Students of calculus, mathematicians exploring limits, and educators seeking to enhance their understanding of limit proofs and techniques.

e(ho0n3
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Prove lim na^n = 0 when 0 < a < 1.

The attempt at a solution
Without danger, we change from the discrete n to the continuous x so that now we have to prove that lim xa^x = 0. Let e > 0. We have to find an N such that xa^x < e for all x > N. Now if xa^x < e is the same as 1 < eb^x/x, where b = 1/a. Using L'Hospital's rule, we have that lim eb^x/x = lim e(ln b)b^x = oo, so there is an N such that 1 < eb^x/x. QED

Is this the simplest way to prove this limit. For some odd reason, I feel that there is a simpler solution. Any tips?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Apply L'Hopital's rule in the limit \lim x.a^x after writing x.a^x = \frac{x}{a^{-x}}.
 
My first inclination is not to use calculus at all!

Let a < u < 1. Prove that, eventually, (n+1)/n < u/a. Then, an easy inductive proof shows that 0 < n a^n < C u^n for some constant C.

I suppose technically I've used some amount of calculus in that I invoke the Archimedean property, the squeeze theorem, and knowledge that u^n converges to 0.


Come to think of it, the inductive step isn't really going to be conceptually much different from taking a derivative or a logarithmic derivative. (Though the analogy might seem opaque if you're just learning this stuff)
 
I would do it by showing log(n*a^n)/n goes to log(a) using l'Hopital. Hence log(n*a^n) approaches -infinity.
 
Thank you for the suggestions. I'm a little rusty on this stuff.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K