Prove: x_m Is Not Bounded Above, x_m Does Not Converge

  • Thread starter Thread starter jeff1evesque
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bounded Sequence
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The sequence defined as x_m = 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/m, where m ∈ N, is proven to be unbounded above, thereby confirming that it does not converge. The key theorem applied states that if a sequence converges, it must be bounded. The proof requires demonstrating that for any positive number S, there exists an m such that x_m exceeds S, establishing the unbounded nature of the sequence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of sequences and series in mathematics
  • Familiarity with the concept of convergence in sequences
  • Knowledge of bounded and unbounded sequences
  • Basic proof techniques in mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of harmonic series and their divergence
  • Learn about the formal definitions of convergence and boundedness
  • Explore proof techniques such as epsilon-delta arguments
  • Investigate related theorems in real analysis, particularly those concerning sequences
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, particularly those studying real analysis, as well as educators looking for examples of proving convergence and boundedness in sequences.

jeff1evesque
Messages
312
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let x_m = 1 + \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{3} + ... \frac{1}{m}, m \in N.
Prove x_m is not bounded above and therefore x_m does not converge.

Homework Equations


We know from our class an important theorem stating that:
If sequence converges then the sequence is bounded.

Thus we can say if the sequence is not bounded then it is not convergent.

The Attempt at a Solution


By above (#2), i just have to show our sequence is not bounded. This means i have the following claim:
x_m is not bounded above if and only if given any S > 0 , there exists m such that x_m > S.

Question:
1. Do i have to prove both sides of the argument (if and only if)? Or can I just change my claim to a one sided (left to right)?

2. Can someone help me formulate some thoughts on how to begin this proof?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is a lot like your other post. Here's a hint. 1/3+1/4>1/2. 1/5+1/6+1/7+1/8>1/2. 1/9+1/10+...+1/15+1/16>1/2. Why?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K